Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Bridget Johnson

Bio

August 31, 2013 - 10:01 pm
Page 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single Page

President Obama sent House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and the president of the Senate, Vice President Joe Biden, draft legislation for authorization of the use of the U.S. Armed Forces in a Syria strike.

The draft was delivered Saturday evening, after Obama’s Rose Garden announcement that he would seek approval from Congress and after his post-announcement golf game at Fort Belvoir with Biden.

The resolution brands the chemical weapons attack on a Damascus suburb “flagrant actions… in violation of international norms and the laws of war,” states “the conflict in Syria will only be resolved through a negotiated political settlement,” and adds “unified action by the legislative and executive branches will send a clear signal of American resolve.”

The meat of the legislation states “the president is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in connection with the use of chemical weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in the conflict in Syria in order to (1) prevent or deter the use or proliferation (including the transfer to terrorist groups or other state or non-state actors), within, to or from Syria, of any weapons of mass destruction, including chemical or biological weapons or components of or materials used in such weapons; or (2) protect the United States and its allies and partners against the threat posed by such weapons.”

Debate on the measure is expected to begin after Congress returns from recess on Sept. 9, though hearings and briefings will be held earlier.

Members of Congress lauded Obama’s announcement while giving early indications on how they would vote.

“I believe the use of military force against Syria is both justified and necessary. I believe the United States has a moral obligation as well as a national security interest in defending innocent lives against such atrocities, and in enforcing international norms such as the prohibition against the use of chemical weapons. Assad must be held accountable for his heinous acts, and the world looks to us for leadership,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).

“The Senate will engage in this critical debate right away, beginning with public hearings and briefings for members next week,” he added.

The draft heads to the Foreign Relations Committee, where Chairman Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) will convene hearings with administration officials next week. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) will hold both classified and non-classified briefings for members next week at which they’ll be able to ask questions of national security officials.

“Following the hearings and briefings, the full Senate will convene and debate a resolution authorizing the use of limited military force against Syria. The Senate will vote on the resolution no later than the week of September 9th, as requested by the Obama administration. This will provide ample time for a robust public debate, while ensuring that this critical issue receives a vote in a timely fashion,” Reid said.

Senate President Pro Tempore and Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) commended Obama’s decision while throwing snark at his predecessors.

“I continue to oppose introducing U.S. troops into this conflict, and I continue to believe that seeking congressional approval of military action is called for,” Leahy said. “Given the positions taken by past presidents, the president’s decision to seek congressional approval is especially commendable.”

Menendez said his committee’s first hearing will be the day after Labor Day.

“Senior administration witnesses will testify before the Committee and the Congress will debate this issue actively, fully, and publicly,” the senator said. “It is my view that the use of military force in Syria is justified and necessary given the Assad regime’s reprehensible use of chemical weapons and gross violation of international law. I look forward to sharing these views with my colleagues in the days ahead as the Senate Foreign Relations Committee convenes to take up this vital national security issue.”

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
The whole world has seen his ass.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
He painted himself in to a corner with his red line speech. Without England, there was talk that Obama would go it alone. But I'm sure he realized that he. ALONE. would be responsible for any unintentional consequences. That is when he decided to involve congress. They would get him out of his corner and take blame for anything that went wrong. I think he's counting on congress to vote no, then he is out of his corner and he can excoriate congress for not doing what he didn't want to in the first place. He's a politician and a coward, not a leader
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
If we don't go to war, he'll just blame it on Republicans and accuse them of being heartless international law breakers who approve of war crimes against those poor, innocent Al Quaeda Sunnis. He'll throw the word 'children' into the mix, too.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (15)
All Comments   (15)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
How is he going to stop proliferation if there are no boots on the ground? Is Obama admitting that there are, indeed, very bad players in the rebel movement? What groups, specifically, does Obama not want getting chemical weapons? Questions, questions, so bothersome.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It's important to realize Obama is not asking for a declaration of war, but only a "resolution" on the part of Congress approving military operations. This is a mistake; See http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110328-what-happened-american-declaration-war

If it really is in our national interest to attack Syria, Congress should declare war, and let Obama, as Commander-in-Chief, conduct it.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Legislation???

If attacking Syria is so vital to our national interests, Why didn't Obama just ask for a declaration of war, Like FDR?

We are being led by an Affirmative Action President, and it shows.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Obama's justification for a military attack on Syria appears to be that it is in our "national interest" to prevent "proliferation" (i.e. falling into the hands of terrorists) of chemical weapons. At this point it does not appear that he wants to risk boots on the ground.

Yet air attacks would only make it more likely that chemical weapons would eventually fall into Al Qaeda's hands. Even with ground troops in Syria, we can't be sure of finding all of Assad's chemical munitions. Does anyone remember the search in Iraq for chemical weapons we knew Saddam Hussein actually had because he had used them on the Kurds?

So a quick and dirty air strike accomplishes nothing, as we can't actually hit the CW depots for fear of killing "innocent" people downwind. And without boots on the ground, there's really no point in the exercise.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Obama is playing a role for which he is not suited, and doing so with the background ideologies of Marxism and Islam in his personal past, and in the forefront of some of his key advisers - especially the leftism. He is at some level aware that he is something like Kevin Kline in 'Dave', except that Kline was a far more compassionate and practical 'President' than this fellow.

As far as the actual chances of US action, while I accept the basic premise that the Syrian gov't committed this attack with Iranian and Russian backing, Obama has given himself the symbolic and literal 'out.' I am thankful that the IDF is so effective, because the 'American word' is worth very little these days.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Permit me to narrowly qualify, "....because the 'American word' is worth very little these days."

I'd have this statement re-worded to read something more like "Obama's word means nothing.", and that "America's word" in generally remains in favor of standing by Israel....according to my gut feeling and personal experience. This has been so since Harry Truman officially recognized the modern state of Israel within hours of its modern re-establishment in 1948 out of it's recent British Colonial Mandate era.

Will stick my neck out and say candidly that our Obama, twice in a row being elected to our Presidency, gives American Democracy a bad name, and graphically points out that we need to revise the rules and qualifications for voters to be eligible to vote in Presidential elections. Being able to grunt and make an "X" on a paper ballot, or push the "X" button on a machine is obviously not gettin' it.

That snappy term, "Affirmative Action", intended for the thrusting forward of the manifestly unqualified needs to be rescinded......Obama's education and career is the immediate indicator.....but good luck with that...it's too "politically correct".

We Americans have now a serious circular problem. Obama's sympathizers and his ilk are the new growing voting majority.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The real reason why Obama won't attack Syria is because of new evidence (with video proof) that it was Al Qaeda militants who launched the chemical weapons. It was all a scheme to blame Assad and provoke an attack, with the U.S. fighting for Al Qaeda. And it would have worked if Congress hadn't threatened to impeach Obama if he broke constitutional law by starting another war without congressional approval, like the horrible mess he made in Libya. The only "red line" is the one that Obama doesn't dare cross.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-30/dont-show-obama-report-about-who-really-behind-syrian-chemical-attacks

I guess you are talking about the above where terror types fire off chem weapons.
In addition axelrod has set up zero to have yet another fat basturd moment by allowing Congress to have a say in the bombing of Syria.A syria by the way which is loaded with shia while our dear leader is a sunni. They hate one another just in case anyone forgot.
In addition to becoming a huge diversion for Benghazi,nsa,irs and a dozen other summer scandals the left will now dodge yet another 2014 bullet and save probably 50 or more seats. Those seats would have been lost had we not fallen into yet another david axerldork psy ops trick.
We never seem to learn its all politics to them.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Please reference this video evidence.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Er Barry, I don't remember much of a debate over Obamacare. And that will cost a whole lot more than a few dozen cruise missiles. And now that we've got six warships in the Eastern Med on hold, what should they do, play hound and hare? Your brilliant strategic intellect seems to have difficulty thinking one day ahead. That little speech you delivered yesterday definitely reveals you to be a petty, calculating, self-serving pol.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Getting involved in another stupid war...whoo hoo. Is it Eastasia this time?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
He painted himself in to a corner with his red line speech. Without England, there was talk that Obama would go it alone. But I'm sure he realized that he. ALONE. would be responsible for any unintentional consequences. That is when he decided to involve congress. They would get him out of his corner and take blame for anything that went wrong. I think he's counting on congress to vote no, then he is out of his corner and he can excoriate congress for not doing what he didn't want to in the first place. He's a politician and a coward, not a leader
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Agreed.
He's showing his innate smallness and amateurishness and is simply covering his a$$.

Suggested viewing: TV news video clip:
"Charles Krauthammer: Obama humiliated....", and read about Obama being "shamed into action". It's all very dangerous for us and sad.....but "politically correct".

Our National Dilemma-Problem goes deeper than this particular specimen of a living, breathing Obama; it is that of having a basically ill-educated, immature electorate. Until the Presidential election voting age is raised along with a stringent literacy test in English, there will be more Obama's elected. Be careful what you wish for. This is Affirmative Action in action.

There's a fine line between Democracy and Mob rule. We've crossed it twice by voting Obama into the our Presidency.

Caveat emptor with politicians. Why do we need to be reminded of this, time after time after time? We're witnessing a circular example of "Political Correctness". We need instead a major shift over to "Common Sense Correctness".

Good luck with that.


1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
View All

One Trackback to “Obama Sends Congress Draft Legislation Authorizing Syria Force”