U.S. Sen. John Cornyn (RINO-Texas) is signaling support for American intervention in Syria’s civil war because it will help U.S. President Barack Obama save face with the “bullies” of the world.
“I believe what I’ve been told and what we’ve all been told that it’s indisputable that chemical weapons have been used,” Cornyn told a Texas radio station last week. “The president said that’s a ‘red line,’ and I think for him not to do anything since the red line has been crossed would just send a signal to Iran who’s building nuclear weapons , and other bullies of the world that we don’t mean what we say.”
Ah … Obama’s “red line.” Along with dubious intelligence … what a great reason to get involved in another Middle Eastern conflict (not).
Cornyn joins fellow “Republican” warmongers like U.S. Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham in supporting military action against the regime of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad – even though there is no compelling national interest involved (and even though intervening in the conflict puts the American military on the same side as these al-Qaeda butchers).
This website has written repeatedly in opposition to American involvement in Syria’s civil war (here, here, here and here) – arguing it serves no compelling American interest and will only make our citizens less safe by needlessly stoking anti-American extremism.
19 comments
Kerry said in an interview the administration views the need to go to Congress as unnecessary step and that a vote against US intervention will not mean that the president cannot enter into Syria as an ‘intervention.’ Lindsay is doing pirouettes at the prospect of playing with soldiers again.
From the longing look on the Palmetto Princess’s face, TBG suggests the headline should read “Another RINO Wants…Another RINO”.
So Obama wants Congressional authorization to go to war with a Middle East country ruled by the Baath Party over weapons of mass destruction? You have to love life’s little ironies.
So Obama wants Congressional authorization to go to war, at the behest of the Saudis and the Israelis, with a Middle East country ruled by the Baath Party …over weapons of mass destruction? You have to love life’s little ironies.
Added a little to it for ya!
I guess its not that surprising. There is one major difference between Obama and Bush, however. Obama is not lying about WMDs and putting the lives of thousands of US service men and women at risk so the corporation run by his Vice President can soak the American taxpayer for hundreds of billions of dollars in war profits.
I think it is pathetic that the Left is still pretending to not know the difference between a lie and being wrong. So please share what lie, specifically, Bush told. I mean date, what he said, and how he knew it was false. And then please explain why the Dems on the committees with security clearance all went along with his lies. And that is absolute nonsense about Cheney. He had divested all shares in Haliburton.
And if you want to demagogue, Chris Stevens could not be reached on Obama administration lies and the lives they have cost.
Interesting that you mentioned lies, because Obama is peddling an actual falsehood about the basis for Syria involvement. He now claims it was not his red line that we would be vindicating, but the international community’s red line. His actual quote was “a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.” (Emphasis added). As the Washington Post noted at the time (link below), the “us” plainly referred to the administration. But they “my” makes it absolutely clear he was speaking to his determination to intervene and what would be his redline for doing so. Yet he is now trying to distance himself from his own statement. As Ramesh Ponneru noted, we are now contemplating war to defend a statement Obama will not even stand behind. Strange times.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-issues-syria-red-line-warning-on-chemical-weapons/2012/08/20/ba5d26ec-eaf7-11e1-b811-09036bcb182b_story.html
I don’t care about any of that. He has asked Congress to decide whether we should take action, and that is what I think he should have done. I have no desire to dump another 2 trillion dollars into the desert for no benefit, the way we did in Iraq, but congress will make that decision; and when that decision is made it will be for reasons that are real reasons, whether good ones or not.
I will never believe that Bush and Cheney did not intend to invade Iraq from the day they were elected; and I will never believe Halliburton getting a no bid contract to run the war was not Cheney’s doing. Nor will I believe he did not profit from it.
I think the fact that Halliburton moved its corporate headquarters to Dubai so that it would not have to detail to the American people exactly what its war profits were and continue to be, speaks volumes.
If it walks like a Dick and quacks like a Dick, its probably a Dick.
And yes, like Colin Powell, I believe the administration knew most of the information they gave him to present to the UN was untrue. I also believe they knew Saddam Hussein was no threat to the US.
You don’t care about Obama’s lie, feel no compulsion to support your allegations against Bush and Cheney, and admit that nothing can change your preconceived notions about Bush and Cheney. That pretty much sums up the level of debate from the Left these days.
I don’t care what Obama said about red lines because its not relevant. You call it a lie, but what difference does it make whose red line it was. I say the sky is gray today and you can call me a liar and say, no not its not, its more blue gray.
Congress will make the decision on whether we take action. Clearly they don’t care whose red line it was or if it was even a red line. This is the level of debate from the right. Lets try to make a mountain out of a mole hill. As I said, if we take action it will be for real reasons, good ones or not.
As for the Bush Administration, I feel no need to further debate that issue. I originally supported the invasion. Since then I’ve listened to the debate and all the available evidence. The debate is over, and for me the verdict is in. Iraq was an unmitigated unnecessary disaster that arose because our President and Vice President took advantage of emotions following 9-11 to do what they were planning to do anyway.
So you are going full Hillary (“What difference does it make?”). Well, it is only the reason we are contemplating war in Syria, so I think it is sort of relevant. And he is lying to try to pass responsibility to others if things go badly. And it is not a matter of nuance – Obama is denying something he is on record as having said, and that his administration has repeatedly affirmed in the past year:
“We go on to reaffirm that the President has set a clear red line as it relates to the United States that the use of chemical weapons ”
“And the people in Syria and the Assad regime should know that the President means what he says when he set that red line. And keep in mind, he is the one who laid down that marker. He’s the one who directed that we provide this information to the public. And he’s the one who directed that we do everything we can to further investigate this information so that we can establish in credible, corroborated, factual basis what exactly took place.”
But it is Obama, so to you that makes it irrelevant.
Unlike you, I was not in favor of the Iraq invasion. But I am in favor of historical accuracy, and it drives me nuts that so many on the Left just lives in this fantasy land where Republicans are evil and they just ignore facts that do not fit their preconceived notions.
“it drives me nuts that so many on the Left just lives in this fantasy land where Republicans are evil and they just ignore facts that do not fit their preconceived notions.”
Not all Republicans, just the important ones, and I would remove the phrase “are evil and they.” If you do so, your statement would accurately reflect my belief. With the exception of Cheney. For him you can add that phrase back and replace preconceived notions with “plans.”
Of course I disagree that it is a fantasy. At some point the debate ends, all the available evidence is in and you have to make a decision on what you believe based on the facts that exist. This debate ended long ago. I think my conclusions are the best fit with the evidence.
“At some point the debate ends, all the available evidence is in and you have to make a decision on what you believe based on the facts that exist.”
Of course, you cannot marshal any of this evidence to support your frankly criminal accusations against the former president and VP. You’ve done nothing but engage in conspiracy theorizing that is frankly not that far removed from Trutherism. They both rest on an unstated premise that our political leaders and intelligence officials cannot be this impotent and/or inept, so there must be some shadowy conspiracy that just needs to be revealed.
Look, I’m not a judge or jury. It doesn’t matter to anyone but me what I believe, and its not my job to convince you I’m right. I think my conclusions best fit the facts that are available and are far more likely to be correct than your “Whoops, we killed 100,000 Iraqis and blew 2 trillion dollars for no reason, boy is our face red” theory. That would have to rank right up their with the most colossal screw ups of all time.
You are correct. I don’t believe our political leaders and intelligence agencies were that inept. I think they got exactly what they wanted.
Do I believe Dick Cheney is a criminal. Yes I do.
Do I believe Bush is a criminal, I’m not sure. Most likely just gullible. I actually always though he seemed to be a genuinely concerned President, which is why I gave him the benefit of the doubt on the invasion until all the facts came out.
Gullible and inept are two things I know Dick Cheney is not. You don’t rise to the leadership of one of the largest corporations in the world without being smart, ruthless and careful. Nor do your ties to such an organization disappear over night. With this much money and power at stake there are no coincidences. It was no coincidence they got the contract to run the war. It was no coincidence they did not have to bid for it; and its coincidence they moved their headquarters to Dubai, to get out from under US disclosure requirements and US Taxes on their war profits.
No one will ever prove anything about Dick, but I know he profited from this war.
If you’re worried about enforcing a red line, don’t draw it in the first place. Let other countries wade through their own mess, lord knows we have our own to deal with.
DAMN STRAIGHT!!!!!!!! We don’t need to go to war, destroying thousands of live (maybe millions if this shit goes Super Nova) over someone’s appearances.
Obama is a weak President and I don’t give a damn if he continues to look weak because of his damnfoolery. We need to stay the hell out of this.
Considering we had a lot of “war mongering” on North Korea before the “Boston Bombing”,………..does anyone not understand the homeland security signals that are really being sent..? How high does Oil have to go on the commodities floor before “action” is taken..?
Furthermore, how unaware are citizens of this FACT, before they gear up to head to a crowded sporting venue..?
When Hillary declared “We Came, We Saw…and He DIED”…..how long did it take for counter action to take place in Benghazi..?
Since Dennis Rodman played for the Bulls and was reportedly back in North Korea, we wonder what signal is being sent..?
OH,shit. Lindsey’s found himself another Silver Daddy!
Yep!