bu. Posted September 1, 2013 Share Posted September 1, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted September 1, 2013 Share Posted September 1, 2013 The Senate will more than likely agree... the House will be a little more hesitant because they just don't like him (and it's Republicant ruled) but we'll see... Of course Obama could just use his toy drone but the republicans will bitch about him "abusing his power" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bu. Posted September 1, 2013 Author Share Posted September 1, 2013 What do you think would happen if Congress say no? I'm surprised David Cameron conducted a vote. I'm also surprised the UK Parliament majority voted no. I wonder if France will act alone should Congress say no and Obama is 'forced' to not do anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted September 1, 2013 Share Posted September 1, 2013 What do you think would happen if Congress say no? I'm surprised David Cameron conducted a vote. I'm also surprised the UK Parliament majority voted no. I wonder if France will act alone should Congress say no and Obama is 'forced' to not do anything. Obama can still strike.. And if he does, his opponents will hate him even more... many of his non-supporters will be a tad harsher... Seems like most people think we shouldn't "go to war" with Syria but chemical warfare on their innocent citizens and no one wants to stop it? Granted America isn't the police of the world but when is enough... enough? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bailey Posted September 1, 2013 Share Posted September 1, 2013 the whole point in bringing it to Congress is to stop Obama, stop him from acting, however in this instance its pretty clear chemical weapons were used and killed many, so the pressure to do something is there, problem is no one wants to get their hands dirty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeJoe Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 we don't need another war Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/09/01/the-5-ways-that-congress-is-splitting-on-syria/?clsrd Congress is pretty split but we'll know by Sept 9th Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 the whole point in bringing it to Congress is to stop Obama, stop him from acting, however in this instance its pretty clear chemical weapons were used and killed many, so the pressure to do something is there, problem is no one wants to get their hands dirty Obama didn't have to bring it to Congress... actually.. there are over 100 occasions where a president didn't get Congress's approval for war... Per the Constitution: The president has the power to initiate hostilities without consulting Congress. So bringing this to Congress doesn't stop Obama at all... but it could bite him in the ass and completely ruin his political career if the mission failed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bu. Posted September 2, 2013 Author Share Posted September 2, 2013 Obama can still strike.. And if he does, his opponents will hate him even more... many of his non-supporters will be a tad harsher... Seems like most people think we shouldn't "go to war" with Syria but chemical warfare on their innocent citizens and no one wants to stop it? Granted America isn't the police of the world but when is enough... enough? My issue is that there's no compelling evidence to suggest that it was even the Assad regime that used it. I know the US claims there is but they've lied before to go to war. How can they have evidence before the UN? Especially since the UN weren't even allowed to enter the country for 4 days. If Assad used it - then I guess it's important to act on it. However logistically speaking I don't think the UK could afford to go to "war" again, especially since the defence budget was cut and the economy is still bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 My issue is that there's no compelling evidence to suggest that it was even the Assad regime that used it. I know the US claims there is but they've lied before to go to war. How can they have evidence before the UN? Especially since the UN weren't even allowed to enter the country for 4 days. If Assad used it - then I guess it's important to act on it. However logistically speaking I don't think the UK could afford to go to "war" again, especially since the defence budget was cut and the economy is still bad. They claim to have intelligent sources.. Intelligent sources don't submit claims to the U.N., to my knowledge. It won't be a full fledge war... Obama clearly stated air strike and no US soldiers on the ground.. Which completely differs from the Iraqi war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bu. Posted September 2, 2013 Author Share Posted September 2, 2013 They claim to have intelligent sources.. Intelligent sources don't submit claims to the U.N., to my knowledge. It won't be a full fledge war... Obama clearly stated air strike and no US soldiers on the ground.. Which completely differs from the Iraqi war. I think the Iraqi war is what bit the UK government in the ass. Had it not been for that then the vote may have gone differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bailey Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 Obama didn't have to bring it to Congress... actually.. there are over 100 occasions where a president didn't get Congress's approval for war... Per the Constitution: The president has the power to initiate hostilities without consulting Congress. So bringing this to Congress doesn't stop Obama at all... but it could bite him in the ass and completely ruin his political career if the mission failed I have to give you credit for this post, because I knew this yet somehow that connection wasn't made, I guess my point is without support of others, even when you can act alone, its not always the best idea. Obama is interestingly on the job as the economy is coming back, and whether he made it happen doesn't matter he will get the credit like finding Osama, Im sure the intelligence for getting Osama came along as part of efforts that began before Obama took office but he was the president on duty when they caught him so he gets the credit. My whole point is why fuck things up when they're just getting good, I mean he could usher in the next President a Democrat no less Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 I have to give you credit for this post, because I knew this yet somehow that connection wasn't made, I guess my point is without support of others, even when you can act alone, its not always the best idea. Obama is interestingly on the job as the economy is coming back, and whether he made it happen doesn't matter he will get the credit like finding Osama, Im sure the intelligence for getting Osama came along as part of efforts that began before Obama took office but he was the president on duty when they caught him so he gets the credit. My whole point is why fuck things up when they're just getting good, I mean he could usher in the next President a Democrat no less Presidents don't control the economy... They can influence it but there is no guarantee their policy would work.. His Administration found and took out Bin Liden on his call.. He will also be the face of equality and marijuana decriminalization.. As well as the Prez who took out Enemy #1 What is he fucking up? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bailey Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 Presidents don't control the economy... They can influence it but there is no guarantee their policy would work.. His Administration found and took out Bin Liden on his call.. He will also be the face of equality and marijuana decriminalization.. As well as the Prez who took out Enemy #1 What is he fucking up? taking us into a conflict many don't want to bother with....no one is saying something isn't needed BUT no one wants to do it...he does that and it could be a disaster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escapade Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 I think Obama knew what he was doing when he announced he was seeking Congressional approval. If it goes bad then the blame won't only be on him. But using chemical weapons on innocent children is wrong. There HAS to be some consequences. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bailey Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 I think Obama knew what he was doing when he announced he was seeking Congressional approval. If it goes bad then the blame won't only be on him. But using chemical weapons on innocent children is wrong. There HAS to be some consequences. ^THIS ....that's the fucked up position he in, on the one hand some say who are we to police the world? On the other hand folks are standing by while genocide takes place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn1814 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 My issue is that there's no compelling evidence to suggest that it was even the Assad regime that used it. I know the US claims there is but they've lied before to go to war. How can they have evidence before the UN? Especially since the UN weren't even allowed to enter the country for 4 days. If Assad used it - then I guess it's important to act on it. However logistically speaking I don't think the UK could afford to go to "war" again, especially since the defence budget was cut and the economy is still bad. I heard some people say that it was the rebels, but if that's the case.. What has Assad done to stop them? Where is his outrage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 I heard some people say that it was the rebels, but if that's the case.. What has Assad done to stop them? Where is his outrage? US has intelligence that claims it was Assad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bu. Posted September 3, 2013 Author Share Posted September 3, 2013 I heard some people say that it was the rebels, but if that's the case.. What has Assad done to stop them? Where is his outrage? That's what I heard. I don't know what to 'believe' tbh. Everything is so blurry. I know Assad asked for proof that he used them although he hasn't denied he has them. This whole situation kind of reminds me of Kosovo in the 90s US has intelligence that claims it was Assad Hasn't their intelligence been wrong before? Although their intelligence did "get" Osama. It's excruciatingly annoying seeing it play out so 'slowly'. I hope the situation ends soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Oh yes their intelligence has been wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 The Orange Speaker of the House said this: @NewsBreaker: BREAKING: House Speaker Boehner: "I'm going to support the President's call for action" on Syria - @jamiedupree So looks likes it's going to rain over Syria soon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bu. Posted September 3, 2013 Author Share Posted September 3, 2013 Apparently 2million Syrians have fled to nearby countries and are now refugees Russia won't be happy with US attacking Syria. I'm not big on army sizes etc but are Russia strong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Apparently 2million Syrians have fled to nearby countries and are now refugees Russia won't be happy with US attacking Syria. I'm not big on army sizes etc but are Russia strong? Yeah I heard that... That's a lot of people! Russia has 1.04 million* active soldiers and spends $60 billion** US has 1.4 million* as but spends $600 billion** * - as of 2009 ** - Figures for the year 2012... The latest data available Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bu. Posted September 3, 2013 Author Share Posted September 3, 2013 Yeah I heard that... That's a lot of people! Russia has 1.04 million* active soldiers and spends $60 billion** US has 1.4 million* as but spends $600 billion** * - as of 2009 ** - Figures for the year 2012... The latest data available What about weapons tho? Russia feels like the new Nazis tbh with all that homo-hate. I bet they'll break the rules in war and spray us all with acid or something . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 What about weapons tho? Russia feels like the new Nazis tbh with all that homo-hate. I bet they'll break the rules in war and spray us all with acid or something . The most powerful military are usually the ones with the most members and bigger budget for the most part. Russia is too private to know what weapons they have There's no rules in war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.