what are the chances Congrees will give authorization?

[blackhawk]

I would put the odds at 50/50 but no matter what Congress does Obama has lost a lot credibility on the world stage with this and keep in mind as Obama himself pointed out today he does have the legal authority to authorize military action against Syria without Congressional approval so he is not going to totally of the hook over his red line comment no matter what.

 

[Hoffstra]

The Republican leadership ALL support this move, and I think in the end they will authorize the use of force.

 

[The Rabbi]

This president cannot accept responsibility for any action he takes during his administration. The only reason he wants Congress's approval is he wants someone to blame for a failed attack or not attacking after promising he would do so.

Obama's legacy: Finding someone to blame.

It's exactly what it is. Obama's plan is grossly unpopular both in the US and abroad. If he throws it to Congress then one of two things happen:
1) They vote for it. When the action fails Obama blames Congress because they voted for it.
2) They vote against it. Obama blames Congress because they kept him from following through on his word.

The most cynical administration in history, looking to blame someone else for their own incompetence.
Personally I think Congress should just vote "Present."

 

[Hoffstra]

Obama got a lot of flack for not getting Congressional approval for our involvement in Libya.

so now he's getting Congressional approval, and the Republican leadership of the Congress supports his move.

 

[The Rabbi]

I am not aware of a way to vote tacit approval.

Think of yourself voting for Romney....that is tacit approval. Nobody wanted that dude as President; you didn't want Obama as President.

I doubt anyone and I mean anyone of any political stripe who has a seat in Congress wants to send a single American soldier into harm's way over any cause; much less Syria which is a wholly unimportant nation. Yet if we don't go...who else is going to go--at least that is the reasoning they'll employ.

Crying ass shame. "The World" demands XY&Z gets done but "the world" doesn't do anything; all too often it is the U.S. That needs to change.

"Think of yourself voting for Romney....that is tacit approval. Nobody wanted that dude as President; you didn't want Obama as President."

Jesus God where do these people come from????????

Forget it, dude. She is among the most clueless worthless posters on this site.

Obama failed to frame the argument, and failed to explain the issue. People are asking "why do we care who's in power in Syria? Both sides suck."
That is the wrong argument. First the argument is, We need to punish use of chemical weapons because if we dont we will see their use increase exponentially. Second, by intervening we get to choose favorites and can influence who gets into power. It is important because the Middle East is an important region and we want stability.
But he can't articulate that much. Because he is a stuttering incompetent who should have been getting Bill Clinton coffee.

 

[The Rabbi]

Obama got a lot of flack for not getting Congressional approval for our involvement in Libya.

so now he's getting Congressional approval, and the Republican leadership of the Congress supports his move.

How much flack did he get over Libya? Yea, none.

 

[Hoffstra]

Obama got a lot of flack for not getting Congressional approval for our involvement in Libya.

so now he's getting Congressional approval, and the Republican leadership of the Congress supports his move.

How much flack did he get over Libya? Yea, none.

WRONG!!!

many people were pissed off because it extended past 60 days after which he needs Congressional approval.

 

[The Rabbi]

Obama got a lot of flack for not getting Congressional approval for our involvement in Libya.

so now he's getting Congressional approval, and the Republican leadership of the Congress supports his move.

How much flack did he get over Libya? Yea, none.

WRONG!!!

many people were pissed off because it extended past 60 days after which he needs Congressional approval.

Wow. People were pissed off at a president's actions. That never happens.

 

[dblack]

The Republican leadership ALL support this move, and I think in the end they will authorize the use of force.

Irrespective of the results of the vote, it will reinforce the burgeoning alliance between the peacenik left and the libertarian right, and I see that as a good thing.

 

[Hoffstra]

Wow. People were pissed off at a president's actions. That never happens.

nice backtracking and rerouting your argument.

first you falsely claim that Obama got no flack for extending the actions passed 60 days.

now you disregard that flack as just no big deal.

 

[The Rabbi]

Wow. People were pissed off at a president's actions. That never happens.

nice backtracking and rerouting your argument.

first you falsely claim that Obama got no flack for extending the actions passed 60 days.

now you disregard that flack as just no big deal.

Both things are true. There was no flack that amounted to anything.
Sorry to bust your bubble.

 

[Hoffstra]

The Senate will approve military action in Syria, but the House GOP will say no.

However if France and Turkey says they will assist in military action, Obama will do it anyways without approval from Congress.

 

[bodecea]

I say slim to none. Repubs will leave Obabble twisting in the wind (as it were)...while the left, after all they have said about W's reckless behavior, will be emarrassed to support another war.

Then...any further use of chemical weapons on civilians will be on them.

 

[The Rabbi]

I say slim to none. Repubs will leave Obabble twisting in the wind (as it were)...while the left, after all they have said about W's reckless behavior, will be emarrassed to support another war.

Then...any further use of chemical weapons on civilians will be on them.

Why don't you go back to gay threads where you belong?

 

[Hoffstra]

Then...any further use of chemical weapons on civilians will be on them.

why on us?

why not on the British, or the UN, or the French, or the Israelis?

why not on NATO or the Russians?

why not on the Arab League?

 

[S.J.]

He doesn't need Congressional approval, legally, but politically he does. Otherwise, he has nobody to blame when it all backfires.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Senate will approve military action in Syria, but the House GOP will say no.

However if France and Turkey says they will assist in military action, Obama will do it anyways without approval from Congress.

They'll both approve it since Obama has that power anyway. If it's successful (whatever that means) Obama will claim credit. If it fails (whatever that means) Obama will blame Congress. The most cynical president in history.

 

[The Rabbi]

Then...any further use of chemical weapons on civilians will be on them.

why on us?

why not on the British, or the UN, or the French, or the Israelis?

why not on NATO or the Russians?

why not on the Arab League?

How about on the people who actually used them? Typical lib behavior to blame someone other than the perpetrator.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

The Senate will approve military action in Syria, but the House GOP will say no.

However if France and Turkey says they will assist in military action, Obama will do it anyways without approval from Congress.

So we're down to France and Turkey as our allies. Are you f*cking kidding me here? Our best allies, well they were our best before obie made them not our allies at all said no. So we are down to f*cking France and Turkey for f*ck sakes.

We have nobody here. We have a president who's balls have been cut off in public and fed back to him and a pretty damn powerful group opposing any action with Russia, China and Iran backing Syria. On our side we have France and Turkey for f*ck sakes. We actually don't have France or Turkey for any actionable response they are just sending in cheerleaders. We have nobody on our side and there's a good reason for that. It's not our f*cking problem and we shouldn't get involved.

 

[S.J.]

Putin demanded evidence from Obama that Syria used chemical weapons. Where is that evidence?