Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Apr 7, 2017 9:43:12 GMT -5
We've been a country at war in the Middle East for over 15 years. I don't recall Obama having to run to congress for every military strike. Why is it different under Trump?
It's a sad state of affairs when dictators can gas their civilians in violation of international law and people think U.S retaliation is a bad thing.
|
|
Rob Base 2.0
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 23, 2017 18:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 1,538
|
Post by Rob Base 2.0 on Apr 7, 2017 9:50:51 GMT -5
As for the haha what's with the Putin connection now? Well for one we supposedly warned Russia beforehand - though we didn't ask what they thought. Which is right in line with trumps MO. And I heard it allowed Russia to get any shit at the target out. I do think Putin wanted trump over Hillary. I think he thought he could control trump, or at least manipulate him. I also think Putin miscalculated if he was banking on that because trump has always been a hair trigger. But I think it's possible putin didn't care - he'd either get a puppet with trump or throw the US into chaos with him...both could be equally good outcomes for Russia. So what if we warned Russia? And it would not surprise me Putin wanted Trump as POTUS over Clinton. But quite a bit of left leaning posters were convicting Trump of Treason and swore the evidence was there. Which is quite different. I wonder now if they will deny it. Like they deny they said the stock market would crash the day after the election. Is it really hard to admit you MIGHT have be wrong? For the record, righties have a similar problem they just are not as radical IMO
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Apr 7, 2017 10:12:26 GMT -5
For all you Hillary fans out there..... If she were elected in November, would this missle salvo have happened? Or would we have another public shaming of Assad in the Rose Garden?
If it were the latter, would you be agreeing with the attack this morning? If so, why?
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,585
|
Post by Tennesseer on Apr 7, 2017 10:59:53 GMT -5
For all you Hillary fans out there..... If she were elected in November, would this missle salvo have happened? Or would we have another public shaming of Assad in the Rose Garden? If it were the latter, would you be agreeing with the attack this morning? If so, why? If Clinton had been elected, she might have sought approval with congress as the Constitution states the president should do. We will never know if Clinton would or would not have. Trump didn't seek Congress' approval. It was because of the non-approval of Congress that Obama didn't do even more in the Middle East. How Trump's Syria airstrike is different from -- and similar to -- Obama'sTranscript of Obama asking Congress for approval to strike Syria: Transcript: President Obama asks Congress to vote on Syria strike
|
|
ken a.k.a OMK
Senior Associate
They killed Kenny, the bastards.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:39:20 GMT -5
Posts: 14,115
Location: Maryland
Member is Online
|
Post by ken a.k.a OMK on Apr 7, 2017 11:03:58 GMT -5
We've been a country at war in the Middle East for over 15 years. I don't recall Obama having to run to congress for every military strike. Why is it different under Trump?It's a sad state of affairs when dictators can gas their civilians in violation of international law and people think U.S retaliation is a bad thing. The difference is that Obama was attacking terrorist groups (al Qaeda and ISIS) with congress's approval, not a sovereign country.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Apr 7, 2017 11:24:26 GMT -5
Not 7 days ago the UN basically conceded Assad would remain in power and were drawing up guidelines for accepting the legitimacy of his government. Then four days later he launches a sarin gas attack on a civilian target (with his own people in the region, no less) for no discernible reason to incur the ire of the entire world and end any chance of the legitimacy he's sought for the past three years? I don't believe it. You'd have to believe the man is insane, and I don't. Your only hope now is that Russia doesn't retaliate in response to this. You mean this? m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58e33defe4b03a26a3657ce2There was an attack in St. Petersburg the other day and the refugee number in Turkey is like 5 million now. Believe what you want my friend. The attack in St. Petersburg had nothing to do with Syrian rebels. The bomber was from Kyrgyzstan and was likely a Chechnyan separatist. Regardless, if Russia chooses to retaliate for that, they'll publicly own it. They won't ask Assad to gas random kids in the middle of nowhere. And yes, the sequence of events set off by Ms. Haley and Sec. Tiller's comments about tolerating Assad is precisely what I was referring to. You inadvertently lost the "n" in "neither" when you bolded, OC. Just FYI, since it completely changes the meaning of the sentence. Geees, Virgil, It wasn't inadvertent, there lots of old stockpiles laying around, Those stockpile came from the Russian or the U.S. My understanding is that the gas was produced in Syria itself. But if not, fine. Regarding the edit: perhaps in future cross out the "n" (e.g. "chemical weapons that originated n either in the US or in Russia"); otherwise the bolding implies emphasis, not modification. I admit I do not know whether this was a good move or not, but listen to all the "crickets" from Middle East states this morning. No one is condemning this attack on an airstrip. What would they say? Every Middle Eastern nation out there has been aligned with either the US or with Russia for years in the proxy war. If they're US-aligned and they condemn the attack, they're either saying they don't care about a chemical weapons attack or that they suspect it was fabricated as a pretense.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Apr 7, 2017 11:25:15 GMT -5
AJ,
Ah yes, the Clinton cruise missiles at Al-Queada whereupon he was chastised for years for not going after....Al Queada.
|
|
Rob Base 2.0
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 23, 2017 18:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 1,538
|
Post by Rob Base 2.0 on Apr 7, 2017 11:29:29 GMT -5
For all you Hillary fans out there..... If she were elected in November, would this missle salvo have happened? Or would we have another public shaming of Assad in the Rose Garden? If it were the latter, would you be agreeing with the attack this morning? If so, why? VB - I am not a Hillary fan but this link may help answer ur question I posted it in the OP since last night www.cnn.com/2017/04/06/politics/hillary-clinton-syria-assad/index.html
|
|
Spellbound454
Senior Member
"In the end, we remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends"
Joined: Sept 9, 2011 17:28:42 GMT -5
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by Spellbound454 on Apr 7, 2017 11:52:17 GMT -5
There is some is some reasons for thinking the Sarin gassing was an airbourne attack rather than a store being hit. (Recently made gas because Sarin doesn't keep) It is stored as two separate chemicals (which then are put in a missile and react together on impact)....and it would have been heavily contaminated by debris and not pure Sarin if it was in store. ....but There is enough of a doubt about this to not do anything reckless until the source is proven. There are liars everywhere. Before we get involved in any more conflicts..... I wont to know what the game plan is... what success will look like...and how do we not make it worse because right now ISIS are celebrating. Do we really want to go to War with Russia? People are thinking who the hell does Trump think he is.... there are plenty of dead babies in Iraq....so who is he to tell anyone else what to do. There arent any clear directions right now.......I think we should back off and let it play out. WE can only make it worse and this latest incident of reckless abandon has just antagonised people more.
|
|
Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger
Senior Associate
Viva La Revolucion!
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 12,758
|
Post by Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger on Apr 7, 2017 11:58:10 GMT -5
Bolded was what I was talking about with the Balkans, Virgil. That's going to be an area to watch. How it relates, Russia is soon to have many problems. Assad has been supported by Russia... Iran also, but there is that whole Saudi-Pakistan military thing with a wall being built between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The UN: to me that sequence goes; America says have fun "winning" Assad, we know what's going on in the Balkans. Assad and Putin think, we have to do something decisive to win this because it's three years we don't have to "win" at the current pace. President Trump makes a deal with SISI(sic) in Egypt, and then A&P take a risk. They miscalculated. Now, have fun "winning" without chemical weapons. We know what's going on in the Balkans and Central Asia.
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on Apr 7, 2017 12:13:01 GMT -5
trump did what the republican congress wouldn't allow President Obama to do. it's a distraction from his growing Russia problem. Seems Jared forgot to disclose this Russian meeting when he applied for a top secret clearance, Oops.
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on Apr 7, 2017 12:14:36 GMT -5
trump did what the republican congress wouldn't allow President Obama to do. What stopped Obama?? I don't see where Trump asked for permission! What stopped Obama? Congress. Trump DIDN'T ask for permission, Which, Constitutionally, is goven only by Congress. Just another example of his distain for the Constitution.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Apr 7, 2017 12:17:17 GMT -5
The Brits also weighed in to Obama that the bombing of Syria would be a bad idea. There are those Americans that think going against the wishes of Congress and ignoring our leading ally is strength. How foolish.
|
|
Rob Base 2.0
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 23, 2017 18:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 1,538
|
Post by Rob Base 2.0 on Apr 7, 2017 12:18:23 GMT -5
trump did what the republican congress wouldn't allow President Obama to do. it's a distraction from his growing Russia problem. Seems Jared forgot to disclose this Russian meeting when he applied for a top secret clearance, Oops. LMBO. DISTRACTION FROM HIS GROWING RUSSIAN PROBLEM
|
|
Rob Base 2.0
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 23, 2017 18:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 1,538
|
Post by Rob Base 2.0 on Apr 7, 2017 12:19:04 GMT -5
there's no poison gas, this is all fake. John Kerry assured us OR THEY FUCKING LIED for political convenience. whatev's Such a potty mouth. Stay classy
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Apr 7, 2017 12:20:40 GMT -5
The reason you can't believe it is because you still think the war in Syria ended with Aleppo?? This isn't the case and there are problems in Sini, Yemen, etc. So Assad actually has everything to gain because once the Balkans becomes a bigger problem, Russia would have to stop supporting Assad and fight there to save themselves. Unless President Trump keeps bombing Assad, he will hold on for another 11 months or so... On the 100th anniversary of the US entering WW1... It's been global for a while... Not 7 days ago the UN basically conceded Assad would remain in power and were drawing up guidelines for accepting the legitimacy of his government. Then four days later he launches a sarin gas attack on a civilian target (with his own people in the region, no less) for no discernible reason to incur the ire of the entire world and end any chance of the legitimacy he's sought for the past three years? I don't believe it. You'd have to believe the man is insane, and I don't. Your only hope now is that Russia doesn't retaliate in response to this. I'm having trouble buying this, too, Virgil. It really doesn't make any sense. There's just too much jockeying for position behind the scenes for me to feel comfortable drawing any conclusions at this point. I'm trying to watch as many sources as I can to get as much input as is available on all sides of these issues. I agree, wholeheartedly, these are pretty scary times.
|
|
Rob Base 2.0
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 23, 2017 18:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 1,538
|
Post by Rob Base 2.0 on Apr 7, 2017 12:23:06 GMT -5
Such a potty mouth. Stay classy Anything on the substance? If there was substance u wouldn't need the profanity.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 14, 2024 15:24:50 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2017 12:29:48 GMT -5
People...... There was no UN mandate to do this. There was no Congressional authorization to do this. There wasn't even any political consensus to do this, not that it would have made it legal. IF Assad dropped chemweaps and broke international law that still does NOT give the US a mandate to just go in blasting. This was cowboy diplomacy, wild west marshal law and an absolutely illegal thing to do. But fear not. We have a seat at the SecCon, and the world's biggest nuclear arsenal. We will get away with it. I guess that makes it right for some of you? Clintons Sudan strike in 98 was justified as follows by his legal team, Trumps strike definitely doesn't fit under self defense IMO: "The Clinton administration justified Operation Infinite Reach under Article 51 of the UN Charter and Title 22, Section 2377 of the U.S. Code; the former guarantees a UN member state's right to self-defense, while the latter authorizes presidential action by "all necessary means" to target international terrorist infrastructure.[54] Government lawyers asserted that since the missile strikes were an act of self-defense and not directed at an individual, they were not forbidden as an assassination.[7] A review by administration lawyers concluded that the attack would be legal, since the president has the authority to attack the infrastructure of anti-American terrorist groups, and al-Qaeda's infrastructure was largely human. Officials also interpreted "infrastructure" to include al-Qaeda's leadership.[55]" en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infinite_Reach
|
|
Icelandic Woman
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 4, 2011 22:37:53 GMT -5
Posts: 4,829
Location: Colorado
Favorite Drink: Strawberry Lemonade
|
Post by Icelandic Woman on Apr 7, 2017 12:34:30 GMT -5
People...... There was no UN mandate to do this. There was no Congressional authorization to do this. There wasn't even any political consensus to do this, not that it would have made it legal. IF Assad dropped chemweaps and broke international law that still does NOT give the US a mandate to just go in blasting. This was cowboy diplomacy, wild west marshal law and an absolutely illegal thing to do. But fear not. We have a seat at the SecCon, and the world's biggest nuclear arsenal. We will get away with it. I guess that makes it right for some of you? And if his minions that salivate at everything he does really believe he did this because he cares about the people of Syria then I have some beautiful swampland in FL to sell them. He did this because he needed a power rush to stroke his massive ego because he can. I was worried about getting through 4 years without Bozo the clown in chief with his finger on the button pulling us into a war now we will be lucky to get through 6 months.
|
|
Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger
Senior Associate
Viva La Revolucion!
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 12,758
|
Post by Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger on Apr 7, 2017 12:53:36 GMT -5
People...... There was no UN mandate to do this. There was no Congressional authorization to do this. There wasn't even any political consensus to do this, not that it would have made it legal. IF Assad dropped chemweaps and broke international law that still does NOT give the US a mandate to just go in blasting. This was cowboy diplomacy, wild west marshal law and an absolutely illegal thing to do. But fear not. We have a seat at the SecCon, and the world's biggest nuclear arsenal. We will get away with it. I guess that makes it right for some of you? I'm not saying it's right, and I fully expect there to be lots of debate(blow back) over it. I'm also not seeing much come of this so far, and when it boils down, Assad and these other dictators out there will know President Trump isn't afraid of them. It's unfortunate that the media(all) has done such a great job of compartmentalizing the war...and there was a time when an attack on European soil wasn't a "common" thing...(I don't give a fuck what the UN says)
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Apr 7, 2017 13:02:56 GMT -5
For all you Hillary fans out there..... If she were elected in November, would this missle salvo have happened? Or would we have another public shaming of Assad in the Rose Garden? If it were the latter, would you be agreeing with the attack this morning? If so, why? If Clinton had been elected, she might have sought approval with congress as the Constitution states the president should do. We will never know if Clinton would or would not have. Trump didn't seek Congress' approval. It was because of the non-approval of Congress that Obama didn't do even more in the Middle East. How Trump's Syria airstrike is different from -- and similar to -- Obama'sTranscript of Obama asking Congress for approval to strike Syria: Transcript: President Obama asks Congress to vote on Syria strikeI assume you could consider this an act of aggression but is not a declaration of war. Unfortunately, for you and others he did not declare war so no Impeachment proceedings will come of this. He did notify Congress, both Dems and Pubs privately, although he did not publicly speak before Congress. So he is covered on that one. All Presidents are allowed via our laws to carry out an "attack against another country". They just are not allowed to declare war.
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on Apr 7, 2017 13:14:45 GMT -5
People...... There was no UN mandate to do this. There was no Congressional authorization to do this. There wasn't even any political consensus to do this, not that it would have made it legal. IF Assad dropped chemweaps and broke international law that still does NOT give the US a mandate to just go in blasting. This was cowboy diplomacy, wild west marshal law and an absolutely illegal thing to do. But fear not. We have a seat at the SecCon, and the world's biggest nuclear arsenal. We will get away with it. I guess that makes it right for some of you? And if his minions that salivate at everything he does really believe he did this because he cares about the people of Syria then I have some beautiful swampland in FL to sell them. He did this because he needed a power rush to stroke his massive ego because he can. I was worried about getting through 4 years without Bozo the clown in chief with his finger on the button pulling us into a war now we will be lucky to get through 6 months. He accomplishes two things - help stop his declining approval numbers (people tend to rally behind a president at war) Distract from his very real and growing Russia problem.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,508
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 7, 2017 13:29:27 GMT -5
I assume you could consider this an act of aggression but is not a declaration of war. Unfortunately, for you and others he did not declare war so no Impeachment proceedings will come of this. He did notify Congress, both Dems and Pubs privately, although he did not publicly speak before Congress. So he is covered on that one. All Presidents are allowed via our laws to carry out an "attack against another country". They just are not allowed to declare war. I agree no impeachment proceedings will come of this but disagree that it couldn't. An unjustifiable act of aggression could easily be the basis for impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors.
|
|
ken a.k.a OMK
Senior Associate
They killed Kenny, the bastards.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:39:20 GMT -5
Posts: 14,115
Location: Maryland
Member is Online
|
Post by ken a.k.a OMK on Apr 7, 2017 13:32:06 GMT -5
If they attack us first.
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Apr 7, 2017 13:34:17 GMT -5
This f*ing idiot is gonna get us all killed
|
|
Rob Base 2.0
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 23, 2017 18:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 1,538
|
Post by Rob Base 2.0 on Apr 7, 2017 13:42:36 GMT -5
And if his minions that salivate at everything he does really believe he did this because he cares about the people of Syria then I have some beautiful swampland in FL to sell them. He did this because he needed a power rush to stroke his massive ego because he can. I was worried about getting through 4 years without Bozo the clown in chief with his finger on the button pulling us into a war now we will be lucky to get through 6 months. He accomplishes two things - help stop his declining approval numbers (people tend to rally behind a president at war) Distract from his very real and growing Russia problem. GG can you define this "Russian problem" that Trumo has please? Because I am a bit confused as I thought previously U said Trump committed treason with Russia on the election. And please no potty mouth. Thanks
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,426
|
Post by thyme4change on Apr 7, 2017 14:18:03 GMT -5
I'm not even sure who are the good guys and who are the bad guys in Syria.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Apr 7, 2017 14:22:21 GMT -5
I agree. I find myself not caring 1 shiite about them.
|
|
toshmanta
Familiar Member
An evil man threw tobacco in the macaque-rhesus eyes.
Joined: Oct 29, 2016 15:29:57 GMT -5
Posts: 682
|
Post by toshmanta on Apr 7, 2017 14:51:42 GMT -5
China's response.
There are rules,this is not Nam.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 14, 2024 15:24:50 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2017 14:57:43 GMT -5
Could a president attack any country without congressional fallout? Say they don't like Virgils response to something on YM, could a president lob 60 missles at Canada with no accountability?
|
|