Author Topic: Obama Speech to Attack Syria  (Read 1832 times)

☺☻JDC™

Obama Speech to Attack Syria
« on: September 01, 2013, 12:39:19 am »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2TmDtj9oPg" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2TmDtj9oPg</a>

In a legacy-defining gamble, President Barack Obama announced Saturday that he has decided to launch military strikes against Syria — but wants the Congress to authorize them.

“In a world with many dangers, this menace must be confronted,” Obama declared in the Rose Garden 10 days after Bashar Assad’s forces allegedly massacred 1,400 civilians with chemical weapons.

“After careful deliberation, I have decided that the United States should take military action against Syrian regime targets,” he said, describing himself as “prepared to give that order.”

The president’s hastily arranged remarks — demonstrators protesting outside the White House gates could be heard from the West Wing only minutes before he spoke — sucked the urgency out of what had looked like a imminent military strike.

Instead, cruise missile-carrying warships off Syria’s coast will have to wait until the week of Sept. 9. That’s when Congress returns from a month-long vacation to take up a measure, drafted by the White House, giving Obama the green-light.

“I’m the president of the world’s oldest constitutional democracy," Obama said. "I will seek authorization for the use of force from the American people's representatives in Congress."

The president ignored a reporter who shouted the obvious question: What happens if Congress says no?

But senior administration officials briefing reporters at the White House later said that Obama still believes he has the legal authority to act without congressional support — meaning that a “no” vote would not necessarily handcuff his foreign policy. And they disputed that Obama risked setting a precedent that could limit the power of future occupants of the Oval Office.

The same officials also sidestepped repeated questions about what happens if Assad responds by stepping up chemical attacks against rebels looking to oust him.

The president himself said there was no sell-by-date for action. “Our capacity to execute this mission is not time-sensitive; it will be effective tomorrow, or next week, or one month from now,” he said.

Obama’s decision came amid public opinion polls showing four out of five Americans wanted the president to seek lawmakers’ approval, and with more than 100 congressional signatures on a pair of letters delivering the same message.

Obama has acknowledged repeatedly that Americans are “war-weary” after a decade of conflict — and worried about standing on the threshold of another escalating entanglement in the Middle East.

“This would not be an open-ended intervention, we would not put boots on the ground,” he promised Saturday. “Instead, our action would be designed to be limited in duration and scope.”

The president said he had spoken by telephone with Republican House Speaker John Boehner and Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and that they agreed with the timetable.

It also followed a series of diplomatic setbacks: Russian opposition blocked a path through the United Nations Security Council, and Britain’s parliament shocked the world Thursday by voting against military action. France signed on, but its parliament planned to debate the issue next week.

Denied both clear international legal legitimacy and a robust “coalition of the willing,” facing clear public resistance as well as a surprisingly assertive Congress, and trapped by his own declaration that Syria had crossed a “red line,” Obama went from saying he would “consult” Capitol Hill to actively courting its support.

The senior aides briefing reporters after Obama’s remarks suggested that he had largely settled on a course of action in an Aug. 24 National Security Council meeting, but did not make a final decision about using force until Friday.

No one — not Obama, not senior aides, not congressional leaders — had suggested securing congressional approval.

And then, sometime around 6 p.m. ET, Obama went for a 45-minute stroll around the South Lawn of the White House with Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, the aides said. During that walk, the president said that he wanted to go to Congress.

A two-hour meeting, from about 7 p to 9 p.m., followed with senior aides during which Obama to shared the same message. Some aides argued against that course-correction, the officials told reporters.

But by the time a National Security Council meeting wrapped up on Saturday, they were all on board, the aides said.

And they detailed the coming campaign to get Congress on board:

- Hammer home the potential threat to staunch ally Israel’s security

- Provide detailed intelligence about the alleged attack

- Underline that the United States ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention, and make a case that American legitimacy — not just his own — is at stake.

- Make the argument that failure to act could lead, one day, to terrorists acquiring chemical weapons from regimes like Assad’s — and turning them on America.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-to-make-1-15-p-m--statement-on-syria-161723103.html

?? ???

Re: Obama Speech to Attack Syria
« Reply #1 on: September 01, 2013, 02:12:03 am »
In a world with many dangers, this menace must be confronted,” Obama declared in the Rose Garden 10 days after Bashar Assad’s forces allegedly massacred 1,400 civilians with chemical weapons.

As in sure na sure na sila ah. Media nga naman talaga. Hindi ko naman sinasabi na wala talagang kinalaman yung gobyerno ni Assad. Pero kung makapag conclude sila, wagas. Parang naniniwala na tuloy ako kay sir 2fear na bias ang media pagdating sa mga Muslim.

Kung wala din palang effect kahit sabihin ng american congress na "no", eh bakit pa sya nanghihingi ng opinion nila? Hay naku...
DESTINY is not a matter of chance...It is a matter of CHOICE.

-=Kurabo=-

Re: Obama Speech to Attack Syria
« Reply #2 on: September 01, 2013, 04:00:32 am »
at pagnawala si Assad, sino mga papalit? mga Al Qaeda na opposition

it ain't over. . .till its over

Adonai

Re: Obama Speech to Attack Syria
« Reply #3 on: September 01, 2013, 06:46:37 am »
In a world with many dangers, this menace must be confronted,” Obama declared in the Rose Garden 10 days after Bashar Assad’s forces allegedly massacred 1,400 civilians with chemical weapons.

As in sure na sure na sila ah. Media nga naman talaga. Hindi ko naman sinasabi na wala talagang kinalaman yung gobyerno ni Assad. Pero kung makapag conclude sila, wagas. Parang naniniwala na tuloy ako kay sir 2fear na bias ang media pagdating sa mga Muslim.

Kung wala din palang effect kahit sabihin ng american congress na "no", eh bakit pa sya nanghihingi ng opinion nila? Hay naku...

Dito papasok ang 'intelligence report' sa sinabi mong as if sure na ba sila. And the reason why Obama is seeking US congress approval is that there's a limited support coming from the American lawmakers. Ang pinupunto din ni Obama dito ay dapat parusahan ang nagkasala dahil ito ay masyadong sensitibong kaso. Kung hindi mapaparusahan ang mga ito, maaaring tularan ito ng ibang bansa o ng ibang tao. Minsan kailangan mong gumamit ng kamay na bakal upang maging mahinahon ang lahat. Isang ehemplo dito ay Davao. Going back, tama ang naging desisyon ni Obama na maging 2nd decision nya ang paghingi ng tulong sa US Congress. But then again miski sabihin na 'NO', na kay Obama pa rin ang huling baraha.
You're not your. This not these. It's not its. We're not were.

Thanks Gat J.P. Rizal for the Arsenal shirt. <3

DjDaveTrance

Re: Obama Speech to Attack Syria
« Reply #4 on: September 01, 2013, 08:04:07 am »
Agree ako na dapat managot ang may sala, matagal na binalaan ni Obama ang Syria sa ganitong pangyayari pero naulit parin.

Ang sa akin lang ang magiging effect nito, for sure Domino Effect ito at China an Russia ang unang papalag. Naku naman! Baka sasali pa N.Korea. Tsk tsk tsk!


#JustMy2Cents

?? ???

Re: Obama Speech to Attack Syria
« Reply #5 on: September 01, 2013, 08:25:13 am »
Dito papasok ang 'intelligence report' sa sinabi mong as if sure na ba sila. And the reason why Obama is seeking US congress approval is that there's a limited support coming from the American lawmakers. Ang pinupunto din ni Obama dito ay dapat parusahan ang nagkasala dahil ito ay masyadong sensitibong kaso. Kung hindi mapaparusahan ang mga ito, maaaring tularan ito ng ibang bansa o ng ibang tao. Minsan kailangan mong gumamit ng kamay na bakal upang maging mahinahon ang lahat. Isang ehemplo dito ay Davao. Going back, tama ang naging desisyon ni Obama na maging 2nd decision nya ang paghingi ng tulong sa US Congress. But then again miski sabihin na 'NO', na kay Obama pa rin ang huling baraha.

Tama po talaga kayo Sir na dapat maparusahan yung nagkasala. Ang tanong lang po kasi eh sino po ba talaga ang nagkasala? Sa statement kasi ni Pres. Obama, pino-point nya na agad na Assad's government ang nasa likod ng chemical attack na yun. Any proof na Assad's government nga? Meron na ba? Sa pagkaka-alam ko kasi eh wala pa. Uulitin ko po, hindi ko sinasabi na walang kasalanan si Assad. Ang point ko lang po, dapat talaga maparusahan yung gumawa nyan. Yung talagang gumawa, hindi yung kung sino lang yung maituro o alam nilang gumawa.
DESTINY is not a matter of chance...It is a matter of CHOICE.

Adonai

Re: Obama Speech to Attack Syria
« Reply #6 on: September 01, 2013, 08:32:44 am »
Classified reports na yata ang hinihingi mo pre. Hindi naman yata sila mag akusa biglaan. Matagal na pong minamatyagan ng US ang Syria.

Source: Al-Assad's wikipedia. Hehehe!
You're not your. This not these. It's not its. We're not were.

Thanks Gat J.P. Rizal for the Arsenal shirt. <3

☺☻JDC™

Re: Obama Speech to Attack Syria
« Reply #7 on: September 01, 2013, 09:19:51 am »
I guess as per my perspective.. Agree din ko sa magiging action ng US para as syria. Kung ang titingnan ay justice para namatay sa chemical bombing. Pero kung may hidden agenda dito ang US...ibang usapan na yan.

bouya harumichi

Re: Obama Speech to Attack Syria
« Reply #8 on: September 01, 2013, 11:26:28 am »
Parusahan ang may sala.. chemical weapon warfare ay sobrang napakadelikado.. kasing delicado ng nuclear warfare.. ok lang na magbarilan cla magbombahan ng missile pero using chemical weapons is a big no.. maaring tularan ng ibang bansa yan.. sino ba aasahan naten pag gamyang mgecsensitibong bagay db america parin..
"If you don't know defeat, it's just because you have only ever been picking on people that weaker than yourselve. There's a word for that: embarrassing!"

Idiot

Re: Obama Speech to Attack Syria
« Reply #9 on: September 02, 2013, 04:34:04 am »
yan din naman kase ang binintang kay SADAM na may chemical weapon in the end wala naman nakita palpak pa nag-kautang utang pa States

ngayon same scenario kaso binigyan nila ng katotohanan pinakita sa media para di naman mapahiya ang coalitation

so gaano katotoo na si assad nga ang gumamit ng chemical weapon dahil sabi lang ba ng US porket sinabi ng US na si assad maniniwala agad kayo may burden of proof ba ang States even sa court di pwede ang sabi ni ganito at sabi ni ganun

kung si assad nga it is illogical na lusubin mo ang syria pwede mo naman daanin sa international court or urge people for revolution or oust

bakit kailangan mo pang lusubin it is illogical
 

ito ang problema ng mga pinoy madaling makalimot

kenji_kulet

Re: Obama Speech to Attack Syria
« Reply #10 on: September 02, 2013, 05:32:21 am »
 smoking:: parang personal na galit na yung ngyari kay Saddam

remember Bush Sr.? kaya may desert storm , US lost the Campaign after that here comes Bush Jr.  smoking:: kaya natuluyan si Saddam

although US hates WMD weapons and Chemical Weapons dahil sila nag start nun  ::laffman

WMD - Hirojima bombing

Chemical weapon - Agent Orange in Vietnam


FerminaDaza

Re: Obama Speech to Attack Syria
« Reply #11 on: September 02, 2013, 12:33:47 pm »
If you want to figure out what's happening in Syria in a few minutes (useful for busy butt like me)  You can read this good article 9 questions about Syria you were too embarrassed to ask.




?? ???

Re: Obama Speech to Attack Syria
« Reply #12 on: September 02, 2013, 11:07:35 pm »
yan din naman kase ang binintang kay SADAM na may chemical weapon in the end wala naman nakita palpak pa nag-kautang utang pa States

ngayon same scenario kaso binigyan nila ng katotohanan pinakita sa media para di naman mapahiya ang coalitation

so gaano katotoo na si assad nga ang gumamit ng chemical weapon dahil sabi lang ba ng US porket sinabi ng US na si assad maniniwala agad kayo may burden of proof ba ang States even sa court di pwede ang sabi ni ganito at sabi ni ganun

kung si assad nga it is illogical na lusubin mo ang syria pwede mo naman daanin sa international court or urge people for revolution or oust

bakit kailangan mo pang lusubin it is illogical
 

ito ang problema ng mga pinoy madaling makalimot


Nadale mo Sir. Eksakto yung pagkakasabi mo. Unang una hindi pa naman napapatunayan ng si assad nga. Pangalawa, kung sya nga naman, bakit mukang giyera agad ng US? Personal interest nalang kasi yata ang dahilan ng US eh. Kung anu-ano pang pakulo yung ginagawa nila.
DESTINY is not a matter of chance...It is a matter of CHOICE.