tomcatwarne: Barack Obama...insisted he had not set the red lines requiring a military response if the Syrian government deployed chemical weapons...."The world set a red line when governments representing 98% of the world's population said the use of chemical weapons was abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use even when countries are engaged in war," "That was not something I just kind of made up, I did not pluck it out of thin air." He added: "My credibility is not on the line. The international community's credibility is on the line...
Read between the lines. What's Obama saying???
He's saying he derives his authority to attack Syria (or any other country) not from his role as US president (the only office he holds) but as an agent of the "international community".
He was not elected by the international community, and his US mandate does not give him any right to act beyond the limits of the US constitution.
Admittedly he and Bush have already shredded the constitution, particularly the bill of rights.
But still he can't claim any sort of global mandate to invade Syria. Obama doesn't represent 98% of the world's population. He doesn't even represent 10% of the world's population. He doesn't even represent the US population when he creates and pursues wars in other parts of the world contrary to the will of the US people.
The US population doesn't want this war. And the world at large certainly doesn't want it either.
The real issue here is national sovereignty vs global control. Obama is championing the idea that some sort of central Globalist authority reigns over the sovereignty of all nations. And he claims to be the enforcer of that globalist authority.
tomcatwarne: On Tuesday Obama portrayed his plans for US military action as part of a broader strategy to topple Bashar al-Assad.
That's right. It's all about toppling the legitimate government of a sovereign nation and replacing it with another puppet regime. Just like Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Chile, Guatemala, Argentina, Mexico, Puerto Rico, the Philippines, Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Grenada, Panama, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Turkey, Yugoslavia, Venezuela, etc etc etc etc.
tomcatwarne: The hawkish Republican senator John McCain, (introduced wording into a Senate bill) which makes it "the policy of the United States to change the momentum on the battlefield in Syria".
In other words the US is committed to toppling the Syrian government and putting its mercenaries into control.
tomcatwarne: Obama also retains the support of the French.
No he doesn't. I live in France. Nobody supports Obama here. Nobody other than French President François Hollande, that is. And his own party doesn't even support his stance on the issue.
LadyDizJohannesburg, Gauteng South Africa1,320 Posts
LadyDizJohannesburg, Gauteng South Africa1,320 posts
Dedovix: Umm, the UN ,same as the league of nations is Rothschilds creation but I bet you folks already knew that
Are you sure about that? As far as I know General Jan Smuts, a South African statesman wrote the blue print for the League of Nations, which was then adopted almost in its entirety by President Wilson. Smuts was also an integral part of the establishment of the UN.
DedovixBig Place, Central Serbia Serbia5,492 posts
LadyDiz: Are you sure about that? As far as I know General Jan Smuts, a South African statesman wrote the blue print for the League of Nations, which was then adopted almost in its entirety by President Wilson. Smuts was also an integral part of the establishment of the UN.
The 10 members of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee who voted Wednesday to authorize a punitive strike against Syrian government targets over an apparent chemical weapons attack received an average of $72,850 from defense contractors over a five-year span compared to an average of $39,770 received by the seven members who voted no, Wired reported.
MADDOG69: The 10 members of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee who voted Wednesday to authorize a punitive strike against Syrian government targets over an apparent chemical weapons attack received an average of $72,850 from defense contractors over a five-year span compared to an average of $39,770 received by the seven members who voted no, Wired reported.
Yea that commy loven Mccain , could see that dove not getting anything from rocket makers . Somebody should have a word to him about the way he votes . Next time he should support his prez .
barry bama is a dumb sob........a lot of our politicians are ignoring citizens' yells that obama rots and we do not want to get involved......we are weary of the war supply company stockholders pushing for more wars.....actually, barry should send cruise missles into certain parts of chicago.....
woodstock1: barry bama is a dumb sob........a lot of our politicians are ignoring citizens' yells that obama rots and we do not want to get involved......we are weary of the war supply company stockholders pushing for more wars.....actually, barry should send cruise missles into certain parts of chicago.....
Maybe he should also "fix" Detroit before he starts fixing other countries
LadyDizJohannesburg, Gauteng South Africa1,320 Posts
LadyDizJohannesburg, Gauteng South Africa1,320 posts
chris27292729: Cleverly distributed by the S, Africans billioners ,to some rising political stars, wasn't Ramaphosa a leader of some union????if remember correctly,so to have them under control.The 3 you mentioned they only allowed to have a very small piece of the pie.
Nope - they are some of the richest men in the world, and the most powerful in SA. Yes, Ramaphosa was a unionist..met him once when I was an activist back in the 80's. How things have changed...
LadyDizJohannesburg, Gauteng South Africa1,320 Posts
LadyDizJohannesburg, Gauteng South Africa1,320 posts
chris27292729: Cleverly distributed by the S, Africans billioners ,to some rising political stars, wasn't Ramaphosa a leader of some union????if remember correctly,so to have them under control.The 3 you mentioned they only allowed to have a very small piece of the pie.
Nope - they are some of the richest men in the world, and the most powerful in SA. Yes, Ramaphosa was a unionist..met him once when I was an activist back in the 80's. How things have changed...
Rupert (cigarette man??) and Oppenheimer are the real power behind them,the one's you mentioned,maybe the have become rich,but their backers, are much richer.
LadyDiz: Nope - they are some of the richest men in the world, and the most powerful in SA. Yes, Ramaphosa was a unionist..met him once when I was an activist back in the 80's. How things have changed...
tomcatwarne: Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin set for collision over Syria at G20 summit
Russian president signals he will take action if America strikes at Assad as US counterpart admits relations have hit a wall
World leaders will gather in St Petersburg on Thursday for what has transformed into an international showdown with Vladimir Putin threatening to send a missile shield to Syria if the US launches an attack without the authority of the United Nations.
The G20 summit, hosted by Putin, had been expected to focus on the world economy and growth, but will now be dominated by the Middle East crisis, even if the formal agenda remains fixed on the slowdown of growth in emerging markets.
Barack Obama, speaking during a stopover in Sweden before the summit, denied his political credibility was at stake but admitted relations with Russia had hit a wall. He insisted he had not set the red lines requiring a military response if the Syrian government deployed chemical weapons.
"The world set a red line when governments representing 98% of the world's population said the use of chemical weapons was abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use even when countries are engaged in war," he said. "That was not something I just kind of made up, I did not pluck it out of thin air."
He added: "My credibility is not on the line. The international community's credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these international norms are important.
"Keep in mind, I'm somebody who opposed the war in Iraq, and I'm not interested in repeating mistakes about basing decisions on faulty intelligence," the US president said at a news conference in Stockholm.
On Tuesday Obama portrayed his plans for US military action as part of a broader strategy to topple Bashar al-Assad, as the White House's campaign to win over sceptics in Congress gained momentum.
Putin, in an interview published on Wednesday, said it was too early to talk about what Russia would do if the US attacked Syria but added: "We have our ideas about what we will do and how we will do it in case the situation develops toward the use of force or otherwise. We have our plans."
He then said Russia might restart Syria's suspended S-300 air defence missile contract. Describing the weapon as "very efficient", he said: "If we see that steps are taken that violate the existing international norms, we shall think how we should act in the future, in particular regarding supplies of such sensitive weapons to certain regions of the world."
The statement could also be a veiled threat to revive a contract for the delivery of the S-300s to Iran, which Russia cancelled a few years ago under strong US and Israeli pressure.
But Obama arrives at the summit with his hand strengthened by the growing impression that he will win the support of Congress next week to take military action. In signs that the political tide was slowly turning Obama's way in Washington, US senators on an important committee yesterday agreed on a draft resolution backing the use of US military force in Syria. The Senate foreign relations committee passed an amended resolution to authorise military action. It authorises strikes against the Syrian regime within a 60-day window, extendable to 90 days, as requested by the White House.
But it also includes tougher wording introduced by the hawkish Republican senator John McCain, which makes it "the policy of the United States to change the momentum on the battlefield in Syria".
Obama also retains the support of the French and the personal backing of David Cameron, even though the British government is now debarred from joining any action owing to last week's mishandled Commons vote.
Rey Yahoo.
My friends living in Russia said Putin has his price which he want from US and Nato
epirb: yea one of Obama's daughters and to keep the harbour in Syria that he has now .
The Harbour is nothing... a few warehouses and can only support 2 small ships at any one time.
No... there's something else. It's got to be big. We don't know what deal was done on Libya.... yet. But, as I said here before when that happened, something was agreed then.
MADDOG69: The Harbour is nothing... a few warehouses and can only support 2 small ships at any one time.
No... there's something else. It's got to be big. We don't know what deal was done on Libya.... yet. But, as I said here before when that happened, something was agreed then.
oh well if it's big it will be Michelle's bum then .
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Read between the lines. What's Obama saying???
He's saying he derives his authority to attack Syria (or any other country) not from his role as US president (the only office he holds) but as an agent of the "international community".
He was not elected by the international community, and his US mandate does not give him any right to act beyond the limits of the US constitution.
Admittedly he and Bush have already shredded the constitution, particularly the bill of rights.
But still he can't claim any sort of global mandate to invade Syria. Obama doesn't represent 98% of the world's population. He doesn't even represent 10% of the world's population. He doesn't even represent the US population when he creates and pursues wars in other parts of the world contrary to the will of the US people.
The US population doesn't want this war.
And the world at large certainly doesn't want it either.
The real issue here is national sovereignty vs global control.
Obama is championing the idea that some sort of central Globalist authority reigns over the sovereignty of all nations. And he claims to be the enforcer of that globalist authority.
That's right. It's all about toppling the legitimate government of a sovereign nation and replacing it with another puppet regime. Just like Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Chile, Guatemala, Argentina, Mexico, Puerto Rico, the Philippines, Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Grenada, Panama, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Turkey, Yugoslavia, Venezuela, etc etc etc etc.
In other words the US is committed to toppling the Syrian government and putting its mercenaries into control.
No he doesn't.
I live in France.
Nobody supports Obama here.
Nobody other than French President François Hollande, that is.
And his own party doesn't even support his stance on the issue.