1 vote

Obama's Blurry Red Line

Astounding to read that the U.S. congress purportedly passed legislation to govern the behavior of those in another country (the article says "signed legislation," but I don't know what that means).

Anyway, the article:

"A year ago, President Obama declared that the use of chemical weapons by Syrian President Bashar Assad would cross a “red line for us” and might trigger a U.S. military response. Now, the president says it wasn’t his red line, but rather a line set by the international community and by Congress.

"It’s true that the international community has long condemned the use of chemical weapons. And Congress in 2003 signed legislation specifically forbidding Syria from using chemical weapons.

"But Obama plays down the importance of his “red line” comments a year ago by suggesting Congress and the world already had made similar pronouncements about military intervention. Neither the Chemical Weapons Convention nor the Syria Accountability Act authorizes the use of unilateral military force to enforce violations. And that’s the context of Obama’s original “red line” comment.

"Obama’s revisitation of the 'red line' statement came during a joint press conference with the Swedish prime minister in Stockholm, after Obama was asked whether “a strike [is] needed in order to preserve your credibility for when you set these sort of red lines?”

Read more: http://www.factcheck.org/2013/09/obamas-blurry-red-line/

Trending on the Web