Skip to main content

View Diary: Latest whip count on Syria shows nays gaining (126 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I wish you were right. (9+ / 0-)

    But I no longer believe he is an 11 dimensional chess player.

    If you hate government, don't run for office in that government.

    by Bensdad on Fri Sep 06, 2013 at 02:24:46 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  This doesn't strike me as an 11DC play.... (15+ / 0-)

      It seems more likely that he greatly underestimated the domestic opposition to intervention, and he saw asking Congress as a legitimate way of deferring to that opposition, at least so that he won't "own" the intervention by himself. Buys him some time, too, to continue making his case.

      I also think the UK vote played a big role here as well, as not only does it mean the British will be sitting this one out, but it would have led to inevitable and good questions about why Obama skipped Congress to launch an extremely unpopular intervention.

      •  I envision the MIC and Joint Chiefs (7+ / 0-)

        yelling in his ear on one side, and the American people against intervention in the other.
        I think the American people are winning.  I even called both my Republican Senators to voice my opinion, which I hardly ever do (waste of time in most cases).
        And the whip count shows both Senators against intervention, so that's good.

        Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

        by skohayes on Fri Sep 06, 2013 at 02:47:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I contacted my Democratic rep.... (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rbird, coral, gerrilea, SixSixSix, skohayes

          ...and asked her not to support the intervention.

          If you hate government, don't run for office in that government.

          by Bensdad on Fri Sep 06, 2013 at 03:10:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I guess we're supposed to be happy (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          julesrules39, madronagal

          but I think this reluctance to discipline a country which has committed an international crime is one of the tragic consequences of our stupid invasion of Iraq. We are weary and our judgment is impaired by endless war. With W having cried wolf again and again, our village is not prepared to respond to another cry -- even if it is genuine. This time we're looking at the use of WMD as verified by a president we trust, but we would rather just let it go. Probably a tragic mistake. Understandable, but tragic. The world will be a different place when we all agree that chemical warfare is just hunky dory for all of the nations of the world to use.

          •  It's also a crime (6+ / 0-)

            To launch a war without legitimate causus belli.

            Breaking the law to enforce the law is vigilante justice. I'd just as soon not become that.

            Also, the reason chemical weapons aren't often used on the battlefield is because they're not really great weapons. Puts your side at risk too. Occasionally someone is crazy or sociopathic enough to do so, but it's a slippery slope to say that one desperate dictator will start a trend when even Hitler and Stalin never used them.

            •  Wow, so now Pres. Obama is potentially a criminal. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              madronagal

              I've found him to be thoughtful and cautious to make sure he didn't act rashly. That's one reason I have been willing to listen to him and hear his arguments. Today on Aljazeera his St. Petersburg interview was carried in its entirety. Listening to him, I could see his point and it made me ponder all of the implications of acting or not acting.

              Your statement that chemical weapons are not really great is just plain silly. Seriously. Children were victims of their usage. They don't have to be great weapons to be horrible. And obviously, they will be used.

              I'm not sure what the correct answer is. But I don't think this decision by Obama is being made lightly. Our knee-jerk opposition is a poor response to his arguments.

              •  It is against international law... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                DSPS owl, aliasalias

                To wage a war unless you have been attacked, or have the approval of the UN Security Council. So yes, unless something unexpected happens with the UN, our strikes would be illegal under international law.

                Your statement that chemical weapons are not really great is just plain silly. Seriously. Children were victims of their usage. They don't have to be great weapons to be horrible. And obviously, they will be used.
                Let's remember that we've also used chemical weapons. Recently. In an illegal war against the Iraqi people at that. Had other countries the same international power we do, we could have been the target for violating international law and norms.
              •  Agreed. (0+ / 0-)

                This knee jerkism  becomes less knee and more jerk every day.
                     This is how the D's lost in '10 by going to la la land on a 'public option.', - led off the cliff by Ed Schultz, Anthony Wiener and Bernie Sanders.  
                       Truly, it is disappointing. And the implications are far reaching.
                How silly and politically weak can some people be.

                •  Stop blaming reliable Democratic voters for 2010. (0+ / 0-)

                  The progressives who were the most furious about the betrayal on the public option, and it was a betrayal, and other issues early in Obama's tenure, tend to be among the most loyal and consistent Democratic voters. Progressives and base voters were not responsible for 2010. And even if they were, why is that somehow more contemptible than the Wall Street types and Blue Dogs, who are constantly catered to, because they are NOT consistent and loyal Democrats when it comes to their votes? Why shouldn't base voters and progressives demand better results on the issues that are important to them?

                  Truly, it is disappointing. And the implications are far reaching.
                  How silly and politically weak can some people be.
                  Silly and politically weak is right, but it should be applied to our elected, establishment members of the Democratic party. The party of professional losers, fencewalkers and half-assery. This talk about "needing to send a message" to Assad, but without the conviction or plan to actually change the situation on the ground is a perfect example.
              •  First of all, (0+ / 0-)

                there are many people who have just as principled arguments against bombing Syria as there are people with principled arguments for bombing Syria.
                Why do you think even the UN is against the US bombing Syria? Think their reaction is "knee jerk"?

                Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

                by skohayes on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 02:45:59 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  One of the reasons (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Reston history guy, SixSixSix

              chemical weapons were banned internationally in 1925 was that using mustard gas in the trenches usually backfired when the wind shifted.  It wasn't a very effective weapon, and even though we have far more sophisticated neurological agents now, there still isn't any effective delivery system.  

              Maybe we'll get lucky and Assad will drop a canister while he's showing the boys his new toy.

              "There are times when even normal men must spit in their hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken

              by rwgate on Fri Sep 06, 2013 at 05:12:51 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  WHAT!? (0+ / 0-)

              Hitler killed 12 million people with chemical weapons.

              "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

              by raptavio on Fri Sep 06, 2013 at 06:32:35 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  One more thing: Americans, and Crying, "Wolf." (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            DSPS owl, aliasalias, zett
            With W having cried wolf again and again, our village is not prepared to respond to another cry -- even if it is genuine.

            We are indeed ready to respond with military force to any country that attacks us. Make no mistake about that. Had Syria attacked the United States, support for war would be overwhelming.

            We are weary of war, yes, but we are especially weary of more conflicts where our national security is not threatened, and we're asked to respond with simple force to a situation that is extraordinarily complex, with multiple accounts of what is happening, and no clear ally to support.

        •  No point in calling my Senator (0+ / 0-)

          I think I can already guess Bomb-Bomb McCain's take on all this.

          I'm going to send an email to Kyrsten Sinema, just in case she hasn't made up her mind.

          "There are times when even normal men must spit in their hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken

          by rwgate on Fri Sep 06, 2013 at 05:08:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  This isn't 11 dimensional chess; (0+ / 0-)

      it's straight-up poker.

      "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

      by raptavio on Fri Sep 06, 2013 at 06:33:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site