US House May Avoid Syria Vote

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

The issue is pretty simple. The Congress of the United States has to determine whether or not to support U.S. strikes on Syria. It is called a declaration of war and it is the job of Congress to either approve or deny military action.

Today, the National Review Online is reporting that Congressional aides are saying that the House may not even vote on action in Syria if House leadership believes the vote will fail.

 

“Two new whip counts of House members by ABC News and the liberal Firedoglake web site show a majority of House members firmly or leaning against intervention. The Washington Post’s more conservative count stands at 204 “no” votes, only 13 short of the majority needed to kill the president’s request. “

 

http://benswann.com/congress-too-cowardly-to-vote-on-syria/

 

Insanity. I just get so sick of stuff like this. Oh, if it looks like we can get it passed, we will put it to a vote... But because people are waking up and these Reps. are finally listening to their constituency, we are just going to pretend like it isn't there.

 

Excuse me while I go vomit.

 

[BUCK3Y3 44]

This country is a joke.

[blotsfan 2,112]

I could think of worse things than the government going by the overwhelming will of the people.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

Yeah lets do the smart thing and stay the hell out of this.

[Bucman 891]

Let the shit hole countries around them deal with this. Saudi is urging action, well do it yourself then.

[OSUViking 505]

I'm confused... they're avoiding a vote so that we can't vote it down, or they are avoiding a vote because we already know it would be voted down?

[GA_Eagle 595]

I could think of worse things than the government going by the overwhelming will of the people.

 

I was under the impression this article is saying they were contemplating avoiding the vote and allowing the executive branch to do as it wished in regards to Syria. Considering the overwhelming sentiment from American citizens to stay out of Syria I'd say that's more just shirking responsibility.

 

 

edit: Maybe someone else can answer this but why isn't this a UN issue (I mean besides the UN not being very effective)? Isn't this kind of stuff it's job?

Edited September 8, 2013 by GA_Eagle

[blotsfan 2,112]

 

 

I could think of worse things than the government going by the overwhelming will of the people.

I was under the impression this article is saying they were contemplating avoiding the vote and allowing the executive branch to do as it wished in regards to Syria. Considering the overwhelming sentiment from American citizens to stay out of Syria I'd say that's more just shirking responsibility.

 

 

edit: Maybe someone else can answer this but why isn't this a UN issue (I mean besides the UN not being very effective)? Isn't this kind of stuff it's job?

If that's what it is than I apologize. I thought it meant we wouldn't do anything there.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Absolutely not. Obama has already said he has the authority to move on with military action even without the approval of Congress. Congress not doing anything just let's him do as he wants and then he even has a convenient excuse on top of it. Very sad.

GA, as far as the UN goes, I have no idea. Maybe a combination of Putin's anti-war vote and UK Parliaments decision not to send troops?

[Guest Phailadelphia]

Obama isn't going to convince anyone this is a good idea if/until he shares the intelligence he's shared with Congress. He's not really in a position to just say "take our word for it. We HAVE to do this."

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

WASHINGTON (AP) - The White House says a "common-sense test" shows that the Syrian government is responsible for a chemical weapons attack last month, and it demands a U.S. military response.

 

White House chief of staff Denis McDonough says the administration lacks the "irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence" that skeptical Americans are seeking, but that "this is not a court of law." He says "intelligence does not work that way."

 

Obama is hitting the media trails this week, lining up a bunch of interviews and scheduling a speech for sometime Tuesday. Can he convince Americans that military intervention in Syria is an appropriate reaction? I sure hope not.

[blotsfan 2,112]

While I do think that the government probably did use chemical weapons, something about killing massive amounts of people not needing the same standard as whether some drug user needs to do community service is off-putting.

[OSUViking 505]

I don't care if common sense says that Assad pulled the trigger. If we are going to war (sorry, launch "military action"), then I want irrefutable proof.

[Guest Phailadelphia]

RT @AP BREAKING: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid delays Senate test vote authorizing military force in Syria