This whole thing seems really weird

There has to be more to it than we know

Wonder when the book will come out

They gave daddy Bush his war on his way out. Why can't Obama have anthing but drones?



But yeah. Strange it is. Something triggered this instant hysteria maybe. I mean, they don't even care this much about doing something real about climate change which is threatening to starve us out of here.

Because you don't have a crystal ball thats going to give you a head count for an alternate reality. You just have a talking point.

What we can all agree on is what is currently happening in this reality, which is chaos and death:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/special-report-we-all-thought-libya-had-moved-on--it-has-but-into-lawlessness-and-ruin-8797041.html

There are no good options. There are no obligations to choose bad options. All bad options chosen will send those hens home to roost one day. But afterall, thatll just be another excuse to choose another bad option.

Really, you can trust all you want, but there isn't a "correct" decision, and the US isn't the one that has to try and figure out the least incorrect one

These politicians don't give a shit about peons dying

There are plenty of people in the US dying prematurely from lack of money, healthcare and other resources. And plenty more around the world who could use some basic things like clean water to keep the croak-rate down

That Obama would jump into this shitstorm is unfathomable

Im unnerved that people continually talk about how this will impact elections or whatever. The US is thinking about going to war. Who fuckn cares who wins the beauty contests or gets footnotes in history books? The last thing anyone should be doing is framing this whole thing in a political manner (how it will hurt or help _____). For the love of God, I can damn well guarantee some lovely souls are going to get their brains torn out from US shrapnel. I don't fuckn care about politics as far as war is concerned

That's all these politicians DO care about. And it has massive influence on their future earning potential

That's why I can't believe Obama would let himself get in this spot

Last (and first)time I looked he was a politician. Oh, wait, let me look again...yup.Still a politician.

but never enough to feed children in our own. If there is a single person that isn't ashamed of that in our country, they should be. And they should be asking who are they voting into office - people that think it is a priority to feed and educate children, or inflate the pay of a military contractor?

And let's not forget Head Start and programs for the sick and elderly. There seems to always be money for warring and killing. What a sick set of values we as a country have embraced.

I don't think he will disappoint.

Or he just doesn't like gas? Maybe they bought the wrong gas? Or they bought it from the wrong country? Maybe only our MIC should make money off child death? What is it?

what about the children killed by his drones?!

A country that cuts food stamps and headstart at home is not going into Syria for children or humanitarian purposes

I guess for some people it makes a difference how they die ...quickly or long and slow.

See my post #72

They do not have a frigging clue what they are talking about here.

Is that you believe that he is only interested in his legacy. You are wrong. The legacy that he wants to leave is not for him but for us. The American people.

As for...

"There are plenty of people in the US dying prematurely from lack of money, healthcare and other resources."

Do you understand what ACA is doing for us? Have you watched and listened to the changes it will bring? As each part of ACA comes into affect, more people will benefit. You do know about children under 26 being able to stay on their parents plan, right? You have heard that people with preexisting conditions will not be disqualified from a health insurance plan, yes? It also lets the new health care law make Medicare stronger by adding new benefits, fighting fraud, cutting costs, and improving care for patients. Affordable Care Act Rules also acts on Expanding Access to Preventive Services for Women. Wow preventative health care!!!!

So yup according to you he cares nothing about the dying. His jobs bills have been destroyed by our dear do nothing congress that not only wishes to repeal ACA. They have never moved on the jobs act. Their only wish for this country is to take down this President. If it means taking down our Country at the same time, in their opinion, so be it.

Shame on you leftstreet.

when the leader tries to solve problems (without cooperation from Congress), or gripe about the government 'interfering or controlling' their lives and then griping that the government is not doing enough for them.

It makes my blood pressure rise when I see these comments. They understand nothing, or don't wish to.

You made my night. Thank you!

is a clear message that killing people with chemical weapons won't be tolerated.

More corpses for the reaper

A Democrat was needed to do these things.

The Plutonomy didn't send him to the White House for him to coast.

The surprising Kennedy endorsement of Obama makes sense now

LOL Hillary was divisive enough with her own base, let alone the GOPers. There's no way she could have pulled off mandated insurance premiums, TPP agreements, wars, chained CPO or any of the other austerity measures they're planning. No way

Had he lived, I think he'd have been appalled by BHO's neocon ways. He voted against IWR and spoke passionately about his opposition. He was for healthcare for all (not health insurance). He was a true liberal and not afraid to use the term...

Ted Kennedy WAS a true liberal...Obama?...I don't think so.

It is my opinion that the American voters sent Obama to the White House. If we voted for him we must have not been paying attention to who we were voting for.

"Whom" is the objective case you want, rather than "who." Do not insert a space before your question mark. Finally, you should use a period or other punctuation mark at the end of each sentence.

It is extremely poor form to blame voters for this bait-and-switch disaster of an administration. Voters carried Obama to victory with joy and tears in 2008 and were repaid with a big "fuck you," again and again. By 2012, voters who wished to defeat the Republican candidate had only two possible options: They could return the viable, slightly less evil corporate liar to office, or they could cast a vote of conscience for a more honest candidate who could not possibly win.

Have a nice day.


[font color = red] War on Syria? Deja bullshit. [/font color]

There is probably more to it than we know. Some people are endowed with principle before pride.

to support it.

I'm not sure what you're talking about

to try to get support. it's completely missing in this case. it's like they don't really care how congress votes.

The Kerry on this matter is not the careful, collected, nuanced--and dare I say boring--Kerry we've seen for decades. Something is off. And I'd venture to say the same about Obama too.

Maybe they don't care because this is a sideshow and they know they have the votes secured (after Congress symbolically works toward the pre-agreed authorization while securing their constituencies), or because theyll do it regardless. This, like all the other US drama, may just be drama to convince the idiot population that their heroic reps fought for them and thought this all out on the way to war. In my opinion, Sausage making is more about convincing the population that whatever is made is the best theyll get and in their interests.

Behind the scenes action is not seen because it's- oh, never mind...

The pressure is intense.

it may not matter much because he knows he can strike without congress approval.

The line that he can strike with or without Congressional approval is for domestic consumption.

Any aggression on a sovereign state without UNSC approval is a war crime. Obama knows that. It's a long haul from Nobel Peace Prize to War Criminal. He's investing every ounce he has in this, to my great chagrin.

He appears to be fighting hard and very determined to lob some missiles into Syria. But when it comes to domestic issues such as tax cuts and dealing with the republicans on a number of issues, he was quickly ready to give in and bargain away all sorts of things - public option, extended the Bush tax cuts, accepted much lower top rate instead of the $500,000 he had been speaking about for months, etc. It is interesting to see what issues he seems ready to be a hard-ass about and make a stand...

I can hear it already

I can't believe after Obama's clever chess maneuvering of the voting public, the result would produce this completely disastrous miscalculation

It is a not very flattering picture.

War and Oil from a Democrat.

Of course, we all know Obama isn't really a Democrat.

with republicans to try to get their support .

all of that is missing in this case.

He's cancelled a trip to CA in order to remain in DC to meet with them and lobby for it. He's had Kerry on the Hill using the strongest imaginable rhetoric.

It's absurd to claim he isn't fighting for this. just ridiculous.

get real!

He cant get anything through the house anyway... this wont really matter to the status quo domestically.

Do you remember the days when we where about to enter Libya? There were people all over the place claiming that even the most mediocre failure would spell an end to Obama's Presidency and give the government back to the GOP. Well, guess what? That didn't happen....and it won't happen with Syria, either

If something DOES happen in '14, it won't be because of Syria.....no doubt that the GOP will use that excuse, but I think most of us know that it will be because of at the very least, renewed election theft efforts.....on top of other things.

It's a poor comparison.

There were still *plenty* of people against us participating in Libya, and yet, we came out unscathed, even after Benghazi.
TBH, this particular things doesn't, and WON'T make a whole lot of difference on the domestic front, in terms of election impacts.

It wasn't nearly as high profile. There was a real coalition. There wasn't a vote in Congress. There wasn't the very high profile international opposition. There wasn't a defeat in Parliament that has had ramifications here.

It is a very poor comparison and I didn't say anything in the op about it having an impact on elections.

And there was plenty of opposition to Libya as well, even if not quite as much in regards to Syria.

I didn't say anything in the op about it having an impact on elections.

And the opposition was completely different. Both the opposition to intervention, AND the opposition that the US would face on the battlefield. Russia, Iran, and other forces will not simply sit by idly if intervention proceeds. The comparison is foolhardy.

I opposed the intervention in Libya. But I did so out of a principle, not because I thought it would lead to international catastrophe. Syria is very different indeed, and an attack will threaten our national security.

Syria is very different indeed, and an attack will threaten our national security.

"renewed election theft efforts"

Wow.

I'm not saying its not going to happen but come on. I had an old coach who used to tell us, "never leave it up to the ref". If the Democrats were doing their job, nothing would be close enough to steal without overtly sending armed thugs to the ballot boxes.

But I am glad the third way has a pre-canned excuse now for why their policies bring electoral ruin

I mean, come on, man, this whole hullabaloo over Syria, the WWIII fearmongering that's been going on, etc. is all beginning to look like nothing more than another distraction from the fact that people are beginning to wake up, *en masse*, to the fact that the .1%, the Powers That Be, are scrambling to hold on to whatever power may be left. People are beginning to realize the full extent of what's been happening, and they're starting to get scared: look at how Karl Rove, perhaps one of their top-most guys in D.C., reacted when Romney lost last year's election. That was a critical clue for me, personally.

We still got a long way to go, though, in the information department: Putin is a puppet of theirs, too(even if not directly so; he is certainly a useful idiot at the very least.). So is Al-Assad(and so was his father). So are the jihadist mullahs in Iran, and the clerics in the hellhole known as Saudi Arabia. So are the Muslim Brotherhood. So are most of the people in control of China, etc. and the list could go on and on, forever, maybe.

If the resolution fails in both houses, that is merely one vote one one issue.

The Congress still has to gain some sort of credible track record of accomplishment if they aren't willing to be thoroughly rejected at the polls in 2014. That being the case, President Obama will have plenty of opportunity to continue with his agenda in the next 3.5 years.

because involvement in Syria is a fucking disaster waiting to happen.

Why should we trust him?

The arguments in favor are weak, very weak. To say this is essential for us to do is a joke. To say it's necessary after you go about talking about a red line, well, that's just saving face for something you probably shouldn't have said in the first place.

I am extremely tired of the egotism on display here.

How about listening to the American people? How about listening to and caring for those who did the most to get you into office, twice?

Too much to expect, I guess.

But I hope he gets a drubbing on this. I hope he gets a drubbing and learns from it.

And no, I don't think that is the end of his presidency. It all depends on what he puts forward. And when it stinks, I think we should say so, and say it loudly.

I hope he'll learn.

I don't trust him, and I hope he gracefully manages to eat a bit of humble pie. It seems very much in order.

And the UN, etc. Obama is not going don by himself on this now.

They've all pretty much said they want to give it a pass. If the slaughter continues in Syria everyone has already priced that into their calculation just as they have for all the other mindless slaughters concurrently raging around this sad planet.

There has been attempts to get Putin to intervene but so far no results. I am hoping with the defection of some of the military and others the Assad government will crumble from within.

But that doesn't explain how the domestic and international "No War" faction is to blame for the President's precipitous actions.

Are you suggesting Obama should have been given license to operate outside international consensus?

There have only been 5 wars declared by congress in the history of our nation. All others were waged without congress ever declaring war.

If congress doesn't vote his way, we are going in anyway. That's where my money is. I don't think there is anything that will stop him from using his executive powers to take us to war.

Obama will be able to say something Bill Clinton can never say about Rwanda.

I tried.

I don't think histroy will blame him for that.

Please study the situation more closely - "Assad" did not kill all of those 100,000. Al Qaeda-allied terrorists on a cleansing campaign were responsible for tens of thousands. I can see where your sympathies lie.

You make many assumptions. Are things that black/white to you, or do you just have a comprehension problem?

You also seem to think assad's government forces are solely focused on " Al Qaeda-allied terrorists". Please study the situation more closely.

Are you sure you don't need to study the situation more closely?

Assad backers reportedly make up 43 percent of dead in Syria

BEIRUT — A new count of the dead in Syria by the group that’s considered the most authoritative tracker of violence there has concluded that more than 40 percent were government soldiers and pro-government militia members.

The new numbers from the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights provide a previously unseen view of the toll the civil war has taken on communities that have supported the government. They also cast doubt on the widely repeated assertion that the government of President Bashar Assad is responsible for an overwhelming majority of the deaths there.

According to the new statistics, which the Syrian Observatory passed to McClatchy by phone, at least 96,431 people have lost their lives in the more than two years of violence that’s wracked Syria.

Of those, Syrian soldiers and members of the government’s security forces account for 24,617, while members of pro-government militias make up 17,031. Taken together, those deaths account for 43.2 percent of the total recorded.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/06/03/192881/assad-backers-reportedly-make.html#.UipTbsbUmSr#storylink=cpy

And if it needs to be added ..... of course, one civilian death is too many.

.."This is still a democracy, and I've had my say. Congress says no,
so Syria's on their own.

Except if he is wise, he will shift to putting HUGE effort into supporting
prosecuting Assad at The Hague, keep pushing for action through the UN,
and provide massive humanitarian aid to the victims in Syria.

I agree with you. He shifted the responsibility to congress and the american people. If they say no then the decision is theirs as are the consequences.

Not just for Pres. Obama, but everyone.

then I suppose we can kill all the brown people we want.
http://www.google.com/images?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&channel=s&hl=en-US&biw=&bih=&q=White+phosphorus+Fallujah&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ei=Zm0qUuzuGOfziQLGkYGYBQ&ved=0CC8QsAQ

Personally, I think we should clean our own house first before attacking god knows who forgod knows what in a civil war damn the repercussions and complications.

What, the Republican House is going to stop cooperating with him over the Syria vote?

turned down by Congress. Considering the overwhelming opposition by members of the public in both parties such a scenario could put the Democratic Party at extreme risk in the 2014 midterms. And that's the last thing that we need to happen.

And it didn't happen like the fearmongers said it would.

The one thing that DOES worry me, however, is if the Goppers are able to steal and otherwise jack the '14 midterms, perhaps to the point where they even get the Senate back. And then when people start asking questions, they'll just say, "Oh, it was because Obama intervened in Syria, blah blah blah". And even though that almost certainly wouldn't be a significant factor, some people might actually be stupid enough to buy it, not just the dumbasses making up many of today's GOP voters, but some misguided dopes on OUR side as well....you know, mainly the Greenwald and Hamsher types. And THAT scares me.

Russia threatening to strike Saudi Arabia if we bombed Libya. They really, really, REALLY like Assad. We gonna play chicken with Putin now?

Until international condemnation of Gaddafi got bad enough to the point where they didn't have a choice BUT to back off. Al-Assad is heading in that same direction as well; the only key difference here is, many of the nations would rather try the U.N. first and see how that goes; it may indeed take a while, but if all the right cards are played, as with Libya, then there won't be a problem.

n/t

Putin is already using Syria to distract from his country's OWN problems........(they never really needed that naval base, anyway.....though, frankly, I believe the same holds true for most of our facilities as well).

down. And the attack was done under the auspices of NATO. If Obama were to attack Syria after getting rejected by Congress it would be a much different situation.

No one is in favor of this conflict, military adventure, excursion, what have you. Just don't call it a "war in the classic sense".

I hope we're being punked in some elaborate hoak for Machiavellian political purposes, but that's wishful thinking.

They were horrible pictures, indeed, and the fate of those pitiful Syrian children is terrible to contemplate.

Excuse me, though, if I note that a great many Americans have seen pictures of thousands of equally pitiful children who have been killed and maimed in our wars on Iraq and Afghanistan. By now Americans are thoroughly educated concerning how well our military performs when it comes to securing safety for the children caught in war zones.

and FWIW his presidency has been dead in the water for years. The only things that get done are republican initiatives. I expect TPP and KeystoneXL to sail through. Anything the least bit populist is doomed.

the world going up in smoke.

Should Obama lose face he can always get back on the horse again. People's memories in this country are very, very short.

Or perhaps Hitlerian levels of stupidity....and I don't think that Putin is Hitler reborn, even if he IS going along with anti-LGBT efforts and isn't exactly an honest fellow.....and then again, the Russian establishment *NEEDS* something to distract from increasing amounts of unrest at home: why not try to bloviate endlessly about how Assad isn't a threat, that all the rebels are jihadists, etc.?

International issues are pretty separate from domestic issues, and "getting involved" has always been a tough sell for any president. Note how long it took for us to get into WWI, and then how long it took for FDR to commit us in WWII. Both against strong opposition. "What's in it for us" is one argument that comes up, which sounds selfish but is really pretty sensible. Sometimes nothing is in it for us, but "the right thing to do".

As said, I can see good or bad outcomes going either way, or perhaps bad outcomes both ways. I credit the president with having looked at the facts and decided on the course his conscience requires, and then working hard for it.

I know most people here would like to see that kind of commitment on domestic and economic issues more often, that willingness to put everything on the line, from any politician.

instead, he's got all the hots for a war of aggression with Syria???????

Are you shitting me?

and have lost, again!

Must be rough never being right about President Obama!

Never showed this kind of fight for anything progressive

If he had, imagine the good he could have done. He could have improved lives - instead of taking them.

There are a lot of people against dropping bombs on Syria...

Can he be anymore lame-duck than he is right now?? The Repubs block him on everything - why shouldn't they block him on this bombing, also?

The President has three years plus left on his second term. If the Repubs vote against the AUMF, then that would indeed set a precedent.

But that would be good!

That would mean that our country was looking inward, perhaps a little isolationist? But it would also mean that our military footprint would be smaller. And that would mean that there might be money for other things we might need? Such as roads, bridges, and streetlights.

And that might mean that we try to live our lives in peace, rather than unending war?

It seems like the political equivalent of Pickett's Charge.

By taking this path, he is putting the whole party in jeopardy, making 2014 potentially a disaster, and greatly reducing our odds of holding the WH in 2016.

And for what? He and Kerry talk about the children. So what is the real principle here? How many children have they killed with their drone strikes? How many previous chemical attacks in Syria were ignored? Why did this one suddenly rise to become the most important issue facing America?

I don't suppose it has anything to do with the fact that, immediately before Obama started sounding the war drums, there was a real uprising building with regard to the security industrial complex.

I don't really see any other reasonable explanation. The real question isn't why he taking such a risk on the Syria thing. The question is why he is willing to lose everything by carrying water for the Security Industrial Complex.

(And really, it isn't such a hard question to answer. We just don't like to face the reality of the obvious answer.)

Losing in Congress or the confidence of many Americans is not as devistating as losing one's principles.

If he loses this it will be embarrassing, but I hardly think he will become a lame duck.

In fact, him losing would probably be a victory overall for the democratic party. I expect most no votes to be democrats and most yes votes to be republicans and given the way the public is responding to this issue it will mainly be the republicans who pay the price for the vote. We could even get the house and senate during the mid-terms.

I am probably being way too optimistic, but I expect this to be like the Amash NSA vote with more democrats being on the correct side of this issue than the warmonger party! If that does happen Obama would actually be able to push more progressive legislation through

He would be anything but a lame duck if that happens!

and make him look weak and ineffective as a leader

he should have never brought this to Congress unless he was sure he had the votes to get it passed

So great to run into you again.

Obama is putting his legacy on the line? He will become a premature lame duck? Really????

Yikes! I bet he is shivering in his boots right now. Damn! What the hell was he thinking? Geez Louise, why in hell should he be concentrating on the people and the children that were gassed. Stupid man he should have been only mindful of his legacy.

FYI, our President is not concerned about his legacy.The one that you joke about. He is concerned about the legacy of the people of this nation.

Shame on you cali.

For me and so many people here it it GOTV 2014. Vote the bastard GOP the hell out of congress. They stand for no one!

not concerned about his legacy.

This makes you ROFL. Are you serious? This is your response?

Frylock, I believe that have lost your soul. Shame on you for your response. Your answer has to be the most despicable response I have ever encountered.

go troll someone else with that guilt-trip garbage.

Last edited Sat Sep 7, 2013, 01:48 AM - Edit history (1)

He is deferring to Congress and setting a precedent regarding the use of force that makes it harder for future presidents to launch airstrikes at a whim.

I'm not sure if I believe that is the goal, but that is the likely outcome, which isn't a bad thing in my mind.