Latest Breaking News

Beer Swiller

(44 posts)

81. He's not waiting at all.

Thu Aug 29, 2013, 07:36 PM

Aug 2013

Read the New York Times link the OP provided, why don't you? Yes, his people said a final decision had NOT been made, and so did he on Sunday, but the fact that Obama is even considering a unilateral military intervention is very disturbing.

Even Bush didn't do THAT. Remember the "coalition of the willing" and all that nonsense?

Sometimes, you have to look beyond the party label.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

126 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Obama Willing to Pursue Solo Syria Strikes, Aides Say [View all] dixiegrrrrl Aug 2013 OP

Without congressional approval? Since when did he become "the decider"? dkf Aug 2013 #1

I am not sure what law it is but doesn't he have 60-90 days before he has to get congressional hrmjustin Aug 2013 #4

That's the War Powers Act. former9thward Aug 2013 #10

Thanks. I agree he should go to congress. I wonder what congress would do. hrmjustin Aug 2013 #12

Same thing they did with Libya. Xithras Aug 2013 #51

Hoping someone can find the answer for me... iamthebandfanman Aug 2013 #59

Legal for two reasons. Xithras Aug 2013 #80

Thank you! iamthebandfanman Aug 2013 #82

Legally I don't believe it has even been decided by the courts whether the WPA is constitutional or 24601 Aug 2013 #121

The Constitution gives Congress more power over the military than that. Xithras Aug 2013 #122

Enough of them will do... awoke_in_2003 Aug 2013 #93

it appears that Putin is now 'the decider' big_dog Aug 2013 #13

He HAS to consider the cost to Russia if he "abandons" Syria dixiegrrrrl Aug 2013 #31

I'm going to hate myself for clicking a debka link… but what the heck... KittyWampus Aug 2013 #68

Having one "Decider in Chief" was enough for one life time AsahinaKimi Aug 2013 #40

Did clinton get congressional approval iamthebandfanman Aug 2013 #48

Wasn't that Bush I? Or are we speaking the of no fly zone? dkf Aug 2013 #50

was bush president iamthebandfanman Aug 2013 #53

See below: dkf Aug 2013 #62

Oh , so this is different iamthebandfanman Aug 2013 #67

It's not against us. Self defense comes into play in '93 because they tried to kill Bush I. dkf Aug 2013 #69

'self defense' iamthebandfanman Aug 2013 #71

We aren't at risk from the Syrians...not unless we go there and put ourselves in danger. dkf Aug 2013 #72

Riiiight iamthebandfanman Aug 2013 #73

so was it? wildbilln864 Aug 2013 #92

The party affiliation of a former President isn't relevant. That it was a former President isn't 24601 Aug 2013 #124

This won't be popular among many... philosslayer Aug 2013 #2

"I trust my President. And I think we all should." Beer Swiller Aug 2013 #29

Hey! There are other intellectual giants that agree with you! Vinnie From Indy Aug 2013 #33

Thank you! Beer Swiller Aug 2013 #78

Geez, you Carolina Aug 2013 #85

LOL Skittles Aug 2013 #117

So, if you don't like it, and you know why LibAsHell Aug 2013 #126

Three things: babylonsister Aug 2013 #3

the UN is leaving a day earlier than they originally planned magical thyme Aug 2013 #5

He hasn't done anything yet, so hold your horses. nt babylonsister Aug 2013 #8

As I posted elsewhere, Wikileaks reported Syria attack was being planned in 2012. dixiegrrrrl Aug 2013 #16

Afghanistan was also on the original PNAC list. magical thyme Aug 2013 #19

ahhh..thank you. dixiegrrrrl Aug 2013 #23

they inspected the largest site and the previous sites. The 3 in question are the most recent Assad KittyWampus Aug 2013 #75

iow, the 3 in question are the ones on which the pending attack are based. magical thyme Aug 2013 #112

No, the 3 in question happened after Assad's forces used chemical weapons on civilians near Damascus KittyWampus Aug 2013 #113

He's not waiting at all. Beer Swiller Aug 2013 #81

"The intelligence does not tie Mr. Assad directly to the attack" KamaAina Aug 2013 #6

No. dixiegrrrrl Aug 2013 #35

And he should. jessie04 Aug 2013 #7

Pity the victims of chemical warfare by the U.S. former9thward Aug 2013 #14

+1. grntuscarora Aug 2013 #17

Don't forget the white phosphorus and depleted uranium we dumped on Iraq magical thyme Aug 2013 #21

Yes, hypocrisy thou name is legion. former9thward Aug 2013 #25

And our great ally Saddam Hussein using CW against Iran KamaAina Aug 2013 #32

True...so i guess that makes it ok. jessie04 Aug 2013 #52

We actually gave Saddam nerve gas munitions. Some were found in occupied Iraq. another_liberal Aug 2013 #83

That's how we knew he had WMD. KamaAina Aug 2013 #96

I'm sure. another_liberal Aug 2013 #97

unnamed Pentagon officials insist strike within days magical thyme Aug 2013 #9

but of course they do moonlady0623 Aug 2013 #20

What is this? damnedifIknow Aug 2013 #11

Statements like that moonlady0623 Aug 2013 #22

+1 n/t wildbilln864 Aug 2013 #46

What law has President Obama broken here? JustAnotherGen Aug 2013 #61

I'm tired of preemptive war moonlady0623 Aug 2013 #74

BEFORE the British vote, eh? dixiegrrrrl Aug 2013 #42

Jesus Christ. I hadn't seen that yet. arewenotdemo Aug 2013 #125

*GROAN* Brigid Aug 2013 #15

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2013 #18

Speaking of impeachment dixiegrrrrl Aug 2013 #47

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2013 #54

The Repubs are quietly there to support the President when he needs it Hydra Aug 2013 #56

They could, of course, be setting him up. Xithras Aug 2013 #64

He got lucky in Libya, imagine the captured F15 pilots on SyrianTV jakeXT Aug 2013 #106

**** that. TheCowsCameHome Aug 2013 #24

That would be a war crime, and an impeachable offense. David__77 Aug 2013 #26

This would give Congressional Repubs a reason for impeachment, something they now lack. red dog 1 Aug 2013 #116

I don't support cowboying our way through.... Agnosticsherbet Aug 2013 #27

NO!!!! Auggie Aug 2013 #28

An Army Of One KamaAina Aug 2013 #30

The same anonymous WH officials who have been pushing this since March '11 leveymg Aug 2013 #34

+ 1 red dog 1 Aug 2013 #114

His political education wouldn't be complete if he hasn't read it. It is the single most important leveymg Aug 2013 #118

Maybe he needs to re-read it! red dog 1 Aug 2013 #119

I'm sure some of his staff are intimately familiar with the details, and he's a good leveymg Aug 2013 #120

I agree 100 percent. red dog 1 Aug 2013 #123

Whats PNAC? darkangel218 Aug 2013 #36

The Project for a New American Century..... wildbilln864 Aug 2013 #55

Wtf..theyre nuts!! darkangel218 Aug 2013 #60

Yes and.... wildbilln864 Aug 2013 #91

Simply NUCKING FUTS! Plucketeer Aug 2013 #37

Why doesn't President Obama put pressure on both sides to sit down & talk in Geneva? red dog 1 Aug 2013 #38

Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2013 #39

One problem is that there are not just two sides to this civil war. another_liberal Aug 2013 #45

You are correct. Beer Swiller Aug 2013 #94

is it war mongering yet...? mike_c Aug 2013 #41

Eh, the resolute Obama. jsr Aug 2013 #43

Go George W. Bush one better! another_liberal Aug 2013 #44

ill ask you since the folks above havent answered... iamthebandfanman Aug 2013 #57

What President Obama wants to do and what he finds he has to do . . . another_liberal Aug 2013 #65

Its always not the same iamthebandfanman Aug 2013 #70

The fact remains, Saddam did not use that occasion to launch retaliatory attacks. another_liberal Aug 2013 #77

Why are you citing something from decades ago? David__77 Aug 2013 #86

No, and he was wrong then too Alamuti Lotus Aug 2013 #102

If he does this the republicans will have grounds to impeach him kimbutgar Aug 2013 #49

Yes - they won't return his "looking forward" favor. polichick Aug 2013 #63

This message was self-deleted by its author polichick Aug 2013 #58

He's vying for another Nobel peace prize. ozone_man Aug 2013 #66

Somehow I doubt this report. DCBob Aug 2013 #76

So is the idea that Assad would use chemical weapons on his own people at this point in time. fletchthedubs Aug 2013 #87

There is no conclusive evidence that he did. Beer Swiller Aug 2013 #88

Dumb idea. nt ladjf Aug 2013 #79

Gee, I guess Carolina Aug 2013 #84

Amen! nt Beer Swiller Aug 2013 #89

BIG, BIG MISTAKE!!! Listen to me!!! Rosa Luxemburg Aug 2013 #90

NO. DeSwiss Aug 2013 #95

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! OnyxCollie Aug 2013 #98

But, but, but..... he has a Nobel Peace Prize! Surely he would never unilaterally use force!!! Pterodactyl Aug 2013 #99

I think there should be a Multinational Appeasement Prize. MAP for short. nt adirondacker Aug 2013 #101

This constitutional law professor says it's unconstitutional. ForgoTheConsequence Aug 2013 #100

I scored straight As on CL in junior college darkangel218 Aug 2013 #103

this is about saving face quadrature Aug 2013 #104

Yes. A true statesman would back off. Celefin Aug 2013 #109

Deja vu pettypace Aug 2013 #105

War hawk. blkmusclmachine Aug 2013 #107

Give back your ill-gotten "Peace Prize," BHO. blkmusclmachine Aug 2013 #108

What is BHO ? Sand Wind Aug 2013 #110

President Obama's initials Skittles Aug 2013 #111

Oh, ok, Barrack Hussein Obama...nt Sand Wind Aug 2013 #115