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?

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.

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.

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.

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.....

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

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.

just bomb the living shit out of them..

More fake news.

Tillerson said Russia/Putin was not told in advance.

END OF MESSAGE

.... US is ready to take more military action against Syria.    If the country has no money to give basic healthcare and decent education to its own people, we have money to go to war with another country that has not attacked us and is no threat to our national security?

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

Russia is nowhere near as powerful as the US and he knows it.

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.

take a shit in Putin's dead mouth.

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?

Fake news this, fake news that, blah, blah, blah...who the fuck does he believe. Fox news??

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.

There isn't a single thing you just said that's true.  I can't stand Trump but:
1) He just put his thumb in Putin's eye and Vlad can't/won't do anything about it.
2) Who told you our Tomahawks are "worthless?"  The Pentagon says 20 warplanes were destroyed.  But I guess they're lying, like you do non-stop.
3) I never said Russia's military wasn't formidable, just not nearly as strong as ours.  But I guess you're our great military mind and we should just bow down to you. They have one carrier, cupcake, and it's out of service.  When they sent it to Syria a couple of months ago it was belching black smoke and had to be accompanied by a tugboat in case it broke down.  Then its arresting gear broke and they lost two aircraft.  So Putin said its mission was complete and it was withdrawn.  Navy guys were laughing at them.
4) One of their planes flew over our ships?  OOOOOOOooooohhhh!  Big fucking deal.  Russian planes and ships (and Chinese) have been buzzing our ships since after WWII.  It's a macho game of theirs and says nothing about their actual capabilities. They do have some nice new planes but so do we.  Just more of them.
As for your final analysis, you sound like you're on crack.  Your opinions are bleats of hot air and worthless.
Now scoot, Taffy!

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

i will go either way on that deal..

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.

But you look like a genius compared to these morons, except of course for the fact that you even talk to LTM&L in the first place.

pretty much everyone except the complete whackos on the far left and interestingly enough on the far right as well,  support this action by Trump. It was swift, it was measured, it was done with a minimal loss of life AND he didn't do it because he had boxed himself into a corner and had to do it. Quite frankly, I was probably the most "presidential" thing he has done since taking office. He actually did it like an adult, go figure.

That is one of the most stupid, incorrect, dishonest, moronic, idiotic post you have ever posted, and as Lying Asinine Fraudulent Fapping Yammerer you have posted some real stupid shit.

 Got any proof of what you say?

Here is proof you are wrong and lying.

 
You're Welcome  
Anchors Aweigh
For God and Country

In Moocher We Distrust

As for Trump's action, I have a lot of mixed feelings.  First of all, it's a shocking turn-about from the guy who warned Obama not to attack Syria.  Also the guy who suggested Obama would attack Syria only to better his standings in the polls.  And I fear this was a single act that's not connected to a coherent US policy on Syria.  Not to mention the question of why THIS particular heinous act so moved Trump when his destruction of hospitals with barrel bombs didn't raise a peep.
That said, I do support the action for a number of reasons.  I like that Trump smacked Putin.  I like that it sent a message to the Chinese and North Koreans.  I even like that Trump's seeming unpredictability will make anyone think twice before screwing with us.  I was supportive of Obama's desire to step back but it's an ugly world out there and you can't stay safe by foreclosing the use of force.  
I should also point out that what Trump did may well have been illegal because he did not seek or get Congressional approval for a act of war.  If you read the AUMF that authorized action in Afghanistan and Iraq it has now been stretched beyond recognition to justify our action against ISIS.  But it can't possibly be used to support an attack on Syria.
If all that is too contradictory for you, well, it's a complex situation.  Like I said, I support the action despite the above.

-- Modified on 4/7/2017 8:04:05 PM

Virtually everything you just said is a half-baked opinion based on faulty information.
1) Who said ANYTHING about Assad surrendering? Nice red herring, bozo.
2)  Bullshit.  You must have been reading Russian BDA.  But the real pictures are on TV now.  I guess you can't see them because you don't own a TV, so scurry off to the public library and borrow a computer to take a look.  There are lots of before and after satellite shots showing how badly the air field was busted up.  There is no reason to disbelieve the Pentagon's assertion that 20 war planes were destroyed.  That's a major portion of Syria's fixed-wing air force.
Oh, and the runway was untouched because we didn't try to hit it.  If you knew jack squat about things military, you'd know cruise missiles are NOT designed to go after runways.  As a military commentator just said, "If we had wanted to take the runway out, we know how to do that and would have taken it out."
3) Carriers can be sitting ducks but only under certain circumstances, not under most real-world combat situations.  Carriers only operate as the core of a battle group with many defenses against missile attacks.  If carriers are such a vulnerable weapon, then why are the Chinese moving ahead as fast as they can to build a serious carrier force?  They are already better at it than the Russians.  How is it you "know" the Iranians could take out one of our carriers?  Please stop posing as a military expert. You are very weak on facts on so many things but it shows even more prominently when you pontificate about things military.
4) There was ONE incident where a Russian plane temporarily disabled a destroyer.  If you think that proves that over all the Russians have better technology than we do only shows what an idiot you are.  Of course, the Russians have some good technology but their limping economy can't support the kind of military we have.  Here's a list of the world's largest military budgets.  Even if there's wasteful spending in ours, it tells a story totally at odds with your inane vaporings.
Calm down.  You're frothing your panties. Please don't fudge them.

So now you believe Russia/putin. Obviously you, in addition to obama, are one of putin’s puppets and you are clearly his head salad tosser.  

 60 missiles were launched 1 failed the others hit their mark. Therefore .016666667% failed all the others hit their target

As for the runways the warheads on the missiles were not the kind that could crater the type of reinforced runway on that airfield therefore they were not aiming for or trying to damage the runways.  

But you go ahead and keep on believing everything your boss putin tells you  

 
You’re Welcome
In Moocher We Distrust

The Pentagon says only one cruise missile went astray.  And, as I've already said, the runways were NOT the target.  Riddle me this, Taffy, what good are runways if you've got no war planes left to use them?
Tell us, do you have some sort of degenerative brain disease?
Please, don't let us confuse me with the facts.

Satan must be practicing his slap shot in hell.

It means you have actually put some thought into this instead of simply buying into what the talking heads from both sides of the aisle are telling you to think.

One thing to keep in mind is that it's not so much that Obama did not attack Syria, some serious arguments could be made that was the best decision that could have been made at the time. The problem was, that stupid "red line" that Obama created and that wussed out of. Say what you want about Trump, but he at least is smart enough not to take anything off the table militarily and MUCH smarter than Obama in the fact that he refused to draw his own line in the sand, even with the MSM "demanding it" and choosing to send his own unscripted and unannounced response on his own terms, not those of the media who seem to love running the show.

And prove what a pussy you are.  Oh, wait! You do that every day! LMAO!
Gawd, you're weak.

You have a chance to separate yourself from the idiocy that Taffy has displayed in this thread and provide a mea culpa after you have seen the evidence that both Jake and I have now linked about the attack.

I told you not to hitch your wagon to his douchebaggery but you wouldn't listen. lol

I'm sure the Russians actually made sure after they were notified that they had personnel very close by, just so they could observe 1st hand the effectiveness and hopefully collect a potentially dud missile. As previously stated, the goal was not to crater the runways as tomahawks aren't armed for such a task. I agree though the goal of the attack was more political message than military. Also, in case it comes up, a conventional tomahawk warhead is not a very safe or effective way to destroy sarin.

Try reading the Pentagon press release? The airfields were NOT a target. Aircraft hangers, air defense, radar, fuel and ammo bunkers etc were the targets. Airstrips can be easily repaired, planes moved to other fields, these were hardened, tomahawks arent designed to take out runways are just a few of the reasons why they weren't targeted. Jake was/is right on this.  

How many times are you going to stupidly bleet your support of assad that "we missed the runways?" Do you really think with 70 missiles we'd miss it if we were trying to hit it? Good lord. Soup line today?

pictures?

"Despite the damage from the US missile strikes, the Syrian Air Force has resumed military flights at the air field.
A correspondent from Russian state-run RIA Novosti witnessed aircraft taking off and returning, in addition to technical checkups and fuel refills.
The opposition activist group Homs Media Center reportedly saw aircraft taking off and landing at the base."

I've witnessed airstrips closed down longer from just a bad thunderstorm!

And now you are on record that the attack "failed bigly" when numerous military analysts  on CNN and MSNBC have said it was a success. lol

You are such a tool, and Taffy's tool. You have now become TSTTT.

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.

and since you are not a blind partisan, maybe you can provide some insight here.

Do any on the left realize some of their own strings are being pulled by Putin (and David Brock)?

Got a link to all those accolades from the cable networks. I was not watching, and very little, if anything of what I've read supports what you say the cable news reported. The fact that they flew bombing runs out of that airfield within 24 hours of us hitting it tells me that it was a success, but not bigly. Being in the Vietnam war, I saw what knocking out an airstrip looks like. It looks a lot like what the Japanese did to us at Pearl Harbor, when most of our aircraft were caught on the ground. Wasn't it Trump who said it was stupid to warn our enemies when we're coming?

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.