War with Syria

blumpster_sl · Sep 12, 2013

Lleauaric_sl said:
How did Obama lose anything?
etc etc.

Interesting post. I never really thought about it like that. I guess I don't expect our government officials to bluff with those kind of intentions; I'm talking about violence. It's really smart, but shady. More power to Obama if he's willing to put his neck out like that and take so many axe chops from almost every angle in order to get a peaceful resolution. And the whole 'bored' persona meshes well with this game plan. If he was bored this certainly shook things up. A lot of his supporters called into question his demeanor based solely on the fact that they want peace over anything else. I know I do. I don't buy into the whole Iron Man the biggest weapons keep the peace strategy, but looking at how nuclear weapons have ended up and being basically fucking useless yet squashing the idea of any world war occurring in the foreseeable future makes me rethink some of my ideas. I still don't 'like' the way Obama handled it, but if Assad hands over the weapons and we keep our military away from Syria it doesn't matter how the outcome is accomplished. Also, if this ends up going the way of peace, Obama earns a gold star in my book. Leaders are supposed to sacrifice, and not their military or their power, but themselves. He did that big time by coming out guns cocked, locked, and loaded. That's what made the whole thing so shocking. Maybe that's why it worked? Nobody expected him to do this. It was so out of character, but apparently he knows what he's doing. Kerry did the same thing. That guy sounded like a snarling, drooling, rabid dog that had broken from his leash. Perhaps it wasn't the case. Perhaps he was ordered by his master to sick 'em. Perhaps Obama really is the most intelligent president we've had in a long time.

Tuco · Sep 12, 2013

Iannis_sl said:
Fair. Because that's the one thing his policy did accomplish, and that probably would not have been accomplished without insane threats.

But... does that accomplish his stated goals of 0 tolerance chemical weapons use in this war? He already had Assad backed into that corner with the threat of force months ago, there is still no conclusive public proof that it was Assad to begin with. Maybe there's top secret proof -- but the committee that was shown to didn't seem to find it entirely convincing, so my guess is all we have is circumstantial evidence. He spent a lot of President Points here to get something that he already had, and he's made the reward even higher for being able to successfully conduct a false flag chemical attack in the war he's trying to reduce their involvement with.

I don't know every (or even most) of the options available to the POTUS. But now it seems to me that for results this flimsy he made some very public statements, and an even more public show of force. He devoted a prime time speech to this issue. That's a serious thing. Something a bit more circumspect seems to have been in order.

Fair question, but I think I agree. He was backed into a corner by his own rhetoric and tried to salvage something from a defeat. It's different than winning. So basically yeah. A continued policy of carefully ignoring the situtationwouldhave been better. It's easier to make the domestic argument that your very own proof is inconclusive and not worth starting a war over than it is to make the international one that your very own proof is inconclusive and worth starting a war over.

I think international reluctance to engage the issue might have surprised him, and I think Britian voting "fuck off cunt" probably blindsided him.

I agree with your post, but Britain didn't vote 'fuck off cunt'. It was a very close vote and if it went the other way wouldn't be a ringing endorsement either.

Personally I think the best thing for America would have been for Obama to establish a precedent of non-invasion, so that future wars would be less likely to occur. But I doubt it would matter that much. A decade more of peace and we'll find ourselves wanting to go back to Afghanistan...

iannis · Sep 12, 2013

Lleauaric_sl said:
The "mistake?" Obama made was asking Congresses permission.

See, I can't take it seriously when you consider the President asking for Congressional support to potentially start a large war a "mistake".

This is a lot of rationalizing how it could have been worse and claiming that because it could have been worse what happened was obviously best. I've seen this kind of thinking before. I've engaged in this kind of thinking before.

Yeah, sure, it could have been a lot worse. We just watched our President completely fuck up. It's ok to admit that.

Araysar · Sep 12, 2013

tad10_sl said:
Obama was (is) an amazing campaigner. His 2012 campaign is arguably the best run campaign ever (or at least the best run of the modern era - difficult to compare his to Grover Cleveland's).

He was unstoppable and indefatigable on the campaign trail, yet in office he just fucking golfs. He's the oddest president ever - he clearly enjoyed campaigning for president, he likes the social aspects of being president (parties as often as he can) but he doesn't seem to actually like the day-to-day job of president (see the anecdote of him just playing cards for the majoriy of the Zero Dark Thirty hit on Osama).

The only comparable public persona that I can think of Thurgoode Marshall, who was one of the most brilliant lawyers in American History but once elevated to the Supreme Court became a forgettable justice. Like Marshall, Obama enjoyed the fight, but when elevated to a position above "the fight" (be it SCJ or President) found themselves bored.

this golf/vacation bullshit is so retarded each time

Adebisi · Sep 12, 2013

^ Bush did a good job rebuilding the twin towers

Soysauceonrice_sl · Sep 12, 2013

Iannis_sl said:
See, I can't take it seriously when you consider the President asking for Congressional support to potentially start a large war a "mistake".

This is a lot of rationalizing how it could have been worse and claiming that because it could have been worse what happened was obviously best. I've seen this kind of thinking before. I've engaged in this kind of thinking before.

Yeah, sure, it could have been a lot worse. We just watched our President completely fuck up. It's ok to admit that.

Um. He's actually right. The president doesn't have to ask for shit before he bombs anyone. There's plenty of precedent to support what he said -- recent example being when Clinton bombed Kosovo without asking for Congressional approval. Obama's problem was that, when he was in Congress, he opened his mouth and said that the president SHOULD ask for permission and those words came back to bite him in the ass. Oops.

Araysar · Sep 12, 2013

Soysauceonrice_sl said:
Um. He's actually right. The president doesn't have to ask for shit before he bombs anyone. There's plenty of precedent to support what he said -- recent example being when Clinton bombed Kosovo without asking for Congressional approval. Obama's problem was that, when he was in Congress, he opened his mouth and said that the president SHOULD ask for permission and those words came back to bite him in the ass. Oops.

He already went back on his words when he bombed Lybia without congressional authorization.

I think he asked for authorization fully expecting them to turn him down, thus saving him face. I dont think he wants to bomb anything in reality. But Congress was actually willing to give him authorization only to give him enough rope to hang himself (how can you send troops into combat during sequestration, blah blah blah). He realized this and was looking for a way out when Russia and Syria was nice enough to throw him a life preserver.

I haven't been following the congressional maneuvering on this particularly close, so I might be wrong.

Soysauceonrice_sl · Sep 12, 2013

Araysar_sl said:
He already went back on his words when he bombed Lybia without congressional authorization.

I think he asked for authorization fully expecting them to turn him down, thus saving him face. I dont think he wants to bomb anything in reality. But Congress was actually willing to give him authorization only to give him enough rope to hang himself (how can you send troops into combat during sequestration, blah blah blah). He realized this and was looking for a way out when Russia and Syria was nice enough to throw him a life preserver.

I haven't been following the congressional maneuvering on this particularly close, so I might be wrong.

At least the military bombings in Lybia was conducted through the U.N., which gave him political cover. I really don't understand why the fuck he asked for congressional approval to be honest, other than to save face. If he wanted to bomb Syria, like he claims he does, he shoulda just went ahead and do it.

iannis · Sep 13, 2013

He is right. The President can 100% start a War all by himself if he wants to. He can fight a war for 8 years and never call it a War. That's not how it should be. There are limits set on that power. Those limits are willfully ignored in various ways by various Presidents. Including this one.

Again, that's not how it should be.

Congress holds the power to declare wars. It's not the documents fault that we don't fight wars the same way that we did 235 years ago. There have been numerous attempts to update and correct that basic principle -- which, again, are mostly ignored whenever convenient.

I have trouble taking any argument seriously which proceeds from such a disingenuous legalism. In this case, where the issue is not immediate and the ramifications of action so unpredictable and multifaceted, I would hope it's obvious that the proper course of action is to consult Congress. Maybe it's not. In some other case which is not and was not this case sure, maybe you do want a President unhindered.

We have a case of a President actually doing the proper thing and respecting the office. Through Providence or Political fear who knows, who cares. But he actually did the right thing and it's called a mistake. Because it makes his team look bad? It's fucking sad.

tad10 · Sep 13, 2013

Araysar_sl said:
this golf/vacation bullshit is so retarded each time

Nice BS numbers as it counts as Bush vacation days when Bush had World Leaders visiting his ranch. I note you didn't attempt to compare golf outings. More to the point Obama takes really expensive vacations to Highway that cost $20,000,000 in the middle of a recession when Bush just flew home to Crawford.

But keep on supporting your Boy. He's totally awesome as this whole Syria thing shows. -_-

Bush fucked up with Iraq, the giant Medicare increase and of course the Patriot Act but - credit where credit is due - he at least had a sense of propriety when it came to vacations and golf that Obama doesn't have.

fanaskin · Sep 13, 2013

Syria said it would abide by an international treaty banning chemical weapons, even as President Bashar al-Assad set conditions that the U.S. lift its threat of military strikes and stop arming Syrian rebels.

I wonder if syria could have played a more mindfuck gambit if it made the condition that israel sign the chemical weapons ban treaty as well.

ORGANISATION FOR THE
PROHIBITION OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS

As of June 2013, 189 states are party to the CWC, and another two countries (Israeland Myanmar) have signed but not ratified the convention.

Israel has not ratified the treaty banning chemical weapons

The State that is at the center of almost all conflict in the Middle East and that fancies itself as the victim of such conflict, is now refusing to sign a treaty that would ratify a ban on chemical weapons. The question to that decision is Why?

As reported yesterday, a new document originated at the Central Intelligence Agency, now reveals that Israel possesses considerable amounts of chemical weapons. As we pointed out yesterday, those chemical weapons have been used multiple times by the Israeli regime against innocent people in Gaza without any consequence for the Israeli government.

CIA Documents Reveal Israeli Stockpile of Chemical Weapons

The document revealed by Foreign Policy magazine on Monday shows that, in addition to building up a nuclear stockpile of an estimated three hundred nuclear weapons during the 1960s and 70s, the Israeli military also developed an extensive stockpile of chemical and biological weapons.

The 1983 document stated that U.S. spy satellites had identified "a probable CW [chemical weapon] nerve agent production facility and a storage facility. at the Dimona Sensitive Storage Area in the Negev Desert. Other CW production is believed to exist within a well-developed Israeli chemical industry."

According to the Foreign Policy report, "Israeli historian Avner Cohen, in his 1988 book Israel and the Bomb, wrote that Israeli Prime Minister David Ben Gurion secretly ordered that a stockpile of chemical weapons be built at about the time of the 1956 war between Israel and Egypt. The CIA, on the other hand, believed that Israel did not begin work on chemical weapons until either the late 1960s or the early 1970s.

The article included the following assessment from the 1983 CIA report: "Israel, finding itself surrounded by frontline Arab states with budding CW [chemical weapons] capabilities, became increasingly conscious of its vulnerability to chemical attack. Its sensitivities were galvanized by the capture of large quantities of Soviet CW-related equipment during both the 1967 Arab-Israeli and the 1973 Yom Kippur wars. As a result, Israel undertook a program of chemical warfare preparations in both offensive and protective areas."

"While we cannot confirm whether the Israelis possess lethal chemical agents," the document adds, "several indicators lead us to believe that they have available to them at least persistent and non-persistent nerve agents, a mustard agent, and several riot-control agents, marched with suitable delivery systems."

Syria says it ratified treaty banning use of chemical weapons"]Syria says it ratified treaty banning use of chemical weapons

Syria became a full member of the global anti-chemical weapons treaty on Thursday, the country's UN envoy said, a move that the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad had promised as part of a deal to avoid US air strikes.

Several UN diplomats and a UN official, however, told Reuters on condition of anonymity that it was not yet clear that Syria had fulfilled all the conditions for legal accession to the treaty.

Soysauceonrice_sl · Sep 13, 2013

Iannis_sl said:
He is right. The President can 100% start a War all by himself if he wants to. He can fight a war for 8 years and never call it a War. That's not how it should be. There are limits set on that power. Those limits are willfully ignored in various ways by various Presidents. Including this one.

I don't understand this statement. Just because Congress never declared war doesn't mean Bush just woke up one day and willy-nilly decided to topple Sadam all by himself. We didn't declare war, but that doesn't mean he skirted around Congressional oversight. Congress voted to give him the authority to go into Iraq, so no, the president can't just decide to start a war all by himself.

The powers of the POTUS in regards to deploying military force without Congressional approval is spelled out in the War Powers Resolution. Basically, once the president commits military force, he has 2 days to notify congress, and then may continue to use that force for up to 90 days without authorization. So if Obama wanted to send a few missles Assad's way, he was legally and constitutionally within his right to do so without asking "may I" from Congress. Plenty of presidents, both Democrat and Republican, have done the same.

And believe me, I actually like Obama, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with everything he does. Even when he deferred the strike to Congress, he was reserving to right to strike Syria anyways if Congress said no. In other words, he was asking permission to do something that he felt like he had the right to do anyways. Que ?

Sebudai · Sep 13, 2013

tad10_sl said:
Obama takes really expensive vacations to Highway that cost $20,000,000

Uhhhhhhhhh

Silence_sl · Sep 13, 2013

tad10_sl said:
Bush fucked up with Iraq, the giant Medicare increase and of course the Patriot Act but - credit where credit is due - he at least had a sense of propriety when it came to vacations and golf that Obama doesn't have.

Yeah! He flew two countries into the ground, but, fuck it! He didn't take expensive vacations!

Soysauceonrice_sl · Sep 13, 2013

fanaskin_sl said:
The 1983 document stated that U.S. spy satellites had identified ?a probable CW [chemical weapon] nerve agent production facility and a storage facility? at the Dimona Sensitive Storage Area in the Negev Desert. Other CW production is believed to exist within a well-developed Israeli chemical industry.?

According to the Foreign Policy report, ?Israeli historian Avner Cohen, in his 1988 book Israel and the Bomb, wrote that Israeli Prime Minister David Ben Gurion secretly ordered that a stockpile of chemical weapons be built at about the time of the 1956 war between Israel and Egypt. The CIA, on the other hand, believed that Israel did not begin work on chemical weapons until either the late 1960s or the early 1970s.

The article included the following assessment from the 1983 CIA report: ?Israel, finding itself surrounded by frontline Arab states with budding CW [chemical weapons] capabilities, became increasingly conscious of its vulnerability to chemical attack. Its sensitivities were galvanized by the capture of large quantities of Soviet CW-related equipment during both the 1967 Arab-Israeli and the 1973 Yom Kippur wars. As a result, Israel undertook a program of chemical warfare preparations in both offensive and protective areas.?

?While we cannot confirm whether the Israelis possess lethal chemical agents,? the document adds, ?several indicators lead us to believe that they have available to them at least persistent and non-persistent nerve agents, a mustard agent, and several riot-control agents, marched with suitable delivery systems.?

Syria says it ratified treaty banning use of chemical weapons"]Syria says it ratified treaty banning use of chemical weapons

They've signed it, but they haven't ratified it. The reason ? Because the Arab countries around them (Syria and Egypt) haven't done the same. And by the way, your sources suck balls. That Real Agenda website isn't a news website, its a propaganda machine that pulls facts out of its ass.

Bullshit website says_sl said:
As reported yesterday,a new documentoriginated at the Central Intelligence Agency, now reveals that Israel possesses considerable amounts of chemical weapons.As we pointed out yesterday, those chemical weapons have been used multiple times by the Israeli regime against innocent people in Gaza without any consequence for the Israeli government.

Now go read that document they link. The document merely states that it is suspected that Isreal has chemical weapons, but nowhere does it say that they have USED these weapons without consequence. So at best, you can say that the Israelis have chemical weapons,but they have not been used, at least not in Gaza.

tad10 · Sep 13, 2013

Silence_sl said:
Yeah! He flew two countries into the ground, but, fuck it! He didn't take expensive vacations!

Afghanistan was justifiable and any President should have gone in after Osama and 9/11. Iraq wasn't and neither is Syria. Both Presidents sucked/suck in their own way but Obama sucks worse because Bush didn't come in saying he'd change the system and then double-down on making the system even more invasive, nor did Bush come in saying he'd stop wars and then try and start one in Syria. But yeah keep on supporting Obama and yes his fucking $20,000,000 vacations.

Erronius · Sep 13, 2013

Sebudai_sl said:
Uhhhhhhhhh

You don't want to walk into this dark alley with him, LOL.

Just one example: his trip to Africa. Somehow when the fringe picked up on the story it turned into a $100 million vacation, when that was the upper range of possible cost for an official trip with vacation time tacked on and much of the cost coming from security measures that would be used regardless. Not to mention that both Bush and Clinton made trips to Africa that were probably pretty costly as well.

Silence_sl · Sep 13, 2013

tad10_sl said:
But yeah keep on supporting Obama and yes his fucking $20,000,000 vacations.

I think you are just sour because you can't take 20MM vacations to Highway.

Soysauceonrice_sl · Sep 13, 2013

tad10_sl said:
Afghanistan was justifiable and any President should have gone in after Osama and 9/11. Iraq wasn't and neither is Syria. Both Presidents sucked/suck in their own way but Obama sucks worse because Bush didn't come in saying he'd change the system and then double-down on making the system even more invasive, nor did Bush come in saying he'd stop wars and then try and start one in Syria. But yeah keep on supporting Obama and yes his fucking $20,000,000 vacations.

http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/

Aside from the financial costs, Bush's unjustified war cost us the lives of over 4 thousand American soldiers. So by my estimation, Obama needs another thousand Benghazis, give or take, to pass Bush as the bigger fuck-up.

Erronius · Sep 13, 2013

tad10_sl said:
nor did Bush come in saying he'd stop wars and then try and start one in Syria.

I'll stick to just nitpicking this - just as an FYI, there's already a war in Syria in case you didn't notice, so it isn't like Obama is'trying to start a a war'there lol. Also AFAIK he is stopping Bush's wars (though doubtless not as quickly as most would like), and even at his worst I don't remember Obama ever saying that he wanted to go beyond some sort of strikes from a distance. If you or others choose to believe that he was secretly gunning for BoTG then that's really your paranoia speaking.

If I had to choose between a President lying about WMD in order to move us from war #1 to war #2 and then hopelessly miring us into it so deeply that it would take us years to pull out, and a President who made a gaffe about 'red lines', only ever intended strikes and now has to settle for Syria voluntarily giving up it's chemical weapons and the US not being involved in that entire Syrian civil war shitshow...yeah, I think I know which one I'd choose.

Obama is nowhere near the president I'd hoped for and there is a lot to criticize him for, but some people are blowing this shit out of proportion simply so it conforms to personal bias.

War with Syria

shitlord

I got Tuco'd!

Musty Nester

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO

Clump of Cells

shitlord

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO

shitlord

Musty Nester

Elisha Dushku

Well known agitator

shitlord

Ssraeszha Raider

shitlord

shitlord

Elisha Dushku

Macho Ma'am

shitlord

shitlord

Macho Ma'am