Still under construction

Obama is far from building convincing case for war with Syria

  • Follow Editorials

Between Democratic loyalists and Republican hawks, it’s looking more likely today than it did last Saturday that President Obama will get the approval of Congress for military strikes on Syria.

Good thing for him, too. He’s betting the prestige of the office on it.

Republican House leaders John Boehner and Eric Cantor fell in line with the president this week, as have other high-profile Republicans.

Georgia’s two Republican U.S. senators, Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson, also support a strike.

It’s a good bet many otherwise dovish Democrats will back Obama, too, in order to avoid having the president be “shamed and humiliated on the national stage,” as nonvoting District of Columbia congressional delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton put it.

It’s a little late for that, given the fact that the mere delay until Congress returns in full next week has led the country’s enemies to crow about Obama’s weakness and vacillation.

The president’s equivocation in his Saturday announcement that he’ll seek congressional approval for military action also stood in stark contrast to Secretary of State John Kerry’s impassioned rallying cry for action just a day before.

It’s interesting that some are willing to support a Syrian strike with what appears to be less evidence than was obtained against Saddam Hussein. And we all know how that turned out.

We also agree with folks such as Isakson and Chambliss that if the president was going to ask for Congress’ marching orders, he should’ve called it into session this week rather than wait until the next.

Most of that will be quickly forgotten, however, should Congress go along with him and the real shooting starts. Moreover, the delay may be changing the outcome: It’s possible Congress would’ve given the Syrian strike a thumbs-down if asked this week; the intervening days give the Obama administration the opportunity to build the case.

Building the case – with Congress, with our allies and with the American people – should’ve preceded all of this. And Mr. Obama should never have bandied about talk of Syria crossing “red lines” by using chemical weapons unless he was quietly assembling an army of supporters. He has mismanaged this crisis horribly from the get-go.

South Carolina Rep. Jeff Duncan speaks for many of us.

“I’m canceling my meetings tomorrow to head back to D.C. to participate in hearings on the president’s request for the use of military force in Syria,” he wrote earlier this week on his Facebook page. “I’ve yet to see how military intervention in Syria is in our national interest, nor have I heard a good argument for why we should aid the al-Qaida-backed Syrian opposition.”

But again, Congress may end up bailing out the president.

If so, we hope they are in possession of compelling information they can’t disclose to the rest of us, because on its face a strike on Syria looks like a potentially catastrophic mistake – a joining in, and an escalation of, a war in which our national interests are either nonexistent or non-negotiable. It seems no-win to us.

We don’t deny the horror of chemical weapons or the need to crack down on their use. But why should the U.S. go it alone, or nearly so – particularly when the former president was excoriated by the current one for supposed unilateralism?

And, as one California Democrat wondered aloud, have we really exhausted all possible peaceful means of upbraiding the Syrian regime?

We look forward to the president making a case for war. Right now, he’s nowhere close.

Comments (125) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
Bizkit
30906
Points
Bizkit 09/05/13 - 09:25 am
5
1
All polls indicate the vast

All polls indicate the vast majority of Americans support not getting involved. Even Chambliss said his constituents don't want to go. So why is our govt-once again-just ignoring our needs and demands and seem to be heading down this suicide lane?

rmwhitley
5542
Points
rmwhitley 09/05/13 - 09:29 am
0
0
The obstructionist, socialistic
Unpublished

democrats and left in America wouldn't know toilet paper from their left hand if it weren't for the pragmatism of the right.

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 09:31 am
0
6
Quote from editorial

"Building the case – with Congress, with our allies and with the American people – should’ve preceded all of this. And Mr. Obama should never have bandied about talk of Syria crossing “red lines” by using chemical weapons unless he was quietly assembling an army of supporters. He has mismanaged this crisis horribly from the get-go"

SURPRISINGLY, I believe this whole paragraph is true! Imagen that coming from a Democrat! As for changing the majority of Americans' attitude, perhaps if the bomb strikes creat a positive outcome, than it will be a win-win situation. If the results are terrible, goodness help our Washington leaders and the few Americans that are for the bomb strike!

Rhetor
1004
Points
Rhetor 09/05/13 - 09:36 am
3
3
good heavens

No Republicans were beating war drums? Try this post, just for a start:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/05/09/syria-chemical-weapons-...

And now, suddenly, Inhofe is against attacking Syria, for no reason at all except that Obama wants to do it. Groan. Let me clarify that I am not in favor of bombing Syria; I am simply astonished by the Republicans' unprincipled response to President Obama. If President Obama really wanted to get rid of the Republicans, which he doesn't, all he would have to do would be to write an executive order forbidding them from jumping off bridges, and they would all do it just to defy him. My friends, it's really getting silly.

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 09:40 am
2
6
Quote from editorial

"South Carolina Rep. Jeff Duncan speaks for many of us"

I believe Rep. Duncan is just posturing to fool his constituents who are diehard conservatives that dislike Obama and like to vote against him in ANYWAY possible!

Bizkit
30906
Points
Bizkit 09/05/13 - 09:41 am
4
2
No different than Dems during

No different than Dems during the Bush administration-remember the 6 investigations. Politics is getting silly for sure.

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 09:45 am
1
3
Quote from editorial

"“I’m canceling my meetings tomorrow to head back to D.C. to participate in hearings on the president’s request for the use of military force in Syria,” he wrote earlier this week on his Facebook page. “I’ve yet to see how military intervention in Syria is in our national interest"

Duncan, AND EVERYBODY ELSE, must understand that just maybe fighting against the use of chemical weapons IS IN The US national interest! I believe this action, "And shame on The Brits", must be carried out in the name of The Geneva Accords!

chascushman
6653
Points
chascushman 09/05/13 - 09:49 am
3
2
There is youtube video of
Unpublished

There is youtube video of Richard Pryor as president. He makes more since than the CLOWN we have now.

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 09:50 am
2
3
Quote from editorial

"But again, Congress may end up bailing out the president"

PERHAPS it is a matter of making sure The Geneva Accords are followed BY EVERY COUNTRY! It may very well be that The US, under your President Bush, was breaking these accords by using water-boarding and other info gathering ways of interegation!

Bizkit
30906
Points
Bizkit 09/05/13 - 09:54 am
3
1
Does the Geneva Accord say

Does the Geneva Accord say anything about radical muslims beheading Americans and televising it?

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 09:56 am
1
4
Quote from editorial

"If so, we hope they are in possession of compelling information they can’t disclose to the rest of us, because on its face a strike on Syria looks like a potentially catastrophic mistake – a joining in, and an escalation of, a war in which our national interests are either nonexistent or non-negotiable. It seems no-win to us"

Again, perhaps it is in the interest of The US to send a deadly message about the use of chemical weapons! Perhaps Sen. McCain's; and others'; beliefs about taking out this dictator is in the interest of The US as well!

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 10:04 am
1
4
Quote from editorial

"We don’t deny the horror of chemical weapons or the need to crack down on their use. But why should the U.S. go it alone, or nearly so"

Even though The US will MOST LIKELY provide ALL of the "fire power", What Obama said yesterday must ring true in the ears of the rest of the free world, "It will not be his nor The US credibilty to be tarnished, BUT the countries that refuss to acknowledge something major must be done to rid Syria of the idea they can use chemical weapons!

dahreese
4703
Points
dahreese 09/05/13 - 10:11 am
3
3
Quoting t3bledso;
Unpublished

Quoting t3bledso; "
"Republican House leaders John Boehner and Eric Cantor fell in line with the president this week, as have other high-profile Republicans"

WHY IS IT that people don't believe these Republicans can't just be following McCain's lead because he knows war first hand??
--------------------------------------------------
If you'll notice, t3, not a single conservative on here has chastised Chambliss or Isakson for their support of an attack on Syria.

They, and the editorial, are all about Obama; not because he is right or wrong on this issue, but because he is a democrat or a "liberal."

And this; "It’s interesting that some are willing to support a Syrian strike with what appears to be less evidence than was obtained against Saddam Hussein. And we all know how that turned out."

Yes, AC, we do know how that turned out.

There is more evidence against Syria than there was Iraq.

The AC supported the attack on Iraq in spite of the fact that the inspectors sent into Iraq by the UN were ordered out before they could truthfully state that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, al la, a "smoking gun."

And, our know it all, remember it all, conservative commenters on here have all forgotten that GWB had to bribe some of the smaller nations in the UN to vote "Yes."

Like, but not limited to this; "Turkey Demands $32 Billion U.S. Aid Package if It Is to Take Part in a War on Iraq."

"But again, Congress may end up bailing out the president."

It's ok to bailout GWB, but not Obama?
------------------------------------------------------
That said, if Syria is such a threat to its neighbors, let the neighbors sort it out.

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 10:12 am
0
4
Quote from editorial

"And, as one California Democrat wondered aloud, have we really exhausted all possible peaceful means of upbraiding the Syrian regime?"

This person, though Democrat, MUST HAVE THEIR HEAD buried in the sand! There is no negotiateing with this dictator, especially since he THINKS that he has gotten away with using VERY EFFECTIVE chemical weapons! If Sen. McCain BELIEVES this dictator MUST go, then perhaps these bomb strikes will "GET HIM" or make his army very weak.

dahreese
4703
Points
dahreese 09/05/13 - 10:15 am
3
2
Whether it's a U.S.drone or
Unpublished

Whether it's a U.S.drone or Syrian gas, it doesn't matter to the innocent dead.

Bizkit
30906
Points
Bizkit 09/05/13 - 10:19 am
3
1
We tried sending a message

We tried sending a message about Chemical weapons use in Iraq-Saddam used them some 15 times killing hundreds to thousands. Apparently that message has done nothing to deter use of chemical weapons in the world. The argument that stopping Chemical weapons use in Syria will have global consequence isn't true. Stopping Assad won't stop their use either. But really we should be supporting Assad because he like Saddam was containing the area. We've learned nothing from Iraq. We know Dems supported maintaining Saddam in power-chemical warfare or not.

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 10:18 am
1
4
Quote from editorial

"We look forward to the president making a case for war. Right now, he’s nowhere close"

FIRST, ACES; you need to stop printing sentences in your editorials that you don't really mean, MUCH LIKE the one about BEING VERY OPENED_MINDED about printing readers' LTE's! Is it because my LTE was vehemently against Mayor Lark Jones' preciuos Poject Jackson??!!

Second, about Obama making the case for a bomb strike, "Don't count him nor the congress out on this one!!

Bizkit
30906
Points
Bizkit 09/05/13 - 10:23 am
3
1
I agree Dahreese America is

I agree Dahreese America is no different using drones to kill innocent children and women as well as targets as the use of chemical weapons by others. Perhaps other countries will hold the US to task for using drones to execute the innocent too.

justthefacts
21414
Points
justthefacts 09/05/13 - 10:26 am
3
1
Well

Neither John Boehner and Eric Cantor are going to make the decision are they? Always trying to deflect. Liberals have it down pate, don't they?

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 10:28 am
1
4
dahreese @ 10:11

"They, and the editorial, are all about Obama; not because he is right or wrong on this issue, but because he is a democrat or a "liberal.""

WELL STATED!! You know, people; of all races; try to hide their racism, BUT it usually will come out in the most subtill of ways!!

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 10:32 am
1
4
justthefacts @ 10:26

"Neither John Boehner and Eric Cantor are going to make the decision are they? Always trying to deflect. Liberals have it down pate, don't they?"

The conservatives who believe in international justice will follow Obama's lead.

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 10:35 am
0
4
Bizkit @ 10:23

"Perhaps other countries will hold the US to task for using drones to execute the innocent too"

Are you refering to the "GUILTY" Americans that were most probably enemy combatants?

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 10:47 am
0
4
HA @ 8:09

"It's easy for you liberals to just make statements that are not true, and hope people believe it, isn't it?"

It's even easier, VERY OBVIOUSLY, for conservatives TO POISON one of their own against debating a liberal! How sad the GOOD debates are now gone because of this POISONING!

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 10:56 am
0
4
seenitB4 @ 8:09

"This is not about the President....this is about chemical weapons used on us at some time.
I put my thoughts on r/r today ...so i won't repeat here....we are sitting ducks quacking our mouths off & can't see the forest for the trees...God help us all"

If you are saying "YES" to the bomb strike, "I whole-heartedly agree!" But to be fair to "THE DOVES" I don't see The Syrians ever being able to strike any of The US ground with chemical weapons.

Bizkit
30906
Points
Bizkit 09/05/13 - 11:08 am
3
1
There would be greater chance

There would be greater chance of the opposition using chemical weapons against America than Assad. We need to use diplomacy to allow Assad to regain control without chemical weapons. Offer Assad covert assistance against the opposition so he can regain control. Just like the Dems argument that Iraq would be better off if Saddam was still in control-ruthless dictator or not. I tend to agree. Strikes won't rid the chemical weapons or use of them ( remember UN inspectors were needed in Iraq and their efforts were slowly productive).

dichotomy
32189
Points
dichotomy 09/05/13 - 11:06 am
5
0
I hope none of you think

I hope none of you think there is a situation where there is ALL right or ALL wrong. Believe me, there are very few good guys in the struggle for power in Syria. No matter what we do, we will be helping bad guys.

If we do nothing, Assad will more than likely feel free to use chemical weapons again......IF, in fact, he is the one that used them. Just remember, 20% of the "rebels" are Muslim Brotherhood and I would not put it past them to use captured chemical weapons on there own people to get the US to take Assad out for them.

If we do SOMETHING, it will likely be totally ineffective. It's not like Assad hasn't had PLENTY of notice and hasn't moved his stockpiles of chemical weapons, launchers, etc......and probably put them next door to innocent civilian neighborhoods. And then there is that remote possibility of our intervention causing Syria and/or Iran to retaliate against Israel......which of course would cause Israel to attack one or both and we would be forced to support Israel.....which could [filtered word] off Russia......which......or well, you get the picture.

So y'all go ahead and tweak each other with "Iraq" and "Bush" but this ain't Iraq...and this ain't Libya. We do not have a UN Resolution, we do not have a coalition, and we do not have a general world consensus.

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 11:16 am
0
4
Dichotomy @ 11:06

"We do not have a UN Resolution, we do not have a coalition, and we do not have a general world consensus"

The free world WILL NEVER have a 100% vote in favor as long as we listen to Russia and China.

Bizkit
30906
Points
Bizkit 09/05/13 - 11:19 am
3
0
I agree Dichot but all the

I agree Dichot but all the countries who have lost their standing ruthless despots have gone from stable to more and more unstable. The whole area is a powder keg with radical religious zealots who seek martyrdom and brainwashed to hate America and kill Americans. I preferred the stability of past despots who maintained secular govts. So what if they spy on their own people, manipulate or control the press, kill their citizens without due process, Hey wait a minute that sounds familiar. LOL.

t3bledsoe
14250
Points
t3bledsoe 09/05/13 - 11:21 am
0
3
Bizkit @ 11:08

"Offer Assad covert assistance against the opposition so he can regain control"

OK, some of your whole statement about Iraq probably is true, BUT do you not put ANY faith in what Sen. McCain is saying?

Bizkit
30906
Points
Bizkit 09/05/13 - 11:34 am
3
0
No I don't support McCain-he

No I don't support McCain-he is a warmonger. Nor do I trust him. I don't think he would have made a good president either.

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs