Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumAvoiding Congress Because Isolationists May Block Attack on Syria ?
Todd added that, as long as action against Syria is relatively quick, the administration believes that they will be legally protected from claims that they violated the War Powers Act.
Todd added that a vote to intervene in Syria may not pass because "isolationists" in both the Democratic and Republican parties would attempt to block a resolution authorizing the use of force.
"Oh, by the way, it would delay any potential action," Todd added. "If you believe you've got to do this in a certain period of time to save lives because you're trying to make sure he doesn't use chemical weapons again, then you're sort of defeating the purpose of the quick action."
Laelth
(32,017 posts)Is that what I am hearing? Really?
I am beyond disappointed.
-Laelth
Civilization2
(649 posts)Much as I would like to stop the bloodshed,. bombing does not seem like an answer to anyone,. except the corporate-military and the mercenary contractors they employ.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Puppet jump UP!
Puppet jump DOWN!
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)in any meaningful way resemble the republic established under its constitution?
bloomington-lib
(946 posts)I'm betting this will have the exact opposite outcome.
AsahinaKimi
(20,776 posts)Correct me if I am wrong, but did not George W. Bush say roughly the same thing once?
blackspade
(10,056 posts)That is what I find really creepy here. Different President, but same language like "the President hasn't yet decided to attack".
blackspade
(10,056 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)drynberg
(1,648 posts)Just look at Rummy when we invaded IRAQ...y'know, quick in and out, and we'll even make money on the deal...yeah, right. What a crock they're trying to pedal. Don't buy it for a second.