Syria

Dumbass pinko-nazi-neoconservative-hippy-capitalists.
Ddrak
Save a Koala, deport an Australian
Posts: 17517
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:00 pm
Location: Straya mate!
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by Ddrak »

Yeah, agreed. Congress REALLY wanted that hot potato!

Dd
Image
User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Syria

Post by Harlowe »

If we're going to do something, I'd like everyone to sign off on it. This is how it's supposed to work according to our Constitution isn't it? Whether you love or hate your current Congress, if this isn't a US emergency, you want it to be more than just a decision from the current administration.

The majority of "the people" aren't behind it, that's for sure.
Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: Syria

Post by Embar Angylwrath »

I don't think congress necessarily has to agree with a military action, as long as it is short of declaring war on a country. The President merely has to consult with Congress. President's take military action all the time without the blessing of Congress. A President is, however, precluded from declaring war on another state. That's the purview of Congress.
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius
Ddrak
Save a Koala, deport an Australian
Posts: 17517
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:00 pm
Location: Straya mate!
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by Ddrak »

I don't the President even has to consult Congress on an action that will not lead to war. He just has to inform them after the fact. In terms of limitations, I'd say he can't do anything that could be termed an "act of war" against another nation. I'd go so far as suggest that he can also make whatever preemptive moves are necessary to defend the nation from imminent and material military threats.

Dd
Image
Kulaf
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 7185
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:06 am

Re: Syria

Post by Kulaf »

Harlowe wrote:If we're going to do something, I'd like everyone to sign off on it. This is how it's supposed to work according to our Constitution isn't it? Whether you love or hate your current Congress, if this isn't a US emergency, you want it to be more than just a decision from the current administration.

The majority of "the people" aren't behind it, that's for sure.
It really depends on whether or not you think two countries can engage in hostilities without going to war. Personally I do. In certain cases limited exchanges can and do occur that do not require a full on war declaration and that is not solely a US concept. Even though their territory was invaded, the UK never declared war on Argentina during the Falklands Islands skirmish.

I believe the President as Commander and Chief has the Constitutional authority to engage in short term military action without the advice or consent of Congress. If Congress does not approve of such action, they have the ability to defund the military.

The War Powers Act is an unconstitutional encroachment of the Legislature into the Executive.
Kulaf
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 7185
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:06 am

Re: Syria

Post by Kulaf »

President Obama wrote:"We gather today to mourn the loss of so many lives and celebrate those who saved them, honor those who survived, and contemplate the obligations of the living."

"But while we are here today to bear witness to the human capacity to destroy, we are also here to pay tribute to the human impulse to save."

"How do we ensure that never again isn't an empty slogan or merely an aspiration, but also a call to action? I believe we start by doing what we are doing today, by bearing witness, by fighting the silence that is evil's greatest co-conspirator."

"We have the opportunity to make a habit of empathy, to recognize ourselves in each other, to commit ourselves to resisting injustice and intolerance and indifference in whatever forms they may take, whether confronting those who tell lies about history or doing everything we can to prevent and end atrocities like those that took place in Rwanda, those taking place in Darfur."
User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Syria

Post by Harlowe »

Kulaf wrote: It really depends on whether or not you think two countries can engage in hostilities without going to war. Personally I do. In certain cases limited exchanges can and do occur that do not require a full on war declaration and that is not solely a US concept. Even though their territory was invaded, the UK never declared war on Argentina during the Falklands Islands skirmish.

I believe the President as Commander and Chief has the Constitutional authority to engage in short term military action without the advice or consent of Congress. If Congress does not approve of such action, they have the ability to defund the military.

The War Powers Act is an unconstitutional encroachment of the Legislature into the Executive.
The problem I have with that is - when have these actions in the Middle East been "short term" military actions? They are actions that tie us up for years and years, create more ill will in the Middle East and cost us trillions of dollars.

Politically, it was absolutely the right thing to do. The administration has nothing to lose by tossing it to Congress. Then it's not something held over a single party. It makes it a bipartisan action. I'm hoping for no action at all, or if any action it's just humanitarian.
Kulaf
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 7185
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:06 am

Re: Syria

Post by Kulaf »

Why would a missile strike against Syria tie us up? Syria has no means of reprisal against us.

And I thought we were discussing Constitutional process.......not pratical application.
User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Syria

Post by Harlowe »

When do we ever just do a "single" strike on anything with regard to issues in the Middle East? Iraq was all about Saddam having "weapons of mass destruction", this is a country with a stockpile of chemical weapons...you think we'd just do a single strike if we got involved?
Ddrak
Save a Koala, deport an Australian
Posts: 17517
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:00 pm
Location: Straya mate!
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by Ddrak »

Kulaf wrote:Why would a missile strike against Syria tie us up? Syria has no means of reprisal against us.
Are you sure about that? I'd say a nation-state has immense power to reprise in assymetric warfare, from kidnappings and hostage taking through state-funded terrorism (we know they have chemical weapons), to cyber-warfare (given the number of successes the Syrian Electronic Army has had, do you really feel confident in your power or water systems?).

I would say Syria has the ability to cause massive damage to the US for a very small investment on their part.

Dd
Image
User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Syria

Post by Harlowe »

By the way, this certainly doesn't look like a single-strike plan -

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/09/the- ... ery-broad/
Kulaf
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 7185
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:06 am

Re: Syria

Post by Kulaf »

Ddrak wrote:
Kulaf wrote:Why would a missile strike against Syria tie us up? Syria has no means of reprisal against us.
Are you sure about that? I'd say a nation-state has immense power to reprise in assymetric warfare, from kidnappings and hostage taking through state-funded terrorism (we know they have chemical weapons), to cyber-warfare (given the number of successes the Syrian Electronic Army has had, do you really feel confident in your power or water systems?).

I would say Syria has the ability to cause massive damage to the US for a very small investment on their part.

Dd
What's stopping them from doing that now? Nothing. So nothing will change.
Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: Syria

Post by Partha »

A smart liberal bloc would refuse to sign off on a Syria AUMF without getting rid of the Iraq one.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.
Ddrak
Save a Koala, deport an Australian
Posts: 17517
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:00 pm
Location: Straya mate!
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by Ddrak »

Kulaf wrote:What's stopping them from doing that now?
Motive.

Dd
Image
User avatar
Arathena
kNight of the Sun (oxymoron)
Posts: 1622
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 4:37 pm

Re: Syria

Post by Arathena »

Rand Paul is a giant flaming cock of a stopped clock that's right on this one, as much as I would like to see a cross shaped metor of gold fly out of space at random and stake his vile heart.

We have no viable strategic, tactical, or political objectives in Syria. What the FUCK are we doing, other than waving our imperial cock around?
Archfiend Arathena Sa`Riik
Poison Arrow
Minute
Sublime Prince of teh Royal Sekrut Strat
Posts: 3419
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:39 am
Location: Brothel Relbeeks Mother Whores Herself From

Re: Syria

Post by Minute »

Image
Fallakin Kuvari wrote:Because laws that require voters to have an ID (Something they are required to have anyway) are bad.... :roll:
Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: Syria

Post by Embar Angylwrath »

Arathena wrote:Rand Paul is a giant flaming cock of a stopped clock that's right on this one, as much as I would like to see a cross shaped metor of gold fly out of space at random and stake his vile heart.

We have no viable strategic, tactical, or political objectives in Syria. What the FUCK are we doing, other than waving our imperial cock around?
The only reason we are in this shit right now is because Obama made a stupid statement a year ago, and he's trying to preserve some street cred. He's trying to save face. His absolutely false statements that he didn't say "red line" are incredulous. Now he's putting the "red line" statement on Congress and world treaties (of which Syria is not a part of)

The more I learn about this, the more I'm convinced we should stay out of it now. Let Iran and Saudi Arabia duke it out over there. If either side wins the battle its a lose-lose for the US. Better to let them expend resources on each other than to lean on the US. I hate saying that from a humanitarian aspect. In that vein, Obama can't claim a humanitarian position. If he did, we'd be in Africa and some of South America.
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius
User avatar
Arathena
kNight of the Sun (oxymoron)
Posts: 1622
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 4:37 pm

Re: Syria

Post by Arathena »

Embar Angylwrath wrote:
Arathena wrote:Rand Paul is a giant flaming cock of a stopped clock that's right on this one, as much as I would like to see a cross shaped metor of gold fly out of space at random and stake his vile heart.

We have no viable strategic, tactical, or political objectives in Syria. What the FUCK are we doing, other than waving our imperial cock around?
The only reason we are in this shit right now is because Obama made a stupid statement a year ago, and he's trying to preserve some street cred. He's trying to save face. His absolutely false statements that he didn't say "red line" are incredulous. Now he's putting the "red line" statement on Congress and world treaties (of which Syria is not a part of)

The more I learn about this, the more I'm convinced we should stay out of it now. Let Iran and Saudi Arabia duke it out over there. If either side wins the battle its a lose-lose for the US. Better to let them expend resources on each other than to lean on the US. I hate saying that from a humanitarian aspect. In that vein, Obama can't claim a humanitarian position. If he did, we'd be in Africa and some of South America.
There's nothing humanitarian to be served by shooting things with missiles in any case. The best you can do is cause a shitload of collateral damage and make enemies out of people that don't currently care about you one way or another. If you want humanitarianism, call off the damned military, send food and shelter aid to the neighbors, and build an asylum network for the millions that just want to run the hell away.
Archfiend Arathena Sa`Riik
Poison Arrow
User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Syria

Post by Harlowe »

The more I learn about this, the more I'm convinced we should stay out of it now. Let Iran and Saudi Arabia duke it out over there. If either side wins the battle its a lose-lose for the US. Better to let them expend resources on each other than to lean on the US. I hate saying that from a humanitarian aspect. In that vein, Obama can't claim a humanitarian position. If he did, we'd be in Africa and some of South America.
My thoughts as well. Stay out....we have no horse in this race. As far as the humanitarian part goes, launching missiles won't help that. It's only going to drag us into a losing battle either way.

There's nothing humanitarian to be served by shooting things with missiles in any case. The best you can do is cause a shitload of collateral damage and make enemies out of people that don't currently care about you one way or another. If you want humanitarianism, call off the damned military, send food and shelter aid to the neighbors, and build an asylum network for the millions that just want to run the hell away.
This...absolutely.
Ddrak
Save a Koala, deport an Australian
Posts: 17517
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:00 pm
Location: Straya mate!
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by Ddrak »

I have to agree with our (new) Prime Minister when he described the situation in Syria as "baddies vs baddies". :)

Dd
Image
Post Reply