Nancy Pelosi Going to Syria

[ACPlayer]

Even your analogy is terrible.

Has Syria said that they dont want to talk to Pelosi?

[ShakeZula06]

Who cares if she goes to Syria? What bad could come from it?

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
Who cares if she goes to Syria? What bad could come from it?

[/ QUOTE ]

The US could someday develop a rational foreign policy!!!! Think of the children!

[AzDesertRat]

Our foreign policy has been [censored] since the Monroe Doctrine. What's going to improve it now?

[NT!]

Apparently Pelosi is going to Syria to work for the release of the Israeli soldiers kidnapped by Hezbollah. Man, what a monster that woman is!

Apparently not only have Republican legislators met with Assad in the past (and no mention of Bush supporting or opposing their visit), Pelosi's delegation also includes one Republican legislator this time around.

Even the President's own Study Group recommended he sit down and talk with Iran and Syria. This attack on Pelosi is such BS posturing.

[Felix_Nietzsche]

[ QUOTE ]
Apparently Pelosi is going to Syria to work for the release of the Israeli soldiers kidnapped by Hezbollah.

[/ QUOTE ]
LOL! I hope this is true. An American congresswomen, elected by the City of San Francisco, conducting foreign policy on behalf of Israel, without the approval of Israel or the US State Department. This would be too JUICY if it is true. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
Apparently not only have Republican legislators met with Assad in the past (and no mention of Bush supporting or opposing their visit),

[/ QUOTE ]
The president has the power to conduct foreign policy.
To quote Nancy Pelosi, "elections have consequences". If the Dems want to conduct foreign policy, then then need to win the executive branch. As for the president, he can send special envoys to other countries at his whim.... The key is whether these Repub congressman went with the president's approval or not. Nancy Pelosi decided to go over the objections of the president and the State Dept...

[Spud CA]

Just a quick correction, Syria's killing spree in Lebanon has not been restricted to [ QUOTE ]
Lebanese Christian leaders

[/ QUOTE ]. They've killed non-Christian leaders as well case in point Rafik Hariri.

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you have similar objections to the recent trip to Syria and meeting with Syrian President Assad by Republican members of the House?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I do UNLESS they ask permission from the President.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow -- that's precious!!!

Dear Mr. Lyndon Johnson,

May I please go to Vietnam to see if the situation is seemingly as you say, since it is after all my responsibility and not yours to declare war?

Signed,
Congressional leader

Dear Congressional leader,

Thanks for your letter. Sorry, but no, you can't go. Trust me, I'm am an honest john and really brilliant strategist, the situation is exactly as I say. So please keep giving me carte blanche power to wage an unconstitutional war and stay in your office.

Sincerely,
Lyndon (or any other President, for that matter)

[bdk3clash]

[ QUOTE ]
To prove hypocricy you need to cite two events.
You cited Bill Crystal opposition to Nancy Pelosi going to Syria so where has Crystal supported UNSANCTIONED visits to Syria or any other country?

My instincts tell me you have no such example and are just throwing out the "hypocrisy" word because you think it sounds cool to throw that word around....

[/ QUOTE ]

To clarify, I was referring to your hypocrisy. The Bill Kristol quote was to buttress my agrument that you were "in good company" if you knowingly (see below) singled out Pelosi for criticism

Anyway, based on your posts in this thread I see two possible scenarios:

1) You were aware only of Pelosi's visit to Syria and meeting with President Assad.

2) You were aware of Pelosi's and other members of Congress's (both Democratic and Republican) visits to Syria and meetings with President Assad.

If #1 is the chase then you're off the hook for the charge of hypocrisy, although this would speak to an interesting selection bias in your news gathering abilities. Why were you only aware of Pelosi's visit when it was public knowledge (see my links above) that other members of Congress (both Democratic and Republican) were visiting Syria at or around the same time?

If #2 is true then your hypocrisy is blatant. It is a sin of omission--choosing to single out Pelosi for criticism while choosing to not mention other members is hypocritical by its very nature.

[ QUOTE ]
And based on your total avoidence of my post, I assume you agree it is bad form for Pelosi to go to Syria over the President's and the State Department's objections...

[/ QUOTE ]
Here we get to the meat of the issue. Regardless of my thoughts on your hypocrisy or lack thereof, I disagree with the assumptions you appear to make (but don't state) about meeting with Syria in general and about meeting with countries and foreign leaders the President (both generally and this one) would prefer members of Congress not meet with.

I personally support a foreign policy that is generally proactive, engaged, multilateral, consensus-building, and tactful. And please note that none of these characteristics should be confused with weakness.

We've had six years of the type of foreign policy you're espousing, and it has resulted in a debacle of tragic proportions in Iraq, an increasingly hostile and isolated Iran, a nuclear-capable North Korea, and an unstable Taliban-friendly Pakistan, just to name a few choice outcomes.

It's also resulted in a general erosion of faith in the United States as an honest broker. It's time to let the grownups have a shot at it.

I don't claim to have all the answers, and I certainly don't think that Democrats do, but I do think they'll do a much better job than the current administration has with near unitary executive power to conduct foreign policy as it sees fit.

As a great politician once said, "The politics of failure have failed. It's time to make them work again."

[Felix_Nietzsche]

[ QUOTE ]
To clarify, I was referring to your hypocrisy. The Bill Kristol quote was to buttress my agrument that you were "in good company" if you knowingly (see below) singled out Pelosi for criticism

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh?
Then please cite a case where I said it was OK for Repubs to visit Syria without sanction from the executive branch? Do you want to concede your talking out your ass or would you prefer just to pretend you didn't see this post? Hint: I have NEVER said anything like this. Clinton let Carter negotiate with North Korea. I thought this was a huge mistake by Clinton but it was his right as president to delegate this authority to Carter.
We certainly do NOT need 535 congressmen trying to conduct foreign policy.

[ QUOTE ]
1) You were aware only of Pelosi's visit to Syria and meeting with President Assad.
2) You were aware of Pelosi's and other members of Congress's (both Democratic and Republican) visits to Syria and meetings with President Assad.

If #1 is the chase then you're off the hook for the charge of hypocrisy, although this would speak to an interesting selection bias in your news gathering abilities. Why were you only aware of Pelosi's visit when it was public knowledge (see my links above) that other members of Congress (both Democratic and Republican) were visiting Syria at or around the same time?

[/ QUOTE ]
Ahhh. So you don't know. You just start calling people hypocrites without having evidence. Ready-Shoot-Aim! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Just say, "Oooops my bad. I apologize." then we can drop this nonsense.

[ QUOTE ]
We've had six years of the type of foreign policy you're espousing, and it has resulted in a debacle of tragic proportions in Iraq, an increasingly hostile and isolated Iran, a nuclear-capable North Korea, and an unstable Taliban-friendly Pakistan, just to name a few choice outcomes.

[/ QUOTE ]
I wonder if you have ever read any of my posts.
I am no fan of Bush's foreign policy decisions. I agree that Afghanistan/Iraq should have been invaded. Other than that I have been quite irritated with Bush. On the domestic front I'm even more irritated at Bush. I only voted for Bush because Gore and Kerry are worse.

Reagan, for the most part, had an excellent foreign policy. When Reagan sank half the Iranian navy in one day for mining the Persian Gulf, the Iranians became very polite towards us. Gee funny how that works with Rogue regimes like Iran.....