This must be a good political comment because it annoys the heck out of me.
The American people (constituents) don’t support this because nobody has made a good case for why we (The Americans) should go it alone.
Many of us are tired of wars that don’t provide anything but prestige to the President.
I don’t like the use of Chemical weapons but I also don’t think it is the US’s job to police the world.
Once again Obama takes his “laser” focus off the American issues and focuses on foreign affairs. It was just a month ago he was promising that he would use his last 1000 days to focus on jobs and the economy. One more political promise that isn’t worth the time it took to hear it.
Mr. Danziger’s cartoon simply shows what Congress does best. Nothing.I do not support the US taking a lead role in manned flights over Syria. I don’t even support cruise missile attacks unless the many Arab League nations who have bought advanced fighters from us don’t take the lead on this punitive strike.But as I look att he quality of life of my fellow citizens, as I see stories about entire communities having depend on outside food assistance, as I watch people who thought their pensions would leave them secure in their elder years working for minimum wage while the people who mishandled those pensions get richer and richer, I see Congress as a major part of the problem.No talk of job creation, or infrastructure security at all. No ideas to improve healthcare reform, just an adamant cry to kill it. Congress is much better at stopping things than making things happen, and most surprising, too many of the members are proud of this.The United States cannot be led by extremists and remain a free and innovative nation. We must be willing to go up to those who think differently from ourselves and at the very least, work on those important issues on which we can agree.Respectfully,C.
No. In this case it is NOT congress’s fault! It is OUR fault! We are telling the congress to do nothing, so do you expect congress to then decide to do something? That’s counter intuitive. If we, as a country, decide to do nothing, then we should own up to that decision. And, Obama needs to own up to his “red line” speech too!
The right time to go into Syria was “the minute Assad started putting down the protestors violently.”[]Because we didn’t go in at that moment, the protestors – turned – rebels ultimately received help from a different outside source: Al Qaeda.[]The Al Qaeda-backed cells have made it clear that if they do, indeed, succeed in toppling the Assad regime, then all “blasphemers” (re: Christians, Jews, and any Muslim of the wrong sect) will either be killed or driven out.[]As such, boots will ultimately be needed on the ground at some point, even if only to stop a different round of genocide.[]And it’s my understanding that since Obama has tried to claim that there will be no boots on the ground, at least one private mercenary organization has gone on a recruiting spree in the anticipation of their services being used in our stead. []So yeah – Obama’s legacy is already a legacy of failure just from his early refusals to get involved.
Oh, please. This is not at all the same as Iraq and you know it. You forget that the “intelligence” supporting invasion of Iraq was cherry-picked to support an agenda that W was overheard cackling about at a party BEFORE he was even “elected”.
It’s possible that if congress does not approve the resolution, Obama may state that the will of the “people” has been expressed, and therefore, no military action will occur. Then, the GOP can no longer claim that he is “weak”, and any negative events that occur from inaction will be solely Congress’ responsibility. Brilliant political position for him. Congress plays checkers, while he plays chess.
Very good comment, Michael.You could have also used as examples of war on false pretenses, the Spanish American War where Randolph Hearst told his photographer in Havana, you send me the pictures, I’ll supply the war, and the Mexican American War in th 1840’s.While this comment of yours lacks the … sarcasm?, the word doesn’t seem appropriate… that some of your other posts have presented, I often wonder how wide is your grin as you write comments that are so tongue in cheek one can imagine the tongue sticking through the side of your mouth.Thank you for your many insightful and thought provoking comments, especially the ones that make the reader smile.Sincerely,C.
I disagree, Tigger. Mr. Obama no more wants to start a war than his predecessor did. Neither Mr. Bush or Mr. Obama wanted to be involved in adventures overseas but circumstances overtook their preferences. Both men wanted to improve the USA using ideas they were convinced were sound and valid, but 9/11/01 changed that for Mr. Bush, just as the expansion of the same enemy into nations like Somalia, Indonesia, Syria, and others have with Mr. Obama.I am certain had this administration not been convinced of the active use of Sarin Gas, Mr. Obama would sadly be allowing the Syrian gov’t to continue killing his people with conventional weapons while providing humanitarian aid to the refugees who have fled the country.As far as the ‘red line’ goes…. Gas was banned by the international treaties after WW1. The saddest thing is how many nations have been allowed to get away with using it with impunity. The worst case of this being Iraq’s use against Iran’s military during their war between each other. We didn’t even bat an eye, and I have read a few sources we even helped supply Iraq in that war. I hope that is not true.What advantage does he gain in starting an arbitrary war? How does it help his party? There is only one reason to go to war over this and that is to make it clear that poisons, and for that matter, nukes, cannot be used without consequences. But this message will not be conveyed unless the same kind of coalition that freed Kuwait can also be assembled to show Assad’s army and political supporters that the WORLD, not just one nation of the world, will not stand for it.Respectfully,C.
It’s not the playground, Tigger. You don’t draw your line in the sand and the moment the person crosses, you fight. I suggest you read Sun Tzu.Even the first Gulf War in Kuwait took months to assemble and launch. But within a few days, it was pretty much over.What does making the exact same statement three times mean? Just curious.C.
Overlooked in the discussion is that this is a civil war in Syria, wit both sides shooting off weapons. Estimates are that 40% of the fatalities of the 100,000+ have been on THE ASSAD SIDE!
I don’t like Assad, and I DO hate war, the only thing I do actually “hate”, but, our role should have been getting a coalition a long time ago to take the issue to the international criminal court in den Hague, but oh, wait a minute, the U.S. under Bush and Republicans refused to acknowledge or sign on to support the court, because it might impact OUR “bad apples”!!
And, Tigger, Assad did NOT get his chemical weapons from Iraq, that myth is just idiotic on it’s face. BTW, where did Israel get their nuclear technology for THEIR WMDs, and why were they helping the South African apartheid government develop nuclear weapons??? We need to be more careful about identifying the “good guys” in the world, including those here at home.
How goes it, PAJ?Perhaps we are using different news sources. My five favorites have ample examples of the POTUS encouraging voters to tell their congressmen to get to work on job creation and he’s only one man. Out of the over 500 legislators who have spoken on a variety of topic, the only time I’ve heard any discussion about job creation from a Senator or Congressman was just prior to an election or when Democrats are trying to make Republicans look bad for votes against the ACA or their filibusters.That said, if Mr. Obama had put the same passion and drive into lobbying congressmen and their donors as he has with the Syrian issue, he might have been able to get the American people behind him on the jobs issue. You and I have agreed in the past that Mr. Obama fails to reach out to his opponents with the energy of a Roosevelt, Reagan, or Clinton. It’s a numbers issue.Respectfully,C.
“Sadly, War Chickenhawk Obama does not…”-You keep trying to hijack the work ChickenHawk and apply it to someone other than the documented Chickenhawks Bush, Cheney, Willard, Bolton, Quayle and the other neocons who are very eager for other people to have the ‘honor’ of sacrificing for their country, but when they are called, they COWER in a safe place.-You are astonishingly DISHONEST, even for a Fox “news” viewer.
Very kind of you, Mr. Stevenson, but if I cannot build a consensus of civility and respect within the boundaries of the GC comment forum, I doubt I’ll have success outside of it. I’m not sure my frequent calls for our fellow commentators to write to their political representatives has had any effect at all. One person cannot solve the world’s ills, but a world of persons can overcome anything. But we must start with civility, respect, and when necessary, a willingness to agree to disagree and move on to the next topic.If you ever wish to discuss the issue further, feel free to contact me at sanesaint@hotmail.comI welcome thoughtful and objective debate.Respectfully,C.
As in the Uk, I believe that while the vast majority of pople in the US want the West to intervene in Syria, they believe that what is needed is diplomatic and humamitarian intervention, not more weapons of war.
Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon were wrong about Vietnam. George l and George ll were wrong in Iraq. Now it’s Obama’s turn to cave in to the American war industry’s lust for war. They can never be trusted. “proof” is manufactured, promises are made, congress falls in line, innocent people die; sons and daughters of working families die FOR NO REASON. No good can possibly come of this for reasons too numerous to even mention here. It’s not partisan politics, it’s fascism, and we’re all complicit.
Mephistopheles over 10 years ago
This must be a good political comment because it annoys the heck out of me.
The American people (constituents) don’t support this because nobody has made a good case for why we (The Americans) should go it alone.
Many of us are tired of wars that don’t provide anything but prestige to the President.
I don’t like the use of Chemical weapons but I also don’t think it is the US’s job to police the world.
Once again Obama takes his “laser” focus off the American issues and focuses on foreign affairs. It was just a month ago he was promising that he would use his last 1000 days to focus on jobs and the economy. One more political promise that isn’t worth the time it took to hear it.
Enoki over 10 years ago
I’m sure someone called 911…
chazandru over 10 years ago
Mr. Danziger’s cartoon simply shows what Congress does best. Nothing.I do not support the US taking a lead role in manned flights over Syria. I don’t even support cruise missile attacks unless the many Arab League nations who have bought advanced fighters from us don’t take the lead on this punitive strike.But as I look att he quality of life of my fellow citizens, as I see stories about entire communities having depend on outside food assistance, as I watch people who thought their pensions would leave them secure in their elder years working for minimum wage while the people who mishandled those pensions get richer and richer, I see Congress as a major part of the problem.No talk of job creation, or infrastructure security at all. No ideas to improve healthcare reform, just an adamant cry to kill it. Congress is much better at stopping things than making things happen, and most surprising, too many of the members are proud of this.The United States cannot be led by extremists and remain a free and innovative nation. We must be willing to go up to those who think differently from ourselves and at the very least, work on those important issues on which we can agree.Respectfully,C.
William Bednar Premium Member over 10 years ago
No. In this case it is NOT congress’s fault! It is OUR fault! We are telling the congress to do nothing, so do you expect congress to then decide to do something? That’s counter intuitive. If we, as a country, decide to do nothing, then we should own up to that decision. And, Obama needs to own up to his “red line” speech too!
Ironhold over 10 years ago
The right time to go into Syria was “the minute Assad started putting down the protestors violently.”[]Because we didn’t go in at that moment, the protestors – turned – rebels ultimately received help from a different outside source: Al Qaeda.[]The Al Qaeda-backed cells have made it clear that if they do, indeed, succeed in toppling the Assad regime, then all “blasphemers” (re: Christians, Jews, and any Muslim of the wrong sect) will either be killed or driven out.[]As such, boots will ultimately be needed on the ground at some point, even if only to stop a different round of genocide.[]And it’s my understanding that since Obama has tried to claim that there will be no boots on the ground, at least one private mercenary organization has gone on a recruiting spree in the anticipation of their services being used in our stead. []So yeah – Obama’s legacy is already a legacy of failure just from his early refusals to get involved.
kamwick over 10 years ago
Oh, please. This is not at all the same as Iraq and you know it. You forget that the “intelligence” supporting invasion of Iraq was cherry-picked to support an agenda that W was overheard cackling about at a party BEFORE he was even “elected”.
It’s possible that if congress does not approve the resolution, Obama may state that the will of the “people” has been expressed, and therefore, no military action will occur. Then, the GOP can no longer claim that he is “weak”, and any negative events that occur from inaction will be solely Congress’ responsibility. Brilliant political position for him. Congress plays checkers, while he plays chess.
kamwick over 10 years ago
Oh, you know “most Syrians” do you, LOL?
SwimsWithSharks over 10 years ago
Surely enough military commitment to the Middle East and we can make everything all better, right Mr. Danzinger?
chazandru over 10 years ago
Very good comment, Michael.You could have also used as examples of war on false pretenses, the Spanish American War where Randolph Hearst told his photographer in Havana, you send me the pictures, I’ll supply the war, and the Mexican American War in th 1840’s.While this comment of yours lacks the … sarcasm?, the word doesn’t seem appropriate… that some of your other posts have presented, I often wonder how wide is your grin as you write comments that are so tongue in cheek one can imagine the tongue sticking through the side of your mouth.Thank you for your many insightful and thought provoking comments, especially the ones that make the reader smile.Sincerely,C.
chazandru over 10 years ago
I disagree, Tigger. Mr. Obama no more wants to start a war than his predecessor did. Neither Mr. Bush or Mr. Obama wanted to be involved in adventures overseas but circumstances overtook their preferences. Both men wanted to improve the USA using ideas they were convinced were sound and valid, but 9/11/01 changed that for Mr. Bush, just as the expansion of the same enemy into nations like Somalia, Indonesia, Syria, and others have with Mr. Obama.I am certain had this administration not been convinced of the active use of Sarin Gas, Mr. Obama would sadly be allowing the Syrian gov’t to continue killing his people with conventional weapons while providing humanitarian aid to the refugees who have fled the country.As far as the ‘red line’ goes…. Gas was banned by the international treaties after WW1. The saddest thing is how many nations have been allowed to get away with using it with impunity. The worst case of this being Iraq’s use against Iran’s military during their war between each other. We didn’t even bat an eye, and I have read a few sources we even helped supply Iraq in that war. I hope that is not true.What advantage does he gain in starting an arbitrary war? How does it help his party? There is only one reason to go to war over this and that is to make it clear that poisons, and for that matter, nukes, cannot be used without consequences. But this message will not be conveyed unless the same kind of coalition that freed Kuwait can also be assembled to show Assad’s army and political supporters that the WORLD, not just one nation of the world, will not stand for it.Respectfully,C.
chazandru over 10 years ago
It’s not the playground, Tigger. You don’t draw your line in the sand and the moment the person crosses, you fight. I suggest you read Sun Tzu.Even the first Gulf War in Kuwait took months to assemble and launch. But within a few days, it was pretty much over.What does making the exact same statement three times mean? Just curious.C.
Dtroutma over 10 years ago
Overlooked in the discussion is that this is a civil war in Syria, wit both sides shooting off weapons. Estimates are that 40% of the fatalities of the 100,000+ have been on THE ASSAD SIDE!
I don’t like Assad, and I DO hate war, the only thing I do actually “hate”, but, our role should have been getting a coalition a long time ago to take the issue to the international criminal court in den Hague, but oh, wait a minute, the U.S. under Bush and Republicans refused to acknowledge or sign on to support the court, because it might impact OUR “bad apples”!!
And, Tigger, Assad did NOT get his chemical weapons from Iraq, that myth is just idiotic on it’s face. BTW, where did Israel get their nuclear technology for THEIR WMDs, and why were they helping the South African apartheid government develop nuclear weapons??? We need to be more careful about identifying the “good guys” in the world, including those here at home.
Rymlianin over 10 years ago
http://aangirfan.blogspot.nl/2013/08/cias-bandar-supplied-gas-for-damascus.html
joe vignone over 10 years ago
Who says it’s your responsibility in the first place. There are others who should take the lead in this!
Dtroutma over 10 years ago
“wing”- if a sane “God” existed we wouldn’t NEED any help!!
chazandru over 10 years ago
How goes it, PAJ?Perhaps we are using different news sources. My five favorites have ample examples of the POTUS encouraging voters to tell their congressmen to get to work on job creation and he’s only one man. Out of the over 500 legislators who have spoken on a variety of topic, the only time I’ve heard any discussion about job creation from a Senator or Congressman was just prior to an election or when Democrats are trying to make Republicans look bad for votes against the ACA or their filibusters.That said, if Mr. Obama had put the same passion and drive into lobbying congressmen and their donors as he has with the Syrian issue, he might have been able to get the American people behind him on the jobs issue. You and I have agreed in the past that Mr. Obama fails to reach out to his opponents with the energy of a Roosevelt, Reagan, or Clinton. It’s a numbers issue.Respectfully,C.
braindead Premium Member over 10 years ago
“Sadly, War Chickenhawk Obama does not…”-You keep trying to hijack the work ChickenHawk and apply it to someone other than the documented Chickenhawks Bush, Cheney, Willard, Bolton, Quayle and the other neocons who are very eager for other people to have the ‘honor’ of sacrificing for their country, but when they are called, they COWER in a safe place.-You are astonishingly DISHONEST, even for a Fox “news” viewer.
lonecat over 10 years ago
You must have a lot of free time.
steve wright over 10 years ago
Who’s next? Egypt? North Korea? Oh, we’ll have great fun in the Sudan!
chazandru over 10 years ago
Very kind of you, Mr. Stevenson, but if I cannot build a consensus of civility and respect within the boundaries of the GC comment forum, I doubt I’ll have success outside of it. I’m not sure my frequent calls for our fellow commentators to write to their political representatives has had any effect at all. One person cannot solve the world’s ills, but a world of persons can overcome anything. But we must start with civility, respect, and when necessary, a willingness to agree to disagree and move on to the next topic.If you ever wish to discuss the issue further, feel free to contact me at sanesaint@hotmail.comI welcome thoughtful and objective debate.Respectfully,C.
chazandru over 10 years ago
I usually find your comments painful, Sir. But I found this one insightful, timely, and well stated.Thank you.Sincerely,C.
Kingoswald Premium Member over 10 years ago
As in the Uk, I believe that while the vast majority of pople in the US want the West to intervene in Syria, they believe that what is needed is diplomatic and humamitarian intervention, not more weapons of war.
tcolkett over 10 years ago
Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon were wrong about Vietnam. George l and George ll were wrong in Iraq. Now it’s Obama’s turn to cave in to the American war industry’s lust for war. They can never be trusted. “proof” is manufactured, promises are made, congress falls in line, innocent people die; sons and daughters of working families die FOR NO REASON. No good can possibly come of this for reasons too numerous to even mention here. It’s not partisan politics, it’s fascism, and we’re all complicit.
sbeavin over 10 years ago
This time let some other country do it. There will always be assholes in the world- deal with it. And STOP doing The bidding of BIG BUSINESS!