As usual, a thoughtful, competently sourced column by Byron York:
A very telling paragraph from this column:
…”influential conservative commentator William Kristol…(believes)…Republicans should vote to authorize force “even if they think that the president’s policy will prove ineffective, do no good, waste money, or entail unforeseen risks…even if they think he has gotten the nation into this situation by blunders, fecklessness, arrogance, or naiveté; and…even if, and especially, if they have no confidence in his judgment.”
Well, that’s the Bill Kristol we’ve come to know and love. Presuming that his words are quoted accurately, I, for one, believe that may be among the dumbest thoughts yet expressed regarding the Syrian mess.
If I were in Congress and being called upon to vote to authorize Barack Obama to use military force, to any extent he deems necessary, I would vote “no” enthusiastically. There are many reasons, and they do not include “racism” or “getting even” for all of this president’s lawless and unconstitutional actions, or a desire for “isolationism”.
Rather than attempting to detail my reasons, concerns, and reservations, I forward a column from the American Thinker
I believe it provides the most compelling case for voting “no” on US intervention in Syria and reflects many of my own views. It doesn’t mention that the two “Republicans” most aggressively supporting Obama’s action are the two people who have no credibility with many conservatives…McCain and Graham.
Of course we are always interesting to learn what Veritas readers are thinking about this most serious issue and all matters addressed in these pages. Our comment section and e-mail address are available for your input.
Take a moment and submit your “yes” (to give Obama authority) or “no” (to withhold authority) vote and feel free to express your reasons for your vote. DLH
Agnostic, leaning opposed for more justification.
Ann Coulter seems to be saying . . . why give Obama cover for this fiasco. He says he has the independent power then let him use it. If the congress wants to deny funding then they have the power for that. Pat Buchanan says no to US involvement. Don’t like all his reasons but several have merit.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/no-syrian-war-to-save-obamas-face/
Sean Hannity seems to be saying stay out because we do not even know who we are really helping. Others say we are helping Islamist /jihadists/terrorists. Still other reasons heard are that the Obama administration that tried to sell us that “intelligence” says the Benghazi attack resulted from a video cannot be trusted. the comparisons to all that was prelude to Operation Iraqi freedom do not speak well of Obama’s due diligence as nay sayers demanded of the Bush administration.
Stuart Varney, who I respect as level headed, seems to be saying we must do this minimal thing as a statement to the world that WMD use will not be tolerated. Also I see from Fox that the Brits used a picture of Saddam’s murder of Kurds as if it were a pictures of Syrian atrocity.
Can what we are being sold, be clarified better. Yes and Congress must be clear about it to the American people, either why or why not.
NO war in Syria! I watched John “I’ve had 20 face lifts” scary Kerry for 2 hours today not successfully answer one question from Senators about what happens after they “briefly” bomb Syria. His only answer was if we don’t it “it will hurt the US if we don’t.”
Any time he was pushed further he said that removing Assad was not the objective. So we just Bomb Syria and let Assad stay in power? Scary Kerry didn’t like when pressed and continued to assure there wouldn’t be “boots on the ground” or a removal of Assad.
Rand Paul grilled Kerry so hard I thought his long face was gonna cry. It was a great ass kicking that can be viewed on Drudge. Several Democrats also came out swinging against Kerry. Of Course “poker boy” John McLame had a warm fuzzy exchange with Kerry that made for a giant bipartisan puke-fest all over the Internet.
Best quote from the day-
Rand Paul to Kerry: “Not one person I have met in person or heard from in the thousands of calls to my office supports this was in Syria.”
War is a nail and government is the hammer. What is a commander in chief without a war or more?
Philosophers thousands of years ago, like Plato and Socretes, discuss this very clearly and their thoughts are such.
Only those who will be the ones doing the fighting and risking their lives should be the ones who determine when and where to go to war, otherwise, a nation with a general at the helm with such power will keep a nation at war indefinitely.
A nation should only go to war when absolutely necessary for the self defense of itself, and only those who will be risking everything will reserve the best judgement for such actions. Not some general or worse, some politician.
Sadly, our nation has forgotten such wisdom since WWII. We have been thrust in perpetual war ever since and it will end when the people have lost everything to political fools. But I doubt any sooner.
Mr. King
I am a small IA farmer located west of Davenport,
And have been active in the local Republican Party. I was also a Naval Officer on a destroyer in San Francisco during the Cuban missile crisis.
History has shown that GREAT Powers often start to believing that the rest of the world will continue to respect their might…. And the get to influence many things in the world without much danger to themselves …. Such we’re the attitudes in 1914.
For Austria… Russia. .. Germany…. France
….and England… These attitudes led to a terrible disaster. And a smaller disaster for the USA.
In our swaggering pride of Military accomplishment we have taken to telling others what to do…. And have become a challenge to others. Now we are attempting to bully a Syria
Fighting for it’s life against Al Quiada….not to use all the weapons at its disposal. Yes. Gas kills people… And children.
So do cruise missiles. And they may light the fuse of WW3….. Gradually involving Iran, Israel,
Egypt, Iraq, and then outside powers like Russia And China.
We do not like either the Islamist rebels or the Syrian government. Why should we add to the killing ? .? And possible spark a wider war?
Please vote for Peace instead of Pride.
Thank You. Bob Kauth
No more cannon fodder
No way Jose. We have no dog in this fight. And the potential unintended consequences are of staggering possibilities.
Some interesting perspectives from others about who and what is going on in that hellhole we call the Middle East:
Before deciding Congress should read this from a Mr. Al-Sabah of London, England. It’s titled: “A short guide to the Middle East.” Al-Sabah writes: “Iran is backing Assad. Gulf states are against Assad! Assad is against Muslim Brotherhood. Muslim Brotherhood and Obama are against General Sisi (Egyptian dictator). But Gulf states are pro-Sisi! Which means they are against Muslim Brotherhood! Iran is pro-Hamas, but Hamas is backing Muslim Brotherhood! Obama is backing Muslim Brotherhood, yet Hamas is against the US! Gulf states are pro-US. But Turkey is with Gulf states against Assad; yet Turkey is pro-Muslim Brotherhood and against General Sisi. And General Sisi is being backed by the Gulf states! Welcome to the Middle East and have a nice day.” Makes your head spin.
Sarah Palin tweeted the other day: “LET ALLAH SORT IT OUT – So we’re bombing Syria because Syria is bombing Syria? And I’m the idiot?” No Sarah, you are not.
Do not believe one word that comes from our leader . Our own leader’s plan is to take down our AMERICA , and change the World. Working Overtime !
New poll out from the PCCC ( Progressive Change Campaign Committee ) in Washington Times today. Over the past 72 hrs. , 73 % of 57,000 LIBERAL acivists have voted to OPPOSE the U.S. taking action in Syria. So Far. POINT TAKEN
Seems everyone has an opinion but no one really knows what to do. To me it is very simple. Keep in mind that simple does not mean easy.
1. The Muslim world is at war with us. If Muslims are going to kill Muslims we should let them. Perhaps we could even arm both sides with old technology and let us help them meet the prophet face to face along with their 72 virgins. If they are going to die at accelerated rates, keeping in mind that Muslim men will die at a rate of 20 to 1 over muslim women especially virgins Allah is going to have a logistical problem keeping his promise. We know the virgin infidels will not be acceptable so there will be problems in paradise. America needs to get out of the way.
2. If we vote no then we must disengage from the Muslim world completely, including Saudi Arabia. We will offer our military support to Israel only offering military bases, naval support and trade status equal to an American state, protectorate or commonwealth. Simultaneously we claim 20 miles off of each coast of the US as “our waters” and we open domestic drilling and development to America Companies while simultaneously committing all resources to the development of the pipeline and moving toward domestic oil and gas use only. Considered as domestic will be Canadian oil and gas and a one time offer to Mexico, Brazil and Venezuela to become part of the American Oil and Gas cartel. Bring home all American Forces from around the globe and develop Military bases and Naval stations on our borders commiting the “savings’ from our ending of military aid around the globe to protecting our borders and building a real border to our south and to our north.
3. If the vote is yes the vote must be yes to war, not some silly action. War means war: a total commitment to ending this thing which means killing a lot of people because as we know from both Carter, Clinton and now Obama that “sending a message” to Muslims does work but not the way that those three think. Blowing up a couple of factories, sending in an ill prepared undermanned rescue team to Iran and now telegraphing every punch not only doesn’t not end hostilities it doesn’t postpone further action either; it only emboldens them as in the case of 9/11 based on the weak response from Clinton’s gutless missile attacks that did nothing but give them the green light. If the vote is yes it must be yes to total victory regardless of the response of China/ Russia and the rest of the world. They must know that the Dog has broken free of his chain and he bites: HARD.
How does the administration get the war with Iran it wants? Attack Syria.
How does this war serve the interest of the U.S.? It serves the interest of the war profiteers, the state (“War is the Health of the State”) and the Federal Reserve who lends the money to buy arms.
If another country intervened (took sides) in our civil war, how would we react?
There is evidence that the gassing was a false flag operation – the same playbook used for decades if not centuries.
We seem to forget that the U.S. gassed its owned people at Waco; those who didn’t die from the gas burned to death.
Bombing Syria is an insanity born out of our acting like an empire rather than a republic. Since WWII we have been the self-appointed police of the world. This has created a certain arrogance in our leaders, and now our governing fools are considering whether to bomb a country that is absolutely no threat to us just because they believe we should. We have been warned of this inclination repeatedly by George Friedman, the editor and publisher of “Stratfor”, a well-respected international intelligence newsletter for business and governments.
There is no reason any one has provided, nor any that can be provided to justify this childlike action by Obama and some worthies like McCain and Graham, the greatest fools in the Republican party. I feel shamed because McCain was actually nominated by the GOP to run against Obama in 2007. Embarrassing. No one, including anyone in our government can explain why US action is needed. Syria is in a civil war. We had a civil war, almost all nations have had a civil war. What is different here, and why?
Obama and the stooges in Congress say the use of chemical weapons is a war crime. The use of chemical biological weapons are against international law, as agreed to by more than 95% of the countries in the world. So if this is such an imminent danger, then why are the signatory countries to this ban so deafeningly silent about it, much less offering any assistance. Only the US seems to feel a need to do anything. Even Britain, our long time ally, has rebuked the Obama administration’s request to join us in this. Syria was a colony of France and they do have some responsibilities to live up to. Perhaps humanitarian aid for the hundreds of thousands of homeless refugees in Syria and flooding into Turkey would be worth consideration. But Obama now has himself painted into a corner with his famous redline remark, and he says himself that his strikes would not endanger anyone, but would sent a message. Sort of like his indiscriminate drone strikes in Afghanistan and Pakistan don’t endanger anyone except those who are killed or maimed by them — innocent civilians. And what message is sent? What is the message this insanity delivers to the people of Syria who are just trying to stay alive?
And then we note the neocons such as Bill Kristol, et al, all of whom just happen to be Jews and believe we ought to walk a tightrope between protecting Israel and further mucking up of the complete mess the US has made of the Middle East. Why should we risk a full regional war, or worse, for the sake of Israel, a country that’s never done a thing for America in good faith, but has in fact consistently engaged in espionage against America. We have the spies for Israel in prison to prove it. The rest of the Israeli diplomatic corps would be in prison too, but for diplomatic immunity. If anyone finds fault with this line of thought, then I suggest they ask anyone in US military intelligence about how Israel has used and abused our trust.
There was mention here in the comments that we are fighting Al Queda. That’s rich. The truth is our CIA is funding Al Queda and furnishing them with arms and ordnance. That is what Benghazi was all about. Benghazi is a CIA outpost. Are we really aware of what a mess we’ve made in the Middle East? Are we aware of our “leaders” duplicity and the lies they have perpetrated on the American people about what is actually happening there?
How will we explain our government’s actions and our failure to stop it to our grandchildren? What will history say of this great republic that went haywire with power and corruption? Napoleon said, “History is lies agreed upon.” We’d better hope we can hold our heads up after this great country falls by its own doing.
We went to war in Afghanistan in 2001 to bring down Osama Bin Laden and al-Qai’da. Now twelve years later we supposedly have killed Osama and are still in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban and al-Qai’da.
We went to war in Iraq in 2003 to depose Sadam Hussein and destroy his “weapons of mass destruction” which we never found. We ended up fighting al-Qai’da insurgents instead while more than 4,000 of our solders died and tens of thousands of Iraqis civilians lost their lives. We laid waste to their cities and villages.
We supported the overthrow of Gaddafi in Libya by furnishing the rebels, some of which were al-Qai’da, with weapons and cover by air strikes.
We were thanked by al-Qai’da with the attack of our embassy in Benghazi and the murder of our Ambassador and fellow Americans.
We looked the other way when the radical anti Christian Muslim Brotherhood overthrew the friendly Egyptian government.
And now our Government, that has been furnishing weapons to the al-Qai’da rebels in Syria, is planning to use our military to help our enemy, al-Qai’da, bomb the legitimate Syria government in order to facilitate al-Qai’da’s take over of Syria.
I always thought treason was the act of aiding and abetting the enemy. If that definition is correct, then the President and anyone else responsible for arming the al-Qai’da rebels need to be brought up on charges of treason, tried, and face a military firing squad.
At a minimum, we need a regime change in the United States in order to restore our Constitutional Republic form of Government.