I've read your reply several times and you're all over the fucking board.
But, I'll bottom-line it for you: Nothing went wrong in Syria under Obama! Obama decided to stay outta Syria because Syria ain't our fucking problem - I happen to agree with him. So "Putin didn't save Obama's bacon," since we didn't have any bacon....aka $$ or troops etc.....in Syria. Obama decided it ain't up to us to police the world - I happen to agree w/him. Ed, please PLEASE, for your sake - and the others on this Board - please take and pass this course: https://www.coursera.org/learn/logic-introduction
In 2011 Obama, along with some of our allies attacked Libya, because Qaddafi was threatening to slaughter many of Libya's citizens, and Congress condemned him for not getting their approval. In 2013, when Assad gassed many more of Syria's citizens, than who were gassed recently, Obama went to Congress for approval to strike, and they refused. Now, Trump and many of those Congressmen have changed their tune. 
seems his actions would point to lots of made-up BS about the Prez relationship W/Putin. Was Hillary aware of these lies? Is the integrity of the news media and the Dems being called into question?
After all, 6 deaths from close to 60 missiles in the wee hours of night, early morning. I mean where were they, out at Kubuki's night club dancing the night away. Get real.....
More fake news.
Tillerson said Russia/Putin was not told in advance.
to get their people out of the way. Putin was told nothing but their military were able to get their people off the base before it was hit. By the time Putin found out, the raid was over.
Do try checking your facts before posting.
Fake news this, fake news that, blah, blah, blah...who the fuck does he believe. Fox news??
Just as he didn't need congress to close Gitmo, as pointed out on numerous occasions by the far Left Code Pink.
Many lefty current and ex-military on CNN and even MSNBC approved of Trump's actions yesterday and several took a shot at Obama for not doing so back in 2013, which made us look feckless and weak.
I don't know if the actions will help or not, but it does feel good to know that that the man in the WH now has a backbone and wont cave to ahole third world, two bit, dictators.
But if you're referring to the AUMF of 9/14/01, it only granted authority for the President to use force against those who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, anyone who harbored or aided them and any "associated forces." Now that's pretty damn wide authority but Syria does not fall under ANY of those descriptions, which is why Obama sought separate authority which Congress denied. Trump didn't even ask for such authority and Republicans in Congress, who helped block it for Obama, seem to have gone in the tank.
Also, this...
-- Modified on 4/7/2017 3:18:30 PM
And you need a vote of approval from congress. But it's a fine line and the house will give "some" play if the actions justify the cause where they'll let it slide. Usually congress will pretend to have it's butt hurt but nothing really comes of it.It all depends who the players are if congress is gonna makes a big stink over it.
A warning shot form Russian PM. These people don't mince words. They have heavy interests in Syria and Iran. If the clueless Clown and his clueless son in law think they can fire Tomahawks in to Syria, here is the warning. Get ready for Russia.
Russia is nowhere near as powerful as the US and he knows it.
We can probably find another 10 thousand similar statements since the cold war started just like this.
Russia isn't going to attack us. We have no interest in Syria other then to stop a nitwit from using chemical weapons and to fight ISIS/DASH/Goat fuckers. This isn't the Clinton administration, Trump isn't looking to profit off of the pipeline.
But wait, you spouted off a 1000 times here how Trump was Putin's puppet. So.. you backtracking those rantings?
We attacked Qaddafi because they were threatening to cut of the oil they sold to the French and the French punked Obama into protecting "their" oil supply.
In Syria Obama drew a "red line in the sand" and was only bailed out by the Russians, even your fellow libs admit it was a foreign policy blunder of epic proportions. The media tried to force Trump into committing the same error, Trump to his credit refused to take the bait and instead let his actions, limited and calculated as they were, speak for him.
just bomb the living shit out of them..
take a shit in Putin's dead mouth.
i will go either way on that deal..
That's debatable but probably true. Regardless, why did Repubs vote it down? And, despite voting it down, the Repubs complained and screamed bloody murder for years because Obama didn't "fix" Syria...
Please explain Jack.....or anyone
First correction to the discussion is that Congress never voted on Obama's use of force in Syria in 2013, although refusing to hold a vote on any affirmative measure is the same as voting against it. I think you'd agree with that here.
Not to change the subject but it's too sad the Left doesn't apply exactly that same logic when it comes to Merrick Garland.
Back to the topic. If you recall that during that first act of the Syrian crisis, the Democrats controlled the Senate and they too refused to hold a vote authorizing President Obama. There were many Republicans in favor of a yes vote then, most likely a greater percentage than Dems in the House or Senate. Fortunately for Democrats (and many Republicans) Putin saved Obama's bacon (can we still talk like that about Putin?) by ensuring Syria's chemical weapons were disappeared. As long as we're helping each other out, maybe you can help explain from Obama's perspective what went wrong there?
Just like the Republicans were split then, so too are they now. I'm not sure a vote would pass today. Back then it was mostly the Neocons criticizing Obama, not all, but for those that were your answer is they are (like almost all politicians) hypocritical when they believe they can get away with it.
I've read your reply several times and you're all over the fucking board.
But, I'll bottom-line it for you: Nothing went wrong in Syria under Obama! Obama decided to stay outta Syria because Syria ain't our fucking problem - I happen to agree with him. So "Putin didn't save Obama's bacon," since we didn't have any bacon....aka $$ or troops etc.....in Syria. Obama decided it ain't up to us to police the world - I happen to agree w/him.
Ed, please PLEASE, for your sake - and the others on this Board - please take and pass this course:
https://www.coursera.org/learn/logic-introduction
400,000 dead = nothing wrong? I'd buy that it wasn't our problem but nothing wrong? Really?
I'll dumb it down for you.
Obama actually thought it WAS our problem but he was too feckless to make an executive decision (other than draw an imaginary red line in the sand).
Obama didn't really want to engage in Syria so he decided to punt to Congress.
While Congress (and contrary to your reporting it was both Democrats and Republicans) were fidgeting about, Putin stepped up and declared he would convince Syria to get rid of their chemical weapons.
Obama trusted Putin and Obama cancelled any desire to engage Syria.
Putin fooled Obama. Syria still had chemical weapons and then this week's atrocity happened. Thanks Obama.
And after all that, you still appear to contend it was all the Republican's fault because they voted NEY, when in fact there never was a vote.
A good first step would be for you to at least acknowledge what you have learned today.
Obama threatened Assad and went to Congress for approval. Congress wouldn't vote to approve, so, what did everyone expect/want him to do?! BTW, most people think President needs approval from Congress. Witness, today, Trump is beginning to ask Congress for approval
But, I'll play, let's suppose Obama DIDN'T need Congressional apro all. He decided, in the end, it's better to NOT spend lives and $$$ on Syria - again, no threat to the U.S.A.
Kudos for your admissions. You're now in the correct ballpark, discussing motives and public opinion. Neither Obama or Trump legally needed Congressional approval. Both of their plays, no action by the former and action by the latter were political moves. You are entitled to your opinion about both. I only requested you get your facts correct, which brings us back to your last point once more. Better not to take action? American lives not lost? Maybe, depended on the action of course. But over 400,000 Syrian lives lost and millions of Syrian refugees displaced = NOTHING as you claimed? Hardly.
I've dealt w/thousands of people over the years. You simply strand out as the most illogical crackpot - by FAR - that I've ever run into. It's IMPOSSIUBLE to have even a semi-intelligent conversation with you!
This whole thread started with the question of "should the U.S. go into Syria." I said "Syria's NOT our (U.S.A.) fucking problem and we should stay the fuck out."
And, you, after changing the subject multiple times end up with "400K dead etc. ain't nothing." This 100% evades the question!
BTW, remember the Iraq war?? W. needed approval to go to war. It's debatable if Trump needed approval for his pin-prick useless failed attack of Syria, but, if Trump wants to attack a foreign power such as Assad he sure-as-hell will need Congressional approval.
Ed, if you care at all about my sanity please PLEASE, I beg of you, PLEASE don't ever again reply to my posts - you're driving me fucking crazy!
I can only conclude that it has all been due to extreme luck on your part. Or maybe you're surrounded by yes-men. I know you're surrounded by yes-men since you can't begin to acknowledge even your errors here, that Republicans voted down Obama's request. I repeat. There NEVER was a vote and the Democrats could have held one anytime they wished because they controlled the Senate.
You personally dug ALL the holes here.
First you denied Putin tremendously helped Obama by SUPPOSEDLY stepping in to remove Syria's chemical weapons. This allowed Obama to save face as he backed away from his own red line.
Then you erred again by claiming NOTHING went wrong in Syria under Obama, (and now you're implying you never even said it).
The ENTIRE problem here (and in your personal business I suspect) is that you find it extremely difficult if not impossible to admit a mistake. I also suspect your inner circle of business people are very resistant to say so to your face.
If you want something to end you should quit changing the subject (now moving all the way back to Bush's Iraq, LOL).
Lastly, you must not be very old and certainly you are not very wise if you believe other people have ANY power over anyone's healthy state of mind.