Obama to seek congress approval

[Trajan]

Every president since FDR can claim that mantle, unfortunately.

No, we were never obvious aggressors until Afghanistan.

Yes, we were: activity in the Caribbean, in Southeast Asia, in Panama, Grenada, long before Bush turned an acceptable punishment of the Taliban and AQ into a long term war to get ready for Iraq.

yes we were and but, if I recall, he didn't not violate the war powers act.

I have said from the git go, obama can do what he wants to for, 60 days.....he knows it. he said so, this going to congress thing is, well, nonsensical now. So if they say yes, ..so? he could have done this a year ago, 6 months ago, 3 months ago after the first attack, or 2 weeks ago....now? and of they say no, we will see umpteen you-tube playbacks of bidens threats ala Bush not seeking permission etc. How will that look?

we look disorganized boobs, unwilling to follow thru. he put his name and the offices gravtis on the line...what a mess.

 

[J.E.D]

What this latest statement amounts to is that Obama,being the weak, indecisive, confused person that he is, he does not want to take any responsibility for any repercussions of an attack, but with Congress approval he will be happy to blame them if necessary.


Vermin will be vermin.

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. That's what this amounts to.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Reagan became BFF with your homeboys the muslim extremists giving them weapons, military training, and even invited them to the white house.

You get a triple F, plus a dunce cap.

Mujaheddin were fighting against your home team: USSR

Sucks to be you and on the wrong side of history 24/7/365

Reagan became BFF with your homeboys the muslim extremists giving them weapons, military training, and even invited them to the white house. Hell he even dedicated the space shuttle columbia to them that's how much Reagan loved islam.

You must take great pride in being the supporter of a party that created the taliban, the GOP, which attacked us on 9/11. You are truly a disgusting piece of shit.

The Taliban attacked us on 9/11? That is news to me and the rest of the world. As to the Taliban Reagan dealt with an entirely different group of Afghans. The same ones we allied with when we attacked the Taliban in 2001. Do try to keep up with your lies and misinformation.

 

[The T]

Obama is a spineless pos and is backing out.

"Leading from Behind" just isn't what it's cracked up to be for Obama...and when he TRIES to lead? He backpeddles because MOST in the world are against him and call him out.

He should have NEVER been elected.

BHO was elected because Americans were terrified of the people like you supporting Romney.

Guess what kuppkake (<-intentionally spelled wrong because YOU don't deserve perfection)...?

I backed Herman Cain and others.

Torpedoes your argument. But YOU der Fakey keep on keeping on with your disingenuousness, false crap...the board knows you are a PHONEY.

Got it pilgrim? YOU need to wake up and admit whom YOU really are. Fess up.

 

[Trajan]

well, hes paralyzed. he has been trying to play catch up with the red line marker he laid down way back.

He announced yes we are attacking then what we'll do, now we'll wait. He spent a week winding this up, now, it will be seen overseas as a balk, and well, its a sign of indecisiveness and weakness. He seems to speak without considering the power of his words cum promises. If he wanted to wait for a coalition to form then he should have before making declarative statements. Kerry too.

Just a note that he doesn't need congresses approval to strike, hes got 60 days.

I read the war powers act because I too believed that, BUT the war powers act restricts him to only using force without approval first if we are attacked, we are invaded , our military are attacked or there is eminent threat of an attack or invasion.

the out clause is national security threat, national interests yada yada he did that for Libya....

 

[Katzndogz]

well, hes paralyzed. he has been trying to play catch up with the red line marker he laid down way back.

He announced yes we are attacking then what we'll do, now we'll wait. He spent a week winding this up, now, it will be seen overseas as a balk, and well, its a sign of indecisiveness and weakness. He seems to speak without considering the power of his words cum promises. If he wanted to wait for a coalition to form then he should have before making declarative statements. Kerry too.

Just a note that he doesn't need congresses approval to strike, hes got 60 days.

I read the war powers act because I too believed that, BUT the war powers act restricts him to only using force without approval first if we are attacked, we are invaded , our military are attacked or there is eminent threat of an attack or invasion.

You are right. Someone should explain it to obumble because he thinks he can order military action even if congress specifically says no.

 

[Zoom-boing]

if the Congress does not approve - this will save obama's face and this country from another unnecessary war.

Call your representatives NOW.

Has the congress ever denied Obama something he really wanted? No. I hope I'm wrong, but congress just wants to be relevant and part of the Washington game-playing.

Only presidential leadership could have kept us from continuing our warring ways. Presidents have set the agenda for war since Korea.

That's all the GOP crybabies do in congress is blocking everything, or wasting time trying to repeal the ACA.

All the faux outrage is nothing but a game from the GOP trash trying to call out the president thinking he was just going to send the missiles over because he doesn't need congressional approval per the constitution.

Obama pulled an excellent chess move by now throwing it on the GOP's lap (whom are going to approve it in a second because they are warmongers) and Obama can now say it's the GOP that wanted it.

Well done Mr. President

Bingo. Obama, who made the red line statement and who is incapable of getting out of that any other way, resorts to what he does best ... finds a way to blame Republicans. Apparently he doesn't need congressional approval to just strike Syria so if they say no, there is nothing stopping him from doing what he said he would do, what is the right thing to do. He said that what, a week or so ago? Does he now no longer believe that? Pfffft, he doesn't know he never listens to what he says.

I am so weary of this clown. His inability to lead would be comical if it wasn't so damn serious. He painted himself into a corner and will, once again, walk away with nary any fault being placed on his shoulders. Continue on with your drool fest.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Even W later admitted Saddam never had WMD's.

again - you prove you are an idiot. and failed simple logic. Bush admitting they did not find WMD does not prove he lied and knew they don't have WMDs.

That was not the claim, silly. The claim was that W admitted he was wrong about WMDs, and he was. It was manly of W to do that. I remember hearing him say that if he had known that, he would not have invaded.

You need to stay on OP and be truthful, Vox.

Reread the exchange, Black label ( I think) claimed Bush LIED to get us in war, simply not true.

 

[Trajan]

Mujaheddin were fighting against your home team: USSR

Sucks to be you and on the wrong side of history 24/7/365

Reagan became BFF with your homeboys the muslim extremists giving them weapons, military training, and even invited them to the white house. Hell he even dedicated the space shuttle columbia to them that's how much Reagan loved islam.

You must take great pride in being the supporter of a party that created the taliban, the GOP, which attacked us on 9/11. You are truly a disgusting piece of shit.

The Taliban attacked us on 9/11? That is news to me and the rest of the world. As to the Taliban Reagan dealt with an entirely different group of Afghans. The same ones we allied with when we attacked the Taliban in 2001. Do try to keep up with your lies and misinformation.

let him go RGS he doesn't even know Carter and Wilson spooled up the muhjahideen.

 

[Trajan]

here we go..


Syria Intervention Would Reaffirm Obama&#8217;s Biggest Flip-Flop

He was explicit in 2007 that Presidents don't have the authority to act unilaterally except to stop 'an actual or imminent threat'


In 2007, Barack Obama was asked when Presidents have the authority to launch a military strike without congressional authorization. He had a precise answer at the ready.

&#8220;The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat,&#8221; Obama told the Boston Globe.


snip-



It would not be the first time Obama acted outside his own previous definition of presidential war powers. In 2011, with a bloody conflict escalating in Libya, Obama authorized the U.S. to join an international coalition that established a no-fly zone in order to stem the threat of mass slaughter. Obama argued the intervention was justified.

&#8220;The growing instability in Libya could ignite wider instability in the Middle East, with dangerous consequences to the national security interests of the United States,&#8221; he wrote in a letter to Congress. Officials pointed to the possibility of an imminent massacre of rebel forces, but no immediate threat to national security.

&#8220;In 2007, Obama was adamant that the President did not have the power to authorize an attack if there was no imminent threat to the U.S.,&#8221; PolitiFact wrote at the time. &#8220;But now he has authorized just such an action.&#8221; The fact-checking site called the reversal a &#8220;full flop.&#8221;


Read more: U.S. Intervention in Syria Would Reaffirm Obama's Biggest Flip-Flop | TIME.com



so we have a full 'double' flop....

 

[Katzndogz]

What this latest statement amounts to is that Obama,being the weak, indecisive, confused person that he is, he does not want to take any responsibility for any repercussions of an attack, but with Congress approval he will be happy to blame them if necessary.


Vermin will be vermin.

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. That's what this amounts to.

That's what is known as a checkmate. He has no good moves left. Anything he did was going to end in disaster. He just did it to himself. It started out as an unthinking boast in the middle of a heated campaign where he wanted to look tough and in control.

The next move will be another chemical attack by the terrorists obama supports.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Every president since FDR can claim that mantle, unfortunately.

No, we were never obvious aggressors until Afghanistan.

Yes, we were: activity in the Caribbean, in Southeast Asia, in Panama, Grenada, long before Bush turned an acceptable punishment of the Taliban and AQ into a long term war to get ready for Iraq.

What did the Taliban do that needed punishment? The Burqas were given as a big reason.

Iraq did nothing to us and were cooperating with UN inspectors. If the cooperation stopped periodically, they were easily forced back into cooperation.

Libya did nothing to us and Syria now too. It's the relentless unprovoked invasions that will solidify our nature to the world. You're basing your arguments on U.S. standards. Go ahead with previous indiscretions of ours. It only bolsters my case. History always judges.

 

[Vox]

again - you prove you are an idiot. and failed simple logic. Bush admitting they did not find WMD does not prove he lied and knew they don't have WMDs.

That was not the claim, silly. The claim was that W admitted he was wrong about WMDs, and he was. It was manly of W to do that. I remember hearing him say that if he had known that, he would not have invaded.

You need to stay on OP and be truthful, Vox.

Reread the exchange, Black label ( I think) claimed Bush LIED to get us in war, simply not true.

Bush DID NOT LIE - Iraq HAD WMDs and it was discovered, contrary to the libtards hysterical lies.

Even wikileaks releases confirmed that.

 

[Sherry]

He basically voted present...color me unimpressed as amateur hour continues in the WH.

 

[Vox]

iraq had WMD...everyone lied about it for various reasons...and the lying continues.

Do you support going out there to dig in the sand agaiin]

going there again has nothing to do with debunking of a LIE that Iraq did not have WMDs and that Bush "lied".

It is 2013 not 2003 and we also have had failed support in Libya and Egypt.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama says he has decided that the United States should take military action against Syria in response to a deadly chemical weapons attack.

But he says he will seek congressional authorization for the use of force.

He says congressional leadership plans to hold a debate and a vote as soon as Congress comes back in September.

Obama says he has the authority to act on his own, but believes it is important for the country to have a debate.

Military action would be in response to a chemical weapons attack the U.S. says Syrian President Bashar Assad's government carried out against civilians. The U.S. says more than 1,400 Syrians were killed in that attack last week.

That motherfucking TYRANT!!!!!! Impeach the fucking bastard for using the proper channels!

Let me get this straight, after months of Obama complaining about the Constitution, and the last few weeks of him declaring that he doesn't need Congress to do anything, you believe him when he says he cares about that stuff?

 

[Trajan]

He basically voted present...color me unimpressed as amateur hour continues in the WH.

"present"...yea...that fits

 

[DaGoose]

That was not the claim, silly. The claim was that W admitted he was wrong about WMDs, and he was. It was manly of W to do that. I remember hearing him say that if he had known that, he would not have invaded.

You need to stay on OP and be truthful, Vox.

Reread the exchange, Black label ( I think) claimed Bush LIED to get us in war, simply not true.

Bush DID NOT LIE - Iraq HAD WMDs and it was discovered, contrary to the libtards hysterical lies.

Even wikileaks releases confirmed that.

OF COURSE they HAD them. Reagan sold them to Iraq for their war with Iran and then looked the other way when Saddam used them on his own people. But by the time "W" became POTUS they were gone.

So yes. BUSH LIED and our soldiers DIED. And anyone who thinks going to war against Iraq was a good thing has no respect for the military.

.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

That was not the claim, silly. The claim was that W admitted he was wrong about WMDs, and he was. It was manly of W to do that. I remember hearing him say that if he had known that, he would not have invaded.

You need to stay on OP and be truthful, Vox.

Reread the exchange, Black label ( I think) claimed Bush LIED to get us in war, simply not true.

Bush DID NOT LIE - Iraq HAD WMDs and it was discovered, contrary to the libtards hysterical lies.

Even wikileaks releases confirmed that.

A lot of countries have WMDs. Should we start a campaign against them all?

Countries With Weapons of Mass Destruction - Intelligence Threat Assessments

 

[hortysir]

That motherfucking TYRANT!!!!!! Impeach the fucking bastard for using the proper channels!

It is simply a way for him to sidestep his declared "redline", do nothing as usual - and be able to hide behind and blame congress for it.