Area congressman differ in response to Trump-ordered bombing of Syria
- Author: Zachary Reyes Апр 12, 2017,
Апр 12, 2017, 6:55
Welch, a Democrat, says Trump has a constitutional obligation to submit to Congress his plans to defeat the Islamic State group and stabilize Syrian.
"The President needs Congressional authorization for military action as required by the Constitution", he added.
Paul also suggested the complex situation in Syria makes it different from the Nazi concentration camps of WWII, when "it was pretty clear" there was "one bad guy". Trump has used that same authority to continue military action in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. "Congress to declare war; president to conduct war and repel sudden attacks".
"If he gives us the comprehensive way to bring the conflict to an end, I know Congress is anxious to work with the President", he said.
"You vote before you go to war, not after you go to war", Paul told reporters.
In a statement Friday, Sen. President Trump has said repeatedly that his objective in Syria is to defeat ISIS.
Other members of Congress had mixed opinions about the decision to fire missiles into Syria and what should occur moving forward.
Joining other dissident voices, such as fellow Vermonter Sen. This is the approach the Clinton Administration took when it participated in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation bombing campaign in Kosovo in the 1990s, and that the Obama Administration was apparently prepared to take if it had chose to use force against Syria in 2013.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) dismissed the notion that there was legal authority for the Syria strike in the AUMF passed by Congress in 2001 following the terrorist attack on 9/11.
Kaine condemned President Donald Trump's decision to attack a Syrian airfield with missile strikes on Thursday in response to the Assad regime using chemical weapons on Syrian citizens.
Paul would not answer as to whether or not he personally approved of Trump's actions but instead, reasserted that the move was unconstitutional and that a debate was needed to decide whether or not the USA should proceed forward.
"What the president did was an important first step to send a message that using chemical weapons and weapons of mass destruction is not acceptable, Moulton said".
Republican leaders, many of whom back a more hawkish view of foreign policy, praised Trump's actions.
Earlier this week, the UN's Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic had launched an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the alleged attack, saying at the time that "it is imperative for perpetrators.to be identified and held accountable".
Now that the US armed forces have engaged the Assad regime for the first time since Syria's civil war erupted more than six years ago, Congress must step up to the plate and make it abundantly clear to the Trump administration that the Constitution isn't some optional document where the president can pick and choose which articles to follow and which to ignore.