What We Know and Don’t Know About the Missile Attack on Syria
I'm so old that I remember when the Senate majority leader said,
"Given the atrocities committed by Bashar al-Assad against his own people, including the use of internationally prohibited chemical weapons and the murder of innocent children, it is time for Congress to debate and vote on whether Syria's heinous actions should be met with a limited use of American military force,” [Senator Harry] Reid said in a statement.That was in 2013. I have not at this hour found a statement by present Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell about last night's attack. Presumably he'll make one this morning. But Speaker of the House Paul Ryan jumped in almost right away:
"I believe the use of military force against Syria is both justified and necessary,” he added. “I believe the United States has a moral obligation as well as a national security interest in defending innocent lives against such atrocities, and in enforcing international norms such as the prohibition against the use of chemical weapons. Assad must be held accountable for his heinous acts, and the world looks to us for leadership."
A bit of a far cry from what he said about President Obama's intention to bomb Syria for the same offense in 2013 (which Obama never ordered).
What changed? Nothing but the party of the occupant of the Oval Office. And you will see the Democrats flip just as firmly. But at least Harry Reid gave a head nod to the Constitution's requirement that only Congress can declare or authorize war. I don't see the Republicans of Congress doing even that. Senator John McCain (R.-Ariz.) has already said Trump didn't need it.
Update: Senator Rand Paul (R.-Ky.) has said that Congressional authorization should have been requested first.
Posts
