Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it is strange that Obama doesn't care what Congress says and is going to do whatever he wants... and then elect to ask Congress's approval... why even ask? Seems to me, Obama is trying to make it appear that there is "public support" if Congress approves... basically he is trying to find a way to DECEIVE you for what he wants to do... when he has zero justification IF you look at the evidence...
Obama once again gives the Pubs what they're asking for (congressional approval for action in Syria) and the RWNJs are foaming at the mouth.
What he did was give himself plausible excuses. He committed to using American fire power by drawing a line in the sand. For what ever reason he assumed the world would rally behind him. The world said no. The UN said NO. NATO said no. The American people say no.
So now he will put it before congress. If they say yes he has shared accountability if anything goes wrong.
If Congress says no he can now say I wanted to do something but wasn't allowed to do something.
That is the reality of his decision making on Syria.
Schizophrenia (/ˌskɪtsɵˈfrɛniə/ or /ˌskɪtsɵˈfriːniə/) is a mental disorder characterized by a breakdown of thought processes and by a deficit of typical emotional responses.[1] Common symptoms include auditory hallucinations, paranoid or bizarre delusions, or disorganized speech and thinking, and it is accompanied by significant social or occupational dysfunction.
The President is being a weak international player. What we should be doing is pulling back, not trying to play team america world police.
Only 27% of Americans approve of the Military option. He if nothing else understands that 27% is not enough, especially if even 1 plane is shot down, or if we have another Libya happen afterward.
Now if congress says yes and things go south he has shared accountability.
If congress says no then he can has a get out of jail card for not following through on his threats.
What a guy. LOL
Polls I've seen show much greater than 27% support for military action, especially if Hassad used chemical weapons and the action was basically cruise missiles and drones.
Plenty of Americans don't care where we bomb as long the prez says we should and not too many Americans die. "Boots on the ground' is a nono, but otherwise, bombbombbomb.
How do you know we have no national interest there? Under what assumption do you make this claim?
It's a logical failure to ask that a negative be proven. The burden is on you to show that we do.
As was suggested in another post, I have no moral or practical objection to standing back and allowing both sides to destroy one another. It won't solve our future problems, but it will lessen them and leave our hands clean as to the present issue.
The President is being a weak international player. What we should be doing is pulling back, not trying to play team america world police.
He's inexperienced. He's a community activist who has been elevated to the highest position in the US without ever having led.
Having "President of Harvard Law Review" just doesn't cut it.
Anyone running for President should have at least a Governorship under their belt.
Running a state is where you cut your teeth and show what you're made of.
He's relying on people to make decisions for him.
The wishy washy, on the fence, changing his mind shows there's infighting in the administration.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.