Obama 2007 : President Can’t Unilaterally Act Unless An Imminent Threat To The US

The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.

– Barack Obama – December 20, 2007

Boston.com – Special reports – News

Obama hasn’t presented one shred of evidence that the Syrian government used chemical weapons, much less presents a threat to the US, much less presents an imminent threat to the US.

The UN has already said that the “rebels” may have used chemical weapons.

ScreenHunter_408 Aug. 26 08.14

UN’s Carla Del Ponte says there is evidence rebels ‘may have used sarin’ in Syria – Middle East – World – The Independent

Share this:

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Obama 2007 : President Can’t Unilaterally Act Unless An Imminent Threat To The US

  1. Chewer says:

    16 minutes after the attack, medical aids and others flowed into the area to help those affected.
    If sarin was used, those helpers would have been dropping like flies also.

  2. Gail Combs says:

    Since when does Obummer give a …Hoot, about the US Congress. Didn’t you see his Crown?

  3. phodges says:

    Not to mention, the Syrian government is fighting our (supposed) enemies!

  4. TomC says:

    “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction…”

  5. bubbagyro says:

    It appears that Sarin was used. However, if it has been used, the likely culprits, logically, would be IMO in this order:
    1) “Rebels”, led by al Qaeda affiliates. Sarin is a simple molecule which may be synthesized by any competent graduate chemist, using agrochemical or university laboratories. As an organic chemist, I have worked with very toxic compounds in my career as intermediates in chemical synthesis, such as hydrogen cyanide gas and fluorine gas, to name a couple.. Sarin is closely related to the malathion class of compounds. It does not have to be “weaponized”—just breaking a vial of an ounce or so in a semi-confined area would do the job. It breaks down rapidly in the environment. Remember the Japanese chemists/physicists who killed many in the Japanese subway systems 20 years ago.
    2) Iranian government for obvious reasons
    3) Syrian government rogue elements.
    4) Another provocateur group, perhaps a university student with laboratory access and jihadist sympathies
    5) US dark assets hoping for an overthrow of Assad and installation of an islamist state (A bit conspiratorial, I admit. Nevertheless, a logical possibility given the recent US track record).
    6) Assad regime.

    Note that I put the Assad regime last, because of the timing, which would be idiotic since he was winning the ground war with conventional weapons.

    .

    5)

  6. John B., M.D. says:

    And number 6 on the Boston.com link link directly applies to Operation Fast & Furious.

  7. John B., M.D. says:

    Flashback to 2007:

    http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071129/NEWS/71129018 – Biden wanted Bush impeached if he bombed Iran without Congressional approval.

    Then, we have the subsequent interview with Chris Matthews: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xpfpciJzBU&feature=player_embedded#t=331
    See 5:30 of the video –

    “Matthews: You said that if the President of the United States had launched an attack on Iran without congressional approval that would have been an impeachable offense. Do you want to review that comment you made? Well how do you stand on that now?

    Biden:Yes I do. I want to stand by the comment I made. The reason I made the comment was as a warning. I don’t say those things lightly, Chris, you’ve known me for a long time. I was chairman of the judiciary committee for 17 years or its ranking member. I teach separation of powers and constitutional law. This is something I know. So I got together and brought a group of constitutional scholars together to write a piece that I’m going to deliver to the whole United State Senate pointing out the President has no constitutional authority…to take this nation to war against a county of 70 million people unless we’re attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked. And if he does, if he does, I would move to impeach him. The House obviously has to do that but I would lead an effort to impeach him. The reason for my doing that, I don’t say it lightly, I don’t say it lightly. I say it because they should understand that what they were threatening, what they were saying, what it was adding up to be, what it looked like to the rest of the world we were about to do would be the most disastrous thing that could be done in this moment in our history that I could think of.”

    Of course, Bush never did bomb Iran. But this rhetoric was used back then and I anticipate that cries of racism will occur if anyone on the right calls for impeachment after Obama bombs Syria. I would not support impeachment, though I am still very curious why Executive Privilege was invoked over Operation Fast & Furious. We may not find out the truth until Obama opens his Presidential Library in Kenya (just kidding).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *