I have to admit, especially with the new possibility of a deal with Russia to get rid of Syria's weapons, I have no idea exactly what the President is going to say. However I know that I would not miss it for the world, because everything about this feels historically important.
I will provide the video once it becomes available, but until then you can view the address as it happens by clicking here.
Update: Here is the video.
I love my Prez. We're both Chicagoans. Glenview specifically. Give em hell Barry. Don't take any shit.
ReplyDeleteI notice we never talk about our use of chemical weaponry during Vietnam.
ReplyDeleteOur hands are certainly not clean in this area.
Vietnam? Hello, First Gulf War we used chemical weapons.
DeleteWhite phosphorus can cause injuries and death in three ways: by burning deep into tissue, by being inhaled as a smoke, and by being ingested. Extensive exposure by burning and ingestion is fatal.
DeleteLast week LOD had a piece on how Ronald Reagan sold chemical weapons to Iraq.
Deletehttp://tv.msnbc.com/2013/09/05/odonnell-reagan-let-saddam-buy-and-use-chemical-weapons/
powder produced during impact and combustion of depleted uranium munitions can potentially contaminate wide areas around the impact sites, leading to possible inhalation by human beings.
Delete133 states are signatories to the Landmine Ban, hope none of them decide they are the world's policeman and decide to bomb us.
Delete5:07 PM -- Do you remember Vietnam? This has been going on for YEARS.
DeleteAgent Orange caused thousands of cancer cases with OUR troops being exposed to it. We don't have a count of the NVA and Vietcong that died from it. Our government denied its use for two decades, and then it was another 10 years later that we found out that Monsanto & Dow knew that it was carcinogenic. Profits were more important than the lives of our troops or the "enemy". White phosphorous and napalm sprayed directly in areas without troops (as a defoliant) caused horrible burns because the napalm "stuck" and just burned flesh and bone.
DeleteYes, we sold arms to Saddam in Iraq (and provided "aid") while he was at war with Iran. Of course, that was after propping up the Shah from 1954 until he was ousted by the Mullahs in Iran, notably Ayatolla Khomeni. Then we turn around and arrange for ISRAEL to sell our arms to IRAN (at $100M profit) to get our hostages back. Of course then the Reagan/Bush admin went around Congress and funded the guerrilla "freedom fighters" in Central America. And the shit has been rolling downhill ever since. Lots more atrocities and govts were overturned from 1953 up to this past spring by our CIA. Some of what they do is for national security, but the money always lands in the 1%'s lap. Much of what they do is mischievous and meddlesome, but it is always the "lucky few" that end up with profits and contracts and We the People end up paying the tab. Same old shit as WW2.
What if they gave a war and nobody came?
DeleteI have a little dispute with the IRS right now and I swear, if we end up spending more tax dollars on war with Syria I will just let them put a lien on my house as I'm not going to pay for another war effort in the middle east.
ReplyDeleteIs that you, Sarah?
DeleteGood Luck with that little dispute!
DeletePresident Obama says Assad's use of chemical weapons will make it easier for terrorists to obtain chemical weapons. HOW?
ReplyDeleteBecause they will have an anti American country to buy them from? To target us from? To take commercial flights with chemicals from?
DeleteTo: Anonymous5:07 PM
DeleteHow old are you? 3rd grade?
NO boots on the ground. But that does NOT necessarily mean no American casualties.
ReplyDeletePlanes do get shot down occasionally.
I cannot help but wonder if this is a not an address directed at Syria to let them know we are serious and hopefully push them to hurry up and make that deal with Russia.
ReplyDeleteI was wondering that myself.
DeleteI think you are absolutely right.
DeleteThat's the only reason I can see for laying out his case in one breath and then postponing the vote in the next.
DeleteNo, he probably doesn't have the votes yet anyway, but this could very well be for purposes of putting more pressure on Assad.
WTF is this going? He rattles his saber and absent that he's saying he's going to bomb?
ReplyDeleteYeah, you're lost all right. Loon.
DeleteThe President has just admitted that he talked to Putin and encouraged him to make that offer to Syria.
ReplyDeleteHah, I knew it!
he stated that they discussed this for 20 minutes at the summit. This was not a surprise.
DeleteWELL WHEN PUTIN REARS HIS HEAD, TIME FOR SARAH TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE. HEH BITCH DID YOU SEE THE PREZ IN RUSSIA TALKING TO PUTIN?
DeleteYOU DIPSHIT
Keeping the military on alert in case diplomacy fails.
ReplyDeleteYep that is definitely pressure to keep Assad focused on taking Russia's offer.
We are supposed to believe there is proof that it was Assad even though President Obama doesn't intend to show us the proof. Same deal that got us into Iraq.
ReplyDeleteIf it were the rebels, you would have seen the waeapons used more by now. It's clear 1300 people died. How much proof do you want?
DeleteI would suggest you look at non-American news sources and you'll find plenty of proof.
DeleteI bet Colin Powell wishes he'd demanded real proof before he blundered through his weapons of mass destruction speech to the UN.
DeletePutting Assad on notice in front of the world. It's not a goodwill gesture. We don't want a war and we can't pay for it right now. Also letting the countries who are permanent members of the UN Security Council know what to expect, come hell or high water. Putin doesn't want to get into a clash with US. A lot of posturing is being done so no one loses face, but if this deal goes down, Obama wins this round without firing a shot or losing any troops or assets. And the region is less volatile and has more order and more awareness of what Syria was up to. Win win for everybody but Dyria, but they dodged the missle strikes, and we saved our cash, military assets, troops, and the cost of Aid to help rebuild their infrastructure.
Delete@5:18 PM:
DeleteThis is nothing like Iraq, because Barack Obama isn't trying to falsify evidence, like the Bush administration did. Unlike George Bush, President Obama said that he is going to wait for the report from the U.N.
What more do you want?
How would anyone think he wouldn't have?
ReplyDeleteShort and to the point. It did not seem that the President tried terribly hared to make the case for war.
ReplyDeleteNow here come the political pundits to try and read between the lines.
Personally I think the President is going through the motions because he has confidence that the deal with Russia is going to happen.
Just my opinion.
I hope you're right Gryphen.
DeleteDid you catch the smoke coming out of Chis Matthew's nostrils? lol I wouldn't want him as my partner at poker!
DeleteMeh. Why'd he even bother talking to us, the inhabitants of this country? He and Congress will do whatever they want to do.
ReplyDelete"Second verse, same as the first." -- Herman's Hermits
DeleteYou're right. It's ALL of them.
I think he bothered to speak to us because he remains optimistic there are some Americans left who understand the complexity of the entangled and shifting relationships of politics, morality and law involved in enforcing international norms with a combination of approaches.
DeleteThank you, Ailsa!
DeleteHe also spoke to anyone else in the world who is prepared to listen that he is trying to undo some of the damage done by the neocons.
Anon at 5:26 pm. That was George W. Bush who did whatever he and his cronies wanted. This president is different. He takes his job and his Constitutional duties seriously. Remember that for George W. Bush the Constitution was just a "piece of paper." No conservatives ever attacked him for that attitude.
DeleteBeaglemom
@5:26 PM:
Delete"He's going to do whatever he wants to do, anyway."
Spare me.
Barack Obama is not George W. Bush. When did George W. Bush ever try diplomacy? President Obama is not trying to rush the country into a war with Syria. If Barack Obama really wanted to attack Syria without congressional approval, he would have done it by now, like he did with Libya. Congress will vote against it anyway, and he probably knows that. He gave this address to keep pressure on Russia, and Syria.
President Obama just stole all the big donors from the Republicans.
ReplyDeleteDefense Contractors are writing checks to Hillary as we speak.
IMO, there is nothing to add to what was said. It was direct and clean, and there's nothing to read between the lines, although yes, the old pundits will pick it apart and try to read something that isn't there.
ReplyDeleteI am relieved. Relieved that the speculation and war drums has toned down. Now, it's up to the GOP and right-leaning talkers to decide if they're going to quit picking a fight with everything this President does.
Just checked with CNN and sure enough, Newt starts picking on the fact that POTUS went ahead with a speech tonight. He thought it was unnecessary.............I'm trying to imagine what the barkers over at Fox are raging on about.
How easy is it to target weapons depots without actually hitting the chemical cartridges and causing chemical leakage? What exactly would a target target?
ReplyDeleteFirst you would target the delivery systems. Then you would go after storage favilities.
DeleteI watched on MSNBC. It doesn't seem like the Chrises...Matthews and Hayes...listened to what the President said. They're trying hard to ignore the amazing events of today which include Assad admitting to having chemical weapons. Rachel is doing a great job bringing all back to point.
ReplyDeleteUp until today, I've been very opposed to possible U.S. military intervention. I'm in awe of Assad's admission, knowing that it's only Pres. Obama's resolve that brought this about. The speech have changed my mind...at least, for now. I'm so relieved that Pres. Obama is our Commander-in-Chief.
I agree on all points.
DeleteOnly Rachel appeared to be really listening. It seems that many people are so busy thinking about the not-so-clever things they want to say that they are incapable of hearing, never mind processing, what the POTUS said.
I just saw it and said the same thing. Chris Matthews seems SHOCKED that Putin knew Syria has chemical weapons. Yo, Chris, guess who sold them to Syria!
DeleteRussia and our ally, Great Britain sold them to Assad.
DeleteI think that both Chris Matthews and Chris Hayes have ADD. They both always bounce around and never really listen to what their guests have to say. Sometimes I like them a lot but their blithering inattention gets to me.
DeleteBeaglemom
I've always watched MSNBC but have turned them off. Lawrence McD was horrible w/Wiener, Chris Matthews doesn't listen to people he has on his show (talks over them) and Chris Hayes has gotten pompous and doesn't listen either. The latter two seem to be far more interested in what they have prepared to say and the hell w/anyone else!
DeleteRachel Maddow appears now to be going after President Obama (almost like the Republicans) and that bothers me too.
Their ratings have dropped and they all seem far more aggressive than they use to be. MSNBC has changed!
It's been 45 minutes and nothing from the Wasilla Village Idiot.. Mansour fingers must be typing away on MS Word somewhere..
ReplyDeleteI think Congress was going to vote no, so Obama "delayed" the vote.
ReplyDeleteIt really doesn't matter if congress votes NO, anyway. President Obama still has the power to order limited strikes against Syria without congressional approval. That's how he did it in Libya. It's just that in this particular situation, President Obama would rather do it with congress's approval.
DeleteThe only people bitching about the vote being delayed are assholes who want President Obama to be embarrassed on the global stage, and to lose his leverage against Russia, and Syria.
This, from Politicus says it for me -
ReplyDeleteThis speech was framed by the media as Barack Obama trying to sell the public on war, but what he really was doing was keeping the pressure on Syria while pushing forward on his diplomatic objective. The media questioned whether Obama could walk the line between discussing a military strike and diplomacy. The president did both with relative ease.
The reason why the president was able to make this argument is because he isn’t arguing for war. This isn’t about whether Obama convinced the American people. This is about Obama convincing Assad that his best course is to embrace the diplomatic solution.
The president laid the groundwork for a justification for military strikes, but he clearly explained the limits of such strikes. He also made the case for international intervention, but mostly, this speech was guided by the president’s desire for a diplomatic solution. It was a brilliant balancing act.
http://www.politicususa.com/2013/09/10/obama-walks-line-delivers-masterful-speech-syria.html
The question I have is why do so many people who voted for Obama underestimate him?
A week ago there didn't seem to be any way this could turn out to be anything but a disaster for the President. However, as always, there were things going on behind the scenes that none of us knew about, like the subject of his discussions with Putin.
DeleteI am so very glad that this very, very smart man is in the White House!
I am so torn on this. I am war weary, one of our sons had 8 deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan. But, what if they decide to use their access to chemical weapons here? Over NY? LA? New Orleans?
ReplyDeleteI am torn, would I feel differently if we hadn't been in 2 wars we shouldn't have been in for the last 12 yrs?
Not sure, hoping the "big stick" of Prez Obama gets Assad to back down.
Ateopine is cheap. Qe should be getting it handed out to us at school work , corners, door to door campaigns. Take away the threat.
DeleteThe President is playing chess while everyone else is playing checkers.
ReplyDelete"That's what makes America exceptional. With humility..."
ReplyDeleteWha?!?
American exceptionalism is a myth at best. Anyone who travels internationally knows that. Pandering, IMO.
That said, I also believe Obama threw the ball to the lame-fucking-est congress ever in order to allow other channels of resolution to come to fruition. Very wise, on many levels.
the jedi master at work!
DeleteHe gave a well thought out, measured and factual speech which gives him more time for diplomacy and for cooler heads to prevail.
ReplyDeleteCongress will have enough to
It's impressive Syria admitted they had WMD's before Sarah Palin could admit she faked Trig's birth.
ReplyDeleteShe needs to have a 20 minute talk with PUTIN and she'll be squealing like a pig about poor Trig's birth certificate.
Deletewhich by the way ...........
WHERE IS IT SARAH AND TODD or BRISTOL can you pull it out for us?
He did well. He gave a measured speech while biding time for diplomacy and cooler heads to prevail and hopefully a non military solution. There's no way Congress will push this, they'll keep doing what they've done all along. Defund Obamacare, Benghazi, etc etc etc.
ReplyDeleteI just found a use for Sarah Palin: comic relief. We sure can use it this week.
ReplyDeleteOT
ReplyDeleteSarah has over 3 million "fans" on facebook, but her recent video has only 91,000 views on Youtube.
Hmmmm
Stick a fork in her, she's done.
We should bomb the manufacturers and the sellers of chemical weapons. If bombs are such a great idea for teaching Syria to not use chemical weapons, then it would really do a bang up job at teaching the producers.
ReplyDeleteDo we really want to damage Assad's forces to the point where he loses control of his chemical weapons? Do we want the rebels to have the chemical weapons?
ReplyDeleteThis president has not been party to the use of any chemical weapons and yes, America is not clean, but his government is.
ReplyDeletePresident Obama put the breaks on. Why are you mad?
ReplyDeletePresident Obama said "If fighting spills beyond Syria’s borders, these weapons could threaten allies like Turkey, Jordan and Israel." as an argument for a non-pinprick attack. The "spills" event seems distant enough that it is not a good argument.
ReplyDeleteMillions of refugees have already fled to Turkey and Jordan, putting a heavy burden on those countries. One refugee camp in Jordan has a population of 150,000. It's at the crisis point, and the possibility of fighting spilling into those countries is likely, and sooner rather than later.
ReplyDelete