General Discussion

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)

23. um. The only way to get a draft AUMF out of the senate committee was to

Mon Sep 9, 2013, 10:47 PM

Sep 2013

sell your soul to John McCain --

But the committee also voted to accept controversial amendments proposed by hawkish Republican senator John McCain that would explicitly make it a policy of the US to seek to "change the momentum of the battlefield" in ways that would force Assad to negotiate his resignation.

"It is the policy of the United States to change the momentum on the battlefield in Syria so as to create favourable conditions for a negotiated settlement that ends the conflict and leads to a democratic government in Syria," said the second of two amendments proposed by McCain and Democrat Chris Coons.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/04/syria-senate-committee-vote-military-authorization-obama

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

48 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So now history is being rewritten to ignore that regime change was on the table? [View all] R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2013 OP

Meh. It'll be yet another story tomorrow. n/t winter is coming Sep 2013 #1

Regime change was an explicit goal in the Senate draft AUMF. morningfog Sep 2013 #2

In some Senate draft that hasn't been voted on? n/t pnwmom Sep 2013 #7

The VIDEO is from 4 months ago May 16, 2013 n/t NOVA_Dem Sep 2013 #10

So? Wanting Assad to step down isn't the same as being willing pnwmom Sep 2013 #13

the article is dated 2011 notadmblnd Sep 2013 #38

In the Senate draft out of the Foreign Relations Committee. The one that passed the committee. morningfog Sep 2013 #40

I am beginning to think we want a war newfie11 Sep 2013 #3

it came from 2 years ago. JoePhilly Sep 2013 #5

The OP was muddying up the waters with an article from 2 years ago, pnwmom Sep 2013 #8

AHAHAHAHAHA! Like that matters. R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2013 #9

Obama wasn't threatening in 2011 to attack Syria to bring about regime change pnwmom Sep 2013 #11

The video was from May 16, 2013. Come on. At least try to be consistent. R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2013 #15

Calling for Assad to be replaced is very different from being willing to start a war pnwmom Sep 2013 #17

What do you believe that the USA is doing right now? R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2013 #18

There isn't one cohesive rebel group. And the strongest of the groups pnwmom Sep 2013 #42

Actually the war would be used to "change the momentum on the battlefield" Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #24

McCain is more hawkish on Syria than Obama has ever been. McCain wanted boots on the ground. nt pnwmom Sep 2013 #43

There's nothing in the resolution passed by the SFRC about changing the momentum on the bornskeptic Sep 2013 #44

Especially when we can just arm the rebels. Let them fight and die to achieve our ends. Comrade Grumpy Sep 2013 #39

Give them a break, pnwmom-not. That's all they have is crap like this. Cha Sep 2013 #37

The perpetually outraged aren't going to get a PNAC war like they hoped. JoePhilly Sep 2013 #46

Regime change was not the goal of the potential strikes. JoePhilly Sep 2013 #4

um. The only way to get a draft AUMF out of the senate committee was to Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #23

And? JoePhilly Sep 2013 #45

I've never argued Obama was waving his PNAC. I've argued against it, in fact. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #47

Well Done. bvar22 Sep 2013 #48

It wasn't. Not in 2013. Obama explicitly took it off the table -- your article was from 2 years ago. pnwmom Sep 2013 #6

Are you suggesting that President Obama was for it before he was against it? R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2013 #12

I'm suggesting that it is a completely different thing to call for Assad to resign pnwmom Sep 2013 #14

See post #18. R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2013 #19

Fuck post #18. phleshdef Sep 2013 #21

What about post #24? Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #25

Yea, I'm well aware of what came out of the senate committee. phleshdef Sep 2013 #26

It reinforces the premise of the OP. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #28

It has everything to do with regime change, my little chicken. R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2013 #29

DId Kerry say in opening remarks to the senate committee last week, cthulu2016 Sep 2013 #32

The true believers only fool themselves LittleBlue Sep 2013 #16

There is nothing WRONG with wanting regime change in Syria. phleshdef Sep 2013 #20

Please stop with the hyperventilation. R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2013 #31

don't forget anyone who is for peace also has a sexual fetish for shirtless putin! bobduca Sep 2013 #34

Are you part of the al Queda fan club? former9thward Sep 2013 #36

I missed the memo. Am I not even supposed to *want* regime change in Syria now? Recursion Sep 2013 #22

That was no where near a threat to go to war bhikkhu Sep 2013 #27

Uhhh, ummmm, and the problem with "regime change" ---- IS????????1 nt UTUSN Sep 2013 #30

Revisionist Present bobduca Sep 2013 #33

Just more proof that this has nothing to do with chemical weapons, and is part of GoneFishin Sep 2013 #35

History is alway being rewritten and its' not history until it's done. Uncle Joe Sep 2013 #41