Syrian civil war in photos
September 3rd, 2013
07:11 AM ET
8 months ago

Obama administration presses for support on Syria strikes

(CNN) – The Obama administration will spend this week trying to persuade lawmakers at home and allies abroad that an attack on Syria is the appropriate response to the alleged use of poison gas by the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.

The White House's push comes after al-Assad once again raised the specter of an all-out regional war if the United States strikes.

FULL STORY

Filed under: Congress • President Obama • Syria
soundoff (26 Responses)
  1. Gurgyl

    Nothing to worry–just wait till congress on 9th Sept.

    September 3, 2013 07:21 am at 7:21 am |
  2. smith

    WOW, deja-vu Iraq. Where`s code pink? Where`s all the liberals who thought the arab spring was so great? Come on liberals why aren`t you calling Obama a war monger or chicken hawk? Obama should have never commented on Syria, now he`s stuck in a bind. Be smart Mr. POTUS, turn your back and walk away from this conflict.

    September 3, 2013 08:08 am at 8:08 am |
  3. Rudy NYC

    What's the rush? We're still not sure who is actually responsible. Yeah, let the Congress take their authorization vote, which has the fringe benefit of silencing the critics who say that the U.S. is telegraphing its' response. Those critics are the war mongers, anyway. Most of them are anxious to know why we haven't gone in already?

    Besides, who appointed the United States to be the vigilante state of the world? Take it up at in the U.N. and in the World Court. Has the Arab League condemned or condoned the gas attacks?

    September 3, 2013 08:23 am at 8:23 am |
  4. Southeast

    So stupid,whether your on the right or left , we are all in it together

    September 3, 2013 08:26 am at 8:26 am |
  5. Rudy NYC

    smith

    WOW, deja-vu Iraq. Where`s code pink? Where`s all the liberals who thought the arab spring was so great? Come on liberals why aren`t you calling Obama a war monger or chicken hawk? Obama should have never commented on Syria, now he`s stuck in a bind. Be smart Mr. POTUS, turn your back and walk away from this conflict.
    ----------------
    Pres. Obama commented on Syria to silence the war monger critics at home. They wanted to know why the administration hadn't ordered strikes, and demanded to know what the policy towards Syria is supposed to be. And so, he told them in order to shut them up. Now they're back at it again. Demanding military action on the one side, while demanding Congressional authorization on another side, all the while criticizing the administration for telegraphing its' response.

    The war mongers have also chosen to ignore the Russians, who by the way, are most upset about the missle test that the Israelis pulled off early this morning. A jet over the Mediterranean fired a missle, which was shot down by a ground based missle.

    September 3, 2013 08:27 am at 8:27 am |
  6. Richard Long

    Obama put his foot in his mouth... now all of us have to pay for his mistake.

    How come they stopped reporting that the 'rebels' allied themselves with al-Qaeda?

    Why is the UN not doing their 'job' and intervening?

    September 3, 2013 08:30 am at 8:30 am |
  7. Dominican mama 4 Obama

    You know, I couldn't help but wonder, when I heard that the President was going to let Congress vote on whether or not we sanctioned Syria with any type of military action, if the President was being his usual masterful self.
    Let's face it, any 6 year-old would know by now that if THIS President said "Let's go left" Congress would go right.
    If he said " I want to..." Congress would say "We don't", and so on.
    So, bearing in mind the fact that the President knows that we're war-weary, and tired of minding other people's business better than we mind our own, I wonder if he knows that Congress is going to shoot this down.
    I wouldn't doubt it.
    Everyone would come out a winner, at least here at home.
    The people would get their wish, Congress would once again obstruct something they think the President would like to accomplish, and the President voiced his wish to do the morally correct thing but was kept from so doing by the usual suspects in Congress.
    I'm just ruminating here...and hoping that Congress holds true to form.

    September 3, 2013 08:34 am at 8:34 am |
  8. Fair is Fair

    Nothing good comes out of this no matter the decision. What a mess.

    September 3, 2013 08:47 am at 8:47 am |
  9. tom l.

    @Dominican
    "Congress would once again obstruct something they think the President would like to accomplish"

    And just what would the president "accomplish" here? What would the goal be? I find it amazing how much you worship President Obama. The man can do no wrong according to you.

    September 3, 2013 08:52 am at 8:52 am |
  10. ST

    By going through the comments here, I found people have a little knowledge of the whole issue. And it has to remain so because we want to succeed in the whole mission. Can you ask yourself a question : why we were not informed that time of taking bin Laden out? And if we were informed before, don't you think the discussion of who agree and don't could had a difference of what we are having now? Folks, trust this man, Pres. Obama. He is a very thoughtful man who knows what he is doing for the benefit of all people. Let all keeping our fingers crossed, we will all come to thank him later for his braveness.

    September 3, 2013 08:58 am at 8:58 am |
  11. Dominican mama 4 Obama

    @ tom l.
    I find it amazing how much you worship President Obama. The man can do no wrong according to you.
    -------------------------------------------------
    I see your reading comprehension is still on the fritz tom l.
    I find it amazing how much you detest President Obama. The man can do nothing right according to you.
    FIFY.

    September 3, 2013 08:59 am at 8:59 am |
  12. Lynda/Minnesota

    Dominican mama: If he said " I want to..." Congress would say "We don't", and so on.

    I had this same conversation with my husband yesterday!

    I also want to let you know that I tried to respond to your comment last Friday in hopes of letting you know I was as always proud of your response. There were a couple of your responses that really stood out.

    September 3, 2013 09:00 am at 9:00 am |
  13. Rudy NYC

    Fair is Fair

    Nothing good comes out of this no matter the decision. What a mess.
    ----------------
    Agreed. It's time to take the path of least resistance, the lesser of the two evils. The problem is figuring out where that path lies, and what's at the end of it.

    September 3, 2013 09:06 am at 9:06 am |
  14. Rudy NYC

    ST

    By going through the comments here, I found people have a little knowledge of the whole issue. And it has to remain so because we want to succeed in the whole mission. ... ... ...
    -------------
    Do you have any idea how irrational that "we want to succed in the whole mission" part sounds? If we are supposed to remain in the dark about the actual facts, then how on earth can you know what "the whole mission" actually is? What's even worse is the fact that your entire argument is based upon the assumption that a military strike with no actual facts is the proper course of action.

    September 3, 2013 09:12 am at 9:12 am |
  15. Dominican mama 4 Obama

    Lynda/Minnesota

    Dominican mama: If he said " I want to..." Congress would say "We don't", and so on.

    I had this same conversation with my husband yesterday!
    -------------------------------------------------
    Glad to know that I'm not the only one my friend!
    I beg to differ with Rudy who concurs with one of the usual suspect that nothing good comes out of this.In the scenario that I described I would say that maybe not all parties will come out winners but some certainly will. Those that do not want to see the expense of any type of militay strike. Those that hope that our representatives will listen to the wishes of the people and keep us out of an involvement. Our military. Those that are tired of having people around the world hate us even when our presence is there to aid them.. Congress for foiling the President's wishes...again. The people for having Congress finally represent them.
    Thanks for your suppport Lynda...but aren't you supposed to be on vaca?! Lol!

    September 3, 2013 09:19 am at 9:19 am |
  16. Malory Archer

    smith

    WOW, deja-vu Iraq. Where`s code pink? Where`s all the liberals who thought the arab spring was so great? Come on liberals why aren`t you calling Obama a war monger or chicken hawk?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Because unlike the previous occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue who believed he was above the law and and if we weren't with him we were "with the terrists", the Obama administration will spend this week trying to persuade lawmakers at home and allies abroad that an attack on Syria is the appropriate response to the alleged use of poison gas by the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.

    September 3, 2013 09:20 am at 9:20 am |
  17. onlyfacts

    All you narrow minded Obama haters think it is all so simple. It was well known by all that al-Assad was capable of using chemical weapons. An ultimatum is a typical military tactic used to try to wake up an enemy to the consequences of using these chemical weapons. We all know now this tactic didn't work and al-Assad has proven to be off the charts crazy. Not one of us average citizens have a clue to the complexity of this matter. Making comments based on your Fox "news" leaders opinion is only comical. And if you believe the GOP is going to agree with Obama on any decision then you are living in a fantasy world.

    September 3, 2013 09:25 am at 9:25 am |
  18. Data Driven

    Again I ask: why is Obama bothering? U.S. credibility? If so, he need not worry - we have none, anyway. Disagree? Then why is he going around begging Congress and allies to support this action?

    September 3, 2013 09:29 am at 9:29 am |
  19. tom l.

    @Dominican,
    You use the word "detest" as if it's some sort of personal vendetta I have against him. It's his decisions that bother me. It's his politics that bother me. That is what I dislike. In this case, he has basically put our country in a no-win situation, and it was all his own doing. He is the one that drew a red-line...whatever that is supposed to mean. In this case, I would think you would recognize how we have zero support from around the world (not even Great Britain is with us on this), yet he clearly wants to go and do something. The left was hyperactive when Bush wanted to go to war (and at least he had a large coalition who agreed with him) yet Obama has no other country in support of action (except France) and he is still pushing to go in. It just seems odd that you wouldn't call him out on this obvious fumble. And what is also painfully obvious, yet completely ignored, is that Obama has clearly not improved our standing in the world. In fact, we are even less like now than we were when Obama was elected 5 years ago. And you are just too blinded by your infatuation with our president to see it.

    September 3, 2013 09:30 am at 9:30 am |
  20. ST

    @ Rudy NYC
    I beg to remain silence and hope it will serve the purpose.

    September 3, 2013 09:37 am at 9:37 am |
  21. Rudy NYC

    DM4O wrote:

    Glad to know that I'm not the only one my friend!
    I beg to differ with Rudy who concurs with one of the usual suspect that nothing good comes out of this.In the scenario that I described I would say that maybe not all parties will come out winners but some certainly will. ... ...
    ------------------
    I don't see any paths that lead to anyone being a winner, except for those who wish to see large scale death and destruction. They will certainly get their wishes, whether the U.S. involves itself or not.

    Besides, why does the U.S. *have* to intervene in Syria, anyway? I think worrying about honor abroad is nothing to worry about because most of America's biggest foreign policy achievements have come at the cost of opponents who had underestimated America. What's the rush to do something *right now*?

    September 3, 2013 09:38 am at 9:38 am |
  22. Rudy NYC

    tom l.

    @Dominican,
    You use the word "detest" as if it's some sort of personal vendetta I have against him. It's his decisions that bother me. It's his politics that bother me. That is what I dislike. In this case, he has basically put our country in a no-win situation, and it was all his own doing. He is the one that drew a red-line...whatever that is supposed to mean. In this case,
    -------------------–
    Pres. Obama drew the red line at the provocation of war mongering critics at home. Besides, what's done is done. You're saying the president made the wrong choice. So tell us what was the correct actions that he should have taken. If you can't tell us then I suggest that you stop whining over spilled milk, which is really all that you're doing.

    September 3, 2013 09:41 am at 9:41 am |
  23. Data Driven

    @tom l,

    "The left was hyperactive when Bush wanted to go to war"

    Cuidado. You're conflating the "left" with Obama supporters. Those two camps are aligned about 40% of the time.

    September 3, 2013 09:42 am at 9:42 am |
  24. Lynda/Minnesota

    "Thanks for your suppport Lynda...but aren't you supposed to be on vaca?! Lol!"

    Vacation was cut short ... my husband was called back to work for a work related emergency. I had us all packed and ready to go Monday afternoon, said my farewell to you, traveled 100 hundred miles, unpacked and spent the evening sweeping the bugs out of (and off) of our cabin. By Wednesday morning we were back home. I would have stayed, but the heat was unbearable causing the grandchildren to snip at one another (and themselves). I dropped them off at their homes, unpacked, and called it a day.

    September 3, 2013 09:48 am at 9:48 am |
  25. Dominican mama 4 Obama

    Besides, why does the U.S. *have* to intervene in Syria, anyway? I think worrying about honor abroad is nothing to worry about because most of America's biggest foreign policy achievements have come at the cost of opponents who had underestimated America
    -------------------------------------------------
    Maybe I'm mis-reading your post Rudy, but it sounds as if we're in agreement.
    I too say why intervene in this situation. I too am quite willing to turn a blind eye on intervening based on "honor".
    Therefore if we don't intervene that would make those that think like me, and you, "winners"...of sorts.
    In so far as carnage, that's going to be inevitable for the Syrian people whether we go in or not. I am hoping to keep the possibility of any carnage, and or retaliation for our side down to a minimum by again hoping that we NOT intervene,

    September 3, 2013 09:53 am at 9:53 am |
1 2