Afternoon Syria Soundbites – Quotes from around the web…
Ramesh pretty much nailed it on twitter: “So we’re going to go to war to defend the credibility of a comment Obama won’t take responsibility for.”http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/357563/obamas-redline-problem-and-ours-jonah-goldberg
Now, concerning Syria, he lectures Congress, seeking an accomplice while talking about accountability. In the Illinois legislature, he voted “present” 129 times to avoid difficulties; now he stoops from his executive grandeur to tutor Congress on accountability. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will-obama-seeks-an-accomplice-for-syria-action/2013/09/03/675e4f74-14be-11e3-a100-66fa8fd9a50c_story.html
Why are we even talking about taking military action in Syria? What is that military action supposed to accomplish? And what is the probability that it will in fact accomplish whatever that unknown goal might be?
When the president of the United States issues an ultimatum to another sovereign nation, he should know in advance what he is going to do if that ultimatum is rejected
The grim reality is that the people in key positions to shape our foreign policy during the Obama administration — the president, the vice president, two secretaries of state, and the current secretary of defense — all have a track record of grossly misconceiving the issues, our enemies, and our national interest.
This is the administration that is now asking for a blank check from Congress to take unspecified military action to achieve unspecified goals. “Military action” is a polite phrase for killing people. It would be nice to believe that this has some purpose other than saving Barack Obama from political embarrassment after he issued an ultimatum without having thought through what he would do if that ultimatum was ignored.
He has the authority to take military action if he wants to. The question is whether he can sucker the Republicans into giving him political cover by pre-approving his unknown actions and unknown goals.http://www.nationalreview.com/article/357500/unserious-about-syria-thomas-sowell
Britain’s Parliament inadvertently revived the constitutional standing of Congress when British Prime Minister David Cameron’s incompetent management of the parliament’s vote resulted in the body refusing to authorize an attack. His fumble was a function of Obama’s pressuring him for haste. If Parliament had authorized an attack — seven switched votes would have sufficed — Obama probably would already have attacked, without any thought about Congress’s prerogatives.
Obama’s sanctimony about his moral superiority to a Congress he considers insignificant has matched his hypocrisy regarding his diametrically opposed senatorial and presidential understandings of the proper modalities regarding uses of military force. Now he asks from the Congress he disdains an authorization he considers superfluous. By asking, however reluctantly, he begins the urgent task of lancing the boil of executive presumption. Surely he understands the perils of being denied an authorization he has sought, and then treating the denial as irrelevant.http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will-obama-seeks-an-accomplice-for-syria-action/2013/09/03/675e4f74-14be-11e3-a100-66fa8fd9a50c_story.html