Does anyone here really think that President Obama would have submitted the Syria

[HardTimes99]

matter to Congress for a vote if public opinion had shown a 90% approval rating for a military strike?

I'm in favor of the Executive Branch seeking Legislative Branch approval for any use of military force (other than actual or imminent attack), but giving Obama credit for doing "the right thing" when public opinion was overwhelmingly against him seems to me a bit expedient.

I can admire his political prowess in inoculating himself from the consequences of a (potentially) bad decision by submitting the matter to Congress but I don't see this move as any evidence of Obama's devotion to separation of powers or balance of powers doctrine. In my opinion, had public opinion been overwhelmingly in favor of attacking Syria, the attacks would have already happened, Congress be damned.

[rug]

1. No.

[JaneyVee]

2. Yup. I was 100% sure he would seek congressional approval.

[randome]

3. A Democracy does not function based on majority rule.

Obama has sworn to do what he thinks is best. That doesn't mean he never plays politics. After all, he is a politician. But give credit where credit is due. He is under no obligation to make decisions according to polls.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Bluenorthwest]

15. And yet we have 3 co-equal branches of government not just the one in the big house.

He has actually sworn to uphold and to defend the Constitution of the United States which says he needs to consult with Congress, which he is doing. He has not sworn to do what he thinks best, he's sworn to defend and uphold the Constitution. I bet you knew that.

[randome]

25. Everyone has a different interpretation of what that means.

'Defend the Constitution' can also mean declaring war when necessary.

Congress gave away some of that authority after 9-11. This seems to be as much about Obama giving some of that power back where it belongs. At least I hope that's what it is.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Liberal Veteran]

4. Perhaps the answer to your question is dependent on your opinion of President Obama?

If one is inclined to be cynical about President Obama, one will lean to the cynical answer and so forth.

[HardTimes99]

6. You have captured a deep truth here. Obama had declared a 'red line' only

to find 90% public disapproval of the consequences of acting upon said red line. I think he had painted himself into a corner with a red line, and submitting this to Congress allows him to escape a self-inflicted wound (the cardinal sin of politics). So I admire his political prowess even as I doubt somewhat his bona fides in putting this matter before the people's house.

[Junkdrawer]

5. No. It's the Cameron backpedal redux....

What's frightening is what may happen to change those numbers....

[Benton D Struckcheon]

7. What happened to Cameron had to have shocked him.

And then he looks at the low approval for the Syria strike, and thinks, hmm, maybe the writers of the Constitution had a point?
It sets a very good precedent. Precedent is very very important. We're in this fix of having an imperial Presidency because of the legacy of Truman and Korea, which he never sought Congressional approval of any sort for. That set a precedent of one kind. One hopes this will set a better, opposite precedent.

[HardTimes99]

11. I agree with your general point and principles but I have to take issue with your

use of Truman and Korea as your example. IIRC, Korea was a U.N. operation and only happened b/c the Soviet Union walked out of the Security Council meeting where the matter was under debate, thereby allowing a duly-constituted quorum of Security Council members to authorize military intervention.

Congress did not exercise its power of the purse to block U.S. involvement in Korea but public opinion turned so sharply against the situation there that Truman decided not to run for a third term (even though the amendment restricting presidents to two terms only did not apply to Truman, who could have escaped its strictures had he so chose, b/c it did not pass until he was already president).

I think the problem began with Vietnam and the Gulf of Tonkin resolution that gave LBJ a seeming blank check. Interestingly, public opinion also caused LBJ to decide not to seek re-election.

[quinnox]

8. I think junkdrawer nailed it. In that a lot of it had to do with the shock reversal in Great Britain

that blew up in Cameron's face.

That said, I applaud the president for this move, no matter why he did it. It was the right thing to do, and as I posted in a different thread, I give him full credit. It is the best thing I have seen Obama do in a long long time.

[HardTimes99]

13. I could see those Republican assholes preparing two possible ad campaigns for 2014: the first

would attack Obama for not doing enough (Benghazi redux, if you will), while the second would have put the debacle around his neck like some rotten albatross. Depending on the situation in August 2014, the fascists would have used one ad campaign and shelved the other.

So, by putting the onus on Congress for now, Obama has escaped the box and stepped nicely out of the corner into whcih he had seemingly painted himself. I applaud his poltiical savoir faire but remain somewhat skeptical about his devotion to separation of powers doctrine.

If Obama had enjoyed Bush's 90% approval ratings (in the immediate aftermath of 9-11), he would not have needed congressional approval and I strongly suspect he would not have solicited it.

[spanone]

9. yes, i really think that.

[leftstreet]

10. What if that was the plan all along?

Obama's advisers KNEW that Americans would be against any intervention. The Democrats ESPECIALLY know this - they pummeled the GOP in 2006 and 2008 by going antiwar. Nothing has changed.

GOPers and Democratic hawks seem to want more war than Obama's offering them with limited strikes, so a vote is a strange thing to add to the mix

McCain, Graham Say Obama’s Syria Plan Falls Short

August 31 2013.

WASHINGTON–Two key Republican Senate lawmakers gave notice that despite President Barack Obama‘s pledge to seek congressional authorization for a potential military strike against Syria, they wouldn’t support a limited attack that fell short of changing the momentum on the battlefield.

The statement by Sens. John McCain (R., Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) demonstrates clearly the challenges the president faces in winning congressional authorization for his plans to punish the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for allegedly using chemical weapons in an attack last week.

“We cannot in good conscience support isolated military strikes in Syria that are not part of an overall strategy that can change the momentum on the battlefield, achieve the president’s stated goal of Assad’s removal from power, and bring an end to this conflict, which is a growing threat to our national security interests,” the senators said in a joint statement.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/08/31/mccain-graham-say-obamas-syria-plan-falls-short/

[HardTimes99]

22. Sorry, somehow missed your reply on my first pass through the responses. If I heard

correctly, Boner was saying that there would only be a vote if it were tied to a repeal of ACA. I was like WTF???? Don't understand why the MSM isn't ripping Boner a new one for that and demanding he resign like yesterday.

FWIW, I'm strongly opposed to military action against Syria or any combatants in its civil war. But, even so, Boner's response seems to me verging perilously close to treason as the term has been historically used.

[reformist2]

24. I think I know what you're trying to say, and I like it.

Multi-dimensional chess, right?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. We owe the Brits a big thank-you and 3 jolly good cheers.

[warrior1]

14. Feel better that you got that off your chest now

The president was damned if did damned if he didn't. I trust the president.

[HardTimes99]

16. WTF? Why don't we all just shut up, bow down before our monarch (and you) and

watch American Idol? I guess the opposition of 90% of Americans means nothing to a quasi-royalist like you.

I trust the president too but, according to Chuck Todd at NBC, his aides didn't think congressional approval was necessary as recently as YESTERDAY. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023572600

So the question becomes, why seek congressional approval now?

[Bluenorthwest]

17. The people of the US and the UK let them know they have lost our trust and the lack of

accountability over Iraq has not gone unnoticed as the Beltway Boys wanted it to. We remember what was done and what was swept under the rug. We remember because we sent our young people into harm's way and many died. We remember because our countries have paid very high prices for those lies.

[HardTimes99]

18. Our countries but the poor Iraqis and Afghans too. So much human tragedy and

so little meaningful accountability for said war crimes and crimes against humanity.

I shall never forget as long as I walk this earth.

[Le Taz Hot]

19. Nope.

He's got a Republican Congress and Republicans never met a war they wouldn't support (so much for fiscal responsibility and blowing up the deficit). Obama knows who his allies are and it's not us and it's not the Democrats.

[Warren Stupidity]

20. Don't care what his motivation was.

He did the right thing. He gets credit.

[morningfog]

21. To the extent any credit is deserved when one is

trying to start a war and being blocked by every other party in the world.

[HardTimes99]

23. The rip-tides and cross-currents can at times be bewildering. Does Obama get credit for

doing what circumstance compels him to do? Or, less cynically, does Obama get credit for at least giving nominal respect to the Constitution's idea of co-equal branches of government?

[alcibiades_mystery]

26. We already know your answer: Obama gets no credit for anything ever

The rest of your justification for that is just your usual song and dance.

[HardTimes99]

27. I don't think I've done or said anything to justify such snarking from you. My

"usual song and dance"? WTF? I supported Obama in 2008 and 2012 (a little less enthusiastically the 2nd time around but compared to Romney a no-brainer).

[backscatter712]

28. Sounds to me like Obama didn't want to be the one hung out to dry when Syria went pear-shaped.

So he's gonna get Congress to vote on this, and make sure the Republicans have to record their votes and put skin in the game.

[Safetykitten]

29. As the polls came in and looked nasty, he responded.