# Can anyone defend the Admin Syria drive? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 9, 2013, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417 "2013-09-09T16:04:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 22
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2013, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/421 "2013-09-17T15:26:10Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Just admit you’re wrong and move on. Obama doesn’t have the support he needed for a vote and Reid acted on it to avoid the embarrassment Cameron went through. > > And don’t try to throw the absolutism card down as an argument. Support means greater than 50%. Right now he doesn’t have it from either house, the public at large, or internationally. I questioned your false link to a report in USA Today that you cited to make your assertion that Obama had no support in the US Senate. I have not disputed that the public is not behind a proposed strike on Syria. As the USA also cited there is support in the Senate and there is opposition but the majority of Senators on September 10 were undecided. You count those as no votes. You are not making a credible argument when a link to a report is distorted. Your cite merely said Obama was losing momentum on bipartisanship because five Republicans announced they were against. Turning that into no support’ which you did is a problem I am not the one who is wrong. I have no reason to move on. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2013, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/422 "2013-09-17T15:33:15Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Er… Your source, the occidental observer declares itself to be a promoter of “white interests” and “white culture” and the article relies heavily on VDARE founded by the racist Peter Brimelow which is so extreme in its racial views that when John Derbyshire was fired for racism by that bastion of knee-jerk liberalism The National Review he immediately went over to them to expound on the dangers of “them.” > > Of course they’re going to blame “the Jews” and others for problems of the white people in America. > > If they could geta away with blaming the Jews for irritable bowel syndrome, they would. > > What’s surprising is that such a self-styled progressive as yourself would use them as a source. No one here is blaming the Jews for anything. I am making a point that headlines are that the Pro-Israeli Lobby supports Obama on the Syria Strke and that US conservatives usually side with them on matters involving Israel. Can you dispute that point? And I hardly ever agree with Progress on national security matters. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2013, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/423 "2013-09-17T15:39:55Z")
Dear Ibn, Does it mean that posting a link to a website that it means the poster is a follower of the subjects ideology. I also cited the CS Monitor which means the point I attempted to highlite that the pro-Israel Lobby in our country supports a strike against Syria is broadly acceptable as fact. So would I if Syria does not reasonably comply with their agreement to surrender their CW to the international community. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2013, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/424 "2013-09-17T15:54:26Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Obama doesn’t have the support he needed for a vote and Reid acted on it to avoid the embarrassment Cameron went through. The reported you cited also explained that Reid pulled the procedural vote becsuse the Putin discussions about disarming Syria may have an impact on the minds of some Senstors. Did you see that? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2013, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/425 "2013-09-17T16:06:58Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > The reported you cited also explained that Reid pulled the procedural vote becsuse the Putin discussions about disarming Syria may have an impact on the minds of some Senstors. > > Did you see that? Here’s the article: [http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/397017/3/Senate-delays-Syria-vote-as-Obama-loses-momentum](http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/397017/3/Senate-delays-Syria-vote-as-Obama-loses-momentum) Can you point out where it says what you claim it says? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2013, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/426 "2013-09-17T16:47:20Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Here’s the article: > > [http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/397017/3/Senate-delays-Syria-vote-as-Obama-loses-momentum](http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/397017/3/Senate-delays-Syria-vote-as-Obama-loses-momentum) > > Can you point out where it says what you claim it says? That is not Magiver’s link. This is Magiver’s link: > **[Senate delays Syria vote as Obama loses momentum](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/09/09/obama-congress-syria-vote-in-doubt/2788597/)** > > Momentum on Capitol Hill is moving away from President Obama's plan to strike Syria. This is in there: > [@](#): > > The delay also came amid reports that Russia was seeking a deal with Syria to dismantle its chemical weapons program. Obama said in television interviews Monday such a deal could circumvent the need for U.S. military intervention, but senators had not been briefed on the development and expressed skepticism. And this: > [@](#): > > However, Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., who voted for the resolution in the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, cautioned Monday that he preferred pursuing diplomatic solutions ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2013, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/427 "2013-09-17T17:00:36Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > [Reid had to delay voting](http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/09/09/obama-congress-syria-vote-in-doubt/2788597/) on it because there was no support. So you would be wrong. > > You are truly clueless when it comes to politics. The Tea Party was aimed at replacing Republicans not supporting them. And given your sycophantic name tag you may want to dial back the politically insulting name tags. It just makes you look more foolish when you’re wrong. The above is from Post#390. Check the link. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2013, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/428 "2013-09-17T19:08:33Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > I questioned your false link to a report in USA Today that you cited to make your assertion that Obama had no support in the US Senate. I have not disputed that the public is not behind a proposed strike on Syria. Well you’re halfway there. No public support. No support from the House. That just leaves the Senate. And where is the Senate vote again? It’s right where I said it was and cited. Reid delayed it because the support wasn’t there. ---
**Author:** ![Werekoala](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/7993a0/32.png) [@Werekoala](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Werekoala)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2013, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/429 "2013-09-17T20:35:47Z")
Hey on the plus side, at least now Obama can arm the “rebels” openly without having to sneak around doing it. All he had to do was convince himself to strike down part of a statute making it illegal. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2013, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/430 "2013-09-17T21:34:11Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Well you’re halfway there. No public support. No support from the House. That just leaves the Senate. And where is the Senate vote again? It’s right where I said it was and cited. Reid delayed it because the support wasn’t there. No, this is what you said: " Reid had to delay voting on it because there was no support. So you would be wrong." -Originally Posted by Magiver. Since what you said is not true since you were citing a news report that did no say what you write. It said Obama was losing bipartisan momentum and the Putin diplomatic stuff played a part in why the vote was canceled. So I am not wrong. Here’s your link again: > [@](#): > > The Senate was scheduled to vote Wednesday on a procedural motion to begin formal debate on the resolution, but Reid announced late Monday the vote would be delayed in order to buy the president more time to make his case to senators and the public. > > “What we need to do is make sure the president has the opportunity to speak to all 100 senators and all 300 million American people before we do this,” Reid said. > > The delay also came amid reports that Russia was seeking a deal with Syria to dismantle its chemical weapons program. Obama said in television interviews Monday such a deal could circumvent the need for U.S. military intervention, but senators had not been briefed on the development and expressed skepticism. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2013, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/431 "2013-09-17T22:10:39Z")
> [@](#): > > The delay also came amid reports that Russia was seeking a deal with Syria to dismantle its chemical weapons program. Obama said in television interviews Monday such a deal could circumvent the need for U.S. military intervention, but senators had not been briefed on the development and expressed skepticism. Why would Sen Reid hold a procedural vote to start debate on a bill that was written prior to new breaking information that a potential diplomatic breakthrough could diminish the need for military action? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2013, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/432 "2013-09-17T23:53:10Z")
> [@Werekoala](#): > > Hey on the plus side, at least now Obama can arm the “rebels” openly without having to sneak around doing it. All he had to do was convince himself to strike down part of a statute making it illegal. What makes you think the rebels need American arms? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2013, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/433 "2013-09-18T02:13:25Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Why would Sen Reid hold a procedural vote Because the President ASKED for a vote. Reid held the vote because there wasn’t support for it. It stated it in the article I cited. The article was clear WHY it was delayed and it was because of a lack of support. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2013, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/434 "2013-09-18T02:45:38Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > No one here is blaming the Jews for anything. Considering the fact that you were earlier ranting about “the Jewish lobby” this is a jaw-droppingly stupid comment. ---
**Author:** ![Werekoala](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/7993a0/32.png) [@Werekoala](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Werekoala)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2013, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/435 "2013-09-18T02:47:43Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > What makes you think the rebels need American arms? Hm… Obama striking down the section of the statute that prevented him from doing so? (LEGALLY…) That was easy. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2013, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/436 "2013-09-18T13:11:50Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Considering the fact that you were earlier ranting about “the Jewish lobby” this is a jaw-droppingly stupid comment. Find a rant from me anywhere about the Jewish Lobby and post it. I agree with the Jewish Lobby /pro-Israel lobby and our President that Assad should be hit with air strikes for using chemical weapons. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2013, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/437 "2013-09-18T13:16:42Z")
> [@Werekoala](#): > > Hm… Obama striking down the section of the statute that prevented him from doing so? (LEGALLY…) > > That was easy. Which statute are you talking about? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2013, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/438 "2013-09-18T13:37:42Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Because the President ASKED for a vote. Reid held the vote because there wasn’t support for it. It stated it in the article I cited. The article was clear WHY it was delayed and it was because of a lack of support. No you said there was ‘no support’ which is not true. And there were way too many undecided Senators for any conclusion to be made that procedural vote to start debate would not pass. They were only voting to start debate when a new development regarding Putin changed the debate entirely. You cite merely said support was slipping. And it reported the reason Reid postponed the vote which was to let Obama address the nation first. And it reported that the vote was pulled because of the chance for diplomacy. And Terr tried to deny that. So that rebuttal went nowhere too. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2013, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/439 "2013-09-18T13:43:04Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Because the President ASKED for a vote. Reid held the vote because there wasn’t support for it. It stated it in the article I cited. The article was clear WHY it was delayed and it was because of a lack of support. Just admit a semantic error. It’s not correct to say there was “no support”, but the key is there wasn’t enough support. I can’t think of any knowledgeable person who was predicted a “yes” vote in either house by the time Reid decided to take a time out. The more Americans heard Obama explain his plan to bomb Syria, the less support it got. Listening to the Sunday Talk Shows, even most of the lefties were talking about how Obama fumbled on this one. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2013, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/440 "2013-09-18T14:16:30Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Just admit a semantic error. It’s not correct to say there was “no support”, but the key is there wasn’t enough support. I can’t think of any knowledgeable person who was predicted a “yes” vote in either house by the time Reid decided to take a time out. The more Americans heard Obama explain his plan to bomb Syria, the less support it got. Listening to the Sunday Talk Shows, even most of the lefties were talking about how Obama fumbled on this one. This discussion was set up on whether if Romney were President after his campaign suggestion that he would put US troops in Syria to stop the threat and spread of CW. My point is that hypothetically there are enough Dem Hawks in the Senate that Romney would get backing for strike after they had been used by Assad. Putting boots on the ground would be a different matter. Magiver said I was ‘wrong’ and know nothing about politics and to back that up he cited the USA Today article and embellished it to say there was no support. It’s hard to have a discussion when one party doesn’t hold up their end to some kind of credible standard when citing things like news reports to back up calling someone wrong. And the fact that the USA Today report added that Reid pulled the vote ‘amid’ breaking news that a peaceful solution could be in the making. So that’s the deal here. Do you think Romney would get Republican support for airstrikes given that he advocated ground troops to deal with Syria’s CW aresenal? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417.md?page=21) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417.md?page=23)