• 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!

Obama's Nation Address Sept 10 2013.....

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private



PRESIDENT OBAMA: My fellow Americans, tonight I want to talk to you about Syria, why it matters and where we go from here.

Over the past two years, what began as a series of peaceful protests against the oppressive regime of Bashar al-Assad has turned into a brutal civil war. Over 100,000 people have been killed. Millions have fled the country. In that time, America’s worked with allies to provide humanitarian support, to help the moderate opposition, and to shape a political settlement, but I have resisted calls for military action because we cannot resolve someone else’s civil war through force, particularly after a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

When dictators commit atrocities, they depend upon the world to look the other way until those horrifying pictures fade from memory, but these things happened. The facts cannot be denied.

The question now is what the United States of America and the international community is prepared to do about it, because what happened to those people -- to those children -- is not only a violation of international law, it’s also a danger to our security. Let me explain why.

If we fail to act, the Assad regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons. As the ban against these weapons erodes, other tyrants will have no reason to think twice about acquiring poison gas and using them. Over time, our troops would again face the prospect of chemical warfare on the battlefield, and it could be easier for terrorist organizations to obtain these weapons and to use them to attack civilians.

This is not a world we should accept. This is what’s at stake. And that is why, after careful deliberation, I determined that it is in the national security interests of the United States to respond to the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons through a targeted military strike. The purpose of this strike would be to deter Assad from using chemical weapons, to degrade his regime’s ability to use them, and to make clear to the world that we will not tolerate their use.

That’s my judgment as commander-in-chief, but I’m also the president of the world’s oldest constitutional democracy. So even though I possess the authority to order military strikes, I believed it was right in the absence of a direct or imminent threat to our security to take this debate to Congress. I believe our democracy is stronger when the president acts with the support of Congress, and I believe that America acts more effectively abroad when we stand together. This is especially true after a decade that put more and more war-making power in the hands of the president and more and more burdens on the shoulders of our troops, while sidelining the people’s representatives from the critical decisions about when we use force.

Now, I know that after the terrible toll of Iraq and Afghanistan, the idea of any military action -- no matter how limited -- is not going to be popular. After all, I’ve spent four-and-a-half years working to end wars, not to start them. Our troops are out of Iraq. Our troops are coming home from Afghanistan. And I know Americans want all of us in Washington -- especially me -- to concentrate on the task of building our nation here at home, putting people back to work, educating our kids, growing our middle class. It’s no wonder then that you’re asking hard questions.

Other questions involve the dangers of retaliation. We don’t dismiss any threats, but the Assad regime does not have the ability to seriously threaten our military. Any other -- any other retaliation they might seek is in line with threats that we face every day. Neither Assad nor his allies have any interest in escalation that would lead to his demise, and our ally, Israel, can defend itself with overwhelming force, as well as the unshakable support of the United States of America.

It’s true that some of Assad’s opponents are extremists. But Al Qaida will only draw strength in a more chaotic Syria if people there see the world doing nothing to prevent innocent civilians from being gassed to death.

The majority of the Syrian people, and the Syrian opposition we work with, just want to live in peace, with dignity and freedom. And the day after any military action, we would redouble our efforts to achieve a political solution that strengthens those who reject the forces of tyranny and extremism.

Our ideals and principles, as well as our national security, are at stake in Syria, along with our leadership of a world where we seek to ensure that the worst weapons will never be used.

America is not the world’s policeman. Terrible things happen across the globe, and it is beyond our means to right every wrong, but when with modest effort and risk we can stop children from being gassed to death and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, I believe we should act.

That’s what makes America different. That’s what makes us exceptional. With humility, but with resolve, let us never lose sight of that essential truth.

Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.....snip~


FULL TRANSCRIPT: President Obama’s Sept. 10 speech on Syria - The Washington Post

The whole Speech is at the Link.....4 pages worth. This is pretty much the gist of what he said tonight. The vid of course has the whole speech.

So this is what he said. Thought upon the matter?
 

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I thought he looked like he was spray-tanned orange. Beyond that, what I saw of it, it seemed like a pretty weak speech.
 

Sharona

Banned
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
263
Reaction score
60
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I thought he looked like he was spray-tanned orange. Beyond that, what I saw of it, it seemed like a pretty weak speech.

I thought it was a good speech .. and an effort to keep US citizens informed of unfolding developments.
 

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I thought it was a good speech .. and an effort to keep US citizens informed of unfolding developments.

Too much equivocation for my taste.
 

reidster

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2011
Messages
184
Reaction score
71
Location
North Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
America is not the world’s policeman. Terrible things happen across the globe, and it is beyond our means to right every wrong, but when with modest effort and risk we can stop children from being gassed to death and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, I believe we should act.

Classic Obama, throwing in the emotional arguments in an attempt to snatch up the mainstream audience.

Anyways, just about what I expected.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
34,143
Reaction score
17,020
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
IMO, the President did not make a strong enough case for the US to get involved.

"because we cannot resolve someone else’s civil war through force,"
So 100.000 killed by conventional means is tolerable. But less than 1.500 by gas is not? its still a civil war.

A limited strike will not end the civil war. It will not lessen terrorist attacks.

Hopefully the Russian proposal will work out.
 

Sharona

Banned
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
263
Reaction score
60
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Too much equivocation for my taste.

Solving problems is not about equivocation .. Its about multilateral negotiations .. Obama has tried sanctions, diplomacy.... and now he has reached some sort of tentative agreement with Putin. Of course I don't have much regard for policy wonks..

We can hope that it works.
 

Sheik Yerbuti

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
11,265
Reaction score
2,921
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Classic Obama, throwing in the emotional arguments in an attempt to snatch up the mainstream audience.

Anyways, just about what I expected.

Yeah, he should have quelled the emotional arguments with ominous possibilities of a mushroom cloud over an American city.
 

Fletch

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
46,790
Reaction score
21,022
Location
Mentor Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Solving problems is not about equivocation .. Its about multilateral negotiations .. Obama has tried sanctions, diplomacy.... and now he has reached some sort of tentative agreement with Putin. Of course I don't have much regard for policy wonks..

We can hope that it works.
Obama tried sanctions and diplomacy? When did he do that? As for the Russian thingie. All that will lead to is what we saw with Saddam in the 1990's--game playing with the UN inspectors and playing for time while essentially nothing is done. It is a win for Russia Syria and a defeat for the US.
 

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,900
Reaction score
57,797
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
The guy goes to Congress instead of just bombing Syria, which was the right thing to do since matters in Syria are not an imminent threat to the USA, and the Right whines. While Congress dithers, a deal pops up which Obama says he will give a chance to develop, thus averting the need for a vote or a war, at least for now, and the Right whines about him bumbling and being indecisive. The guy just finishes a speech explaining the entire turn of events, the Right whines that he was equivocating.

Some people just can't be pleased.
 

Sheik Yerbuti

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
11,265
Reaction score
2,921
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Obama tried sanctions and diplomacy? When did he do that? As for the Russian thingie. All that will lead to is what we saw with Saddam in the 1990's--game playing with the UN inspectors and playing for time while essentially nothing is done. It is a win for Russia Syria and a defeat for the US.
Umm, it led to the end of Saddam's WMD. All that was found were remnants from decades earlier scattered about the country.
 

Sharona

Banned
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
263
Reaction score
60
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Obama tried sanctions and diplomacy? When did he do that? As for the Russian thingie. All that will lead to is what we saw with Saddam in the 1990's--game playing with the UN inspectors and playing for time while essentially nothing is done. It is a win for Russia Syria and a defeat for the US.

Maybe.. Russia is Syria's closest ally ... and needs to maintain their only warm water port in Syria.

Its not a defeat for the US... and it may work.

Unlike Iraq.. Syrian's oil production is quite small.
 

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,900
Reaction score
57,797
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Obama tried sanctions and diplomacy? When did he do that? As for the Russian thingie. All that will lead to is what we saw with Saddam in the 1990's--game playing with the UN inspectors and playing for time while essentially nothing is done. It is a win for Russia Syria and a defeat for the US.

And, you what? preferred Obama bomb the hell out of Syria on his own accord? Tell me you wouldn't be screaming for an impeachment had he done that.
 

Linc

NIMBY
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
58,845
Reaction score
18,513
Location
IL—16
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Rand paul's unofficial reply should earn him a trip to the gallows. He is a TREASONOUS mother **&*
Yeah, he should have quelled the emotional arguments with ominous possibilities of a mushroom cloud over an American city.
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Classic Obama, throwing in the emotional arguments in an attempt to snatch up the mainstream audience.

Anyways, just about what I expected.

From the link.....it appears he isn't getting the vote like he thought he would. Even Democrats are joing the Flip Flop and Fry.

House 252 against 26 for.....Senate 39 against 23 for.



“Over the last several days, I've studied the resolution passed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and I am concerned that its scope is too broad."

Sen. Al Franken (D) - Minn.


“I believe that a military strike against Syria at this time is the wrong course of action."

Sen. Joe Manchin (D) - W.Va.


“I cannot support the resolution . . . because it is too broad, the effects of a strike are too unpredictable, and because I believe we must give diplomatic measures . . . a chance to work."

Sen. Ed Markey (D) - Mass.


“...Ultimately, I’ve concluded that being credible on Syria requires presenting a credible response, and having a credible strategy.”

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R) - Ky.


“The idea that we would—once again—deploy forces while they are financially strapped weighs heavily on many members, including me, who would otherwise vote in favor of a strike.”

Rep. Buck McKeon.....snip~
 

Sheik Yerbuti

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
11,265
Reaction score
2,921
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
The guy goes to Congress instead of just bombing Syria, which was the right thing to do since matters in Syria are not an imminent threat to the USA, and the Right whines. While Congress dithers, a deal pops up which Obama says he will give a chance to develop, thus averting the need for a vote or a war, at least for now, and the Right whines about him bumbling and being indecisive. The guy just finishes a speech explaining the entire turn of events, the Right whines that he was equivocating.

Some people just can't be pleased.

The fact of the matter is ... they will criticize him no matter what he does.
 

Ray410

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
4,838
Reaction score
2,565
Location
Nevada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Obama sounds like he has no clue that no one is listening to him any more. He's an annoyance.

He needs to give two weeks notice.
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Obama tried sanctions and diplomacy? When did he do that? As for the Russian thingie. All that will lead to is what we saw with Saddam in the 1990's--game playing with the UN inspectors and playing for time while essentially nothing is done. It is a win for Russia Syria and a defeat for the US.

Yeah.....I am pretty sure the Chems were there two years ago. Now all of a Sudden they became a pressing issue with Assad using them. Despite knowing the Rebels/ Terrorists had used them.

Course the argument back then was to worry about if AQ and their likes got their hands on them. Which words like terrorists were used. But now that's not so much of a concern.
 

reidster

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2011
Messages
184
Reaction score
71
Location
North Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right


"The chance for diplomacy would not have occurred without strong voices against an immediate bombing campaign."

Spot on.
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Obama sounds like he has no clue that no one is listening to him any more. He's an annoyance.

He needs to give two weeks notice.

Heya Ray. :2wave: Well he definitely has no clue on that National Security Issue with Syria. Then to top it off he even says Assad cannot seriously affect our Military.

Wonder what his definition of seriously is?
 

thinkforyoursel

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
1,095
Reaction score
314
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Anybody believes Assad and Putin is giving up their WMD because out of the goodness of their hearts ...I have the Brooklyn Bridge to sell you.
Obama's finger on the trigger ..is what's creating this.

And I think in the end Obama will strike Assad and weaken his army.....and provide arms to the rebels to finish the job!

Ultimately Assad can no longer lead Syria and his stance is only causing more death ....the best thing for everyone is for Assad to meet the same fate as Khadaffi!!
 

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
74,478
Reaction score
43,751
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Anybody believes Assad and Putin is giving up their WMD because out of the goodness of their hearts ...I have the Brooklyn Bridge to sell you.
Obama's finger on the trigger ..is what's creating this.

And I think in the end Obama will strike Assad and weaken his army.....and provide arms to the rebels to finish the job!

Ultimately Assad can no longer lead Syria and his stance is only causing more death ....the best thing for everyone is for Assad to meet the same fate as Khadaffi!!

Assassination is not a credible foreign policy.
 

Fletch

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
46,790
Reaction score
21,022
Location
Mentor Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Umm, it led to the end of Saddam's WMD. All that was found were remnants from decades earlier scattered about the country.
It took an invasion to find that out. I hardly think that ten years of evasion followed by five years of war is a winning strategy to follow in Syria.

And, you what? preferred Obama bomb the hell out of Syria on his own accord? Tell me you wouldn't be screaming for an impeachment had he done that.
If the president feels it is in the US interest to launch an attack, he should do it. And no, I would not scream for impeachment. Even if congress says no to military action, Obama could still strike since he never needed their authorization in the first place. That said, he would never do it. He went to congress because he lacked the courage to act alone and sought congressional approval for political cover. If they don't give it to him, he wont act.
 

Fletch

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
46,790
Reaction score
21,022
Location
Mentor Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Anybody believes Assad and Putin is giving up their WMD because out of the goodness of their hearts ...I have the Brooklyn Bridge to sell you.
Obama's finger on the trigger ..is what's creating this.
No its not. Obama 'finger is not on the trigger.' Everyone knows Obama doesn't want to do anything. The Russian/Syrian plan is to just make promises they will never keep in order to make any action against Syria impossible. At the end of the day, Assad gets away with it and stays in power: Obama looks weak and feckless and loses credibility.
 

Sharona

Banned
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
263
Reaction score
60
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Obama tried sanctions and diplomacy? When did he do that? As for the Russian thingie. All that will lead to is what we saw with Saddam in the 1990's--game playing with the UN inspectors and playing for time while essentially nothing is done. It is a win for Russia Syria and a defeat for the US.

Sanctions have been incrementally increased for the past three years.. and there have been a number of diplomatic contacts.
 
Top Bottom