Boehner: 'I'm Going to Support the President's Call for Action' in Syria

[cthulu2016]

The Republicans will mostly vote in Favor.

For a Republican, there is little political upside to opposition and a terrible potential political downside to opposition.

To most (not all, but most) Republicans this whole war business is a distraction from their real work of shutting down the government, strangling the economy and defaulting on the debt.

Boehner: 'I'm Going to Support the President's Call for Action' in Syria

"The use of these weapons has to be responded to and only the United States has the capability and capacity to stop Assad and to warn others around the world that this type of behavior is not going to be tolerated," said Boehner after meeting with Obama. "I appreciate the president reaching out to me and my colleagues in the Congress over the last couple of weeks. I also appreciate the president asking the Congress to support him in this action. This is something that the United States as a country needs to do. I'm going to support the president's call for action. I believe my colleagues should support this call for action. We have enemies around the world that need to understand that we're not going to tolerate this type of behavior. We also have allies around the world and allies in the region who also need to know that America will be there and stand up whether it is necessary."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/boehner-im-going-support-presidents-call-action-syria_752675.html

[jsr]

1. It'll pass. Obama will have his own brand new war.

[NickB79]

17. And if anything goes wrong, the GOP will scream bloody murder

A single US soldier or seaman gets so much as a callus, and the GOP will turn it into another Bengazi all over again.

And even if it goes perfectly, be prepared to hear bitching about how many millions were wasted on these strikes, how the President is wasting taxpayer's money, etc, etc.

Politically, Obama has really, really painted himself into a corner here.

[truebrit71]

2. He almost choked on his own bile as he said it though...

...

[eissa]

3. Just ridiculous

They have obstructed EVERYTHING this President has ever proposed, to the detriment of this country. They have blocked measures that would benefit average Americans, have threatened to shut down the government, and have made it their mission to oppose every legislation he advocates. But war? That they'll always support. So disgusted right now.

[alcibiades_mystery]

4. The AUMF will pass with a huge super-majority, as these things invariably do

When the roll call is examined, many people here will be shocked that their Senator and/or Rep voted for the AUMF - Warren, Sanders, Leahy, etc., etc., etc.

There will not be a "war," at least in the sense of Iraq or Afghanistan. There will be small-scale missile strikes, which will be forgotten by this time next year.

The whole thing is a farce.

[cthulu2016]

5. George McGovern voted for the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution

These things generally get support.

[alcibiades_mystery]

8. Indeed

Much to our detriment. The general tenor of American militarism makes it very difficult for Congresspersons to resist such resolutions.

[SidDithers]

12. Well said...

but that won't stop the hair-on-fire brigade from gnashing and wailing and declaring it to be THE WORST THING EVER!!, and THE FINAL STRAW!!.

And most people outside of the DU uber-bubble, will calmly go about their lives, not really giving a fuck.

Sid

[Frustratedlady]

6. I sense cheering behind the curtain.

Sorry, I don't trust Boehner OR his crew. They see a bad outcome for Obama.

[cthulu2016]

7. Probably so.

[SamKnause]

9. Support

Those who control the U.S. government can always rely on bipartisanship when it comes to warmongering and empire building.

A big fat F-U goes out to all the citizens of the U.S. who do not want any part of the warmongering.

The anti war majority will be ignored.

War is always the number one priority of those who control the U.S. government.

Sickening, absolutely sickening, disgusting and heartbreaking !!!!!

[markiv]

10. 'His Master's (MIC) Voice

caught a couple of minutes of 'Meet the Press' on Sunday. A panel, including Bill Kristol, all saying we nee to intervene. Then they break to a commercial, General Dynamics, with fighter jets in the sky. Know any ordinary consumers in the market for a fighter jet? So the sponsor of that program and panel discussion is general dynamics....hmmmm, do you suppose THEY have an opinion on this? What do you $uppo$e that opinion might be motivated by?

Made me sick. How can anyone NOT see that for what it is

[woo me with science]

11. What a shock!

[font size=3]

In the US, there is basically one party - the business party. It has two factions, called Democrats and Republicans, which are somewhat different but carry out variations on the same policies. By and large, I am opposed to those policies. As is most of the population.

Noam Chomsky

[/font size]

[LukeFL]

13. How can you guys not be torned

Of the deaths of those children??

Have democrats/ progressives become like republicans only thinking about themselves?

[TheKentuckian]

16. How can you guys only care about atrocities when the next leg of the Crusades is being promoted?

It is heart string pulling bullshit.

You folks don't care about slaughter, goes on every fucking day. It isn't that. Resource poor African countries can't go full on genocide and there is not sack cloth and ashes campaign.

You don't care about compliance with international norms because no pressure is being applied to sign off on the ban of land mines, even accounting for our great technological superiority and no realistic threat of war in our country.

Like minds clearly have no serious agenda about holding war criminals to account, the biggest cheerleaders for a new war happen to also be the same folks most understanding and supportive of "looking forward not backward" in regards to our own. So, that isn't an overriding concern.

Maybe it is the raw number of deaths caused by the war criminals in question? No, the piles of corpses and cultural destruction caused by those we "looked forward" on are fucking staggering.

Okay, so maybe it is the nature of the deaths caused. What's that no hell to catch for the use of depleted uranium or white phosphorous. No war crimes for the use of Agent Orange and napalm?

It isn't about moral consistency. If Russia or China off hundreds of thousands or even millions we will not be going in guns blazing.

It is about the sacred nature of these treaties. We have actively defended and essentially defended the use in the past when wiping and dangling to prop up Saddam. So it isn't really about the letter of the law nor obviously the spirit when can say something "isn't on the list" from atop our high horse even if the mass destruction capability is far higher (no one else has ever nuked population centers for crying out loud).

Unique love for the Syrian people. Nope, been fine with them going to the grave in droves nor is much concern expressed for those that would be collateral damage in our effort nor is their much if any hand wring about the promised ethnic cleansing and exile promised by "the good guys" as long as the usage of gas is "punished".

So why the twisted undies and high emotionalism here but not in other equally or even more obvious scenarios?
How do we have a blind eye for our own house but somehow are the champions of justice so much that even if the world sits idle that we must act?
FUCKING BULLSHIT IS WHY. This is just the next scheduled leg of the New Crusades, big and bright near the top of the PNAC wish list and folks are being herded into place as usual.

[Catherina]

14. The GOP leaders finally rally behind Obama. Not on foodstamps or jobs- can't afford those

Hate to point out the obvious to them but their constituents will savage them for it and the next round will go to the Tea-baggers.

[Erose999]

15. They left out the part where he ran into the door, fell over, and pissed himself.

He then threw up on the Fox correspondents shoes before Capitol police dragged him off to the drunk tank.

[Jefferson23]

18. Punishment and deterence, is that covered under international law?

I can't wait to hear the OLC legal case for this if Obama gets enough yes votes.