Officially, the Obama Administration is entirely confident of its ability to sell Congress on the Syrian War, with Secretary of State John Kerry pushing the case again while downplaying the importance of what Congress thinks.
It isn’t clear if this is false bravado or simply the impression the administration has gotten from only talking to the tireless hawks in the leadership about the war, but Congressmen are overwhelmingly suggesting it’s going to be a “tough sell.”
More and more Congressmen are going public with their opposition to the war, and with experts saying the administration’s “evidence” is flimsy, there is little reason to think they can coax the “on the fence” voters onto the pro-war side.
Among the unquestioning hawks, there’s been no small amount of annoyance that President Obama decided to bring it to a vote, for fear that they’re not going to win. Kerry’s suggestion that the president had the “right” to attack Syria even if Congress told them not to may well be an effort to placate the hawks.
But it also risks alienating the rest of Congress quite a bit. Large numbers of Congressmen were demanding a say on this war, and for the administration to agree to give it to them but then imply it doesn’t matter is just one more slap in the face to the notion of oversight over the executive branch.
Many are also expressing concerns about the wording of the request, as while the president claims to be planning a brief, in-and-out strike, the resolution seeks open-ended authorization and is very vaguely worded.
Right now the effort seems to be to sell the war any way they can, and with a lot of “undecided” in Congress they appear to believe they can simply trick them into authorizing the war. With debate scheduled for the week of September 9, the prospect of holding the votes on 9/11 in the hopes of trying to link the war to lingering hawkish sentiment of that also can’t be ruled out.
Pulling that vote off isn’t going to be any easy task, however, because the case remains extremely weak for the administration’s narrative, and they are constantly at risk of the United Nations releasing their own report contradicting them. The longer the wait, the more likely the UN is to release a report, and that’s something the administration seems desperate to avoid.
Antiwar.com urges all readers to contact their Congressmen and urge them to vote against attacking Syria. Click here for contract information.
That silly foof is out of control.
Let us check out the logic here; Somebody set of a chem weapon that killed a thousand or so people (in all likelihood it was not Assad.) Therefore U.S.A. will drop some ump-teem tons of munitions, including depleted uranium, which will pulverize an entire nation of millions of people?
Why don't Obama just admit it; he is out for regime change. The only reason he wants the U.S.A. to bomb is because the mercenaries he hired, i.e. the "Rebels", are loosing.
If he really was interested in making peace in the region he'd stop supporting the rebels.
And to think our tax money is going to that stuff.
US war is fraud. This one would be a nice fraud to cite in that light, and probably already is regardless of whether it happens, but it's not exceptional.
You should point out that the official mandate of the United Nations investigative team is to find out what was deployed, and specifically not to find out who deployed it.
And the MSM coverage is largely overlooking that latter question, or the evidence regarding it.
According to the text of the "Syria War Legislation" Congress is being asked to give the President the authority to use force against Syria and apparently anyone else we think maybe doing something we don't like. Shouldn't the legislation state that the United States of America Declares War on Syria. Isn't bombing a country that has not attacked you an act of war. If it is then the legislation should be that simple yes or no. Enough with the vague and misleading wording of legislation when it comes to military action the only thing it ever does is lead to more interventions and it gives Congress the chance to push off their responsibility.
Waiting for some preening, pretentious pundit or politician to explain & expound upon the Obama Doctrine for us.
The Reverend Al Sharpton and his soap box, MSNBC, will certainly be the Ist one to lead into that.
Every Democrat should remember the fate of Hillary Clinton. She voted for war and ended up losing the Democrat nomination to that unknown, "anti-war" upstart from Illinois.
Puppet Obama and his puppet show crew are not wasting any time this 2nd term are they? How can the American people be so stupid to vote for this man? Oh, wait! EBT cards, food stamps, Obama Nazi Care, Obama Phones and handout galore! I guess that's why! Oh, and guilty white people thinking they might be a racist, if they didn't vote for the man. What a shame! Maybe America should be destroyed with fire….
The Congress is more than willing to approve this war, everything is consensual, there'll be no rape here, congress and administration are truly in love on the matter. Simply a lovers quarrel, black eyes or not.
If USA gonna help Syrian people, and protract them, why he didn't help thousands of Egyptian people who killed in Cairo. I know what American doing in Syria, he gonna help Israel not Syrian people.
If the administration is desperate for congress to vote before the UN report comes out for fear the report will contradict them, and then lose the vote, it seems an equally bad outcome (from the standpoint of the entire US government) would be if congress does vote for the war, and then the UN report comes out contradicting the administration.
Ehud Barack Obama is a real pro-war, pro-Israel terrorist.
Does anyone really believe that the US congress is going to vote against doing violence to an enemy of Israel?
The only reason some congressmen would vote against this war is the fear that it will turn out badly (which it will) and they will share part of the blame. If it were just a matter of approving bombing the hell out of another Arab country, they would nearly all be on board (I note that congressman Keith Ellison, a Muslim, is already on board). The Israel Lobby, which is curiously absent from most discussions about this, is going all out to get the votes so the principle will be established that the possible threat of WMD is enough to justify starting a war. Think Iran down the road. I believe they will be calling in all their markers with congress and will be successful.
"Forced by a public outcry to back down from his threat to bomb Syria without congressional authorization, President Obama …" You must be joking. He would not give a danm about the public, about the UN, and about Congress as Kerry has said Obama can still start the war. King Obama can do all he pleases.
The american strike in support of the jihadists will bring the centuries old christian communities in the middle east to a catastrophic end. just today the jihadists invaded an Aramic speaking christian town in syria: check this out: http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stor…
and: http://www.syrianews.cc/fsa-responds-pope-francis…