It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. To Strike Syria Regardless of Congressional Vote

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Less than a day after vowing to put an attack on Syria to a vote in the US Congress, the Obama administration indicated on Sunday that it would launch strikes even in the face of congressional rejection.

President Obama "has the right to do this no matter what Congress does", said secretary of state John Kerry, one of the leading advocates of a military assault on dictator Bashar al-Assad for allegedly using chemical weapons on 12 neighborhoods outside Damascus on 21 August.


So the approval of Congress is irrelevant it seems and the U.S. is willing to go ahead even if they reject military action. So it's all just theater basically...make it look like the democratic route has been taken, even though they intend to strike anyway.


"At the end of the day, Congress will rise to the occasion," Representative Mike Rogers, the chairman of the House intelligence committee, told CNN. "This is a national security issue."


Ah the old "national security" justification...

Obama has the right to strike Syria

Kerry has also said that the U.S. has evidence of sarin use


He said samples from hair and blood gathered after the attack "tested positive for signatures of sarin".


And the UN couldn't tell us this?

They are just determined to go into Syria no matter what.




posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Guardian Live Updates


Kerry indicates how the administration will pitch its case to Congress. He's asked about Sens. McCain and Graham, who want a broader military effort in Syria than the "limited, tailored" approach that has been outlined.

Kerry says he thinks the senators will vote "not to put Israel at risk..not to enforce this message with other interests in the world."

"I am convinced that we can find common ground here with them and others," Kerry says.


Who are they more concerned about...Israel or Syrian civilians?



• The Syrian opposition expressed frustration that Obama had not announced a strike on Assad, with a Syrian National Colition official declaring Obama a "weak president." On this the Syrian government appeared to agree, hailing the beginning of an American "retreat" in a state-run newspaper. Syria's deputy foreign minister Faisal Mekdad has said he expects the US Congress to approve military strikes as it is "pro-Israel".



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:35 AM
link   
I been waiting two years for Obama to play the "National Security" card on Syria.

Thank you Patriot Act. You have paved they way for a gross abuse of power, the kind that dictators use to get their way.

The patriot act has bypassed congress, and bypassed the system of checks and balances designed to protect the people from abuse of power.

Obama the dictator driving America World Police.


What a JOKE!



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 


This whole "Congressional Approval" thing is nothing but a dog and pony show.
Hes soo hoping they approve of a strike on Syria so he can appease those opposed but if
Congress actually listens to its constituents, this will never pass, since polls show only 9%
support this action
If they dont give their approval for war though, "something" else will happen in Syria and Obama
will call an emergency press conference and say, this terrible act by Assad cannot be ignored, blah, blah, blah
I am forced to use my executive privilege to order missile strikes against the Syrian Govt, again, blah, blah.

And yea, if I here the words National Security coming from these asses again, im gonna puke.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Sharingan
 


Yep, my guess is another terrorist video will emerge saying to attack the US with chemical weapons.

Then Obama will use the national security routine to enter Syria without congressional approval.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Sharingan
 


Yes, my thoughts exactly.

I think whichever way the vote goes, the U.S. will be taking action. But before the military offensive, the media offensive will begin in full force to convince the people that it's in their best interests and that U.S.credibility is on the line and Assad is a threat to peace etc.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 


NATIONAL SECURITY! That one phrase gives Obama all the power in the USA thanks to the patriot act.....all in the name of protection the people.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:45 AM
link   
Even if chemical weapons have been used by the Assad regime (which so far we've seen no proof to suggest it was Assad any more than the rebels) it's irrelevant. It's just being seized on as a pretext for them to stick their beaks in and get rid of Assad once and for all and thus weaken and isolate Iran.

I cannot fathom the logic of Assad using chemical weapons, particularly as it was being suggested that government forces were winning.

Contrary to the rhetoric and emotive appeals, the United States couldn't give a damn about the Syrian crisis and are just opportunists using it for their own political ends.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:47 AM
link   

• The Syrian opposition expressed frustration that Obama had not announced a strike on Assad, with a Syrian National Colition official declaring Obama a "weak president." On this the Syrian government appeared to agree, hailing the beginning of an American "retreat" in a state-run newspaper. Syria's deputy foreign minister Faisal Mekdad has said he expects the US Congress to approve military strikes as it is "pro-Israel".



It takes a stronger person to walk away, as the saying goes, this is an ego dig to fuel anger, Obama did the right thing walking away, has so many competing pressures, he needs more then congressional support in my opinion, especially if this was a false flag and this turns into ww3. This is a mess.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 


The problem i see is how can you tell who used them. You can, only that they have been released. The arguments on who used them is irrelevant.

Someone used the most disturbing weapons in human history on innocent people.

I think his whole Syrian intervention is to remove political leaders and replace them with puppets of the administrations choosing.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:52 AM
link   
If anyone read between the lines yesterday... Obama said as much. "I don't need Congressional approval from Congress but by God I'm going to take it to congress...." And then you could see his lips stop moving but you know he had more to say...

Did anyone notice his smirks during certain things he was saying ( ?) i need to study body posture and facial communication more. I'm sure they take a course in all that (?) lol



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by CottonwoodStormy
 


He hasn't waked away, he is just waiting in hopes that they will come to their senses. Obama has the power to bypass congress with the patriot act, and im sure he will in due course.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by shaneslaughta
 


I think it's just as likely that both the government and the rebels have used them.

Are we meant to believe that the rebels fighting tooth and claw against Assad's forces, would refuse to use chemical weapons if they gained access to some? After all these are the rebels composed of those who would cut out the hearts of people and eat them in front of the camera. If there are people willing to do that, then I doubt they would have much qualms about using chemical weapons. To them the end would justify the means.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by tracehd1
 


Obama dont need congress to side with him on matters of national security. And since they are the same terrorists that perpetrated 911, you know we are going to continue our fight against them at all costs.

The minute they signed the patriot act was the opening for an american dictatorship. It just has to fall under the guise of national security, or beat it with a hammer till it fits.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by shaneslaughta
 


So you think if it wasn't for the fact that he might be impeached if he acted alone he would be attacking right now then? I guess this man has no soul at all then hey?



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 



I agree. The problem is we cant carpet bomb them because of non combatants in the area. That opens the door for ground invasion.

Be prepared for another ten plus years of chasing the rest of the AQ off the face of the earth.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by CottonwoodStormy
reply to post by shaneslaughta
 


So you think if it wasn't for the fact that he might be impeached if he acted alone he would be attacking right now then? I guess this man has no soul at all then hey?


That is exactly why he hasn't acted yet. He is waiting for some trigger to fall under the national security clause. Then he can act as he sees fit with NO reprisal from congress.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Q&A: Sarin Nerve Agent


Sarin was among the agents used by the Iraqi government when it killed 5,000 Iraqi Kurds in Halabja in 1988.


Nice little article here by the BBC. Fails to mention that the United States were allied with Saddam at the time and pretty much sanctioned the attacks and then tried to blame them on Iran. Not to mention that much of the materials etc for the weapons were provided by the United States and other countries.


Perforated bags of liquid sarin were left in the Tokyo underground in the 1995 attack by the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo cult. Twelve people died.


Now if a small group of lunatics in Japan were able to use sarin, how is it that the U.S. government is telling us that the rebels do not have the capability to use such weapons? Of course there is massive difference between rockets and bags, but still I think desperate people would find a way.



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 


Typical spin doctor crap. Neglecting facts to change the focus.

I dont mean you or your post.
edit on 9/1/2013 by shaneslaughta because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   
This pretty much agrees with what I said in my first post.

Three reasons why Congress may not approve war


Unpopular: Polls show most Americans don’t want to see any kind of intervention in Syria, so if Congress votes to support this, they will be going against their constituents’ wishes, which is never easy especially for those up for reelection. Members are going to have to defend the intelligence and make the case to their supporters why it’s important to do this. To that end, a limited engagement is better, as they can make the argument that this isn’t the beginning of another decade of war.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join