Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

AtomicKitten

(46,585 posts)
43. Well, you're going to need to do some soul searching.
Thu Aug 29, 2013, 02:02 PM
Aug 2013

Because Hillary has been pushing for military action in Syria for quite some time.

Let’s give the White House and President Obama, personally, credit for blocking the hawks in his administration from going to war in Syria.

Last week, we learned that Hillary Clinton and David Petraeus, now thankfully pursuing other opportunities and spending more time with their families, had cooked up a plan to arm and train the ragtag Syrian rebels, thus getting the United States directly involved in that horrible civil war.

Now we learn that Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs—both of whom are about to join Clinton and Petraeus in the private sector—also backed the Clinton-Petraeus plan,

Who was against it? Obama.

more at: http://www.thenation.com/blog/172774/obama-opposed-syria-war-plan-clinton-petraeus-panetta-gen-dempsey#


... and so has Bill Clinton.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/13/white-house-pushes-back-at-bill-clinton-over-syria/

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

If action were so blatantly necessary, you'd think other countries would be willing to do winter is coming Aug 2013 #1
I guess Obama is the new Decider-in-Chief. :( reformist2 Aug 2013 #39
What worries me is the possibility that Obama is doing this MoonRiver Aug 2013 #2
I cringed when I originally heard him say that "red line" remark.... Little Star Aug 2013 #4
Absolutely. Never make a threat you can't back up. MoonRiver Aug 2013 #8
That's where I'm at.... Little Star Aug 2013 #11
With you LS. MoonRiver Aug 2013 #20
+1. You'd think he'd know better, as a parent himself. n/t winter is coming Aug 2013 #41
Here's the link. Autumn Aug 2013 #3
Thanks! I just added the link to the OP, Duh on me. Little Star Aug 2013 #6
Seriously? We're going with Unilateral action? Savannahmann Aug 2013 #5
Why does this ... 99Forever Aug 2013 #7
I am the Decider GeorgeGist Aug 2013 #9
Maybe it reminds you of this: ProSense Aug 2013 #10
What legal authority does the President have to unilaterally go to war? FarCenter Aug 2013 #14
Would you be OK with it if Congress gives the go ahead? ProSense Aug 2013 #19
I wouldn't support it, but it would be legal FarCenter Aug 2013 #21
This is horrible newfie11 Aug 2013 #12
An entire summer devoted to rhetoric about secrecy and I'm asked to think HereSince1628 Aug 2013 #13
talk about a dumb ass move...even saying it was a dumb ass thing to do bowens43 Aug 2013 #15
Is it so hard to see how condescending this is? To act as if punishment is the US' call? Bonobo Aug 2013 #16
+1 Little Star Aug 2013 #17
We're the self-appointed wielders of punishment for LuvNewcastle Aug 2013 #27
Imperialism gone mad malaise Aug 2013 #18
I agree. But Britain was told they had to wait for the UN this time, thank Dog! Little Star Aug 2013 #24
Swell. City Lights Aug 2013 #22
I hate "cowboy diplomacy". The whole idea of having strong international organizations like the UN pampango Aug 2013 #23
Well, the USA has INTERESTS over there, dontchaknow.... Little Star Aug 2013 #25
I certainly hope that the US and every other country can be a force to protect civilians and promote pampango Aug 2013 #28
Bingo. Plus maybe if we just became energy independent... Little Star Aug 2013 #31
That's why we have American Exceptionalism. The rules don't apply to us. LuvNewcastle Aug 2013 #29
Exactly. We are not the only country that practices "exceptionalism" (Russia's intervention in pampango Aug 2013 #32
Gotta outdo the previous rugged cowboy jsr Aug 2013 #26
That picture just makes me sad now..... Little Star Aug 2013 #30
same Puzzledtraveller Aug 2013 #42
Well, you're going to need to do some soul searching. AtomicKitten Aug 2013 #43
I have no problem with disagreeing with Hillary on this issue. Or Bill. Little Star Aug 2013 #44
We can only hope mulling it over is as far as it gets. nt AtomicKitten Aug 2013 #45
That's always been my favorite picture of Obama. Autumn Aug 2013 #33
I always thought it was a cool picture until the comparison to cowboy Bush. Little Star Aug 2013 #40
Translation: the military industrial complex is going to profit big time. Initech Aug 2013 #34
It's shareholders of military suppliers and contractors. Dreamer Tatum Aug 2013 #35
All these other countries are smarter than us, they are keeping their noses out of Syria. avaistheone1 Aug 2013 #36
Well, Britain's Cameron is trying like hell to join us, sad to say. Little Star Aug 2013 #37
Sounds like we have to follow the money. avaistheone1 Aug 2013 #47
yep Little Star Aug 2013 #48
Yep, as soon as it gets reassurances from global partners HereSince1628 Aug 2013 #38
Sounds like deja vu all over again. nt raccoon Aug 2013 #46
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»US willing to go it alone...»Reply #43