‘Obama changed his mind on Syria’
‘Obama changed his mind on Syria’ | The Times of Israel.
President had been poised to strike at Assad regime without seeking okay from Congress, but had an eleventh-hour change of heart Friday night, officials say
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama had an eleventh-hour change of heart on striking at Syria, officials close to him were quoted saying late Saturday.
Speaking soon after Obama had delivered a White House speech saying he would seek approval from Congress to act against the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons, senior administration officials said Obama had planned to take military action against Syria without congressional authorization, but told aides Friday night that he changed his mind.
The administration officials, quoted by AP, described a president overriding all his top national security advisers, who believed Obama had the authority to act on his own.
But these officials said the president spent much of the week wrestling with Congress’s role in authorizing force and made the decision Friday night after a lengthy discussion with his chief of staff, Denis McDonough.
The administration officials requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss Obama’s decision-making by name.
Earlier, delaying what had appeared to be an imminent strike, Obama abruptly announced he would seek congressional approval before launching any military action meant to punish Syria for its alleged use of chemical weapons in an attack that the US says killed 1,429 Syrians on August 21.
With Navy ships in the Mediterranean Sea ready to strike, Obama said he had decided the United States should take military action, but also determined “our country will be better off” if Congress renders its own opinion.
At the same time, he challenged lawmakers to consider “what message will we send to a dictator” if he is allowed to killed hundreds of children with chemical weapons without suffering any retaliation.
Lawmakers will return to session on Sept. 9.
In Israel, where the Syria crisis is seen by many as an indicator of how the US might act against Iran’s nuclear weapons drive, one right-wing minister said that the Iranian regime would be “opening champagne” in the light of Obama’s hesitation, and a commentator said Tehran might consider that there is a “paper tiger” in Washington, DC.
Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized
WarSclerotic 
August 31, 2013 at 11:35 PM
We already tried to explain this U turning in the Obama’ approach. Because this is so an important issue, we warmly are advising our readers to try and read our last comment.
September 1, 2013 at 12:22 AM
Forgive me, my American friends.
This clown gives your contry’s name a new meaning.
United states of amateurs.
Really, at this point you’d be better off if you take just a bum from the street and put him in the White House.
The film with Eddie Murphy comes to mind …
September 1, 2013 at 12:41 AM
Artaxes, Congress as I’m sure you know is the manifestation of the people in government. Unfortunatly for Israel there is very little stomach for another war with the American public. After a near financial collapse and two recent wars the people want to lick their wounds an hope to see a brighter day. Another war for them is unthinkable. Therefore, I would be surprised if Congress gives Obama the green light.
Israel, I’m afraid will be forced to fend for it self. The evil that has Israel in its sights has just claimed victory and I’m afraid will now make things miserable for Israel…..
September 1, 2013 at 1:49 AM
i appreciate the role of congress and I am all for seeking approval by congress but didn’t know this idiot all this BEFORE?
September 1, 2013 at 1:59 AM
Understood, and I agree, very poorly played by Obama. Somewhere along the line he may have become convinced his little measured attack would lead to a massive shitstorm and lost his nerve. By going to congress his authorization to attack will either be overruled (likely) or be approved (unlikely). In either case he’ll have cover by consensus.
September 1, 2013 at 2:21 AM
In either case Israel I’m afraid is in a very difficult position.
September 1, 2013 at 5:16 AM
Is exactly what I was stated here, yesterday evening, but with a twist: why didn’t he know that Syria is not Libya and meeting Iran here means, in fact, fighting Iran, reality that he is trying so hard to avoid? Where were his advisors? Cameron Britannia knew better, that is why they left the Obama ship the first.
September 1, 2013 at 3:08 AM
Just as I said a couple of days ago; Obama is hoping that Congress will get him off the hook for that stupid throw away line about “red lines”; Congress will oblige; the entire House, and 1/3 of the Senate is up for re-election next year, and the vast majority of the American people are opposed to a war in Syria; there isn’t the slightest chance in hell that they’ll approve an attack on Syria, not if they want to be re-elected next year.
September 1, 2013 at 7:18 AM
Agree.
September 1, 2013 at 4:15 AM
The Mullahs in Iran have always believed they are following Allahs wishes to destroy Israel and create a Middle East Caliphat. The words and actions of men mean less than nothing to them. In each turn of events they see Allahs hand at work convincing them further of their quest. Convincing them the West is weak and ripe for destruction. Very dangerous. This evil can not be negotiated with it can only be destroyed or succumbed to!
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” (Edmund Burke)
September 1, 2013 at 9:12 AM
one right-wing minister said that the Iranian regime would be “opening champagne”
The “Iranian regime” are Muslims and do not open bottles of champagne.