General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWho would you most trust to make a decision on Syria?
Of these choices...
9 votes, 4 passes | Time left: Unlimited | |
Barack Obama | |
3 (33%) |
|
Hillary Clinton | |
0 (0%) |
|
Bernie Sanders | |
6 (67%) |
|
Elizabeth Warren | |
0 (0%) |
|
McCain and Graham | |
0 (0%) |
|
4 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided. | |
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll |
![](du4img/smicon-reply-new.gif)
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)DURHAM D
(32,681 posts)![](/emoticons/shrug.gif)
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)you'll have to use a Ouija board
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Warren is great on financial issues - but come on folks let's get serious here.
Full BIO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_warren
Warren Committee Assignments: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_warren#Committee_assignments
And btw, looking at the committees she is on it looks like she is NOT loading up her resume` for a run in 2016.
![](/emoticons/hi.gif)
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)voted for the Iraq War.
Do you think that was a good decision on their part? Remember, most Democrats - primarily the lower-profile ones who were less versed in the subtleties of foreign policy - voted against going to war.
Barack_America
(28,876 posts)My senator for as long as I can remember.
LukeFL
(594 posts)Is not a liar and thinks decisions such as this through. I would also love to hear what senator Al Franken thinks. I have great respect for him as well.
Does anyone know where he stands in this particular issue?
Warpy
(112,248 posts)Once they get sucked in, they're so propagandized by the MIC that they no longer know which direction is up.
David__77
(23,827 posts)She still speaks for me! Since 2001.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)Right now, I'm very skeptical of what our president is planning.
mazzarro
(3,450 posts)Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)Hillary is neck and neck with McGramps.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)who lives in the bubble of course.
Dems to Win
(2,161 posts)Our wisest, most prescient voice in public life.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)The only Senator to read the entire, unredacted report on Iraq's WMDs...and determined it was total BULLSHIT. He was begging the other Senators to read the full report. Only 2 others did. Those 3 were the only "No" votes on Iraq War.
And BTW, Bob Graham has read all the classified information inre Saudi Arabia and 9/11. He says of we knew the truth, we'd be outraged.
Hekate
(92,596 posts)But under the circs, I'm still clicking on Obama. Good luck to us all -- a bumpy road ahead.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)I categorically distrust anyone who's inside the Beltway, period.
If "Other" had been in your poll, I would have voted for that, and put forth John Pilger as my first choice, with Juan Cole or Josh Landis as further possibilities.
joshcryer
(62,302 posts)WHAT WILL YOU DO?!?!
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)I'm on record favoring a strike if the UN asessment shows that the Syrian government used chemical weapons. As long as it's a well-considered strike.
joshcryer
(62,302 posts)You are one interesting fellow.
(A strike would only be a pretext for Assad to crank up his crackdowns, which is what Israel and the US ultimately want in the end.)
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)I think he's already doing all he can.
The ban on gas is a good one, and the only thing bullies understand is a 2x4 to the head.
joshcryer
(62,302 posts)Assad as shown restraint so far, as much as it disgusts me to say it. Hell I think in their twisted minds the early morning attack was justified by the idea that the children and elderly wouldn't wake up and would go quietly in their sleep.
I have 100% certainty that if there is a strike Assad will respond with so much force against the rebel and civilian population that it will make the world stand back in shock. And the fucked up part about it is that Obama will then be tasked to deal with the ensuing situation. Russia is fully prepared for this outcome because of the War in Chechnya so they know how to deal with mass casualties from a PR perspective. They'll back Syria no matter what.
And all the blame will be on Obama / the US for doing the strike to begin with.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"I'm on record favoring a strike if the UN asessment shows that the Syrian government used chemical weapons."
...already stated that the Assad government is responsible. Do you agree?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)But I think it's prudent to wait for the UN report. Our own government has a history of intentional and unintentional misinformation, don't you agree? I'd hate to find out that we acted based on the the "least-untruthful" information the White House could share.
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)Lasher
(27,886 posts)I don't trust anybody to make that decision for me. I know what I want it should be.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)you're the only one qualified to make a decision like that.
Sid
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Enjoy your stay.
You'll be receiving your Manny Minion packet shortly.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Sanders Statement on Syria
August 31, 2013
WASHINGTON, Aug. 31 Sen. Bernie Sanders issued the following statement today after President Barack Obama announced that he will ask Congress to authorize military strikes against Syria:
The use of chemical weapons by the Assad dictatorship is inhumane and a violation of international law. However, at this point in time, I need to hear more from the president as to why he believes it is in the best interests of the United States to intervene in Syria's bloody and complicated civil war. I look forward to the Senate debate that will be taking place in the very near future.
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=2e6dce9f-dbfe-41ed-ba57-dfbf823f92b8
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)July 08, 2012
WARREN: The ongoing killing of civilians in Syria is a terrible tragedy, and Assad has got to go. The unfolding question is how to accomplish those goals. The President is right to try to work with others in the region and in the international community to influence Syria. Because assistance can have complex and unintended consequences, we should not act unless we are confident that we can do more good than harm and that we have a clear plan and achievable goals.
http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/07/sen_scott_brown_and_elizabeth_13.html
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Elizabeth Warren: Obama Request For Congressional Approval On Syria 'Appropriate'
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said "it's appropriate" for President Barack Obama to seek approval from Congress before taking military action in Syria.
"It's appropriate that he ask for that," Warren said at the annual Central Massachusetts AFL-CIO Labor Day breakfast, according to the Worcester Telegram & Gazette.
"What the Assad regime did is reprehensible, but we have to consider what's in America's best interest," Warren said.
-snip-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/02/elizabeth-warren-obama-syria_n_3856706.html
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)I am sure they would all do a good job as President. And we know which one is actually President.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)First off, we have primaries aevery once in a while... Un-Democratic?
Second, it's a question, not a "pitting". I'm curious.
treestar
(82,383 posts)There is no primary now.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Now I'm certain of your intention.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)RZM
(8,556 posts)Alamuti Lotus
(3,093 posts)LWolf
(46,179 posts)Little Star
(17,055 posts)a war is necessary, then I might listen.