Moot
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Messages
- 40,549
- Reaction score
- 15,452
- Location
- Utah
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Yesterday, Obama gave a press conference stating that the world and congress set the red line, not him.....
“The world set a red line when governments representing 98 percent of the world’s population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty preventing their use even when a country is engaged in war,” Obama said. “Congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. Congress set a red line when it indicated that in a piece of legislation titled the Syria Accountability Act that some of the horrendous things that are happening on the ground there need to be answered for.”
“My credibility is not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line,” Obama said. “And America and Congress’s credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these international norms are important.”
I think Obama is right....186 countries signed and ratified a treaty to stop the use and proliferation of chemical weapons...
Chemical Weapons Convention - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
..and the US Congress unanimously passed the Syria Accountability Act in 2003 that authorized the president to conduct military action against Syria if it used WMDs....
Syria Accountability Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Germany and Britain said they would only support military action on Syria if there is UN approval. Russia and China on the UN security council voted against military intervention in Syria. However, Russia, a supposed ally of Syria recently stopped all weapons shipments to Syria for lack of payment and Putin said if there is convincing evidence Assads military used chemical weapons they would reconsider...
The Russian president said it was "ludicrous'' that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, an ally of Russia, would use chemical weapons at a time when it was gaining ground against the rebels.
"If there is evidence that chemical weapons were used, and by the regular army... then this evidence must be presented to the UN Security Council. And it must be convincing," Mr Putin said in an interview on Wednesday.
But he added that Russia would "be ready to act in the most decisive and serious way" if there was clear proof of what weapons were used and who used them......read...
BBC News - Syria rifts loom large as G20 gathers in St Petersburg
Today is the first day of the G20 Summit. If Obama can convince Putin and other world leaders that Assads' military was responsible for using chemical weapons then it is possible he could get the UN approval. But if he doesn't.....then I seriously doubt Obama will attack Syria no matter how congress votes.
Really, how can Obama can't hold 186 countries accountable for not enforcing their agreement on chemical weapons and then go against a UN agreement himself and attack Syria without UN approval. Violating treaties, even a UN treaty is unconstitutional.....
Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, known as the Supremacy Clause, establishes the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, and U.S. Treaties as "the supreme law of the land."
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding....
Supremacy Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So either international treaties are important or they aren't. If countries don't enforce and/or violate treaties, then why have treaties at all? I think Obama's speech was a precursor for the G20 summit to question the G20 countries that have all signed and ratified the chemical weapons convention and the UN agreement when they became members.
Again, if Obama doesn't get UN approval I really don't think he will attack Syria no matter what US congress votes. He won't be the one violating international treaties, but the world will be.
“The world set a red line when governments representing 98 percent of the world’s population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty preventing their use even when a country is engaged in war,” Obama said. “Congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. Congress set a red line when it indicated that in a piece of legislation titled the Syria Accountability Act that some of the horrendous things that are happening on the ground there need to be answered for.”
“My credibility is not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line,” Obama said. “And America and Congress’s credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these international norms are important.”
I think Obama is right....186 countries signed and ratified a treaty to stop the use and proliferation of chemical weapons...
Chemical Weapons Convention - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
..and the US Congress unanimously passed the Syria Accountability Act in 2003 that authorized the president to conduct military action against Syria if it used WMDs....
Syria Accountability Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Germany and Britain said they would only support military action on Syria if there is UN approval. Russia and China on the UN security council voted against military intervention in Syria. However, Russia, a supposed ally of Syria recently stopped all weapons shipments to Syria for lack of payment and Putin said if there is convincing evidence Assads military used chemical weapons they would reconsider...
The Russian president said it was "ludicrous'' that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, an ally of Russia, would use chemical weapons at a time when it was gaining ground against the rebels.
"If there is evidence that chemical weapons were used, and by the regular army... then this evidence must be presented to the UN Security Council. And it must be convincing," Mr Putin said in an interview on Wednesday.
But he added that Russia would "be ready to act in the most decisive and serious way" if there was clear proof of what weapons were used and who used them......read...
BBC News - Syria rifts loom large as G20 gathers in St Petersburg
Today is the first day of the G20 Summit. If Obama can convince Putin and other world leaders that Assads' military was responsible for using chemical weapons then it is possible he could get the UN approval. But if he doesn't.....then I seriously doubt Obama will attack Syria no matter how congress votes.
Really, how can Obama can't hold 186 countries accountable for not enforcing their agreement on chemical weapons and then go against a UN agreement himself and attack Syria without UN approval. Violating treaties, even a UN treaty is unconstitutional.....
Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, known as the Supremacy Clause, establishes the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, and U.S. Treaties as "the supreme law of the land."
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding....
Supremacy Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So either international treaties are important or they aren't. If countries don't enforce and/or violate treaties, then why have treaties at all? I think Obama's speech was a precursor for the G20 summit to question the G20 countries that have all signed and ratified the chemical weapons convention and the UN agreement when they became members.
Again, if Obama doesn't get UN approval I really don't think he will attack Syria no matter what US congress votes. He won't be the one violating international treaties, but the world will be.
Last edited: