The Senate Foreign Relations Committee Authorizes Limited Military Response In Syria


 

By Jueseppi B.

nomorewars 1236278_159385610933626_982060891_n

 

 

 

Barack Obama FULL Press Conference in Stockholm Sweden

 

Published on Sep 4, 2013

Hela president Barack Obamas presskonferans i Stockholm 20130903.

 

 

 

 

Statement by the Press Secretary

 

Statement by the Press Secretary

This afternoon, on a bipartisan basis, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee approved a resolution authorizing U.S. military action in Syria. We commend the Senate for moving swiftly and for working across party lines on behalf of our national security. We believe America is stronger when the President and Congress work together. The military action authorized in the resolution would uphold America’s national security interests by degrading Assad’s chemical weapons capability and deterring the future use of these weapons, even as we pursue a broader strategy of strengthening the opposition to hasten a political transition in Syria. We will continue to work with Congress to build on this bipartisan support for a military response that is narrowly tailored to enforce the prohibition on the use of chemical weapons, and sufficient to protect the national security interests of the United States of America.

 

My opinion on Syria:

Why AmeriKKKa Must Not Interfere In Syrian Civil War

 

BTAovjuCEAAs67w

 

Senate committee authorizes limited military response in Syria

 

 

 

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday voted to give President Barack Obama the power to a launch a military attack to punish Syria for using chemical weapons.

 

The vote was 10-7. It marked the first time in more than a decade — since a 2002 resolution that preceded the Iraq war — that members of Congress have voted to authorize military action.

 

The resolution, which could be voted on by the full Senate as early as next week, forbids Obama from using ground troops in Syria and allows the military response to last no longer than three months.

 

The yes votes comprised seven Democrats and three Republicans, including Sen. John McCain, who had expressed reservations that the United States was not doing enough to arm the rebels fighting Syrian leader Bashar Assad.

 

“We commend the Senate for moving swiftly and for working across party lines on behalf of our national security,” read a statement from the White House. “We will continue to work with Congress to build on this bipartisan support for a military response that is narrowly tailored to enforce the prohibition on the use of chemical weapons, and sufficient to protect the national security interests of the United States of America.”

 

Earlier in the day, Obama landed in Stockholm and, at a press conference with the Swedish prime minister, declared that punishing Syria for using chemical weapons was a matter of upholding the credibility of the world.

 

Answering a question about his statement last year that Syrian use of chemical weapons would be a “red line,” Obama said the response was not about him.

 

“I didn’t set a red line — the world set a red line,” Obama said. “The international community’s credibility is on the line, and America and Congress’ credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these international norms are important.”

 

Raw: Obama’s Impassioned Plea for Action

 

Published on Sep 4, 2013

President Barack Obama said Wednesday the credibility of the international community and Congress is on the line in the debate over how to respond to the alleged chemical attack in Syria. Obama made his case overseas during a visit to Sweden. (Sept. 4)

 

President Barack Obama speaks to reporters Wednesday in Stockholm, Sweden, about his 2012 “red line” comment regarding Syria.

 

 

 

Obama: ‘I Didn’t Set a Red Line’ on Syria”

 

Published on Sep 4, 2013

“First of all, I didn’t set a red line,” said Obama. “The world set a red line. The world set a red line when governments representing 98 percent of the world’s population said the use of chemical weapons are [inaudble] and passed a treaty forbidding their use, even when countries are engaged in war. Congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. Congress set a red line when it indicated that in a piece of legislation entitled the Syria Accountability Act that some of the horrendous things happening on the ground there need to be answered for. So, when I said in a press conference that my calculus about what’s happening in Syria would be altered by the use of chemical weapons, which the overwhelming consensus of humanity says is wrong, that wasn’t something I just kind of made up. I didn’t pluck it out of thin air. There’s a reason for it.”

 

 

 

He added: “When those videos first broke and you saw images of over 400 children subjected to gas, everybody expressed outrage. How can this happen in this modern world? Well, it happened because a government chose to deploy these deadly weapons on civilian populations.”

 

Later, Secretary of State John Kerry and other top administration officials went before the House Foreign Affairs Committee to confront skeptics and press the administration’s case. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel estimated the cost of a limited strike at tens of millions of dollars.

 

Kerry said American inaction would “live in infamy,” and he drew analogies to black marks of history — the appeasement of Adolf Hitler before World War II and the U.S.’ refusal to accept a boat full of Jewish refugees from Germany in 1939.

 

“There are moments when you have to make a decision,” he said. “And I think this is one of those moments.”

 

He added: “A lot of people out in the Middle East count on us.”

 

“They count on us to help them be able to transition,” Kerry said.

 

Asked in Sweden whether he would strike Syria even if Congress does not authorize force, Obama said: “I believe that Congress will approve it.”

 

He added: “I do not believe that I was required to take this to Congress, but I did not take this to Congress just because it’s an empty exercise. I think it’s important to have Congress’ support on it.”

 

The president said he was mindful that memories of the Iraq war were fresh, particularly in Europe.

 

“Keep in mind I’m somebody who opposed the war in Iraq, and am not interested in repeating mistakes of us basing decisions on faulty intelligence,” he said. “But having done a thoroughgoing evaluation of the information that is currently available, I can say with high confidence that chemical weapons were used.”

 

At Wednesday’s House hearing, Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, expressed deep reservations and asked whether Obama would have “bothered to come to Congress” if the British Parliament had passed its own resolution supporting military force. Parliament rejected it instead.

 

“I believe he absolutely would have,” Kerry said.

 

In a tense exchange, Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., said he had recently spoken to a group of eighth-graders “who get it. They get it that we shouldn’t be drug into someone else’s civil war where there are no good guys.”

 

He praised Kerry for always showing caution with respect to the American armed forces, then asked him whether power was “so intoxicating” to the Obama administration that it couldn’t resist “pulling the trigger” on a conflict.

 

“I volunteered to fight for my country, and that wasn’t a cautious thing to do when I did it,” Kerry shot back. “I am not going to sit here and be told by you that I don’t have a sense of what the judgment is with respect to this.”

 

Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was asked about potential Syrian retaliation. Among the risks he mentioned were that Syria could use rockets to attack its neighbors or American facilities, could encourage surrogate groups to attack American interests or could stage a cyberattack.

 

Obama on Thursday heads for Russia for a summit of the so-called Group of 20 economic powers. President Vladimir Putin, in something of a surprise, gave an interview in which he did not rule out military action against Syria.

 

Putin, in an interview with The Associated Press, said that Russia “doesn’t exclude” supporting a United Nations resolution on a strike — if it is proved that the Syrian regime indeed used poison gas on its people.

 

The United States says it has incontrovertible proof that Syrian leader Bashar Assad gassed more than 1,400 people in a rebel-held neighborhood.

 

But Putin said that it seems “absolutely absurd” that Syria, an ally of Russia, would use chemical weapons. Syria has the upper hand against the rebels, Putin said, and Syria knows that using chemicals would trigger an international response, perhaps forceful.

 

Further, Putin said Wednesday that Congress had no right to “legitimize aggression” against Syria, and accused Kerry of lying to Congress about al Qaeda’s role in the conflict, Reuters reported.

 

Foreign affairs analysts have said that Russia and China, both of which hold veto power as permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, would block any American effort to secure U.N. support for a strike.

 

Reuters contributed to this report.

 

Thank you Kasie Hunt and Erin McClam, NBC News.

 

EXCLUSIVE: Susan Rice says administration ‘quite confident’ Congress will OK Syria action

 

 

BTAiCmVIMAAvSiV

chcogo

 

DA-email-header

stop-the-madness

 

barackthevote2014 blogger4peacelogo cratlogo2 (2)

 

13 Responses

  1. […] The Senate Foreign Relations Committee Authorizes Limited Military Response In Syria (theobamacrat.com) […]

  2. […] The Senate Foreign Relations Committee Authorizes Limited Military Response In Syria […]

  3. […] The Senate Foreign Relations Committee Authorizes Limited Military Response In Syria […]

  4. […] The Senate Foreign Relations Committee Authorizes Limited Military Response In Syria (theobamacrat.com) […]

  5. Don’t use weapons of mass destruction or we’ll nuke your ass

    There should be no outside intervention. It is called a Civil war for a reason.

  6. By the time Congress makes a decision, everyone will be dead or he will be shooting Chemicals to us.

  7. I think this is a setup. How to get rid of Obama?

  8. *sigh* I was so hoping Congress wouldn’t authorize any type of military response…This is a no win situation either way for our country. Screwed if we respond. Screwed if we don’t. Either way we’re going to be looked at as the bad guys by everyone.

Reply At Your Own Risk. Leave The Dumbfuckery At The Door.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 259,982 other followers

%d bloggers like this: