Comments

1
Obama has gone completely off the deep end into megalomania. Who knows what he's thinking? But whatever it is, it certainly can't be called "sane" by any reasonable definition.
2
His reasoning is sound.
3
Actually, the only sane position is not knowing the "right thing" to think or do. Those who have convinced themselves otherwise are out of their fucking minds.
4
If only I could believe it was as simple as he makes it. It could be, but it's much more likely that other motives that we mere citizens could never understand are driving this.
5
Isn't Andrew Sullivan the spineless scumbag who cheerleaded Bush into Iraq while calling the anti-war Left a bunch of traitors? Yeah, Obama should definitely give a shit what he says...
6
I totally agree, Rob. Which is exactly why we shouldn't be doing anything at all.
7
@5 nobody should give a shit what Sullivan says.
8
check.
drones: spiffy.
gas: not cool.
(wait, what about gassy drones?)
hey, could we just sell Assad some drones and everything would be copacetic?
9
Honestly, I think Obama is hoping that big talk will either bring Syria to the bargaining table or urge its allies (Russia) to talk him out of doing what he is doing.

Makes sense he would throw the decision to Congress in this scenario, as that guarantees that it will delay any response. I think he is hoping the clock does not run out and no one calls his bluff.

If it comes down to it though, he will stop bluffing and send in the bombers. Let's up Syria and Russia do not let it come to that, or cooler heads prevail in Congress (ha!).
11
Obama said he was against dumb wars, like Iraq. some uses of force are good, some war is good, some force isn't war, some force can be used without getting us into quagmire, upholding the law against chem weapons, helping to either destroy the assad regime capability, make it pay a price so it's less likely to kill 1500 or 5,000 or 50,000 with this poison, making it less likely others will do so, making it less likely oppo groups will get them or al quada.

before passion took us into stupid war. now it's blocking smart and proper, reasonable, justified and limited use of force.

this is weaponry that even hitler didn't use on the battlefield. if we do nothing we establish there's no real norm against it and this makes it far more likely these weapons will come into more use.

Obama is the guy we elected. let' s listen to him make his case. he's being a great liberal standout in even seeking congressional approval, too. chemical weapons ARE different and worse because if they come into common use expect millions to die and the entire effort since ww1 to go up in smoke. imagine if it becomes okay to use chemical weapons. this will be our legacy? dear grandkids, we left you higher sea levels and we ended the norm against chemical weapons.

12
International law on human rights needs to be enforced lawfully, by joining the ICC and letting crime courts do their job. We can't afford to have nations break international law, like waging war without being attacked, to enforce international law. Let's hope the US also stops opposing international agreements on the banning of cluster bombs, landmines, and other unethical weaponry (like depleted uranium ammunition).
13
Every kid knows that two wrongs don't make a right.
14
@9
"If it comes down to it though, he will stop bluffing and send in the bombers."

It's not really a bluff then, is it?
He would kill Syrians because Syrians have killed Syrians.
15
Andrew Sullivan caught AIDS on purpose and believes in the Curve Bell racial theory.
16
Agree with @8. Assad should be using drone strikes and double taps instead of gas, DUH!
17
The only thing that would work is ending all the Wars of Opportunity and investing the money wasted in the Middle East on US capital projects to build (not plan, build) solar, wind, tidal, and geothermal on a Marshall Plan scale.

Oil and coal are dead technologies. End their subsidies and market price exemptions and let the Invisible Hand solve the terrorism problem instead.
18
Shouldn't the UN-as the international body-enforce international norms?
19
@18 Yes. Let's start with the top violator of UN mandates, Israel.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.