SYRIA: Nerve Gas Attack

I am forcing myself to sit through Obama waffle without damaging my TV. It sounds like he's going to delay the Congress vote so they can 'discuss developments' and put his war on hold.

It's hard to tell, because so much is empty cliche.

I think he knows he does not have the vote he wants? So, to save face, AGAIN, he states delayed?

I would say so, yes, and by them discussing it, without voting, he can pretend that was the idea all along? Most of his interview was just hot air, but he seems to have rubbed out the red line he has since claimed he didn't draw in the first place.

I have never in my life known such a liar of a politician. He is not even man enough to take responsibility for his er......mistakes.

Heaven help us all.  

President Obama on Monday took a sharp turn away from his "red line" threat to Syria on the eve of taking his case to the American people, saying in an interview with Fox News that he's open to negotiations on an alternative plan that could avert a military strike.
The president was responding to a proposal, formally put forward by the Russians, to have the Assad regime turn over its chemical weapons to international control.
"We will pursue this diplomatic track," Obama told Fox News. "I fervently hope that this can be resolved in a non-military way."
The president, while saying his advisers would "run to ground" that proposal, indicated he still wants Congress to debate a resolution to authorize a strike against Syria. "I think it is important for us not to let the pedal off the metal when it comes to making sure they understand we mean what we say," Obama said.
But the president's decision to pursue the diplomatic track is a departure from his decision more than a week ago to pursue a military strike. And it could bring the temperature down a notch in the ongoing stand-off between his administration and the Assad government.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/09/obama-backs-off-red-line-opens-door-to-diplomatic-track-on-syria/#ixzz2eRCyqoxl


You get the idea.....

Almost forgot, that is a fantastic article about from the Guardian. Makes such sense unlike the official version.

Cannot believe it. They cannot tell the truth about anything, or so it seems.

Try not to swear, Lily...

Roughly quoting the late President Ronald Reagan, he said: "It's not enough just to trust. I think we're going to have to verify."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/09/obama-backs-off-red-line-opens-door-to-diplomatic-track-on-syria/#ixzz2eREpIwiI

     

He must be the most inept President ever. If we thought George W was bad, this bozo makes him look like the world's best leader ever.

Can you imagine the carnage that he might have caused? Oops, better be quiet as we are not over it yet.

No, there's a long way to go before it's over and I wouldn't trust Obama as far as I could throw him. I hadn't paid much attention to him before this started, and I am not one bit impressed.

He makes Cameron look like a statesman.

I think it took about 5 months after he was first sworn in for me to see what a bad choice he was. I always wanted to be proved wrong.

He is an embarrassment. I always thought Carter was the worst in recent years, followed by W. but this guy makes them look like saints. Even Cameron, Bonny.

Oh dear.  What a shame.


Discord Over Military Strike Imperils President’s Agenda

Bid to Win Backing in Congress Drains Political Capital


Obama's bid to win congressional approval for military action in Syria threatens his broader agenda by draining the White House's political capital and absorbing the time of legislators as well as the president.

By Colleen McCain Nelson, Janet Hook

President Barack Obama’s bid to win congressional approval for military action in Syria threatens his broader second-term agenda by draining the White House’s political capital and absorbing the time of legislators as well as the president, lawmakers of both parties say.

Mr. Obama already was headed down a bumpy road on Capitol Hill as he prepared a push to address the federal borrowing limit, confirm a new Federal Reserve chairman and rewrite immigration laws.

Now, both the White House and lawmakers have set these issues aside to contend with a resolution on a Syria strike. From a practical standpoint, weeks could be consumed by the Syria debate. On a broader level, the Syria vote could imperil Mr. Obama’s political standing.

Anything short of a victory could dim the president’s prospects for winning support for other legislation.

“This is a huge gamble by the president, putting at risk not only what’s left of his domestic agenda but also his foreign policy,” said Jim Manley, a former longtime aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.). “A rejection by the Congress would be a serious setback.”

The vote’s importance is evidenced by the White House’s all-hands-on-deck effort to convince both Congress and the American public the U.S. must use military action to send a message to the regime of President Bashar al-Assad and the world that the use of chemical weapons won’t be tolerated.

Mr. Obama and Vice President Joe Biden personally are making the case to lawmakers in meetings at the White House and on Capitol Hill, in phone calls and at a dinner Sunday night. Other top administration officials have been dispatched to deliver speeches and hold briefings. The president sat for interviews about Syria with six networks Monday, a day after his chief of staff, Denis McDonough, appeared on five Sunday talk shows. Mr. Obama plans a televised speech to the nation Tuesday night.

It is possible the final outcome may be muddier than a clear win or loss. The Senate might muster the votes to authorize action against Syria while the House could pass a watered-down resolution or choose not to act at all, Republicans and Democrats said. The outlook and timing of the debate was roiled Monday when Senate leaders delayed plans to hold the first test vote Wednesday, after Russia opened the door for a possible diplomatic initiative.

Either outcome in Congress would present Democrats with the prospect of a weakened president who then struggles to move forward with the rest of his agenda.

“We all have an interest in a strong president, particularly when we’re going into a series of fiscal crises,” said Rep. Jim Moran (D., Va.), who supports the Syria resolution and says a defeat would weaken Mr. Obama’s hand. “It matters if he gets repudiated. It matters to all of us.”

The White House said it continues to move forward on an array of issues, such as implementing the Affordable Care Act. The “president and his team continue to do everything we need to do to execute on his domestic agenda,” White House spokesman Eric Schultz said. “But we also understand that the decision before Congress on how the U.S. responds to the Syrian chemical weapon attack is exactly what the president, Congress and the public should be discussing, debating and focused on at this moment.”

For now, the fight over Syria is undercutting one of Obama’s most powerful weapons on Capitol Hill: the unity of his party on issues from immigration to spending to taxes. The Syria debate is splitting Democrats as deeply as Republicans, with a steady stream of Democratic lawmakers announcing their opposition to military action even before the president’s speech Tuesday.

If Mr. Obama fails to notch a win on the Syria vote, the defeat could embolden Republicans, especially those who have sought to attach conditions to budget talks, such as defunding the health-care law, said John Feehery, a former aide to House Republican leaders. “The president would be totally emasculated if the Congress tells him ‘hell no,’ ” he said. “He’ll have to prove that he’s relevant.”

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R., Calif.) told reporters Monday the debate over Syria offered an opening to revisit the budget cuts he said are hanging over the military due to the federal government’s spending reductions known as the sequester.

“It’s immoral to continue to ask our men and women in uniform to go out, carry out missions without having all the equipment, tools, training and things they need,” he said. Mr. McKeon, who indicated his concerns about the sequester would lead him to oppose the Syria resolution, said he raised his worries at a meeting with Mr. Obama and other lawmakers last week.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D., Md.), ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said divisions aren’t likely to persist as Congress contends with other issues such as the budget. “I don’t see this [Syria resolution] as a test of party unity,” said Mr. Van Hollen, who has proposed a much narrower use-of-force resolution. “This should be a case of people reaching their own conclusions.”

–Kristina Peterson

contributed to this article.

Write to Colleen McCain Nelson at colleen.nelson@wsj.com and Janet Hook at janet.hook@wsj.comhttp://stream.wsj.com/story/latest-headlines/SS-2-63399/SS-2-321274/

I won't pretend to know anything about Obama's domestic policy, Lily, but having seen his international policy - or lack of - I suspect it will be an unworkable, irrational shambles?

Looks like he's been painted into a corner over Syria:

http://news.sky.com/story/1139477/syria-obama-may-halt-strike-over-weapons-deal

Syria strike test vote put on hold as Obama backs off 'red line

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/10/obama-backs-off-red-line-opens-door-to-diplomatic-track-on-syria/#ixzz2eUCBOhmT

 

Red line? What red line? Who said anything about red lines?

Looks like WW3 has been cancelled:

http://news.sky.com/story/1139734/syria-agrres-to-hand-over-chemical-weapons

Syria Agrres To Hand Over Chemical Weapons
12:18pm UK, Tuesday 10 September 2013

Syria has accepted a Russian proposal to put chemical weapons under international control, it has been reported.

Tw@t Hague is still making growly noises, but it does seem the world is not going to go up in flames as some had planned:

http://news.sky.com/story/1139734/syria-agrees-to-hand-over-chemical-weapons

However, what will the Saudis have to say about it? Also, Israel for that matter? Someone won't be pleased......

How long will it take to think up another excuse?

I've just watched Kerry addressing congress; he seems to think he can still bomb Syria. I am not too sure just what he said, none of it seems to bear much relation to reality.

No, the Saudis and co who were going to foot the bill aren't going to be happy, that's their pipeline screwed. What, surely no-one thought Obama and co actually cared about anything except their bank accounts?  

Corrupt politics as usual then?

What does lobbing a few bombs, killing/maiming people and maybe even starting a bigger war have to do with stopping this? Heavens to Betsy, no. Nothing. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ 

You mean, the 'unbelievably small' military action that will be so small, Syria won't retaliate and put a few holes in US warships, and drop a few US warplanes in the Med?

That one? The one that isn't going to land on schools and hospitals, not to mention on chemical weapons stores and poison half the Middle East?

No.     It will most likely be similar to firing a paper clip or two from rubber bands. That one, Bonny.  

Can't Obama just put Assad's photo on the White House dartboard and throw darts at it, or something? Make a voodoo doll? Something unbelievably small that won't get untold thousands killed?

If he wants to get really angry, he could have an image somewhere where the family dog likes to lift his leg?

Dogs are considered unclean.........but that wouldn't start WWIII.

Rumour now has it that the Pres is going to address the nation tonight to say, Thanks, Vlad, you da man! Either that, or pretend he had a Cunning Plan all along, which no-one is going to believe because he's made such a mess of this.

Oh, like this maybe?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2416530/First-lady-Michelle-Obama-opposes-military-action-Syria-president-reveals.html