Obama to seek congress approval

[Pheonixops]

For the record, I think that he should have condemned the alleged gas attacks, put the issue regarding before the Congress, UN, and NATO way before he started talking about attacking Syria. I'm disappointed that some of his domestic and foreign policy, is very similar to the people in the Republican party who i disagree with. I think the diplomatic route should have been employed first, if the UN decided to make sanctions and strike Syria, let some other country or countries do the work and be the "bad guy".
The difference between me and some of these dolts, is that I don't care what party or president it is, I stand by my beliefs and don't change them because there is a "D" or an "R" in office.

so, you're for erosion of exec. privilege/power?
​​bzxh11

the john kerry of 2004 would have put it to the 'global test'

is very similar to the people in the Republican party

when does that similarity disappear? and you realize they are all basically the same?OR, How about its similar to JFK, or LBJ?

I don't want a monarch, I want any President to put the matter before Congress before they go off half cocked and initiate military action, when there is no direct threat towards us. Unless you think that the Syrians allegedly "gassing" their own people is a direct action and threat towards this country.

I'm not a Kerry fan, and after listening to some of his comments regarding this matter, I don't agree with his stance.

I do think that they are all basically the same.

 

[saintaugusto]

If Obama strikes Syria, what will that accomplish? He made it sound as if there were no specific targets, we would go in for a limited timeframe, limited strikes. So .... then what?

Give the man a break. He is simply following orders from this man:

.

You mean, the same man that he treats worse than any other foreign leader, while praising Muslim Brotherhood?

I hope, you love for America finally supersedes your hatred for Jews.

 

[Contumacious]

If Obama strikes Syria, what will that accomplish? He made it sound as if there were no specific targets, we would go in for a limited timeframe, limited strikes. So .... then what?

Give the man a break. He is simply following orders from this man:

.

You mean, the same man that he treats worse than any other foreign leader, while praising Muslim Brotherhood?

I hope, you love for America finally supersedes your hatred for Jews.

Obama probably knows that the Muslims are correct RETALIATING after 90 yers of injustices perpetrated by the Judeo-American axis of evil.

NBC has been The number one promoter of intervention in Syria. Guess who is boss at NBC Universal:

Stuart J. Epstein

EVP and Chief Financial Officer,

NBCUniversal

.

 

[J.E.D]

you are correct about one thing, obozo has backed himself into a box with no excape route. thats what idiots do, and obama is a idiot.

That's not what I said. Nice try though.

What Obama did was put the decision into the hands of Congress. You know, the same Congress that you guys always claim he ignores or oversteps.

Really?

He said he has decided to ask for their approval, even though he doesn't need it, might not wait for it, and will act on his own even if he doesn't get it. That is not putting the decision in the hands of Congress, it is placating idiots, like you, that want to believe he is better than Bush.

It's quite the conundrum the wingnuts have gotten themselves into. You should take your fingers out of your ears before your head explodes.

 

[Care4all]

You don't think anti war people ( and there are a lot of em) are going to be watching very closely ?

Of course they are..

Bottom line is the US ALREADY screwed the pooch on this issue during the Iraq/Iran war.

This is a chance for Redemption.

Bush screwed the pooch by getting the UN, an international coalition, and Congress, behind him when he invaded Iraq.

Obama is redeeming us by openly saying that, since the UN disagrees with him, he doesn't need them, nor does he need Congress, and he won't even lead from behind like he did in Libya, he will just act because, despite the fact that no nation has ever acted in the past when chemical weapons were used, we have to do it because history demands it.

Sorry, I got lost trying to figure that one out, can you explain it?

No, you are WRONG on President G W Bush getting the UN'S approval.

We DID NOT get the UN'S approval for the Iraqi War, and as far as the UN is concerned they stand by the Iraqi invasion BY President GW Bush as being an ILLEGAL WAR.

 

[usmcstinger]

He is following the Constitution, I am good with this, this is not a move to be taken lightly. Congress needs to debate it and then give Obama a decision.

No matter what happens, the other side will condemn it, just as they did under Bush.

Obviously, you do not understand the Constitution or the War Powers Act of 1973.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

He is following the Constitution, I am good with this, this is not a move to be taken lightly. Congress needs to debate it and then give Obama a decision.

No matter what happens, the other side will condemn it, just as they did under Bush.

Let's get this straight, there is nothing in the Constitution that requires him to seek approval before he orders a military strike. He cannot unilaterally declare war, but he can do pretty much anything short of that. Even the War Powers Act doesn't require him to get approval before ordering a military action, it just requires him to justify it to Congress if it goes on for more than 60 days.

we all saw how much he cared about the WPA with Libya.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

I did answer your question, I referred to a thread addressing fabricated Intelligence fed by Israel to the US specifically designed to initiate a US attack on Syria. And that plan is failing, thank God. And after this post, I am placing you on ignore because it is impossible to have rational discussions with you. So, consider posts you address to me in the future as posts to yourself. I shall not be reading them./QUOTE]

You're putting me on ignore because I keep calling you out on your lies and dismantling your 'logic' .
And no, you didn't answer my question, liar !!
Have a nice life

I think it's funny ! This " Christian" honestly doesn't care that Arabs are getting gassed. Yet we as Jews are supposed to care about Arabs? I do not stay up at night thinking about it . However unlike this " Christian" I do not believe they deserve to get gassed

Could you imagine if these reports/ pictures were coming out of the W. Bank?

I have never argued for US miltary strikes against anyone anywhere anytime. I oppose the US killing of anyone to include innocent civilians and I am proud of my position opposing US military strikes in the ME that always lead to killings of civilians in the ME. And while we have not seen US killings of civilians in Syria this weekend, thank God, we , I am sad to say, did carry out a military strike in Palistan and killed civilians there. My opposing US miltary strikes/killings says nothing about how I feel about others who kill.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's not what I said. Nice try though.

What Obama did was put the decision into the hands of Congress. You know, the same Congress that you guys always claim he ignores or oversteps.

Really?

He said he has decided to ask for their approval, even though he doesn't need it, might not wait for it, and will act on his own even if he doesn't get it. That is not putting the decision in the hands of Congress, it is placating idiots, like you, that want to believe he is better than Bush.

It's quite the conundrum the wingnuts have gotten themselves into. You should take your fingers out of your ears before your head explodes.

Here are his exact words.

But having made my decision as Commander-in-Chief based on what I am convinced is our national security interests, I’m also mindful that I’m the President of the world’s oldest constitutional democracy. I’ve long believed that our power is rooted not just in our military might, but in our example as a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. And that’s why I’ve made a second decision: I will seek authorization for the use of force from the American people’s representatives in Congress.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Of course they are..

Bottom line is the US ALREADY screwed the pooch on this issue during the Iraq/Iran war.

This is a chance for Redemption.

Bush screwed the pooch by getting the UN, an international coalition, and Congress, behind him when he invaded Iraq.

Obama is redeeming us by openly saying that, since the UN disagrees with him, he doesn't need them, nor does he need Congress, and he won't even lead from behind like he did in Libya, he will just act because, despite the fact that no nation has ever acted in the past when chemical weapons were used, we have to do it because history demands it.

Sorry, I got lost trying to figure that one out, can you explain it?

No, you are WRONG on President G W Bush getting the UN'S approval.

We DID NOT get the UN'S approval for the Iraqi War, and as far as the UN is concerned they stand by the Iraqi invasion BY President GW Bush as being an ILLEGAL WAR.

We had the UN approval because of the numerous resolutions. You might not want to admit that, but that doesn't make it go away.

 

[saintaugusto]

[/B]

Give the man a break. He is simply following orders from this man:

.

You mean, the same man that he treats worse than any other foreign leader, while praising Muslim Brotherhood?

I hope, you love for America finally supersedes your hatred for Jews.

Obama probably knows that the Muslims are correct RETALIATING after 90 yers of injustices perpetrated by the Judeo-American axis of evil.

NBC has been The number one promoter of intervention in Syria. Guess who is boss at NBC Universal:

.

1. Your ignorance of history, including recent, is appalling. Put away the Mein Kampf and Iranian websites, and learn.

2. You have to stop generalizing. There have been tons of Jews who have been worse towards Israel than Arabs. Most of them are left-wingers from the US and Israel itself.

But again, in order to do the aforementioned, imagine for a moment that you don't hate Jews. Trust me, facts become much clearer then.

 

[Vox]

He made a decision to set the stage for saying "I wanted to do something but republicans wouldn't let me."

Exactly!

During this time of not acting, there is the possibility of Syria giving these weapons to Hezbollah or be taken by other Islamic Terrorists Groups.

Obama would be able to then blame Congress for not acting quickly enough.

This strategy is pretty smart, it lets him off the hook for a lot.

.

I don't think so.

It is so transparent that even the stupidest voter can see. Oh, wait, the stupidest are obama voters anyway, so it does not matter - they will worship him no matter what

 

[saintaugusto]

Exactly!

During this time of not acting, there is the possibility of Syria giving these weapons to Hezbollah or be taken by other Islamic Terrorists Groups.

Obama would be able to then blame Congress for not acting quickly enough.

This strategy is pretty smart, it lets him off the hook for a lot.

.

I don't think so.

It is so transparent that even the stupidest voter can see. Oh, wait, the stupidest are obama voters anyway, so it does not matter - they will worship him no matter what

Tru dat!

 

[Papageorgio]

He is following the Constitution, I am good with this, this is not a move to be taken lightly. Congress needs to debate it and then give Obama a decision.

No matter what happens, the other side will condemn it, just as they did under Bush.

Let's get this straight, there is nothing in the Constitution that requires him to seek approval before he orders a military strike. He cannot unilaterally declare war, but he can do pretty much anything short of that. Even the War Powers Act doesn't require him to get approval before ordering a military action, it just requires him to justify it to Congress if it goes on for more than 60 days.

we all saw how much he cared about the WPA with Libya.

Good points.

 

[Vox]

Of course they are..

Bottom line is the US ALREADY screwed the pooch on this issue during the Iraq/Iran war.

This is a chance for Redemption.

Bush screwed the pooch by getting the UN, an international coalition, and Congress, behind him when he invaded Iraq.

Obama is redeeming us by openly saying that, since the UN disagrees with him, he doesn't need them, nor does he need Congress, and he won't even lead from behind like he did in Libya, he will just act because, despite the fact that no nation has ever acted in the past when chemical weapons were used, we have to do it because history demands it.

Sorry, I got lost trying to figure that one out, can you explain it?

No, you are WRONG on President G W Bush getting the UN'S approval.

We DID NOT get the UN'S approval for the Iraqi War, and as far as the UN is concerned they stand by the Iraqi invasion BY President GW Bush as being an ILLEGAL WAR.

yes, he DID - UN SC resolution 1441 and specifically 678, Iraq war was ABSOLUTELY LEGAL.

 

[TooTall]

If we are going to attack Syria, we should do it as a united country.

if the country doesn't support this action, we shouldnt be doing it.

Obama has done the right thing.

Bush got bi-partisan support from the Congress, blessings from the UN and 48 countries, including middle-eastern countries, to join in the invasion of Iraq.

When Obama does that I am a go for it.

His present strategy is a carbon copy of Clinton's cruise missile foreign policy that resulted in the attack on 911.

 

[The T]

Really?

He said he has decided to ask for their approval, even though he doesn't need it, might not wait for it, and will act on his own even if he doesn't get it. That is not putting the decision in the hands of Congress, it is placating idiots, like you, that want to believe he is better than Bush.

It's quite the conundrum the wingnuts have gotten themselves into. You should take your fingers out of your ears before your head explodes.

Here are his exact words.

But having made my decision as Commander-in-Chief based on what I am convinced is our national security interests, I’m also mindful that I’m the President of the world’s oldest constitutional democracy. I’ve long believed that our power is rooted not just in our military might, but in our example as a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. And that’s why I’ve made a second decision: I will seek authorization for the use of force from the American people’s representatives in Congress.

In other words? Obama caved to pressure NOT only from The people, The Congress, but other World leaders as well...He was forced to do his job much to his annoyance.

 

[Contumacious]

He is following the Constitution, I am good with this, this is not a move to be taken lightly. Congress needs to debate it and then give Obama a decision.

No matter what happens, the other side will condemn it, just as they did under Bush.

Obviously, you do not understand the Constitution or the War Powers Act of 1973.

Obviously, you do not understand the Constitution or the War Powers Act of 1973.

The War Powers Resolution Fraud

By Thomas E. Woods Jr.

February 4, 2006

In the wake of the Vietnam War Congress passed the War Powers Resolution of 1973. As the history books would have it, Congress thereby restrained presidential war powers and reasserted traditional congressional prerogatives in foreign policy as envisioned by the Constitution.

Not so. Not even close to being so.

Congress did pass the War Powers Resolution, to be sure. But if anything, the Resolution — sympathetic mythology to the contrary notwithstanding — actually emboldened the president and codified executive warmaking powers that would have astonished the framers of the Constitution."..


.

 

[The T]

Bush screwed the pooch by getting the UN, an international coalition, and Congress, behind him when he invaded Iraq.

Obama is redeeming us by openly saying that, since the UN disagrees with him, he doesn't need them, nor does he need Congress, and he won't even lead from behind like he did in Libya, he will just act because, despite the fact that no nation has ever acted in the past when chemical weapons were used, we have to do it because history demands it.

Sorry, I got lost trying to figure that one out, can you explain it?

No, you are WRONG on President G W Bush getting the UN'S approval.

We DID NOT get the UN'S approval for the Iraqi War, and as far as the UN is concerned they stand by the Iraqi invasion BY President GW Bush as being an ILLEGAL WAR.

yes, he DID - UN SC resolution 1441 and specifically 678, Iraq war was ABSOLUTELY LEGAL.

And what did Obama say of the U.N. yesterday? They were "paralyzed"...

 

[abu afak]

Some would like to deceive themselves into thinking the desires of the American people who do not want a war in Syria do not matter. I am watching a massive American Anti War Campaign be birthed in my nation and it is awesome to behold. What Irony, the roles played by Institutions like moveon.org, town hall meetings organized by Quakers and Anti War groups.

At NO time did Obama want a "war" with Syria.
You Misconstrue/Deceive on the situation.

This was/is a ONE time, ONE day punishment/degrading of Chemical weapons abilities.

This Israeli plan to get the US to attack Syria is going to back fire big time against Israel. Americans are tired of fighting wars for Israel, killing innocent civilians in the ME for Israel. ENOUGH is Enough!

More anti-semitica from Munnerlyn.

Israel would probably be better off with Assad than a possible al-Qaeda govt next door.
Even if not al-Qaeda it would be a wildly unstable situation.

Israel also might very well be the target of retaliation for such an attack. A national run on Gas Masks.

Your post, as always, is Jew-Hating delusion.
-