Air Strikes in Syria Begin

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Air strikes begin in Syria. people have different opinions and to each his own. but it looks to me Obama pulled another boner. He got the cooperation from Congress for funding then waited for them to go on recess and start the airstrikes without their approval. This will likely provoke more friction between Obama and Congress and cause more trouble for Dems up for election in Nov. What do you think? Should he have got Congressional approval or wait until they left town as he took action?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/23/us-launches-first-wave-bombing-strikes-over-syria/

[AUUSN 823]

I really want to punch my computer monitor right now...

The decision to launch was up to CENTCOM. Once we have the go from CiC, we don't wait for congress to get in town.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

I really want to punch my computer monitor right now...

The decision to launch was up to CENTCOM. Once we have the go from CiC, we don't wait for congress to get in town.

Is your frustration with the action or someone attempting to politicize the action? Is this also somewhat of a gesture toward Russia?

[cooltigger21 0]

You think he gives a rats rear end about Congress? There isn't a day that goes by he doesn't violate the constitution. Isis is digging in. They will be effective up to a point Really and truly he doesn't care about defeating these people.

[AUUSN 823]

I really want to punch my computer monitor right now...

The decision to launch was up to CENTCOM. Once we have the go from CiC, we don't wait for congress to get in town.

Is your frustration with the action or someone attempting to politicize the action? Is this also somewhat of a gesture toward Russia?

I'm the first to voice that this isnt the route we need to take in this conflict. I don't want to see another Libya operation. My frustration is people who are ignorant on the War Powers act. So to state:

"The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war."

So yes POTUS did brief members of congress:

"President Obama spoke with House Speaker John Boehner and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi about the strikes Monday evening, officials said. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who chairs the Senate Committee on Intelligence, was briefed by Vice President Biden earlier in the day."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-launches-first-airstrikes-against-isis-in-syria/

[homersapien 11,354]

Air strikes begin in Syria. people have different opinions and to each his own. but it looks to me Obama pulled another boner. He got the cooperation from Congress for funding then waited for them to go on recess and start the airstrikes without their approval. This will likely provoke more friction between Obama and Congress and cause more trouble for Dems up for election in Nov. What do you think? Should he have got Congressional approval or wait until they left town as he took action?

http://www.foxnews.c...kes-over-syria/

I thought the problem just recently was Obama's slowness and apparent reluctance in developing and executing a strategy. Now he's going too fast?

[TitanTiger 20,471]

I'm confused as to what the problem is here. Help me sift this out.

-- Do you think that the decision to go after ISIL in Syria is the right call?

-- What protocol do you think he violated in authorizing this action (if any)?

-- Is the main problem that you think he should have done something to ISIS/ISIL sooner? How would that have been received given that attacking ISIL by default assists Assad?

-- Does anyone feel we had the realistic option to not get involved?

What am I missing here?

[homersapien 11,354]

I'm confused as to what the problem is here. Help me sift this out.

-- Do you think that the decision to go after ISIL in Syria is the right call?

-- What protocol do you think he violated in authorizing this action (if any)?

-- Is the main problem that you think he should have done something to ISIS/ISIL sooner? How would that have been received given that attacking ISIL by default assists Assad?

-- Does anyone feel we had the realistic option to not get involved?

What am I missing here?

The point is Obama's incompetency, no matter what. Those are irrelevant details.

[Strychnine 1,802]

I'm confused as to what the problem is here. Help me sift this out.

-- Do you think that the decision to go after ISIL in Syria is the right call?

-- What protocol do you think he violated in authorizing this action (if any)?

-- Is the main problem that you think he should have done something to ISIS/ISIL sooner? How would that have been received given that attacking ISIL by default assists Assad?

-- Does anyone feel we had the realistic option to not get involved?

What am I missing here?

As AUUSN would call it, ODS is what you are missing Titan.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Titan...IMHO I guess the issue here is whether the POTUS can unilaterally approve a hostile act against another country without congressional approval. I'm not an expert but I have heard arguments both ways about the War Powers act and even some Dems are complaining this morning. My understanding is for him to act without Congress' approval it has to be an emergency I just think it's another bad Obama move to say he wants to work with Congress, they approve is funding request, and then when they leave town he finally strikes after two years of threats Coincidence......I doubt it. A lot of DEMs up for reelection don't have to be on record with a vote. So I the timing just in the interest of the country or more political? I think I can predict how every poster

here will answer.

I guess the SCOTUS will ultimately have to decide what the POTUS can do under the law. Meanwhile I guess we have to rely on the expert AUUSN here. I would suggest, however, he call Retired Navy Captain Nash who expressed a different opinion this morning. Meanwhile some of us will just have to remain ignorant in AUUSN's eyes.

[WarTim 3,456]

You think he gives a rats rear end about Congress? There isn't a day that goes by he doesn't violate the constitution. Isis is digging in. They will be effective up to a point Really and truly he doesn't care about defeating these people.

He is helping them as much as possible...

[alexava 6,973]

I'm confused as to what the problem is here. Help me sift this out.

-- Do you think that the decision to go after ISIL in Syria is the right call?

-- What protocol do you think he violated in authorizing this action (if any)?

-- Is the main problem that you think he should have done something to ISIS/ISIL sooner? How would that have been received given that attacking ISIL by default assists Assad?

-- Does anyone feel we had the realistic option to not get involved?

What am I missing here?

You are not new here are you?

[japantiger 4,051]

I really want to punch my computer monitor right now...

The decision to launch was up to CENTCOM. Once we have the go from CiC, we don't wait for congress to get in town.

Is your frustration with the action or someone attempting to politicize the action? Is this also somewhat of a gesture toward Russia?

I'm the first to voice that this isnt the route we need to take in this conflict. I don't want to see another Libya operation. My frustration is people who are ignorant on the War Powers act. So to state:

"The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war."

So yes POTUS did brief members of congress:

"President Obama spoke with House Speaker John Boehner and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi about the strikes Monday evening, officials said. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who chairs the Senate Committee on Intelligence, was briefed by Vice President Biden earlier in the day."

http://www.cbsnews.c...-isis-in-syria/

So which one of these applies in this case...the War Powers act requires one of the following in regards to the president exercising his power as Commander in Chief...their's no declaration of war; or statutory authorization from congress...and the president has been adamant that their is no threat to the US....

"and that the President's powers as Commander in Chief are exercised only pursuant to a declaration of war, specific statutory authorization from Congress, or a national emergency created by an attack upon the United States (50 USC Sec. 1541)."

[icanthearyou 4,462]

Titan...IMHO I guess the issue here is whether the POTUS can unilaterally approve a hostile act against another country without congressional approval. I'm not an expert but I have heard arguments both ways about the War Powers act and even some Dems are complaining this morning. My understanding is for him to act without Congress' approval it has to be an emergency I just think it's another bad Obama move to say he wants to work with Congress, they approve is funding request, and then when they leave town he finally strikes after two years of threats Coincidence......I doubt it. A lot of DEMs up for reelection don't have to be on record with a vote. So I the timing just in the interest of the country or more political? I think I can predict how every poster

here will answer.

I guess the SCOTUS will ultimately have to decide what the POTUS can do under the law. Meanwhile I guess we have to rely on the expert AUUSN here. I would suggest, however, he call Retired Navy Captain Nash who expressed a different opinion this morning. Meanwhile some of us will just have to remain ignorant in AUUSNs eyes.

Let's not go down the name-calling trail.

[AUUSN 823]

I really want to punch my computer monitor right now...

The decision to launch was up to CENTCOM. Once we have the go from CiC, we don't wait for congress to get in town.

Is your frustration with the action or someone attempting to politicize the action? Is this also somewhat of a gesture toward Russia?

I'm the first to voice that this isnt the route we need to take in this conflict. I don't want to see another Libya operation. My frustration is people who are ignorant on the War Powers act. So to state:

"The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war."

So yes POTUS did brief members of congress:

"President Obama spoke with House Speaker John Boehner and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi about the strikes Monday evening, officials said. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who chairs the Senate Committee on Intelligence, was briefed by Vice President Biden earlier in the day."

http://www.cbsnews.c...-isis-in-syria/

So which one of these applies in this case...the War Powers act requires one of the following in regards to the president exercising his power as Commander in Chief...their's no declaration of war; or statutory authorization from congress...and the president has been adamant that their is no threat to the US....

"and that the President's powers as Commander in Chief are exercised only pursuant to a declaration of war, specific statutory authorization from Congress, or a national emergency created by an attack upon the United States (50 USC Sec. 1541)."

I've already explained the provisions of the 1973 War Provisions Act. McCain introduced a modification to that act in Jan 2014 but to my knowledge has not passed both houses of congress. I really don't want to but I can go down a list of combat actions a president has initiated and magically got out before the 60 days were up.

[Tigermike 3,008]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/23/us-strikes-target-al-qaeda-veterans-in-syria-plotting-imminent-attack/

[AUUSN 823]

^{For Immediate Release}

^{September 23, 2014}

^{Letter from the President -- War Powers Resolution Regarding Iraq}

^{TEXT OF A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT}

^{TO THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES}

^{AND THE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE}

^{September 23, 2014}

^{Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)}

^{In my reports of August 8 and 17 and September 1 and 8, 2014, I described a series of discrete military operations in Iraq to stop the advance on Erbil by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), support civilians trapped on Mount Sinjar, support operations by Iraqi forces to recapture the Mosul Dam, support an operation to deliver humanitarian assistance to civilians in the town of Amirli, Iraq, and conduct airstrikes in the vicinity of Haditha Dam.}

^{As I noted in my address to the Nation on September 10, with a new Iraqi government in place, and following consultations with allies abroad and the Congress at home, I have ordered implementation of a new comprehensive and sustained counterterrorism strategy to degrade, and ultimately defeat, ISIL. As part of this strategy, I have directed the deployment of 475 additional U.S. Armed Forces personnel to Iraq, and I have determined that it is necessary and appropriate to use the U.S. Armed Forces to conduct coordination with Iraqi forces and to provide training, communications support, intelligence support, and other support, to select elements of the Iraqi security forces, including Kurdish Peshmerga forces. I have also ordered the U.S. Armed Forces to conduct a systematic campaign of airstrikes and other necessary actions against these terrorists in Iraq and Syria. These actions are being undertaken in coordination with and at the request of the Government of Iraq and in conjunction with coalition partners.}

^{It is not possible to know the duration of these deployments and operations. I will continue to direct such additional measures as necessary to protect and secure U.S. citizens and our interests against the threat posed by ISIL.}

^{I have directed these actions, which are in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States, pursuant to my constitutional and statutory authority as Commander in Chief (including the authority to carry out Public Law 107-40 and Public Law 107-243) and as Chief Executive, as well as my constitutional and statutory authority to conduct the foreign relations of the United States.}

^{I am providing this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148). I appreciate the support of the Congress in this action.}

^Sincerely,

^{BARACK OBAMA}

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

AUUSN....thanks for providing that. I assume that makes things legal under the law, something he hasn't always done IMHO.

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

Air strikes begin in Syria. people have different opinions and to each his own. but it looks to me Obama pulled another boner. He got the cooperation from Congress for funding then waited for them to go on recess and start the airstrikes without their approval. This will likely provoke more friction between Obama and Congress and cause more trouble for Dems up for election in Nov. What do you think? Should he have got Congressional approval or wait until they left town as he took action?

http://www.foxnews.c...kes-over-syria/

I thought the problem just recently was Obama's slowness and apparent reluctance in developing and executing a strategy. Now he's going too fast?

Ya kinda confused here myself. I read many articles about the Republicans saying bomb bomb bomb. So now he is doing what they wanted and its a problem. Besides, when are you gonna catch these guys, they have only put in a full weeks worth of work about 14% of the time since 78.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/09/22/since-1978-congress-has-worked-a-full-week-14-percent-of-the-time/

[japantiger 4,051]

^{For Immediate Release}

^{September 23, 2014}

^{Letter from the President -- War Powers Resolution Regarding Iraq}

^{TEXT OF A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT}

^{TO THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES}

^{AND THE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE}

^{September 23, 2014}

^{Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)}

^{In my reports of August 8 and 17 and September 1 and 8, 2014, I described a series of discrete military operations in Iraq to stop the advance on Erbil by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), support civilians trapped on Mount Sinjar, support operations by Iraqi forces to recapture the Mosul Dam, support an operation to deliver humanitarian assistance to civilians in the town of Amirli, Iraq, and conduct airstrikes in the vicinity of Haditha Dam.}

^{As I noted in my address to the Nation on September 10, with a new Iraqi government in place, and following consultations with allies abroad and the Congress at home, I have ordered implementation of a new comprehensive and sustained counterterrorism strategy to degrade, and ultimately defeat, ISIL. As part of this strategy, I have directed the deployment of 475 additional U.S. Armed Forces personnel to Iraq, and I have determined that it is necessary and appropriate to use the U.S. Armed Forces to conduct coordination with Iraqi forces and to provide training, communications support, intelligence support, and other support, to select elements of the Iraqi security forces, including Kurdish Peshmerga forces. I have also ordered the U.S. Armed Forces to conduct a systematic campaign of airstrikes and other necessary actions against these terrorists in Iraq and Syria. These actions are being undertaken in coordination with and at the request of the Government of Iraq and in conjunction with coalition partners.}

^{It is not possible to know the duration of these deployments and operations. I will continue to direct such additional measures as necessary to protect and secure U.S. citizens and our interests against the threat posed by ISIL.}

^{I have directed these actions, which are in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States, pursuant to my constitutional and statutory authority as Commander in Chief (including the authority to carry out Public Law 107-40 and Public Law 107-243) and as Chief Executive, as well as my constitutional and statutory authority to conduct the foreign relations of the United States.}

^{I am providing this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148). I appreciate the support of the Congress in this action.}

^Sincerely,

^{BARACK OBAMA}

Good to see him follow part of the War Powers act...still has not established the threat to the US. Sounds like another intevention on behalf of people who make no effort to defend themselves.

[AUUSN 823]

^{For Immediate Release}

^{September 23, 2014}

^{Letter from the President -- War Powers Resolution Regarding Iraq}

^{TEXT OF A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT}

^{TO THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES}

^{AND THE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE}

^{September 23, 2014}

^{Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)}

^{In my reports of August 8 and 17 and September 1 and 8, 2014, I described a series of discrete military operations in Iraq to stop the advance on Erbil by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), support civilians trapped on Mount Sinjar, support operations by Iraqi forces to recapture the Mosul Dam, support an operation to deliver humanitarian assistance to civilians in the town of Amirli, Iraq, and conduct airstrikes in the vicinity of Haditha Dam.}

^{As I noted in my address to the Nation on September 10, with a new Iraqi government in place, and following consultations with allies abroad and the Congress at home, I have ordered implementation of a new comprehensive and sustained counterterrorism strategy to degrade, and ultimately defeat, ISIL. As part of this strategy, I have directed the deployment of 475 additional U.S. Armed Forces personnel to Iraq, and I have determined that it is necessary and appropriate to use the U.S. Armed Forces to conduct coordination with Iraqi forces and to provide training, communications support, intelligence support, and other support, to select elements of the Iraqi security forces, including Kurdish Peshmerga forces. I have also ordered the U.S. Armed Forces to conduct a systematic campaign of airstrikes and other necessary actions against these terrorists in Iraq and Syria. These actions are being undertaken in coordination with and at the request of the Government of Iraq and in conjunction with coalition partners.}

^{It is not possible to know the duration of these deployments and operations. I will continue to direct such additional measures as necessary to protect and secure U.S. citizens and our interests against the threat posed by ISIL.}

^{I have directed these actions, which are in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States, pursuant to my constitutional and statutory authority as Commander in Chief (including the authority to carry out Public Law 107-40 and Public Law 107-243) and as Chief Executive, as well as my constitutional and statutory authority to conduct the foreign relations of the United States.}

^{I am providing this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148). I appreciate the support of the Congress in this action.}

^Sincerely,

^{BARACK OBAMA}

Good to see him follow part of the War Powers act...still has not established the threat to the US. Sounds like another intevention on behalf of people who make no effort to defend themselves.

Congress holds the purse strings. We are currently operating on a CRA until Dec so we certainly don't have the money for this campaign. DoD will need to go to with hat in hand for contingency funds. At anytime, congress can cut the funding and bombing will stop.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Texan4Auburn...if I'm one of the ones confusing you. let me be more clear. I was not complaining about the air strikes, just whether Obama had followed the law.

[TitanTiger 20,471]

Good to see him follow part of the War Powers act...still has not established the threat to the US. Sounds like another intevention on behalf of people who make no effort to defend themselves.

No effort to defend themselves, or are unable to defend themselves because they are so vastly outgunned?

Also, do you really believe that ISIL is not an established threat to the US?

[cooltigger21 0]

Good to see him follow part of the War Powers act...still has not established the threat to the US. Sounds like another intevention on behalf of people who make no effort to defend themselves.

No effort to defend themselves, or are unable to defend themselves because they are so vastly outgunned?

Also, do you really believe that ISIL is not an established threat to the US?

They are a threat but were they an imminent threat? This administration has gone out of its' way to portray them as not being an imminent threat or anything remotely like that. All of a sudden we now learn they believe they were an imminent threat. One never knows with this bunch. They have become so adept at lying to the American public in every aspect of governance. How can we have any real faith in them now?

[TitanTiger 20,471]

I'm confused as to what the problem is here. Help me sift this out.

-- Do you think that the decision to go after ISIL in Syria is the right call?

-- What protocol do you think he violated in authorizing this action (if any)?

-- Is the main problem that you think he should have done something to ISIS/ISIL sooner? How would that have been received given that attacking ISIL by default assists Assad?

-- Does anyone feel we had the realistic option to not get involved?

What am I missing here?

As AUUSN would call it, ODS is what you are missing Titan.

What is ODS?