Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 04-08-2017, 11:41 PM   #31
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,438
this doesn't go quite as she planned

scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2017, 04:13 PM   #32
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 1,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Dangles View Post
Where was the outrage when Barry drew the line in the sand and looked away?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
did some research it seems congress looked away as well


President Obama abruptly changed course on Saturday and postponed a military strike against the Syrian government in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack so he could seek authorization first from a deeply skeptical Congress.

On Aug. 28 of that year, then-Rep. Cory Gardner, Rep. Scott Tipton, and Rep. Mike Coffman signed on to a House letter to Obama that urged the president to “consult and receive authorization from Congress before ordering the use of U.S. military force in Syria.”

“Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution,” the letter said.

The letter the three Colorado Reps. signed onto said they viewed the bypass of Congress when ordering military strikes as “unconstitutional.”

“Tonight’s actions in Syria come after Assad’s horrific actions against his own people,” he said in a statement. “America must show leadership and I’m thankful for what appears to be an effective response by our military.”

Seems republicans love wearing Flops Flops when it moves them
wdmso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2017, 08:13 PM   #33
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
did some research it seems congress looked away as well


President Obama abruptly changed course on Saturday and postponed a military strike against the Syrian government in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack so he could seek authorization first from a deeply skeptical Congress.

On Aug. 28 of that year, then-Rep. Cory Gardner, Rep. Scott Tipton, and Rep. Mike Coffman signed on to a House letter to Obama that urged the president to “consult and receive authorization from Congress before ordering the use of U.S. military force in Syria.”

“Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution,” the letter said.

The letter the three Colorado Reps. signed onto said they viewed the bypass of Congress when ordering military strikes as “unconstitutional.”

“Tonight’s actions in Syria come after Assad’s horrific actions against his own people,” he said in a statement. “America must show leadership and I’m thankful for what appears to be an effective response by our military.”

Seems republicans love wearing Flops Flops when it moves them
So when Trump can't get Congress to pass one of his initiatives (health care reform), he is ineffective. When Obama can't get Congress to pass one of his (retaliation against Assad), it's Congress that is ineffective.

When Trump keeps his promise re Assad and goes around Congress and possibly around the Constitution in order to do so, his action is questionable.

When Obama disregards Congress and the Constitution (which he did several times) in order to keep his promises, he is brilliant, and gets things done in spite of Congress and in spite of the Constitution. (which he could have done when Assad crossed his "red line).

So, when Obama and Trump act in similar ways, for Obama it's win, win. For Trump, it's lose, lose.

Nice.
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 07:47 AM   #34
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 1,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
So when Trump can't get Congress to pass one of his initiatives (health care reform), he is ineffective. When Obama can't get Congress to pass one of his (retaliation against Assad), it's Congress that is ineffective.

When Trump keeps his promise re Assad and goes around Congress and possibly around the Constitution in order to do so, his action is questionable.

When Obama disregards Congress and the Constitution (which he did several times) in order to keep his promises, he is brilliant, and gets things done in spite of Congress and in spite of the Constitution. (which he could have done when Assad crossed his "red line).

So, when Obama and Trump act in similar ways, for Obama it's win, win. For Trump, it's lose, lose.

Nice.

Seems your creating a narrative thats not there .. some may think that .. not I

I am just pointing out that Most conservatives wanted him (Obama) to seek congressional approval..prior to mil action in syria as did Trump as seen in his many tweets .. but conservatives as a whole do not no seek such requirement today
wdmso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 08:18 AM   #35
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,438
a conservative view.....

"Why is Donald Trump making war on Syria? Congress ought to ask him to explain that, and also to explain from where he believe he derives the authority to do so without legal authorization."

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...egal-pointless
scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 09:52 AM   #36
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
Seems your creating a narrative thats not there .. some may think that .. not I

You often contradict yourself without realizing that you do. As is the case here--saying that I'm creating a narrative that is not there while at the same time saying "some may think that". If some do think that, then the narrative is there. Whether you think that or not does not discount the narrative. The narrative doesn't have to include you. I wasn't referring just to you. Although, whether you think so or not, you feed into it. As you did here by minimizing the comparison to Trump taking action on his promise regarding lines crossed to Obama's lack of response to a crossing of his red line. Obama could have carried out his threat, regardless of Congress, just as Trump did. It was HIS red line, not Congress's red line. Not enforcing HIS threat emboldens the enemy. Don't make threats, red lines, if you can't, or won't enforce them. That is not good foreign policy.

I am just pointing out that Most conservatives wanted him (Obama) to seek congressional approval..prior to mil action in syria as did Trump as seen in his many tweets .. but conservatives as a whole do not no seek such requirement today
As Scottw's article points out, there is no "conservatives as a whole" on this issue, as on many others, regarding Trump.

As for me (I've already stated a few times that I'm more of a classical liberal with a "conservative" bent), there are arguments both ways whether Trump should have gotten Congressional approval to send missiles to Syria. Or, for that matter whether Obama would have needed to do so. I am mixed in opinion on it. The "message" sent by firing the Tomahawks sounds about right. But the notion of eventually removing Assad or weakening his ability to fight does not appeal to me in light of what would fill the vacuum.

I made the little "narrative" as you called it just to point out some apparent contradictions in politicized reactions to things Trump does, or doesn't do.

In this case, Trump specifically said he had a change of mind and heart when he saw the videos of dying and dead babies. Whether you believe that or not, he did say it. Maybe you don't think he should be allowed to change his mind. Maybe you don't trust someone who does rather than rigidly sticking to former positions. He also did specifically say a few times that he is flexible.

So you chime in about how he called for congressional approval before but didn't seek it in this instance. He may well have checked with his legal advisers who may have said that conditions and precedent didn't require the approval to do what he wanted in the cautious way (warning ahead) he did it. And maybe Obama really didn't want to bomb Assad and meekly acceded to Congress as a way to cop out of having to enforce his red line.

Don't know. But all of what has happened, action and inaction, point out a stark difference in making threats and enforcing them. And the politicized reactions to the difference. That's all the little "narrative" was about.

Last edited by detbuch; 04-10-2017 at 04:44 PM..
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 05:45 PM   #37
buckman
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
buckman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND View Post
Turns out they,and the rest of the coalition was wrong. Or Assad brought some back in to Syria.

See, I voted for him, but I don't think he was infallable...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Except once again they knew they were lying when they stayed over and over again that the chemicals were gone .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
buckman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 07:43 PM   #38
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman View Post
Except once again they knew they were lying when they stayed over and over again that the chemicals were gone .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Yes, the Obama administration knew that Assad still had chem weapons. The deal they made with Assad and the Russians would see to it that Assad would get rid of all of his DECLARED weapons. Of course, they must surely have known that he would not declare all of his stock. But that deception, making a deal which allowed Assad to keep WMDs, while at the same time the Obama administration could claim that it was able to broker a deal, without force, to make Assad get rid of his chemical weapons--that the administration was able to do it with diplomacy. In fact, one of them, I can't remember who, maybe Kerry, said that it was possible that Assad didn't declare everything and that he might have retained a stock of stuff, including sarin gas.

The sneaky word DECLARED was not noticed or not paid attention to by the American public nor by the media. No doubt the deception by the Obama administration was intentional. All we paid attention to was ALL the weapons, not to the more accurate all of the DECLARED weapons.

The deal with Iran and the supposed cessation of its nuclear program was a similar kind of deception. But with that, it was more widely understood that the deal was temporary, at best. And that Obama, as he did not with his Syrian "red line," would not enforce the Iranian deal. And Iran shortly after started breaking the agreement, and no retribution against it was made.
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2017, 08:26 AM   #39
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
As Scottw's article points out, there is no "conservatives as a whole" on this issue, as on many others, regarding Trump.

As for me (I've already stated a few times that I'm more of a classical liberal with a "conservative" bent), there are arguments both ways whether Trump should have gotten Congressional approval to send missiles to Syria. Or, for that matter whether Obama would have needed to do so. I am mixed in opinion on it. The "message" sent by firing the Tomahawks sounds about right. But the notion of eventually removing Assad or weakening his ability to fight does not appeal to me in light of what would fill the vacuum.

I made the little "narrative" as you called it just to point out some apparent contradictions in politicized reactions to things Trump does, or doesn't do.

In this case, Trump specifically said he had a change of mind and heart when he saw the videos of dying and dead babies. Whether you believe that or not, he did say it. Maybe you don't think he should be allowed to change his mind. Maybe you don't trust someone who does rather than rigidly sticking to former positions. He also did specifically say a few times that he is flexible.

So you chime in about how he called for congressional approval before but didn't seek it in this instance. He may well have checked with his legal advisers who may have said that conditions and precedent didn't require the approval to do what he wanted in the cautious way (warning ahead) he did it. And maybe Obama really didn't want to bomb Assad and meekly acceded to Congress as a way to cop out of having to enforce his red line.

Don't know. But all of what has happened, action and inaction, point out a stark difference in making threats and enforcing them. And the politicized reactions to the difference. That's all the little "narrative" was about.
"the notion of eventually removing Assad or weakening his ability to fight does not appeal to me in light of what would fill the vacuum"

Exactly. There's areal chance he could be replaced with someone a million times worse. It's a very, very challenging situation.
Jim in CT is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright 2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com