Obama to seek congress approval

[JakeStarkey]

Every reactionary, by comparative extension, has condemned Bush's invasion of Iraq.

This thread has been worth that exposure of reactionary hypocrites.

 

[Freewill]

Syria is a small, poor country with few resources that is a prime candidate to use CW when its existence is threatened by a superpower for no reason. In the end, what other defense do they have?

we should not engage into Syrian war. Let the others do the cleaning.

we will just watch and comment.

Why wasn't there a big stink about Libya which is pretty much the same thing? Why did Obama hesitate if he thinks it is the right thing to do, he said he has the authority, and he said a strike would make us more powerful. All I can guess is without the Brits on board Obama is now making this even more political.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The hypocrites here are silly: he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

Jake's favorite representative & "Basher"

 

[Freewill]

Almost all the democrats that voted for war in Iraq turned their backs on our troops as soon as we did attack. But they didn't have the balls to pull the funding which the Democrats certainly could have done, thus ending the war. Talk about hypocrites.

 

[tinydancer]

Pelosi sided with Boehner. Obama had to back down.

Nancy Pelosi warns President Obama that he needs to win over Congress before launching a unilateral strike against Syria

Half of Americans say they oppose taking military action against Syria and nearly 80 percent believe Obama should seek congressional approval before using any force, according to a new NBC poll
Administration officials spoke with a group of lawmakers for more than 90 minutes Thursday evening to explain why they believe Bashar Assad's government was the culprit in a suspected chemical attack
House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi says she sides with House Speaker John Boehner on the matter
Pelosi said must engage with the full Congress on military intervention in Syria and provide 'additional transparency into the decision-making process'

Article at link:

Nancy Pelosi warns President Obama that he needs to win over Congress before launching a unilateral strike against Syria | Mail Online

 

[tinydancer]

Pelosi sided with Boehner. Obama had to back down.

Nancy Pelosi warns President Obama that he needs to win over Congress before launching a unilateral strike against Syria

Half of Americans say they oppose taking military action against Syria and nearly 80 percent believe Obama should seek congressional approval before using any force, according to a new NBC poll
Administration officials spoke with a group of lawmakers for more than 90 minutes Thursday evening to explain why they believe Bashar Assad's government was the culprit in a suspected chemical attack
House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi says she sides with House Speaker John Boehner on the matter
Pelosi said must engage with the full Congress on military intervention in Syria and provide 'additional transparency into the decision-making process'

Article at link:

Nancy Pelosi warns President Obama that he needs to win over Congress before launching a unilateral strike against Syria | Mail Online

 

[francoHFW]

Syria is a small, poor country with few resources that is a prime candidate to use CW when its existence is threatened by a superpower for no reason. In the end, what other defense do they have?

WTF are you talking about? They used CW on their own people, and no one is invading them. Do you believe in international law and punishing war crimes or not?

 

[Freewill]

The hypocrites here are silly: he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

Jake's favorite representative & "Basher"

I wonder if Kerry is jealous with Queen Nancy hitting on Kerry's dear friend.

 

[Dot Com]

Obama to seek congress approval

Thats an impeachable offense if there ever was one!!! Not quite as flagrant as this incident though: http://www.usmessageboard.com/political-satire/310130-finally-an-impeachable-offense.html

 

[Freewill]

Syria is a small, poor country with few resources that is a prime candidate to use CW when its existence is threatened by a superpower for no reason. In the end, what other defense do they have?

WTF are you talking about? They used CW on their own people, and no one is invading them. Do you believe in international law and punishing war crimes or not?

Did not we believe back before the Iraq war that Saddam used chemical weapons against the Kurds? Why yes everyone did, my how you now blow a different horn.

 

[deltex1]

Barack Obama on Syria: text in full - Telegraph

Here's my question for every member of Congress and every member of the global community: What message will we send if a dictator can gas hundreds of children to death in plain sight and pay no price? What's the purpose of the international system that we've built if a prohibition on the use of chemical weapons that has been agreed to by the governments of 98 per cent of the world's people and approved overwhelmingly by the Congress of the United States is not enforced?

Make no mistake – this has implications beyond chemical warfare. If we won't enforce accountability in the face of this heinous act, what does it say about our resolve to stand up to others who flout fundamental international rules? To governments who would choose to build nuclear arms? To terrorist who would spread biological weapons? To armies who carry out genocide?

Like Obama said, just because we punish and destroy them for CW usage doesn't mean other countries would not follow this lead, if their existence were threatened like Syria's was. It is a last-ditch effort of desperation that is the issue, when they shouldn't have been put in that position in the first place.

Are you saying you think Assad is losing???

 

[Freewill]

Syria is a small, poor country with few resources that is a prime candidate to use CW when its existence is threatened by a superpower for no reason. In the end, what other defense do they have?

we should not engage into Syrian war. Let the others do the cleaning.

we will just watch and comment.

Does Syria have oil? (sarcasm)

 

[Vox]

Syria is a small, poor country with few resources that is a prime candidate to use CW when its existence is threatened by a superpower for no reason. In the end, what other defense do they have?

we should not engage into Syrian war. Let the others do the cleaning.

we will just watch and comment.

Why wasn't there a big stink about Libya which is pretty much the same thing? Why did Obama hesitate if he thinks it is the right thing to do, he said he has the authority, and he said a strike would make us more powerful. All I can guess is without the Brits on board Obama is now making this even more political.

that( Libya) was a mistake, though their rebels did seem to differ somewhat from MB and other muslim fundamentalists - or so we thought.

turns out - there are no "good guys" in the ME, except Israel.

Now all the support is gone and there is a staunch opposition to the war both inside and outside the country.

Stepping into the same pile of shit ( after Egypt's support and Libya) is incredibly stupid.
Even for obama.

 

[tinydancer]

Syria is a small, poor country with few resources that is a prime candidate to use CW when its existence is threatened by a superpower for no reason. In the end, what other defense do they have?

WTF are you talking about? They used CW on their own people, and no one is invading them. Do you believe in international law and punishing war crimes or not?

The UN's investigation will not be wrapped up for two weeks. You have no proof at all that Assad used the chemical weapons.

If US Intelligence has proof Putin says share the proof. Makes sense to me.

Because last time everyone believed US Intelligence, a lot of countries went to war with Iraq and suffered greatly.

 

[francoHFW]

Syria is a small, poor country with few resources that is a prime candidate to use CW when its existence is threatened by a superpower for no reason. In the end, what other defense do they have?

we should not engage into Syrian war. Let the others do the cleaning.

we will just watch and comment.

Why wasn't there a big stink about Libya which is pretty much the same thing? Why did Obama hesitate if he thinks it is the right thing to do, he said he has the authority, and he said a strike would make us more powerful. All I can guess is without the Brits on board Obama is now making this even more political.

Kaddafi said he was going to massacre the people of Bengazi and NATO stopped his troops and tanks in the suburbs. OBVIOUSLY, there was no time for congressional BS lol.

 

[Vox]

Syria is a small, poor country with few resources that is a prime candidate to use CW when its existence is threatened by a superpower for no reason. In the end, what other defense do they have?

we should not engage into Syrian war. Let the others do the cleaning.

we will just watch and comment.

Does Syria have oil? (sarcasm)

I honestly wish those libtards were right and we at least got our hands on oil - in Iraq, in Libya and elsewhere.

 

[Contumacious]

Yet another example of why conservatives have zero credibility: their lies.

No one is advocating, including the president, ‘going to war’ with Syria.

Yo fucktard


So Syria and Russia will not consider the act of launching Tomahawk missiles their way as an act of war?

Who would have thunketh.

.

See you need a lesson in the liberal lexicon. First war must mean putting boots on the ground, not just blowing people to kingdom come. It goes with their nature. If they can kill a person in Pakistan from a bunker in Nevada that is not war, that is merely a real first person video game. Second terrorism is bad real bad. Planting bombs is bad. On the other hand it is not terrorism to launch missiles into another country as has happened to Israel for many years. Or it is not bad to launch missiles in ally countries and blow to pieces a "maybe" legit target and those around him as this President has.

The stupid fucks completely disregard the fact that the federal government has no authority to use US treasury funds nor the military to grandstand for the Zionists or the Saudi Arabian Sunnis.


BTW, each Tomahawk is $3,000,000.00 apiece.

.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Syria is a small, poor country with few resources that is a prime candidate to use CW when its existence is threatened by a superpower for no reason. In the end, what other defense do they have?

WTF are you talking about? They used CW on their own people, and no one is invading them. Do you believe in international law and punishing war crimes or not?

Obama's and Hillary's intentions have been made clear enough for what 2 years now like a giant standing over an ant, but even ants have modes of preservation.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

we should not engage into Syrian war. Let the others do the cleaning.

we will just watch and comment.

Does Syria have oil? (sarcasm)

I honestly wish those libtards were right and we at least got our hands on oil - in Iraq, in Libya and elsewhere.

We have all we need and can only store so much, but gaining geo-political dominance over the Middle East will last 50 years and guarantee us oil when it begins to run out?

 

[JakeStarkey]

And if and when congressional approval is obtained, I somehow think all the boing will stop, and the little neo-cons will be happy again, asking why are troops not being put on the ground.