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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Sunlei

(22,651 posts)
Sat Sep 7, 2013, 03:26 PM Sep 2013

Weekly Address: Calling for Limited Military Action in Syria

Source: White House

In his weekly address, President Obama makes the case for limited and targeted military action to hold the Assad regime accountable for its violation of international norms prohibiting the use of chemical weapons.


&feature=player_embedded

Read more: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/09/06/weekly-address-calling-limited-military-action-syria
23 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Weekly Address: Calling for Limited Military Action in Syria (Original Post) Sunlei Sep 2013 OP
Great President...100% correct...He's spot on !! jessie04 Sep 2013 #1
! blkmusclmachine Sep 2013 #21
People need to listen to what he has to say. wisteria Sep 2013 #2
why do you continue to assume that people aren't listening to what the president is saying? frylock Sep 2013 #6
Hope. blkmusclmachine Sep 2013 #22
Great speach ! Nt Sand Wind Sep 2013 #3
Pres. O,publishes a weekly video address every Saturday morning of his presidency Sunlei Sep 2013 #4
Thanks, it was brief and direct. Nt Sand Wind Sep 2013 #5
I listen to his addresses (audio on the radio) every Sat. morning BumRushDaShow Sep 2013 #7
I had to read the transcript instead of watch it. rug Sep 2013 #8
So true, rug Carolina Sep 2013 #15
Transcript below Tx4obama Sep 2013 #9
Thanks for the text - had time to study it. ConcernedCanuk Sep 2013 #16
Just to Get the War Started, That is His Goal School Teacher Sep 2013 #10
Agreed! Carolina Sep 2013 #14
Some Peace Prize Indeed! mazzarro Sep 2013 #23
I think we have fallen into the illusion that the Democratic Party should be anti-war by default BlueEye Sep 2013 #11
Welcome to DU BlueEye FedUpWithIt All Sep 2013 #17
Boo to the proposed war for terrorism. David__77 Sep 2013 #12
Fine-sounding sophistry masking a business-as-usual agenda Alamuti Lotus Sep 2013 #13
Promising that there will be only a little bit of war fedsron2us Sep 2013 #18
Obama doing what Obama does best. sendero Sep 2013 #19
Meh. blkmusclmachine Sep 2013 #20
 

wisteria

(19,581 posts)
2. People need to listen to what he has to say.
Sat Sep 7, 2013, 03:35 PM
Sep 2013

People have made up their minds without hearing all the facts.

BumRushDaShow

(129,572 posts)
7. I listen to his addresses (audio on the radio) every Sat. morning
Sat Sep 7, 2013, 04:11 PM
Sep 2013

where the #1 rated local news radio station here plays it at ~6:08 am... assuming they remember not to run an extra series of commercials, afterwhich they then "run out of time" to air it before doing the traffic, weather and sports (am guessing the sat feed of the audio portion goes out at 6 am ET).

The same #1 station used to tape Shrub's weekly address and then air his bullshit, without fail, at a more "realistic" time of 10:00 am on Sat. mornings. But naturally, with this black President, they want to make sure that folks w/o internet access to Whitehouse.gov miss it, so then they can pile on with bogus complaints about how the current President does not communicate with the people the same way that FDR did (which he does but shhhhh... FDR didn't do it weekly but that doesn't count.).

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
8. I had to read the transcript instead of watch it.
Sat Sep 7, 2013, 04:19 PM
Sep 2013
But we are the United States of America. We cannot turn a blind eye to images like the ones we’ve seen out of Syria. Failing to respond to this outrageous attack would increase the risk that chemical weapons could be used again; that they would fall into the hands of terrorists who might use them against us, and it would send a horrible signal to other nations that there would be no consequences for their use of these weapons. All of which would pose a serious threat to our national security.


Hegemonist horseshit.

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
9. Transcript below
Sat Sep 7, 2013, 04:40 PM
Sep 2013

Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
The White House
September 7, 2013

Almost three weeks ago in Syria, more than 1,000 innocent people – including hundreds of children – were murdered in the worst chemical weapons attack of the 21st century. And the United States has presented a powerful case to the world that the Syrian government was responsible for this horrific attack on its own people.

This was not only a direct attack on human dignity; it is a serious threat to our national security. There’s a reason governments representing 98 percent of the world’s people have agreed to ban the use of chemical weapons. Not only because they cause death and destruction in the most indiscriminate and inhumane way possible – but because they can also fall into the hands of terrorist groups who wish to do us harm.

That’s why, last weekend, I announced that, as Commander in Chief, I decided that the United States should take military action against the Syrian regime. This is not a decision I made lightly. Deciding to use military force is the most solemn decision we can make as a nation.

As the leader of the world’s oldest Constitutional democracy, I also know that our country will be stronger if we act together, and our actions will be more effective. That’s why I asked Members of Congress to debate this issue and vote on authorizing the use of force.

What we’re talking about is not an open-ended intervention. This would not be another Iraq or Afghanistan. There would be no American boots on the ground. Any action we take would be limited, both in time and scope – designed to deter the Syrian government from gassing its own people again and degrade its ability to do so.

I know that the American people are weary after a decade of war, even as the war in Iraq has ended, and the war in Afghanistan is winding down. That’s why we’re not putting our troops in the middle of somebody else’s war.

But we are the United States of America. We cannot turn a blind eye to images like the ones we’ve seen out of Syria. Failing to respond to this outrageous attack would increase the risk that chemical weapons could be used again; that they would fall into the hands of terrorists who might use them against us, and it would send a horrible signal to other nations that there would be no consequences for their use of these weapons. All of which would pose a serious threat to our national security.

That’s why we can’t ignore chemical weapons attacks like this one – even if they happen halfway around the world. And that’s why I call on Members of Congress, from both parties, to come together and stand up for the kind of world we want to live in; the kind of world we want to leave our children and future generations.

Thank you.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/09/06/weekly-address-calling-limited-military-action-syria

 

ConcernedCanuk

(13,509 posts)
16. Thanks for the text - had time to study it.
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 02:55 AM
Sep 2013

.
.
.

First off - Obama's speech is typical lawyer obfuscation/doublespeak.

As a lawyer he knows he is misleading the people, stating "facts" which in fact are not.

We do not have any proof yet that chemical weapons were used, highly suspected, yes, maybe even probable, but not proven.

Then, and ONLY then(proof that chemical weapons were used), one has to discover WHO used them.

Obama is encouraging sending missiles and dropping bombs on gawd knows who . . .

How many is Obama willing to kill?

CC

 

School Teacher

(71 posts)
10. Just to Get the War Started, That is His Goal
Sat Sep 7, 2013, 06:01 PM
Sep 2013

I don't believe him for a minute. With the powerful forces at play, PNAC, AIPAC and the Neocons, this is not going to end anytime soon. with a "little" strike. This is just a start. I can't believe him anymore. Some Peace Prize! Don't Israel and Saudi Arabia and the CIA have their own armies for this job?

BlueEye

(449 posts)
11. I think we have fallen into the illusion that the Democratic Party should be anti-war by default
Sat Sep 7, 2013, 06:47 PM
Sep 2013

There is no historical precedent for that. Democratic presidents have been just as willing as Republicans to commit the military to foreign interventions. Furthermore, a number of those interventions ended rather poorly. Pacifism is a popular liberal position, but a political party as massive and influential as the Democrats could never practically adopt it into its ruling ideology.

I do not think that is necessarily a bad thing. War is terrible, but sometimes it is a necessary extension of diplomacy. I believe that Democratic presidents are *less* motivated by defense industry lobbying in their interventionist pursuits, or at least there is a more genuine element of humanitarianism than with the Republicans, who are blatantly guilty of war profiteering. Take as evidence the fact that all military actions launched by Democrats since the 1990's have been more or less limited in scope, with better outcomes.

Which brings me to my last point. President Obama says this will be limited. What evidence do we have to doubt him on that? Obama's foreign policy is very reminiscent of Clinton's, which was also interventionist. But you can not deny that neither Clinton nor Obama have (to date) started a protracted war like Bush 41 and 43 did.

I voted for President Obama in 2012 knowing full well that Libya might not be the last American intervention we see. The President says it will be limited. I support him on that and I have no reason to doubt it will indeed be limited in nature (using previous actions as well as Clinton as a precedent).

David__77

(23,535 posts)
12. Boo to the proposed war for terrorism.
Sat Sep 7, 2013, 07:59 PM
Sep 2013

It's highly insulting that it's a war for terrorism is being proposed on the anniversary of 9/11.

fedsron2us

(2,863 posts)
18. Promising that there will be only a little bit of war
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 06:40 AM
Sep 2013

is rather like saying I am only going to make you a little bit pregnant.

Presumably Obama put on those really cool sunglasses he owns so he could not read the briefing from General Martin Dempsey and the Joint Chief Of Staffs outlining what would be required in the terms of military intervention to neutralise all the Chemical weapons facilities in Syria. It is going to require a lot more than a few token missiles and a bit of bombing from the air to achieve that end.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101001802

sendero

(28,552 posts)
19. Obama doing what Obama does best.
Sun Sep 8, 2013, 07:16 AM
Sep 2013

..... which is talk. Action to back up the talk? Only if it is sticking our already bruised noses into yet another place it does not belong.

Glad to see, I guess, that he can actually get worked up enough to do something for once.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Weekly Address: Calling f...