Comments about ‘How an attack on Syria would be 'Obama's biggest flip-flop'’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Aug. 28 2013 2:00 p.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Mountain View, CA

So what? That was politics. I am NOT unilaterally an Obama supporter, but his job should be to act to do what is right not worry about being called a "flip flopper". Stop making this about politics. If Syrians are killing each other by the hundreds of thousands I think I would commit troops even if it was the one thing I said I would never do, because it is the right thing to do. Stopping Genocide >>>>>> name calling.

Saint George, UT

Whoa, whoa, whoa.

Progressives (or ANY politician for this matter) DO NOT flip-flop.

They evolve...

California Steve
Hanford, CA

What does Obama care? To him there is no constitution. There is no law. There is no congress. There is only the golf course.

Cairo, AE

@ Foxtrot,

The point of the article calling Mr. Obama a "flip flopper" is not directed at his willingness to employ US forces in punitive action against the Assad regime, it is directed at the way he purports to do it, by side-stepping congress as required by the War Powers Resolution. This is in direct contradiction to his strong criticism of former President Bush. This is but another in a long list of significant miscues Mr. Obama would be committing with respect to inappropriate use of executive power.

I agree with you in that if he and congress agree that it needs to be done, so be it. But he needs to do it the way it is constitutionally mandated to be done.

Salt Lake City, Utah

So how many have been wounded, disabled, or killed? Several thousand? The AMA, FDA, BigPharma and oncologists do that and more day in and day out using the chemical warfare known as Chemotherapy. How many lives have been scarred by this barbaric and failed 'treatment' here at home? Different motives? How about greed and power. I can't say the prescription drug industry has any better track record. But ask your doctor about alternatives - in the 'Land of the Free' he is under a gag order. Go figure.

Buena Vista, VA

There are so, so many other things that Obama criticized Bush for, which he is now doing himself. Someone should compile a list of them, or write a book about them.


This is a no win situation for republicans in congress. If he goes through them first and they agree to allow action against Syria then their base will crucify them for working with Obama and agreeing with him on something. If they do not authorize action then they are siding with Assad and they get to own every action he takes against a civilian populace. The only "win" for republicans is if he doesn't go to congress for authorization, then they an criticize whatever action he does take, either way.

Down under
Salt Lake City, UT

And so goes his entire presidency, a big flip flop. He will say ANYTHING to get elected and then do as he pleases.

Mcallen, TX

Foxtrot--flip-flop. Biden also. flip-flop.

Syria has done nothing to us. May be they should bomb us for the killings in Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia, L.A, etc.

Attacking Syria would be helping the Muslim Brotherhood gain power.

Manti, UT

Let's see. In Iraq you had a renegade, leader that was destabilizing the middle east who invaded other countries at will, used chemical weapons on his own people and those of surrounding countries and an oil interest. And the liberals say that was wrong to use military force there. In Syria you have no outside threat, no oil interests and a leader trying to control his subjects. Hey, lets march!

Let's help the rebels so they can bomb our embassy afterwards. No wait, that's not right. Um, lets send the rebels military aid like the Muslim Brotherhood so they can shoot their own people. Oops, maybe that's not right either. How about we just stay the heck out of this?


I too, have wondered if Obama feels the least bit ashamed or embarassed for now doing the same thing he criticized Bush for.

A good way to take his mind off his "flip-flops", (I thought ONLY Romney did that)would be to go play a round of golf.

Salt Lake City, UT

As with President Bush, as with President Obama, as with virtually any president. All evolve, all flip-flop over time, as the demands of the office and dealing with real problems often require a reversal of campaign promises and priorities, to do what must be done during their presidency in fulfilling their responsibilities. We wish them all well and pray on their behalf.

Salt Lake City, UT

Obama has repeatedly shown complete disdain for the Constitution's separation of powers provisions. More than any prior President, he has become a law unto himself. His actions and statements evince his belief that Congress and the powers granted that branch by the Constitution are a mere inconvenience as he moves forward to implement whatever edict happens to suit his fancy at the moment.

I don't know if the Constitution "hangs by a thread" at the moment, but it certainly will at some point unless the Supreme Court or Congress itself steps forward to stop this constant usurpation of authority by the executive.

redlands, CA

When The President made his first comments, he wasn't the President. He knows more now about the situation and how things work.

Totally understandable.

Kaysville, UT

This President is supposedly a Constitutional lawyer but maybe doesn't know international law or knows enough to get around the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty that is in-force in the United States of America as a signatory with President William Clinton's signature on it. This treaty was made with certain protocols for situations such as this. He has had 12 months since his red line was drawn in the sand and he has several times he could have done something prior to now. Benghazi was within days of the first communication during the campaign and convention time. He couldn't be bothered by that and didn't need to be as he could have had Ambassador Rice push the situation with the United Nations. However, she was too busy making a defense on all forms of media for Benghazi and that fiasco.

A Guy With A Brain
Enid, OK

So let me get this straight....

If Bush invades a foreign country who (by virtually EVERY civilized country (go look it up), deemed Iraq a threat to America and the western world) it was really invaded for oil.

If Obama invades a foreign country who is NOT deemed a threat to America or the western world, it's a righteous and holy action entirely justified.


And here I thought only Romney "flip-flopped".

Mcallen, TX

Paco--evil is not understandable. Attacking another country that is not a threat to us is evil.

Will somebody please get Obama back on a golf course.

Jonathan Buttall
London, 00

I voted against Romney because he talked about getting us into more wars. So I voted for Obama and we got the biggest war monger in the history of our country. Reminds me of when we voted for LBJ in 1964 because we were told Goldwater would get us in war, and of course LBJ got us into a disastrous war that we lost.

So what's the point of voting when both parties have the same failed foreign and war policy? Is there anyone out there opposed to such international aggression and national betrayal? Who do we vote for in the future to stop this insanity? Eisenhower was right about the military industrial complex running the country.

Cottonwood Heights, UT

I'm just rolling on the floor laughing at all the Obama supporters lame lame lame excuses for him. He really has them fooled.

Salt Lake City, UT

This wasn't already done with Libya? I feel like the writer is a couple years late on thinking this...

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments