Sen. Paul spars with Kerry: Will vote on Syria be binding?

[TBomb]

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2647765107001/sen-paul-spars-with-kerry-will-vote-on-syria-be-binding/?intcmp=obnetwork

 

 

This is an excellent debate regarding our constitution and what powers Obama has/doesn't have.

PAUL: How do you ask a man to be the first man to die for a mistake?

Even if not a war in the ‘classic sense,’ it would be a mistake

 

By Sen. Rand Paul

Thursday, September 5, 2013

 

This week, Secretary of State John F. Kerry came before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to make his case for war with Syria— a war that a majority of Americans don’t want, the administration still can’t clearly justify and for which Mr. Kerry himself made a very poor case.

A war that Mr. Kerry even refuses to call a war — at least not in the “classic sense,” he assures us.

The American people certainly see this as a potential new war, and the country is war-weary. After well over a decade in Iraq and Afghanistan, they are not eager to commit to another questionable intervention. Americans also know that whatever assurances this administration pretends it can give — that there will not be boots on the ground, that this will not be a protracted engagement — are all negotiable once the war actually begins.

The Washington Examiner’s Tim Carney writes: “Some members of Congress say they’ll support a limited strike on Syria. But this is a fantasy. It relies on limiting two things that naturally defy limit: war and presidential power.”

Mr. Carney continues: “War cannot be tamed. War might turn out according to plan (for everyone who didn’t get killed or maimed), but that’s largely a matter of chance. Men cannot control war — not even with the greatest military ever; not even with chants of ‘Yes, we can’; not even with a Nobel Peace Prize.”

To the extent that Mr. Kerry made a case at all — along with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel — the secretary was not very convincing. Even as the committee predictably approved authorization of the use of military force, the administration still failed to demonstrate any clear national security connection the United States has in Syria. The supposed justification for intervention to stop the use of chemical weapons still does not tell us how military action would actually deter their use. We’re still not absolutely sure about the origins of their use.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/5/rand-paul-no-explanation-for-a-questionable-interv/#ixzz2e8OF0YZs
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Edited September 6, 2013 by TBomb

[pattyangel]

Sad leaders we have.  Grown men sitting behind a desk all slicked up with their suits and ties and saying we are not going to war.  I can't believe the general can sit there and side with this limited action.  I really think they think that the American people are ignorant in accepting this "limited action" as not meaning war.  We need to voice our opinions loud and clear before next week.  We need to let the other countries know that we do not side with this "limited action"

 

We have global leaders voicing their opinions, that if we take action they will be jumping in on the band wagon of destruction.

 

I have no doubt this will turn into a war.   JMO

[TBomb]

Me either Patty.  Listen at the very end of the video where Kerry is asking a General to speak..the General kindly refuses and Kerry says, "thanks for pulling the rug out from under me."  My opinion of this is that the General couldn't speak, because he cannot guarantee that this won't turn into a "boots on the ground"/war operation.

Edited September 6, 2013 by TBomb

[dog53]