Obama Admits Syria Strategy Has Failed

[Tehon]

Lets just say for the sake of arguement everyone had gotten onboard for airstrikes against Syria and we had toppled Assad what then? What was the post Assad plan? The one thing that both Republican and Democrat Presidents have shown is we can topple dictators with ease it's what we to do afterwards we seem to have no clue about. Getting rid of a dictator before you have a plan of what to do after he is gone has not worked out well for America.

bingo. How has emasculating Assad made US safer? And, really, are the Syrians better off?

We are in the middle of a conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia. This has nothing to do with making us safer here, it is fallout from the Iraq war.

 

[Tehon]

It's funny. I asked, and I asked, and I asked, and I asked the rubes what we should do about Syria and/or ISIS back when Republicans were pissing their pants over Obama wanting to bomb Syria. They pitched such a hissy fit over the idea, Obama caved in to them.

I'm STILL waiting for them to answer.

you poor sad idiot; that questio was answered long ago. we wanted obama to go through Congress

we both know he didnt because HIS OWN PARTY was against the idea

how can you mindless morons call people "war-mongers" all day long then and then imply they didnt want military action over there/

what part of what i just said isnt true leftard?

what part of what i just said isnt true leftard?

All of it.


Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against the Government of Syria to Respond to Use of Chemical Weapons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

House reaction[edit]
Before the authorization bill had even been drafted in the Senate, much less voted upon, there were already doubts being raised about whether any such measure would pass in the House.[33] Prior to Obama's announcement that he would seek Congressional approval, there had already been House Republicans that had announced their opposition to intervention in Syria, arguing that the civil war did not pose a threat to the United States.[33] Doubts about the ability of any legislation authorizing a strike to pass in the House continued over the following week.[2] The House Armed Services Committee was scheduled to hear from Secretary of State John Kerry about the need for strikes on Syria at a hearing on September 10, 2013.[2]

Newspaper The Hill released its own Syria Whip List with information on which Senators and Representatives had announced their support or opposition for an American military intervention in Syria.[41] As of the 3:34pm update, the whip list stood at:

• Yes/Leaning Yes: House (32) (22 Democrats, 10 Republicans)
• No/Leaning No: House (155) (120 Republicans, 36 Democrats)
• Undecided/Not Clear: House (93) (72 Democrats, 21 Republicans)

The Washington Post also created its own whip count of where the votes stand on Syria.[42] Their count, as of 11:37am on September 9th, stood at:

• Yes: House (26) (18 Democrats, 8 Republicans)
• No: House (120) (29 Democrats, 91 Republicans
• Leaning No: House (118) (38 Democrats, 80 Republicans)
• Undecided: House (169) (114 Democrats, 55 Republicans)