CNBC: US military has launched more than 50 missiles aimed at Syria: NBC News
- Thread starter mackaveli
- Start date
- Status
Unfortunately "GOTCHA" only matters when the people that supported the hypocrites are willing to admit that the hypocrite is being hypocritical. There is not many Republicans who are going to admit that, if they even bother to recall it.
Obama himself did not set the precedent of strikes without Congressional approval, but he did use that precedent against Libya, which is what I think that guy meant.
U.S has a lot of history of using one and done strikes against other nations without permission of Congress, so neither President is setting any precedent by doing so.
How do we know this?
Authorization of force resolutions aren't secret.
People are acting like these tweets from 4 years are some huge GOTCHA because these tweets from 4 years ago are a huge GOTCHA.
Honestly, whether or not Trump did the right thing here is very, very complex and probably won't be known for a while. The ONLY thing we do know, is that Trump and most everybody in the GOP are huge, flaming hypocrites. Their arguments four years ago that they used against Obama ALL hold true today. Nothing has changed the logic of their arguments. They didn't say "well it was only one chemical attack, and if there was a second one with a video I'd be all for it." No, they mostly said, "we need to be very careful" and "a military strike won't make us safer." And further, they specifically said that he must ask for authorization and not act unilaterally.
Nothing about those things has changed. It's just that it's not a black Democrat asking for military authorization anymore.
benjipwns
Banned
That's 19th century thinking.
Really? Oh yeah that's right the people that elected and supported trump were uneducated people. That statement again huh? Come on.
Anyways. Russians were on the base they were supposed to monitor and prevent these attacks? Russia won't respond to this because it will be against a unilateral approval of numerous nations. Russia will be outnumbered.
Especially since it was established years ago that if something like this happened again, this would be the outcome. This was set during Obamas time, so people trying to attack trump really look silly the more they tow that line.
If Russia lets Assad go and lets the US oust him, he will not likely be replaced by somebody more friendly to the Russian presence there.
I also don't see anything about this that makes it more likely that those sanctions against Russia will ever be lifted. It is still the case that anything the Trump administration does that it seen as preferential to Russia will set off alarm bells. All eyes are on those sanctions.
I just need a link or something saying trump did it without permission.
Netherscourge
Banned
He didn't NEED congressional approval.
He has the constitutional right to use military forces, including Nuclear Weapons, for up to 60 days without congressional approval.
After that, he needs congressional approval to continue any attacks for another 30 days or if Congress votes for a War declaration.
That's not fair, Roosevelt received congressional approval to declare war on the Japanese!
DontBeThatGuy
Member
For all intents and purposes, this was a one-off and nothing more.
You're not wrong but sure didn't stop him from tweeting about Obama needing it.
He doesn't need it.
This isn't going to oust Assad though
Lys Skygge
Member
I feel like a retaliation was nessessary, however, I'm extremely worried how Trump will handle the fallout.
Well oiled machine
The Albatross
Member
This is within the powers of the executive. Congress has only authorized the use of military force 9 times in about 100 years, yet there have been far more military actions in that time than 9.
Generally, since the Korean War, presidential use of military force without congressional authorization has rested on two criteria. First, the military action is intended to defend U.S. persons, property, or national interests. Second, the military operation is clearly short of the traditional understanding of war.
(Quote from below but on phone)
https://www.americanprogress.org/is...authorizations-for-the-use-of-military-force/
When Obama performed strikes on Libya it was without Congressional approval.
benjipwns
Banned
Unless he's bombing Kosovo.
Or enforcing no-fly zones over Iraq.
Or "not participating" in hostilities in Libya, plus NATO's in charge anyway so it doubly doesn't count.
Electric Eye
Banned
He'll probably get that military parade he wants so bad.
GoldenEye 007
Member
A good chunk yeah. Problem? They're also hypocrite​s and full of shit. What of it.
LocknessMobster
Member
LMAO! fuck this got me.
Media reported on it heavily but I never saw anything else, might be wrong.
Fucking hell
Tell me more about how Trump is handling this the same way any president would.
I love how Trump is trying to convince us there's no infighting and the admin. is running smooth. No one is talking to one-another.
Obama asked the GOP congress to authorize military force. They declined.
hey_monkey
Banned
No, it's not. It's bad feels over photos and also the need to look tough to get some approval ratings boosted and a lack of thinking or consideration and never mind the fact that we said fuck refugees. It's fucking staggering. I can hardly believe this happened in this way just now. 59 missiles.
Russia helped broker a deal for Syria to voluntarily give up their stockpiles. The question about whether they kept some back, or where these munitions came from, really needs to get some attention.
I mean, yeah? We're talking about a Donald Trump who, onstage at a rally, said something along the lines of "I love the poorly educated" which, of course, prompted cheers because that's how cults work.
Russia will look out for it's own self interests and keep some of course. Any state would. Problem is there is no stopping another attack and more kids will suffer.
I can't exactly fault him for this. People are acting like he actually declared war on Syria and just dropped bombs all over the country. But that's not the case. How was this action a bad thing? I don't think we should fall into hating on everything Trump does just because he's Trump. I'm not going to pat him on the back because there are other options he could also be doing here *cough*refugees*cough* along with this. But I'm not going to immediately jump to say this was a horrible atrocity and prepare for the world to end tomorrow.
Not true the Authorization Measure just stalled out before Military action(https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/21), because Syria accepted the US-Russian negotiation to turn over 100% of their chemical weapons (which we now know they didnt)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_Syria's_chemical_weapons
But why didn't he ask about Libya? Why did he ask about Syria?
Fancyarcher
Member
"Nothing to see here. I swear everything's going completely fine, and no I'm not lying".
The Albatross
Member
I mean, the idea that this was done to boost approval ratings is your opinion.
It's 59 missiles against a military base that launched a chemical weapons attack on civilians 2 days ago...
I get the hypocrisy of trump and all, I hate the guy, I don't trust him at all but ... I don't know if I want to live in a world where I'm staggered by the idea that somebody should do something to prevent chemical weapons attacks against civilians.
TheWorthyEdge
Member
but...but...Russia.
Captain Chaos
Member
But what if the sarin was stored at the base, one of these tomohawks could hit the stock pile and it would release the gas everywhere.
Cause he wanted bipartisan support in case everything got fucked up. It was a poison pill that congress didn't want to swallow.
Obama argued that the 2001 AUMF against Al Qaeda and terrorists applied in Libya.
He didn't choose to make that argument for attacks on Assad.
I know nothing about how sarin gas works if anybody has a clue what happens when you throw a missile at the stockpiles please inform me.
Sarin is fairly fragile, chemically speaking. It is a risk, but a minor one as the bombing/fire should destroy most of it.
He wanted an excuse to not go into Syria and used Congress.
Seriously. Everyone around was against going into Syria because the people were overwhelmingly against it.
The Albatross
Member
If your military is stock piling sarin nerve gas with the intent to use it on civilians, I think the higher priority is to prevent it being used on civilians. I'm sure one of the missiles did hit a chemical container. I'd imagine the warhead on the missile is a greater risk than the gas.
Also correct me if I'm wrong but this base is in northern Syria which is pretty remote.
Electric Eye
Banned
It can be worst we have personnel on the ground advising and assisting they can very well turn those weapons of them.
Ah thank God, that could have been much worse.
- Status