RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria

RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DesideriScuri -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 8:02:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri I know he's convinced that the Assad regime used the chem weapons. I just don't know, though. It seems way too early for that determination, imo. Too many conflicting reports. Do you have access to the intel reports that the Prez is using? The media, as has been posted, is showing the UN investigation team is leaning towards the rebels being behind it (they do admit that their evidence isn't conclusive yet). Now, Obama is basing his determination on CIA intel and interviews from locals. The UN team is basing it's determination on having investigated the blast zone(s) and interviews from locals. There is also a report that one of the rebel groups is admitting that it was the rebels. I am not saying the President is wrong. I'm saying I don't know that he's right. Considering I believed W, way back when, I'm much more skeptical today. Even if it turns out I was wrong, at least I would have been wrong in a way that was "safer." The problem is where would the rebels have gotten a sarin artillery shell? You don't just whip up high purity sarin in that quantity in a small lab. Saudi Arabia, perhaps? My guess is that it was already in Syria. And it's probably Russian. According to the link, it wasn't already in Syria. If it was Assad's regime that used it, I wouldn't be surprised to find out it was from Iraq, Iran or Russia.

RacerJim -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 8:13:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Yeah, that's just fucking brilliant, Joether. A question of whether our nation should be getting involved in a civil war fought between a brutal dicatator and Al Qaeda shouldn't be considered in any frame other than of strict partisan gamesmanship... You sicken me. Ditto. From Twitter, August 30, 2013 "LET ALLAH SORT IT OUT So, we're bombing Syria because Syria is bombing Syria? And I'm the idiot?" Now THAT'S actually brilliant

RacerJim -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 8:28:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Amazingly enough, he isnt constitutionally required to have Congress' approval first. Amazingly enough even Obama and Biden said POTUS is constitutionally required to obtain Congressional approval first. “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation. The president can only act unilaterally in instances of self-defense.” -- Senator Barack Hussein Obama -- 2007 “The president has no constitutional authority to take this country to war unless we’re attacked or unless there is proof that we are about to be attacked. I want to make it clear and I made it clear to the president, if he takes this nation to war in Iran, without congressional approval — I will make it my business to impeach him.” -- Senator Joe Biden, 2007.

DaddySatyr -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 9:36:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RacerJim quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Amazingly enough, he isnt constitutionally required to have Congress' approval first. Amazingly enough even Obama and Biden said POTUS is constitutionally required to obtain Congressional approval first. “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation. The president can only act unilaterally in instances of self-defense.” -- Senator Barack Hussein Obama -- 2007 “The president has no constitutional authority to take this country to war unless we’re attacked or unless there is proof that we are about to be attacked. I want to make it clear and I made it clear to the president, if he takes this nation to war in Iran, without congressional approval — I will make it my business to impeach him.” -- Senator Joe Biden, 2007. Come on, Jim. That doesn't count. They said those things when there was a guy with an (R) after his name in the Whitehouse and they were running against a guy with an (R) after his name. That makes it *completely* different. Regards, Tim Russert

Phydeaux -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 9:49:19 AM)
Snicker. Leadership is letting Congress decide...

chatterbox24 -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 9:58:37 AM)
Maybe this is very naïve, but why don't they get all those leaders together, all the countries who have a major investment for whatever reason and go with peace talks maybe. I say go with humanitarian type measures, not indulge further in violence. But if they continue to bomb their own people like animals and no peace prevails, blow them out of existence. Wouldn't it be great if they could just come to a peaceful conclusion, and it should be examined. But allowing mass killings after that is not acceptable. Give them a choice until the end.

FatDomDaddy -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 10:06:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy Well... is he calling for a joint session of Congress and asking them to declare war on Syria? Please... speak right up? I didn't think so. If the President does that and the nation declares war, I shall support the war effort. Why is that so hard for you to understand? However, the President isn't doing anything of the sort. Still digging a hole for yourself then ? Care to explain how the two posts YOU made actually differ in meaning ? Why not just accept you made two contradicting posts about the President. Far wiser than getting pissy because you got caught out. I see absolutely no contradiction. Would you care to point it out?

dcnovice -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 10:23:36 AM)
FR [image]https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1235331_646430538708597_229155335_n.jpg[/image]

chatterbox24 -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 10:32:38 AM)
TEABAGGER on SUNDAY Excuse me but do I have egg on my face?

Politesub53 -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 10:35:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri The media, as has been posted, is showing the UN investigation team is leaning towards the rebels being behind it (they do admit that their evidence isn't conclusive yet). Now, Obama is basing his determination on CIA intel and interviews from locals. The UN team is basing it's determination on having investigated the blast zone(s) and interviews from locals. There is also a report that one of the rebel groups is admitting that it was the rebels. I am not saying the President is wrong. I'm saying I don't know that he's right. Considering I believed W, way back when, I'm much more skeptical today. Even if it turns out I was wrong, at least I would have been wrong in a way that was "safer." Blatant nonsense. Nowhere in your link even mentions the UN, let alone what they have concluded. The whole link seems to be based on accounts from rebels in one particular area.

Yachtie -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 10:36:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny quote: ORIGINAL: joether Oh, and they'll be responsible if Syria uses ANOTHER chemical weapon's attack. That is an utterly ridiculous statement. Blame Syria's further use of chemical weapons on the Republicans? WTF? I'm sure it makes perfect sense to joether[;)]

Politesub53 -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 10:46:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy I see absolutely no contradiction. Would you care to point it out? Well you would say that, wouldnt you. I have already pointed it out several times, as has Ken. You are trying to suggest your words re war with Syria and attack on Syria, somehow mean different things in the current context depending on what day you posted them.... Or are you suggesting you would support a war but not air strikes. Your claim was "if the president called upon Congress to vote" you would "Firmly support the President". Clearly from the OP you made after he askef for a vote, you have changed your mind. Fucking laughable.

Yachtie -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 10:48:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 I have already pointed it out several times, as has Ken. That's supposed to say something?[:(]

Politesub53 -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 10:52:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 I have already pointed it out several times, as has Ken. That's supposed to say something?[:(] Dont shoot us, we are only pointing out FDDs contrasting position on the same issue. That said, it doees seem common among Republicans.

JeffBC -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 11:03:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Charles6682 Don't worry, Hillary Clinton will get her chance to be President, when she is elected President in 2016. Man, that scares the bejeebers out of me. I don't know exactly how I got this impression but I feel like if I looked in the dictionary under "Corporatism" I'd see her picture there. I also see the woman as ruthless, cold-blooded, and entirely amoral... she will do whatever she can to consolidate her own power base. So this lefty is way the hell too left to vote for Hillary. If the Republicans would give me someone not so allied with the religious fundamentalists it's quite likely they'd get my vote over Hillary. But, as we all know, that isn't about to happen.

DesideriScuri -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 11:10:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri The media, as has been posted, is showing the UN investigation team is leaning towards the rebels being behind it (they do admit that their evidence isn't conclusive yet). Now, Obama is basing his determination on CIA intel and interviews from locals. The UN team is basing it's determination on having investigated the blast zone(s) and interviews from locals. There is also a report that one of the rebel groups is admitting that it was the rebels. I am not saying the President is wrong. I'm saying I don't know that he's right. Considering I believed W, way back when, I'm much more skeptical today. Even if it turns out I was wrong, at least I would have been wrong in a way that was "safer." Blatant nonsense. Nowhere in your link even mentions the UN, let alone what they have concluded. The whole link seems to be based on accounts from rebels in one particular area. Come on, polite. I think there are 3 different Syria/Chem Weapons/US intervention threads going on right now. So, this one wasn't about the UN. I have posted others.

TheHeretic -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 11:13:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 That said, it doees seem common among Republicans. Yeah. So I hear. Funny how the biggest Republican douchebags in the room get all the mainstream press coverage, while Jesse Jackson Jr. never gets held up as the face of who the Democrats "really" are... There are circumstances when the US President is going to have to make the call, and do what has to be done, when it has to happen. If there is time for press releases and public moralizing, though, then there is time for Congress to have the issue presented, and do the job assigned to them by the Constitution. I hope the Congress rejects this intervention, and would expect that to be a non-partisan vote, if it falls that way.

JeffBC -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 11:16:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Yeah. So I hear. Funny how the biggest Republican douchebags in the room get all the mainstream press coverage, while Jesse Jackson Jr. never gets held up as the face of who the Democrats "really" are... We see that all the time on these very boards too. Someone will say something like, "I just wish once some <insert party here> would admit that <insert failing of party here>..." when in fact many of those people HAVE been lamenting that thing all along and are happy to do so again. We just don't want to let go of the stereotypes. We must repeatedly convince ourselves that the other guys are "the enemy".

TheHeretic -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 11:26:39 AM)
No, Jeff. It's that we must be kept convinced of it. Get individuals outside of their information bubble, into direct interaction with other individuals of differing views, and it flakes away pretty quickly.

Politesub53 -> RE: President Obama Looks to Congress Now On Syria (9/1/2013 12:14:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri The media, as has been posted, is showing the UN investigation team is leaning towards the rebels being behind it (they do admit that their evidence isn't conclusive yet). Come on, polite. I think there are 3 different Syria/Chem Weapons/US intervention threads going on right now. So, this one wasn't about the UN. I have posted others. I even posted the part where YOU mentioned the UN, now you claim the thread isnt about them. If so, why did you mention them ? IF you have a link where the UN blame the rebels, then post it, but dont accuse me of posting about something you clearly alluded to.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875