Senate votes in favor of Obama’s war against Syria

6The U.S. Senate just voted in favor of yet another war — in Syria.

This afternoon, in a bipartisan 10-7 vote, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee approved a resolution granting Obama supposedly limited authority to conduct military strikes on Syria.

Three Republicans (John McCain of Arizona, Bob Corker of Tennessee, Jeff Flake of Arizona) joined seven Democrats in backing the measure, while two Democrats (Tom Udall of New Mexico and Chris Murphy of Connecticut) opposed it along with five other Republicans.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee approved Obama’s war against Syria despite the fact that:

1. There is compelling evidence that the Obama regime lied to us about the August 21 chemical attack that reportedly killed 1,429 Syrians outside of Damascus. Those lies include (see “Article cited by Limbaugh on Syrian chemical attack being a U.S. false flag“):

  • The identity of the chemical attack perpetrators being the Syrian al-Qaeda rebels instead of the Assad regime.
  • Obama regime having foreknowledge of the August 21 attack.
  • U.S. intelligence agents telling — and arming — the rebels to prepare for a major game-changing development that will result in U.S. bombing of Syria and the toppling of the Assad regime.

2. Whatever evidence we have indicate that members of U.S. armed forces oppose this war (see “U.S. soldiers in open rebellion against Obama’s war in Syria“).

4

3. A majority of the American people oppose this war, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, conducted last Wednesday through Sunday (Aug. 18-Sept.1) as the Obama regime made its public case for military strikes. The poll found that:

  • Nearly 6 in 10 U.S. adults oppose missile strikes.
  • Democrats and Republicans alike oppose strikes by double digit margins.
  • There is deep opposition among every political and demographic group in the survey, with political independents the most clearly opposed.

WaPo pollEven worse, although Obama and John Kerry repeatedly said a U.S. intervention will not include “boots on the ground” but will be confined to air strikes, the Washington Times reports that analysts and lawmakers said the language of the Senate’s Syria resolution or Authorization for the Use of Military Force, contains plenty of holes the White House could use to expand military action well beyond what Congress intends.

In fact, an effort by Sen. Tom Udall (D-New Mexico) to specifically limit attacks to naval or air power outside Syria was defeated overwhelmingly.

The resolution still prohibits “combat troops” from being deployed, but analysts said that still leaves open room for other American troops to be used in Syria, either as special forces or search and rescue missions.

The resolution drafted by Sens. Robert Menendez and Bob Corker, the top Democrat and Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, grants  Obama power “to use the armed forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in a limited and tailored manner against legitimate military targets in Syria” — but only in relation to that nation’s weapons of mass destruction. The resolution puts a 60-day limit on Obama’s ability to conduct strikes, while allowing him one 30-day extension of that authority.

Louis Fisher, scholar in residence at the Constitution Project and a veteran of four decades of studying legislation for the Congressional Research Service, asks “What could possibly be the meaning of ‘limited and tailored?’ I doubt if I’ve ever seen the word ‘tailored’ in a bill. Even if the ‘intent’ of Congress is a limited war, war has its own momentum.” As an example, Fisher points to the 1964 resolution that authorized a limited response to the Gulf of Tonkin, but that ended up being the start of an escalation of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam war.

Now the resolution goes to the House of Representatives.

Tell your representative to vote against the resolution!!!!

To find out how to contact your representatives, click here.

~Eowyn

Advertisements

10 responses to “Senate votes in favor of Obama’s war against Syria

  1. WEll there is still another week left in which this can be resolved. Thierry Myssen has just published an article on Voltaire and states that if the UN Security Council is unable to come to a conclusion, then the question of this strike has to be opening up to the entire UN General Assembly who can forbid it an Emergency Meeting which Ban K Moon will convene.

    Like

  2. This is like a nightmare.
    I am in absolute shock at this resolution giving the moron-in-chief authorization to engage but I am not surprised that the idiots McCain, Flake and Corker voted for the attack.
    Though the National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition never endorsed McCain (we caused him to lose the SC primary in 2000) or Flake, we did endorse Corker and are very disappointed. It may be that someone must have something on him; he was reelected in 2012 so I suspect he feels that we shall forget his nefarious vote by 2018,… if we are all still here.
    Hopefully, Putin if meets with Obama, he do some heavy arm twisting to prevent an attack.

    John Molloy
    Chairman
    National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition

    Like

  3. To these feeble minded so called sheeple in the senate and the house. This is not the voice of the people you are suppose to be representing. This is the voice of your pos. If this was so dier of a situation every country in the world would be jumping up and down. This whole senerio stinks of a false-flag operation. Obummer’s muslum brotherhood are getting their asses kick out of another country and he can’t look bad for his puppetmasters.

    Like

  4. These Idiots should have to grab a rifle and lead the attack…

    Like

  5. I am disgusted. My emails and phone calls and those of countless others have not succeeded to force these jerks to do the right thing. This war agenda is too set in stone and these whores have sold their souls to the devil. May the earth open up and swallow them whole and save us from their evil schemes, I pray.

    Like

  6. This is insane.

    -Dave

    Like

  7. What a surprise ………….NOT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    If they are so gung-ho to do this , let there happy-asses be on the front line .

    Like

  8. Thank you Dr. Eowyn for telling us about the insanity of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The word, “tailored” could mean anything, since it is not a legal term. How stupid and ridiculous!

    Like

  9. Pingback: GOP elites tell Conservatives and Tea Party to shut up -

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s