Massive use of chemical weapons in Syria, 1,429 killed including 426 children

[Admiral Yi]

You go to war with the Congress you have, not the one you wish you had.

[Legbiter]

On the other hand if he's at best lukewarm about beating Assad up putting this in front of Congress might be smart. If he dosen't get approval, he can say he tried. If he does get it, then he spreads responsibility for the outcome if things don't go well.

[CountDeMoney]

It's a mistake to ask this congress.  He'll give them a platform and they'll go on about Benghazi, Obamacare, and Fast and Furious.  You'll never get them to shut up.

They'll just attach an amendment to it prohibiting Federal funding of the Affordable Care Act.

[CountDeMoney]

On the other hand if he's at best lukewarm about beating Assad up putting this in front of Congress might be smart. If he dosen't get approval, he can say he tried. If he does get it, then he spreads responsibility for the outcome if things don't go well.

I don't think he's capable of such cynical political maneuvering; I honestly think he sincerely believes that if he tries long enough and hard enough, he can actually work with people who hate his fucking guts.

[Legbiter]

So when's the vote?

[Admiral Yi]

Is this a non-binding "sense of the Senate" vote, or formal WPA authorization?

[DGuller]

I think Obama is hoping that Congress weasels him out of the commitment, with a side benefit making his opposition look like traitors.

[Savonarola]

If you were a senator what would you do; vote for authorization and then claim you were lied to if things go wrong or vote against and then say "I told you so," if things go wrong?

If you want to run for president I think you have to do the latter.  No one will remember if this only lasts an hour or two, and if it does fall apart you'll be a genius.

[Tonitrus]

I think Obama is hoping that Congress weasels him out of the commitment, with a side benefit making his opposition look like traitors.

Or making it look like they're into hugging children with chemical weapons.

[Admiral Yi]

If you were a senator what would you do; vote for authorization and then claim you were lied to if things go wrong or vote against and then say "I told you so," if things go wrong?

If you want to run for president I think you have to do the latter.  No one will remember if this only lasts an hour or two, and if it does fall apart you'll be a genius.

I would vote against, on the grounds that it doesn't advance US interests, and that if gas is an international war crime the response should be international, not two guys.

[Ed Anger]

I think I owe Yi 6 quatloos.

[Admiral Yi]

I think I owe Yi 6 quatloos.

If you're imaginary hard up right now I can imaginary let it slide.

[Savonarola]

I would vote against, on the grounds that it doesn't advance US interests, and that if gas is an international war crime the response should be international, not two guys.

I said if you were a senator not a principled person; the two terms are antonyms.



(Edit: I didn't intend to make the above statement sound as though I thought Yi was unprincipled; just senators...)

[Ed Anger]

I think I owe Yi 6 quatloos.

If you're imaginary hard up right now I can imaginary let it slide.

Nah, I will pay it from my imaginary quatloos safe.

[Admiral Yi]

I said if you were a senator not a principled person; the two terms are antonyms.

If I was guided only by political calculations I would probably vote for.

As I said earlier to Grallon

(






G.)

the odds of quagmirification are zero.  International and domestic professional bitches could bitch about advancing jihadism or taking sides or whatever, but they'll bitch regardless of what we do or don't do.  I think punishing use of chemical weapons is a very easy sell on the campaign trail.