War With Syria: Yea Or Nay?

[TooTall]

Sorry, but the President will get his way. Republicans don't want to be seen supporting a dictator like Assad or standing passively by in the face of the use of Weapons of Mass Destruction or appear weak on a national security issue.

Democrats will support their President mostly. 50% of the house and the senate is an easy bar to pass.

Plus, even if the President doesn't get to 50% approval, he can still launch the missile strike.

George H.W. Bush was willing to launch the first Gulf War in 1991 even if he did not get a majority of the members of congress behind them.
The fact is, the only real power the congress has over the Presidency is its ability to cut funding. But in order to cut funding, congress needs a veto proof 2/3 majority. Congress does not have that right now in either the Senate or the House, so Obama can go ahead with the strike PERIOD!

If you consider Republicans that vote against an act of war against Syria support for Assad, do you consider the Democrats that opposed the war in Iraq supporters of Saddam Hussein?

Just asking.

Yep. Supporters indeed of letting Saddam remain in power which was indeed the wrong choice!

Just so you will know:

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (short title) (Pub.L. 102–1) or Joint Resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (official title), was the United States Congress's January 14, 1991 authorization of the use of U.S. military force in the Gulf War.

House Joint Resolution 77 was approved in the United States House of Representatives on January 12, 1991 by a vote of 250 to 183.
Democrats: 86-179. 86 (32%) of 267 Democrats voted for the resolution.
Republicans: 164-3. Reps. Silvio Conte, Connie Morella, Frank Riggs voted against the resolution.
Independent: 0-1. Rep. Bernie Sanders (I) voted against the resolution.

Senate Joint Resolution 2 was approved in the United States Senate on January 12, 1991 by a vote of 52 to 47.
Democrats: 10-45. 10 (18%) of 56 Democratic Senators voted for the resolution: John Breaux, Richard Bryan, Al Gore, Bob Graham, Howell Heflin, Bennett Johnston, Joe Lieberman, Harry Reid, Chuck Robb, Richard Shelby.
Republicans: 42-2. Chuck Grassley and Mark Hatfield voted against the resolution.

That is a clear majority in Congress supporting George HW Bush.

 

[U2Edge]

Funny. I look at the results of this rather "unscientific" poll and I see that the vast majority of the participants do NOT want these "so-called" strikes on Syria. I have no doubt whatsoever that this is reflected in America as a whole, as well.

Yet, I'm out feeding stock today and I'm listening to Sirius and amazingly, I hear the democrats in hearings defending OBarry's position on strikes.

Looks like we should prepare to be bamboozled, once again. After all, it's for "our own good", don't you know....

The strike is coming and getting approval in congress should be easy. Obama already had the Senate with him and after few days he will have the House. He only needs 70% of the House Democrats and 33% of the House Republicans to get to 50%.

Well, of course it's coming you twit. How the hell else can "politicians" justify their existence? These fat-assed clowns, sitting in their leather bound seats, with their "HON so and so name plates" and their $25,000 gold rolex's - passing judgement on the rest of the world.

Irony? You bet. Democrats who steadfastly protest any kind of war (only when it comes from the right) are now defending Barry and his cohorts and preaching that "it's our obligation" to be the "protectors" of the world.

But, like those on the left are fond of telling us now, "It's only a few cruise missiles", and "we aren't putting boots on the ground", and "we aren't trying to Nation build in Syria".

Bull Sh&t. I heard the same nonsense from Bush.

But you folks on the left - you go on telling yourselves that your boy has the "best interest" of the US at hand. Go on buying into the propaganda that you are fed. As long as it comes from Barry - it MUST be a Holy Endeavor.

Sheep. and Barry is the Wolf.

I'm not from the left and didn't vote for Obama in either election. I support the missile strike because its the right policy and necessary for US national security.

Its beautiful the way the Senate and the House will come together to support this policy. Many on here have said it would be voted down in congress. I told them it wouldn't.

Will soon have a vote in support of the missile strike, the missile strike itself, and Assad will go back to only using conventional weapons in his war with the rebels. That will be it.

Also, don't recall Bush ever saying that there would not be boots on the ground in Iraq or Afghanistan. There were boots on the ground from the start for both of those wars. Overthrow of the Taliban government in Afghanistan and Saddam's regime in Iraq with a nation building process to follow in both cases!

 

[U2Edge]

If you consider Republicans that vote against an act of war against Syria support for Assad, do you consider the Democrats that opposed the war in Iraq supporters of Saddam Hussein?

Just asking.

Yep. Supporters indeed of letting Saddam remain in power which was indeed the wrong choice!

Just so you will know:

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (short title) (Pub.L. 102–1) or Joint Resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (official title), was the United States Congress's January 14, 1991 authorization of the use of U.S. military force in the Gulf War.

House Joint Resolution 77 was approved in the United States House of Representatives on January 12, 1991 by a vote of 250 to 183.
Democrats: 86-179. 86 (32%) of 267 Democrats voted for the resolution.
Republicans: 164-3. Reps. Silvio Conte, Connie Morella, Frank Riggs voted against the resolution.
Independent: 0-1. Rep. Bernie Sanders (I) voted against the resolution.

Senate Joint Resolution 2 was approved in the United States Senate on January 12, 1991 by a vote of 52 to 47.
Democrats: 10-45. 10 (18%) of 56 Democratic Senators voted for the resolution: John Breaux, Richard Bryan, Al Gore, Bob Graham, Howell Heflin, Bennett Johnston, Joe Lieberman, Harry Reid, Chuck Robb, Richard Shelby.
Republicans: 42-2. Chuck Grassley and Mark Hatfield voted against the resolution.

That is a clear majority in Congress supporting George HW Bush.

I never said he did not get a majority of congress. I said that IF, IF, he did not get a majority of from congress he was still willing to launch desert storm! He wanted approval from congress, but not getting that approval would not have stopped him.

The only power congress has over the President is funding. It takes a 2/3s majority in both the house and senate to override a presidential veto of a bill. So without a 2/3's majority in both houses against the President, the President can do what he wants.

 

[RandallFlagg]

The strike is coming and getting approval in congress should be easy. Obama already had the Senate with him and after few days he will have the House. He only needs 70% of the House Democrats and 33% of the House Republicans to get to 50%.

Well, of course it's coming you twit. How the hell else can "politicians" justify their existence? These fat-assed clowns, sitting in their leather bound seats, with their "HON so and so name plates" and their $25,000 gold rolex's - passing judgement on the rest of the world.

Irony? You bet. Democrats who steadfastly protest any kind of war (only when it comes from the right) are now defending Barry and his cohorts and preaching that "it's our obligation" to be the "protectors" of the world.

But, like those on the left are fond of telling us now, "It's only a few cruise missiles", and "we aren't putting boots on the ground", and "we aren't trying to Nation build in Syria".

Bull Sh&t. I heard the same nonsense from Bush.

But you folks on the left - you go on telling yourselves that your boy has the "best interest" of the US at hand. Go on buying into the propaganda that you are fed. As long as it comes from Barry - it MUST be a Holy Endeavor.

Sheep. and Barry is the Wolf.

I'm not from the left and didn't vote for Obama in either election. I support the missile strike because its the right policy and necessary for US national security.

Its beautiful the way the Senate and the House will come together to support this policy. Many on here have said it would be voted down in congress. I told them it wouldn't.

Will soon have a vote in support of the missile strike, the missile strike itself, and Assad will go back to only using conventional weapons in his war with the rebels. That will be it.

Also, don't recall Bush ever saying that there would not be boots on the ground in Iraq or Afghanistan. There were boots on the ground from the start for both of those wars. Overthrow of the Taliban government in Afghanistan and Saddam's regime in Iraq with a nation building process to follow in both cases!

BS.

There was a no-fly zone (enforced by the US) for several years BEFORE there were boots on the ground (1991 to 2003). There were missile strikes for years before there were boots on the ground. Get your facts straight.

So, we somehow get this clown (Assad) out of Syria. He is replaced by radical extremists who want our death. Congratulations rube. One more enemy that is plotting to kill us.

I fought in Vietnam and served 22 years in the Army. How about YOU suiting up and go show them how it's done?

 

[Hoffstra]

BS.

There was a no-fly zone (enforced by the US) for several years BEFORE there were boots on the ground. There were missile strikes for years before there were boots on the ground. Get your facts straight.

So, we somehow get this clown (Assad) out of Syria. He is replaced by radical extremists who want our death. Congratulations rube. One more enemy that is plotting to kill us.

I fought in Vietnam and served 22 years in the Army. How about YOU suiting up and go show them how it's done?

indeed, the folks calling for war do so from the comfort of their loveseat while watching Fox News.

 

[Indofred]

The strike is coming and getting approval in congress should be easy. Obama already had the Senate with him and after few days he will have the House. He only needs 70% of the House Democrats and 33% of the House Republicans to get to 50%.

Well, of course it's coming you twit. How the hell else can "politicians" justify their existence? These fat-assed clowns, sitting in their leather bound seats, with their "HON so and so name plates" and their $25,000 gold rolex's - passing judgement on the rest of the world.

Irony? You bet. Democrats who steadfastly protest any kind of war (only when it comes from the right) are now defending Barry and his cohorts and preaching that "it's our obligation" to be the "protectors" of the world.

But, like those on the left are fond of telling us now, "It's only a few cruise missiles", and "we aren't putting boots on the ground", and "we aren't trying to Nation build in Syria".

Bull Sh&t. I heard the same nonsense from Bush.

But you folks on the left - you go on telling yourselves that your boy has the "best interest" of the US at hand. Go on buying into the propaganda that you are fed. As long as it comes from Barry - it MUST be a Holy Endeavor.

Sheep. and Barry is the Wolf.

I'm not from the left and didn't vote for Obama in either election. I support the missile strike because its the right policy and necessary for US national security.

Its beautiful the way the Senate and the House will come together to support this policy. Many on here have said it would be voted down in congress. I told them it wouldn't.

Will soon have a vote in support of the missile strike, the missile strike itself, and Assad will go back to only using conventional weapons in his war with the rebels. That will be it.

Also, don't recall Bush ever saying that there would not be boots on the ground in Iraq or Afghanistan. There were boots on the ground from the start for both of those wars. Overthrow of the Taliban government in Afghanistan and Saddam's regime in Iraq with a nation building process to follow in both cases!

Please explain the danger Syria poses to the U.S.
Is it ready to invade new york, bomb the white house or use its massive navy to strike America with missiles?

 

[RandallFlagg]

Well, of course it's coming you twit. How the hell else can "politicians" justify their existence? These fat-assed clowns, sitting in their leather bound seats, with their "HON so and so name plates" and their $25,000 gold rolex's - passing judgement on the rest of the world.

Irony? You bet. Democrats who steadfastly protest any kind of war (only when it comes from the right) are now defending Barry and his cohorts and preaching that "it's our obligation" to be the "protectors" of the world.

But, like those on the left are fond of telling us now, "It's only a few cruise missiles", and "we aren't putting boots on the ground", and "we aren't trying to Nation build in Syria".

Bull Sh&t. I heard the same nonsense from Bush.

But you folks on the left - you go on telling yourselves that your boy has the "best interest" of the US at hand. Go on buying into the propaganda that you are fed. As long as it comes from Barry - it MUST be a Holy Endeavor.

Sheep. and Barry is the Wolf.

I'm not from the left and didn't vote for Obama in either election. I support the missile strike because its the right policy and necessary for US national security.

Its beautiful the way the Senate and the House will come together to support this policy. Many on here have said it would be voted down in congress. I told them it wouldn't.

Will soon have a vote in support of the missile strike, the missile strike itself, and Assad will go back to only using conventional weapons in his war with the rebels. That will be it.

Also, don't recall Bush ever saying that there would not be boots on the ground in Iraq or Afghanistan. There were boots on the ground from the start for both of those wars. Overthrow of the Taliban government in Afghanistan and Saddam's regime in Iraq with a nation building process to follow in both cases!

Please explain the danger Syria poses to the U.S.
Is it ready to invade new york, bomb the white house or use its massive navy to strike America with missiles?

There is no threat from Syria. This is about a president who puffed his little chest up, ran his mouth and had his bluff called. The world is laughing at Barry. He knows it. This is his reaction. It really IS that simple. Nothing more, nothing less. Barry = incompetent fool. John Kerry = incompetent fool. Martin Dempsey = Incompetent fool. Chuck Hagel = incompetent fool.

 

[TooTall]

Yep. Supporters indeed of letting Saddam remain in power which was indeed the wrong choice!

Just so you will know:

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (short title) (Pub.L. 102–1) or Joint Resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (official title), was the United States Congress's January 14, 1991 authorization of the use of U.S. military force in the Gulf War.

House Joint Resolution 77 was approved in the United States House of Representatives on January 12, 1991 by a vote of 250 to 183.
Democrats: 86-179. 86 (32%) of 267 Democrats voted for the resolution.
Republicans: 164-3. Reps. Silvio Conte, Connie Morella, Frank Riggs voted against the resolution.
Independent: 0-1. Rep. Bernie Sanders (I) voted against the resolution.

Senate Joint Resolution 2 was approved in the United States Senate on January 12, 1991 by a vote of 52 to 47.
Democrats: 10-45. 10 (18%) of 56 Democratic Senators voted for the resolution: John Breaux, Richard Bryan, Al Gore, Bob Graham, Howell Heflin, Bennett Johnston, Joe Lieberman, Harry Reid, Chuck Robb, Richard Shelby.
Republicans: 42-2. Chuck Grassley and Mark Hatfield voted against the resolution.

That is a clear majority in Congress supporting George HW Bush.

I never said he did not get a majority of congress. I said that IF, IF, he did not get a majority of from congress he was still willing to launch desert storm! He wanted approval from congress, but not getting that approval would not have stopped him.

The only power congress has over the President is funding. It takes a 2/3s majority in both the house and senate to override a presidential veto of a bill. So without a 2/3's majority in both houses against the President, the President can do what he wants.

Point taken. I will support Obama when he gets the majority vote Aye in Congress and something like GHW Bush had before committing an act of war.

A coalition of forces opposing Iraq's aggression was formed, consisting of forces from 34 countries: Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Egypt, France, Greece, Italy, Kuwait, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Portugal, Qatar, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Syria, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the U.S. itself. U.S. Army General Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr. was designated to be the commander of the Coalition forces in the Persian Gulf area.

Although they didn't contribute any forces, Japan and Germany made financial contributions totaling $10 billion and $6.6 billion respectively. U.S. troops represented 73% of the Coalition’s 956,600 troops in Iraq.

 

[Hoffstra]

Iraq gassed the Iranians.
...we did not respond.

Iraq gassed the Kurds.
....we did not respond.

We were right then, and we would be right now to not respond.

This is not my war!!!

 

[antiquity]

If anyone should get involved in this mess it should be the Arab League. They are the one supporting the fall and replacement of the Syrian government, they are the ones supporting the Egyptian military with tons of money.

 

[Kondor3]

Yeppers... the Arab oil sheiks have money coming out of their asses... let them handle this...

 

[Indofred]

There is no threat from Syria. This is about a president who puffed his little chest up, ran his mouth and had his bluff called. The world is laughing at Barry. He knows it. This is his reaction. It really IS that simple. Nothing more, nothing less. Barry = incompetent fool. John Kerry = incompetent fool. Martin Dempsey = Incompetent fool. Chuck Hagel = incompetent fool.

It's a bit hard to argue with that.
Obama has messed up big style on this one.
In doing so, he's made America look like a set of bloody idiots.

This whole thing is about removing Iranian influence from a country that borders Israel and nothing at all to do with U.S. national security.

The big question here is, how much is Obama getting paid to let Americans die for Israel?

 

[TooTall]

The strike is coming and getting approval in congress should be easy. Obama already had the Senate with him and after few days he will have the House. He only needs 70% of the House Democrats and 33% of the House Republicans to get to 50%.

Well, of course it's coming you twit. How the hell else can "politicians" justify their existence? These fat-assed clowns, sitting in their leather bound seats, with their "HON so and so name plates" and their $25,000 gold rolex's - passing judgement on the rest of the world.

Irony? You bet. Democrats who steadfastly protest any kind of war (only when it comes from the right) are now defending Barry and his cohorts and preaching that "it's our obligation" to be the "protectors" of the world.

But, like those on the left are fond of telling us now, "It's only a few cruise missiles", and "we aren't putting boots on the ground", and "we aren't trying to Nation build in Syria".

Bull Sh&t. I heard the same nonsense from Bush.

But you folks on the left - you go on telling yourselves that your boy has the "best interest" of the US at hand. Go on buying into the propaganda that you are fed. As long as it comes from Barry - it MUST be a Holy Endeavor.

Sheep. and Barry is the Wolf.

I'm not from the left and didn't vote for Obama in either election. I support the missile strike because its the right policy and necessary for US national security.

Its beautiful the way the Senate and the House will come together to support this policy. Many on here have said it would be voted down in congress. I told them it wouldn't.

Will soon have a vote in support of the missile strike, the missile strike itself, and Assad will go back to only using conventional weapons in his war with the rebels. That will be it.

My crystal ball is not nearly as good as yours.

 

[Kondor3]

"...how much is Obama getting paid to let Americans die for Israel?"

Smoke 'em if you got 'em...

 

[The T]

*STILL* my answer is NO.

 

[The T]

"...how much is Obama getting paid to let Americans die for Israel?"

Smoke 'em if you got 'em...

Is that the 'O's' Brand?

 

[The T]

Yeppers... the Arab oil sheiks have money coming out of their asses... let them handle this...

Since Qtar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey support us in an attack on Assad?

I'd tell them to **** themselves and they take that money, those weapons WE sold them, and tell THEM to deal with it...WE will sit and watch.

 

[The T]

Why Qatar Is Quietly Supporting a U.S. Strike in Syria

Arab allies of US exasperated by Western stance on Syria

NO MORE fighting for these jackholes...THEY have the weapons WE sold them...it's in THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD...LET THEM DEAL WITH IT.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

*STILL* my answer is NO.

I want to change my vote from Nay to F*CKIN' NAY!

 

[The T]

ALL Obama is about is saving FACE...He's pissed...and embarrassed.

Obama/ Mr. President? YOU created this...SHOW SOME BALLS and take a REAL stand. STOP with yer shit...this isn't about your legacy.

Learn It, Live it, KNOW IT.

Bodansky: What If Bashar Didn't Do It?

FIRESTORM...