Syrian chemical attack victim hits out CNN journalist
- Author: Leroy Wright Apr 10, 2017,
Apr 10, 2017, 4:32
Marco Rubio of Florida, applauded the strikes without mentioning congressional approval.
"I said "thank you" because I am very glad the Syrian regime is facing consequences for its actions.", Kawas told i.
In a statement issued the day of the chemical weapons attack, Trump said, "President Obama said in 2012 that he would establish a "red line" against the use of chemical weapons and then did nothing". He's a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
McConnell made a statement on the Senate floor Friday regarding the decision.
I am old enough to remember the last time the United States declared war in accord with Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.
"There is no legal justification for this", Kaine said. The Virginia Democrat said senators were told the administration would address that question in the coming days.
"It is now appropriate for the administration to consult with Congress as it considers next steps to resolve the long-running crisis in Syria". Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, referring to Syria's embattled leader.
SIEGEL: So we've got lots to discuss with our political observers, columnists E.J. Dionne of The Washington Post and The Brookings Institution.
The administration has signaled that it could take further action.
As part of his promise to suspend immigration from terror-prone places, Trump signed an executive order January 27 temporarily halting the entry into the United States of nationals from seven countries impacted by terrorism (Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen).
"I mean, the generation of 9/11 certainly shouldn't bind us to a forever war in the Middle East".
Some senators had their own ideas for why they believe the administration was acting legally.
"The action was taken to deter the Assad regime from using chemical weapons again", McConnell said.
One of the most immediate and effective ways to force the White House to engage in a discussion of Congress' role in military action in Syria is by using Congress' power over funding for the Defense Department and the government as leverage.
Dipoko said Trump's actions highlight his reckless approach to global relations, which could spark wider conflict worldwide.
"We have ceded far too much authority", Gardner said.
In 1973, with the War Powers Resolution, it allowed the President to commit troops anywhere in the world for up to 60 days without congressional involvement. But the law has been criticized as toothless.
These punitive aerial attacks did little to alter Saddam Hussein's behaviour, and in fact subsequently intensified the conflict between the United States and Iraq, where after 1998 the Iraqi president ordered increased efforts among his air defence forces to bring down an American aircraft, leading to an increase in American retaliatory bombings that continued right up to the 2003 Iraq war.
Others said Congress could introduce its own AUMF.
Senator Tim Kaine said Trump's failure to seek congressional approval violates United States law.
That's it. Absent those criteria, the president has no authority to act without congressional authorization. "Now I'll be glad to continue to negotiate, but I will not give up the commander in chief's responsibilities".
Trump's willingness to accept that he now bears some responsibility for Syria's conflict marks a significant moment for an "America First" president who has vowed to focus narrowly on US interests. "So we ought to be anxious about it".
"It's easier to get into a war than get out of one", Sanders said.