• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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 Weekly Address for 9/8/2013: Calling for Limited Military Action in Syria....

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Here was Obama's Weekly Address yesterday.....with his reasons why he has asked Congress to Authorize the Strike. He talks about the images that were shown. Nothing is mentioned about what wasn't shown with the Rebels.


In his weekly address, President Obama makes the case for limited and targeted military action to hold the Assad regime accountable for its violation of international norms prohibiting the use of chemical weapons.....snip~
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Re: Obama's Weekly Address for 9/8/2013: Calling for Limited Military Action in Syria

Yep, and any from that Christian Town. So its going to be an all out blitz with the media. Telling us this is what they are going to do. He will get the votes he wants in the Senate.

Even the House Members I talked to say it's going to pass.....even if they vote no.
 

sawdust

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
3,177
Reaction score
1,533
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Re: Obama's Weekly Address for 9/8/2013: Calling for Limited Military Action in Syria

Yep, and any from that Christian Town. So its going to be an all out blitz with the media. Telling us this is what they are going to do. He will get the votes he wants in the Senate.

Even the House Members I talked to say it's going to pass.....even if they vote no.
Yea, he's doing it for the children. Any time someone says they are doing it for the children I know they aren't making an argument based on intelligence, they are making one based on emotion and aiming at the lowest common denominator.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,614
Reaction score
37,821
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: Obama's Weekly Address for 9/8/2013: Calling for Limited Military Action in Syria

How does Obama's planned "limtted attack" decrease the possibility of these chemical weapons falling into the hands of terrorists? I fully get the idea of "punishing those that used these chemical WMDs" but see that as simply weakening any state security now in place to prevent their "falling into the wrong hands".

I see no way, short of boots on the ground, to secure these chemical WMDs. The idea that Obama can and will destroy any capability to use these chemical WMDs without doing anything but blowing stuff up for "a few days" has not been shown to me. When I hear the pentagon brass actually saying this, then I might begin to believe our POTUS.

I see this as simply Obama's step one in Syria, and the rest (now cleverly left unsaid) being added as "necessary" to accomplish the stated mission, then already having been approved by our congress critters. Nobody ever approved spending over a decade in Iraq and/or Afghanistan yet look what actually occured there.
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Re: Obama's Weekly Address for 9/8/2013: Calling for Limited Military Action in Syria

How does Obama's planned "limtted attack" decrease the possibility of these chemical weapons falling into the hands of terrorists? I fully get the idea of "punishing those that used these chemical WMDs" but see that as simply weakening any state security now in place to prevent their "falling into the wrong hands".

I see no way, short of boots on the ground, to secure these chemical WMDs. The idea that Obama can and will destroy any capability to use these chemical WMDs without doing anything but blowing stuff up for "a few days" has not been shown to me. When I hear the pentagon brass actually saying this, then I might begin to believe our POTUS.

I see this as simply Obama's step one in Syria, and the rest (now cleverly left unsaid) being added as "necessary" to accomplish the stated mission, then already having been approved by our congress critters. Nobody ever approved spending over a decade in Iraq and/or Afghanistan yet look what actually occured there.
According to General Dempsey they know Assad has moved stuff around to civilian neighborhoods. Or will have prisoners around whatever. He says they are ready for the fall out with the Media.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,614
Reaction score
37,821
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: Obama's Weekly Address for 9/8/2013: Calling for Limited Military Action in Syria

According to General Dempsey they know Assad has moved stuff around to civilian neighborhoods. Or will have prisoners around whatever. He says they are ready for the fall out with the Media.
OK, so to punish Assad for "inhumanely" killing thousands of innocents we will now "humanely" kill thousands of innocents to destroy what we think now houses the evil WMDs that he controls?
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Re: Obama's Weekly Address for 9/8/2013: Calling for Limited Military Action in Syria

OK, so to punish Assad for "inhumanely" killing thousands of innocents we will now "humanely" kill thousands of innocents to destroy what we think now houses the evil WMDs that he controls?
Analysis: Surprise or not, U.S. strikes can still hurt Assad

It would hardly be a surprise to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad or his military if American missiles start hitting Syria soon.

With weeks to prepare for an attack, Assad might benefit in some ways from the delay in any strike caused by President Barack Obama's decision to seek approval from a divided U.S. Congress.

U.S. officials and defense experts say Assad's forces cannot take enough targets out of reach to blunt the U.S. military mission, especially since it is billed as having very limited objectives.

Defense analyst Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank said if successful, hitting fixed targets would eliminate key assets to Assad that "can't easily be replaced, like command and control facilities, major headquarters."

"These are lasting targets," Cordesman said

COLLATERAL DAMAGE

General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged publicly to Congress that Obama has ordered the military to develop plans that keep a lid on collateral damage - civilian deaths and damage to civilian infrastructure.

"Though they are in fact moving resources around - and in some cases placing prisoners and others in places that they believe we might target - at this point our intelligence is keeping up with that movement," Dempsey, the top U.S. military officer, told lawmakers on Wednesday.....snip~

Analysis: Surprise or not, U.S. strikes can still hurt Assad

Yet they don't know which oppositions groups belong to whom and who is backing whom. But they do know many of these groups are on the terror list.

Why let any of them leave?
 
Last edited:

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
30,944
Reaction score
9,014
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: Obama's Weekly Address for 9/8/2013: Calling for Limited Military Action in Syria

He's FOS
 

thinkforyoursel

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
1,095
Reaction score
314
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Obama's Weekly Address for 9/8/2013: Calling for Limited Military Action in Syria

Yea, he's doing it for the children. Any time someone says they are doing it for the children I know they aren't making an argument based on intelligence, they are making one based on emotion and aiming at the lowest common denominator.
...because the yeehhaww drumbeat to invade Iraq wasn't emotional ....it was all .....L-O-G-I-C!!:roll:
 

sawdust

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
3,177
Reaction score
1,533
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Re: Obama's Weekly Address for 9/8/2013: Calling for Limited Military Action in Syria

...because the yeehhaww drumbeat to invade Iraq wasn't emotional ....it was all .....L-O-G-I-C!!:roll:
Prior to the war in Iraq I wrote on the Thom Hartmann board that I opposed it because Hussein was someone else's tyrant and I didn't want to build a new power grid in Iraq after we destroyed the old one because we needed one in California. I feel the same about Syria.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,614
Reaction score
37,821
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: Obama's Weekly Address for 9/8/2013: Calling for Limited Military Action in Syria

Analysis: Surprise or not, U.S. strikes can still hurt Assad

It would hardly be a surprise to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad or his military if American missiles start hitting Syria soon.

With weeks to prepare for an attack, Assad might benefit in some ways from the delay in any strike caused by President Barack Obama's decision to seek approval from a divided U.S. Congress.

U.S. officials and defense experts say Assad's forces cannot take enough targets out of reach to blunt the U.S. military mission, especially since it is billed as having very limited objectives.

Defense analyst Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank said if successful, hitting fixed targets would eliminate key assets to Assad that "can't easily be replaced, like command and control facilities, major headquarters."

"These are lasting targets," Cordesman said

COLLATERAL DAMAGE

General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged publicly to Congress that Obama has ordered the military to develop plans that keep a lid on collateral damage - civilian deaths and damage to civilian infrastructure.

"Though they are in fact moving resources around - and in some cases placing prisoners and others in places that they believe we might target - at this point our intelligence is keeping up with that movement," Dempsey, the top U.S. military officer, told lawmakers on Wednesday.....snip~

Analysis: Surprise or not, U.S. strikes can still hurt Assad

Yet they don't know which oppositions groups belong to whom and who is backing whom. But they do know many of these groups are on the terror list.

Why let any of them leave?
Rest assured that many pictures of destroyed non-military stuff and plenty of dead civilians will be provided to "prove" that the U.S. is the great satan even if this "mini war" goes exactly as Commander In Chief Obama has planned. Will a "hurt" Assad be any less dangerous to whirled peas?
 
Top Bottom