• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Congress vote on Syria

C

CRoland_1973

Banned
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The US Congress reconvenes today and there will be a vote on military strike against Syria.
US Secretary of State John Kerry now says he has the support of at least ten countries over taking "limited" military action following a poison gas attack on Damascus suburbs on August 21, which the US blames on President Bashar al-Assad's regime.

What do you think if "Captain America" managed to persuade senators to vote in favor of adoption of resolution?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-djALXzE7A8M/Ui3Cw4YUFqI/AAAAAAAAAFU/vJbOSCizaQ8/s1600/CAPTAIN-AMERICA.jpg
 
CRoland_1973 said:
What do you think if "Captain America" managed to persuade senators to vote in favor of adoption of resolution?
Click to expand...

The senate is the only shot he really has of getting an approval. As it stands today, the House is a long shot at best. Obama needs to put on his best snake oil salesman suit to sway the American people today and tomorrow to even come close, and I hope he fails miserably.
 

Here in the Uk, after our NO vote, I really get the sense that the average citizen was listened too, for a change. It feels quite good actually

Paul
 

That's a pretty idiotic photo, considering he's dead-set on bombing a Muslim country.
 

The opposition among the people is pretty well-solidified.

It's just about the only issue he's gotten a large majority of Americans to agree on.
 

He might go in even if Congress does not approve. I am extremely worried about this occurring.

Also, I haven't seen you in a while Ockham. How goes life?
 
Mr. Invisible said:
He might go in even if Congress does not approve. I am extremely worried about this occurring.
Click to expand...
If the Senate approves and the House rejects I too think he may still go in. If both reject I don't think he'll do it as it will really hurt his last 3 years in office.

Mr. Invisible said:
Also, I haven't seen you in a while Ockham. How goes life?
Click to expand...

Been going well - about 18 months of self imposed exile on political forums. Needed a break and new perspectives. Hope things with you are well!
 

It may hurt his last three years, but I don't know. Look at how people supported going into Libya with all the media lies about Gaddafi bombing his owns people and the like.


Good to hear that you've been well. Hope you got some new perspectives. I have as well, as you can see by my lean.
 
I don't think it's wise to give the evidence to more representatives than necessary. I think we're making better use of the time than Assad. Obama can probably order strikes under WPR and certainly via NATO treaty (Libya). The Russians can secure oil infrastructure. The Iranian regime is not a consideration, they will continue to pursue nukes and not intervene directly.

It doesn't matter if he ordered it directly. There are too many military officers involved, using state facilities, for it to be a terrorist operation.

And what do the terrorists get? UN intervention, which is not going to put the terrorists in charge of the government. The longer Assad stands, the more powerful they get; intervention is not in their interest.
 
MadLib said:
Really now?
Click to expand...

Really. It was a lie, there was no conclusive evidence that he bombed his own civilians.


EDIT:

We can also look at the NYT which stated that “the rebels feel no loyalty to the truth in shaping their propaganda, claiming nonexistent battlefield victories, asserting they were still fighting in a key city days after it fell to Qaddafi forces, and making vastly inflated claims of his barbaric behavior." (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/22/w...tml?_r=1&ref=daviddkirkpatrick&pagewanted=all)

In addition to this Amnesty International stated on the rape charges that they had “not found cases of rape….Not only have we not met any victims, but we have not even met any persons who have met victims. As for the boxes of Viagra that Gaddafi is supposed to have had distributed, they were found intact near tanks that were completely burnt out." (http://www.liberation.fr/monde/01012344751-il-y-a-eu-des-dizaines-de-cas-de-soldats-assassines)
 
Last edited:
Today US Congress suspended voting on Syria. Obama agreed to consider Russian proposal of taking Assad's CW under international control and further its abolition. Now the international community has time to think it over, and Obama is losing the main cause of military strikes. Lack of CW in Assad's hands makes us strikes impossible. Let's see if peace will return to the ME.
 

I think it is important to make a distinction between air bombing and rocket firing. It doesn't appear, from the AI article, that airpower was used to drop bombs on civilian areas, but that rockets and cluster bombs were fired as artillery into civilian areas. Other than that, you make a good point over exaggerated claims.

It's really no secret that the Gaddafi regime was corrupt and despotic, so I don't appreciate it when they manufacture crimes against him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…