Barack Obama | News | Syria

President Obama to Seek Approval from Congress on Syria Strike: VIDEO


Yesterday in a White House press conference with Joe Biden at his side, President Obama expressed is outrage at Syria's use of chemical weapons and said that he would take the case for military action to the American people and the world, but most importantly, seek approval from Congress:

Now, after careful deliberation, I have decided that the United States should take military action against Syrian regime targets. This would not be an open-ended intervention. We would not put boots on the ground. Instead, our action would be designed to be limited in duration and scope. But I'm confident we can hold the Assad regime accountable for their use of chemical weapons, deter this kind of behavior, and degrade their capacity to carry it out.

Our military has positioned assets in the region. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs has informed me that we are prepared to strike whenever we choose. Moreover, the Chairman has indicated to me that our capacity to execute this mission is not time-sensitive; it will be effective tomorrow, or next week, or one month from now. And I'm prepared to give that order.

But having made my decision as Commander-in-Chief based on what I am convinced is our national security interests, I'm also mindful that I'm the President of the world's oldest constitutional democracy. I've long believed that our power is rooted not just in our military might, but in our example as a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. And that's why I've made a second decision: I will seek authorization for the use of force from the American people's representatives in Congress.

Watch his remarks, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. I say we stay out of Syria and let those violent Islamist Arab freaks destroy each other. Love you Mr. President, but I don't see drones to convey an ideology working out so well.

    Posted by: whitneyisadude | Sep 1, 2013 10:09:15 AM

  2. Furthermore, all those people seem to care about is oil money and Muhammad. Their brains have been enslaved and rotted to the core by their faith and there no point in getting into the middle of it. I am so tired of people trying to drag them into the 21st century. Look at Canada, France and the UK. They just enter secular societies and try to turn back the clock in the name of Allah. /semiracistbuttruerant

    Posted by: whitneyisadude | Sep 1, 2013 10:15:07 AM

  3. Lastly, this whole issue was ironically started by colonial meddling in the first place. Leave those people alone.

    Posted by: whitneyisadude | Sep 1, 2013 10:26:47 AM

  4. SAY NO TO THIS 'LIMITED ENGAGEMENT'. We [Americans] are not responsible for solving the world's problems, nor should we be the mega multinational corporation oligarchy's muscle.

    And congress should start doing it's job. It's not supposed to automatically give any president carte blanche. They just don't want to take responsibility and political liability, especially flack from their campaign contributors.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Sep 1, 2013 10:49:39 AM

  5. It's right to consult Congress, and there may be good international "peace reasons" to interfere but Americans are sick of Muslim nations and their internecene hysteria. Stay out of it.

    Posted by: UFFDA | Sep 1, 2013 11:32:23 AM

  6. All the phony finger-pointing candidate Obama did about ending the wars, closing Guantanamo, and stopping the federal government's snooping on US citizens, and now we move into Syria. Remarkable.

    Posted by: LincolnLounger | Sep 1, 2013 12:01:44 PM

  7. ^ all the same poster with different sock puppets it would seem

    Posted by: Moz's | Sep 1, 2013 12:08:42 PM

  8. @LincolnLounger,

    Yeah, but he's the first black president and after a very long period of 'thinking it through' he personally believes gay marriage is OK! And he was going to host a bisexuality summit!!

    Mr. President is like many other high powered individuals: highly narcissistic and possibly sociopathic/psychopathic.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Sep 1, 2013 12:08:56 PM

  9. I doubt Congress will approve this, this just seems like posturing to appease Israel.

    Posted by: JMC | Sep 1, 2013 12:22:52 PM

  10. JMC

    in what way?

    The saudi royal family is directly financing and arming the rebels and being sunni would prefer the alawite = shia affiliated & pro iran assad and his ruling family/party weren't around

    Israel is neither arming nor financing the rebels though a less pro iran regieme would be better for Israel long term, the saudis are the ones who benefit the most from the ousting of assad

    Posted by: moz's | Sep 1, 2013 1:10:04 PM

  11. Lets try an international economic sanctions instead of military action. We can't repeat the mistake of Iraq again. Ever!!!!

    Posted by: Tom | Sep 1, 2013 1:56:51 PM

  12. He's actually adhering to the Constitution. Presidents have taken military action unilaterally, Bush's Iraq war resolution to the contrary. If nothing else, President Obama's request for a Congressional vote is a good omen. Let them be on official record for any military action.

    Posted by: Terry | Sep 1, 2013 2:29:27 PM

  13. He is out of his mind. For once, I agree with John Boehner:
    "what concrete US interests does it server?"

    Posted by: simon | Sep 1, 2013 3:53:14 PM

  14. He has to be careful. It cost Jimmy Carter his second term in the Iran crisis if it turns ugly. Of course he doesn't have to worry about that.

    Posted by: simon | Sep 1, 2013 4:03:13 PM

  15. We need to stop interfering in countries that only 10% of us could find on a map.

    Posted by: Ed | Sep 1, 2013 6:24:26 PM

  16. @Terry,

    That's the point: they should never take such military action unilaterally unless it's some dire emergency where time is of the essence. Even then, responsible congressional leaders should be fully informed and congress should publicly debate the issue as soon as possible. It should always be debated and approved by congress.

    Congress controls funding for EVERYTHING in the the U.S. government, even how much funding the white house gets for it's upkeep. And they are responsible for debating and approving military action, so-called 'police action' or 'limited engagement', better known as wars. They should be held accountable along with the president.

    What a fraud this guy Obama is.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Sep 2, 2013 9:36:21 AM

  17. @Ed: That might include Mexico! I was once on a business trip in Canada and the TV had a news item about how most school kids in Texas didn't know what country was on the southern border of the U.S.!
    It made the news in Canada, but probably not in the U.S. as it was too embarrassing.

    Posted by: Bill | Sep 2, 2013 3:51:50 PM

  18. Biden's got his best frown on. We should have learned, but history can repeat itself. Obama will do anything to salvage his reputation -- warrior against chemical weapons. We can't afford a military action with unknown consequences. The real goal should be surviving the remainder of Obama's term. Not to sound too pessimistic, but blunders in Syria, could lead to WWIII.

    Posted by: GB | Sep 2, 2013 4:31:21 PM

Post a comment


« «Federal Judge Strikes Down Law Barring Same-Sex Veteran Benefits« «