Obama official: Syria votes are coming
September 9th, 2013
09:33 AM ET
8 months ago

Obama official: Syria votes are coming

(CNN) - A top Obama administration official says he believes that the congressional votes favoring a military strike against Syria will be there "at the end of the day." The goal of a strike would be to "deter" and "degrade" President Bashar al-Assad's "ability to use chemical weapons," Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes told CNN's "New Day."


Filed under: President Obama
soundoff (18 Responses)
  1. Data Driven

    I was saying the same thing last week, but now I'm not so sure. With 7 in 10 Americans against a unilateral strike, what's the political gain for a "Yea" vote?

    September 9, 2013 09:45 am at 9:45 am |
  2. Italmn

    President Obama will never get the votes !

    September 9, 2013 09:50 am at 9:50 am |
  3. kirk

    I see the military contractors have learned from big oil, grease both sides of the aisle, and you always get what you want

    September 9, 2013 10:02 am at 10:02 am |
  4. sonny chapman

    Country First. Here's your chance Repubs.

    September 9, 2013 10:02 am at 10:02 am |
  5. John

    Most of the American people are against an attack on Syria. At this point Obama can stop asking about Syria and start answering questions about why the U.S. goverment is spying on its "own" people through phone and the internet.

    September 9, 2013 10:08 am at 10:08 am |
  6. joe d

    the israeli feces called AIPAC has given it's orders to the anti-american pigs called congress..Americans you have been punked by the neocon israeli dirtbags once again

    September 9, 2013 10:12 am at 10:12 am |
  7. Fair is Fair

    @ Data -

    No political plus side. None at all. Tough, tough vote though. And it's really in the Senate's hand, if you think about it. If it doesn't pass the Senate, the House doesn't even have to take it up for a vote and they're off the hook. And that would be a shame. This will probably be the hardest vote the congress has to take, and the American Public deserves to see, ON RECORD, where EVERY SINGLE ONE of them stands (YEAH, that means YOU, Junior Senator from Massachusetts Markey, A.K.A. "I'll vote present").

    September 9, 2013 10:45 am at 10:45 am |
  8. Data Driven

    @Fair,

    Agreed. I would also like to see all of our representatives votes on the record. We can, and will, discuss Obama's error in judgment about "red lines" and unilateral strikes, but he has done the right thing by giving Congress at least some responsibility on Syria, rather than succumbing to the imperial urge right off the bat. Now this is what a mature democracy looks like - let's see if Congress acts like adults and put themselves on record.

    By the way, poignant post several threads down, Fair.

    September 9, 2013 10:59 am at 10:59 am |
  9. Geordie

    Over 100 000 people have died in Syria and without a doubt many of them were children , yet nothing was done !!
    Obama has been a dithering fool and not shown any leadership , hence hardly any support from other western leaders.
    Any action now would aid the rebels who are terrorists and the main goal of the Muslim Brotherhood to make Syria a Muslim state. Look what happened in Egypt.

    September 9, 2013 11:03 am at 11:03 am |
  10. ST

    @Fair is Fair
    For the first time ever am agreeing with you. What everyone has to keep an eye on is the Senate vote. These people ever since know what is important and what to do to the country. The other chamber is always there on life support. Nothing concrete they have ever done to the country. Their Approval Rating tells all, 18% (that is their lucky number)!

    September 9, 2013 11:05 am at 11:05 am |
  11. David

    The United States of America needs to stop focusing on other countries, and start to unify its own country. They spend so much time "helping" other countries, that their own country has, for lack of better words, gone down the gutter.

    September 9, 2013 11:10 am at 11:10 am |
  12. S.B. Stein

    I believe that this is required by some of the chemical weapons treaties that the country has signed onto. No country or dictator should be using weapons like this on people no matter what they do.

    I hope people see this a proxy war between the West and Iran; the Saudi and Iran; North Korea, Iran and others developing WMD and the civilized (to some extent) world just to name a few proxy fights.

    September 9, 2013 11:11 am at 11:11 am |
  13. Rudy NYC

    "I have a really bad feeling about this."

    September 9, 2013 11:12 am at 11:12 am |
  14. 82ndABNVET

    I actually would like to see both the Senate and House vote on this. That way thier votes can be on the record.

    If we do strike Syria, and it erupts into a much larger conflict (ie, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, etc) we can hold those accountable for thier support of a "limited strike". Then, the voters can have thier say at the polls in November.

    If you are not going to gain some sort of military victory, why even do it? Why waste expensive weapons when your end game is just more of the same?

    I say if your going to do it, go big or go home. Level it. Who cares? But if all your going to do is kick Asad in the sac..........and then leave...........what does that prove to anyone?

    September 9, 2013 11:15 am at 11:15 am |
  15. Lynda/Minnesota

    Let them have their votes. In the long run it isn't going to matter which way they vote.

    September 9, 2013 11:26 am at 11:26 am |
  16. Rudy NYC

    82ndABNVET

    I actually would like to see both the Senate and House vote on this. That way thier votes can be on the record.

    If we do strike Syria, and it erupts into a much larger conflict (ie, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, etc) we can hold those accountable for thier support of a "limited strike". Then, the voters can have thier say at the polls in November.
    -----------------
    Survival. That's probably exactly why so many members will vote against action, but they just won't come out and say so.

    September 9, 2013 11:27 am at 11:27 am |
  17. Winston Smith

    Where is the money coming from to do this? If we have funds for this, we'd better have funds to keep the Social Security Administration solvent, and in the black.

    September 9, 2013 11:29 am at 11:29 am |
  18. Deb in MT

    And, in breaking news: Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has promised that Russia–Assad's big backer in the region–will pressure Assad to gather his chemical arsenal and put it under international control. Sounds like there might be a non-combat way out of this mess after all.

    Could President Obama and SOS Kerry have had this in mind when Kerry made his statement? Were they working out some back channel deal? I don't know, but it suddenly seems like Assad needs to consider this option seriously, when his biggest buddy is also backing it. Good old political pressure could save us yet...

    September 9, 2013 11:36 am at 11:36 am |