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.
Now even Trump admin is saying it didn't make sense that Assad ordered the gas attack.
That is my biggest problem. Since when does any investigation get completed in 48 hrs? Is it probable Assad did this? Yes. Is it possible al Qaeda or Isis had a hand yes? Is it possible it was as Russia said that it was an accident? Yes.
That is my biggest problem. Since when does any investigation get completed in 48 hrs? Is it probable Assad did this? Yes. Is it possible al Qaeda or Isis had a hand yes? Is it possible it was as Russia said that it was an accident? Yes.
There was no evidence, and they just pulled the trigger anyway. This is why the founding fathers wanted the Congress decide when the nation goes to war. A larger body of cooler heads is more likely to reach the correct conclusion as opposed to one person running on pure emotion.
There was no evidence, but they just pulled the trigger anyway. This is why the founding fathers wanted the Congress decide when the nation goes to war.
There was some evidence. But what we know through media is not conclusive. Perhaps there is intelligence that we are not privy to that makes it conclusive. I have my doubts on that. Some say Isis does not have chemical capabilities but that is not true. The UN has already linked them to crude attacks in Syria. Moreover, this is a civil war with many outside players giving assistance. Could Isis have captured an area and taken over as dads weapons? Could they have been armed by Iran? Or turkey?
Recent events provide useful context. In the late summer of 2013, the Obama administration was preparing to launch a military strike in Syria. The circumstances were very similar to what happened this week: There was evidence that Syrian President Bashar Assad had ordered a deadly chemical attack against Syrian civilians. However, as the Obama administration prepared to respond, more than 100 members of Congress, mainly Republicans but some Democrats as well, signed a letter explaining that the president could not act alone, that he needed congressional approval.
As these members of Congress explained, the Constitution does not permit the president to unilaterally order military action unless the United States or Americans face a direct threat of attack. That is an accurate description of constitutional law. Article I of the Constitution assigns Congress the power to declare war. Records from the Constitutional Convention of 1787 indicate that the framers believed the president would have authority to act unilaterally only in an emergency, to repel a sudden attack. At the time, Donald Trump agreed, tweeting that “The President must get Congressional approval before attacking Syria — big mistake if he does not!”
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.
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.
