Feel good video: FA-18 Hornets blow up ISIS terrorists...

Finally, a good use for our tax dollars.

John "Lurch" Kerry is making the case to attack his "Dear Friend" Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad

Lurch seems to be point man when it comes to making the case for military action against Syria for use of chemical weapons...

Via NBC News:

Hinting at a military response, Secretary of State John Kerry on Monday accused Syria of using chemical weapons against its people, and said President Barack Obama believes “there must be accountability.”
Kerry, using forceful language in a brief statement to reporters, said images that have emerged from Syria in the past week — entire families killed without shedding a drop of blood, bodies contorting in spasms — “shock the conscience of the world.”
The president feels there must be accountability for those who use “the world’s most heinous weapons,” he said.
The secretary added: “Nothing today is more serious, and nothing is receiving more serious scrutiny.”
He spoke hours after a United Nations team investigating claims of a poison-gas attack in a rebel-held suburb of the Syrian capital collected blood samples and interviewed survivors despite being temporarily turned back by sniper fire.

 I bet John Kerry wishes he a a do-over on this:

[S]taffers describe their collective cringe when, after a motorcycle ride with Bashar al-Assad, he returned to Washington referring to Bashar as “my dear friend.” Bashar may be a lot of things, but “my dear friend”—an address Kerry used only with a select few, such as the late Ted Kennedy—should not have been one.

War drums: U.S. naval forces moving closer to Syria...

I wonder if Obama's UN masters will ever give him permission to use military force? 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- U.S. naval forces are moving closer to Syria as President Barack Obama considers military options for responding to the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Assad government. The president emphasized that a quick intervention in the Syrian civil war was problematic, given the international considerations that should precede a military strike.

The White House said the president would meet Saturday with his national security team to consider possible next steps by the United States. Officials say once the facts are clear, Obama will make a decision about how to proceed.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel declined to discuss any specific force movements while saying that Obama had asked the Pentagon to prepare military options for Syria. U.S. defense officials told The Associated Press that the Navy had sent a fourth warship armed with ballistic missiles into the eastern Mediterranean Sea but without immediate orders for any missile launch into Syria.

Shocking report: Obama asked Netanyahu to postpone Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities until after November election

Wouldn't want those pesky gas prices spiking until after November...

YNet News reported:

White House tells Sunday Times Obama pressed Netanyahu to postpone Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities until after November, adding president ‘might visit Israel in summer’
Israel will only strike Iranian nuclear facilities in September or after the United States presidential elections in November, a White House official told the British Sunday Times newspaper after a meeting between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama last week.

According to the report, Obama has taken Israel’s warnings about a possible strike in Iran very seriously. The Washington source added that the president “might visit in the summer to reassure the Israelis that the US commitment to defend Israel is unshakable and thus thwart a possible autumn attack.”

Obama insisted that any attack on Iran should be postponed until after the US presidential elections in November, possibly even until next spring. The source revealed that Netanyahu consented to delaying a strike, but wished to know until when. “The question is how much time,” he reportedly said.

The White House source added that Netanyahu presented a number of demands Iran must fulfill in order to avoid an Israeli attack, including transferring 150 kilograms (330 pounds) of enriched uranium to a third party, stopping the enrichment process at the Fordow site near Qom and ceasing any further enrichment beyond the 3.5% required for power generation.

Chutzpah: Ahmadinejad tells West, "As God is my witness, the Iranian nation will not give a damn for [your] bombs"

Does anyone really think sanctions are going to work with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?

KARAJ, Iran — Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made a defiant TV speech Sunday in which he taunted the West, saying the Islamic Republic is unfazed by the threat of Western military action.

“As God is my witness, the Iranian nation will not give a damn for [your] bombs, warships and planes,” Ahmadinejad said in a televised speech in Karaj, west of Tehran, reported by the official IRNA news agency.

“They say all [options] are on the table. Well, let them rot there. You yourself will rot,” he added.
The hard-line leader accused the US and other Western nations of bullying Iran, adding that the West “should talk politely, and recognize the rights of nations, and cooperate instead of showing teeth, and weapons and bombs.”

Flashback to 2007: Senator Obama said President does not have power to authorize non defensive military attack without consent of Congress

 Here is what Senator Obama, in December of 2007, had to say about possible U.S. military action against Iran's nuclear program.

Barack Obama's Q&A:

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.

As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.

Of course, President Obama has obviously changed his position by authorizing U.S. military action against Libya, which is clearly no imminent threat to the U.S.



The purpose of this post isn't that I disagree with President Obama's decision to bomb Libya. I don't. This post merely illustrates the mind-exploding hypocrisy of Barak Obama. Senator and candidate Obama severely criticized former President Bush for holding prisoners indefinitely in Gitmo and launching military action without prior consent of Congress. Now, he is doing the exactly the same things.

Barack Obama's Q&A:

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.

As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been the driving force for this military action in Libya. Ironically, she also claimed during the 2008 campaign the President doesn't have authority to bomb (Iran) without consent of Congress.