Rand Paul's Statement on Syria 8/28/13

[tsai3904]

Aug 28, 2013

Sen. Rand Paul released the following statement today regarding reports of potential military action by the Obama Administration in Syria.

"The United States should condemn the use of chemical weapons. We should ascertain who used the weapons and we should have an open debate in Congress over whether the situation warrants U.S. involvement. The Constitution grants the power to declare war to Congress not the President.

"The war in Syria has no clear national security connection to the United States and victory by either side will not necessarily bring in to power people friendly to the United States," Sen. Paul said.

###

http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=932

 

[radiofriendly]

Unless Rand Paul sings this to the tune of Bohemian Rhapsody on every channel at once, I'd say he is standing with the neocons and Obama on this Syria war thing.

 

[FSP-Rebel]

https://twitter.com/stevebruskCNN/status/372780164557864960

Steve BruskVerified account
‏@stevebruskCNN
Sen. Rand Paul on Syria: "we should have an open debate in Congress over whether the situation warrants U.S. involvement."

 

[angelatc]

Unless Rand Paul sings this to the tune of Bohemian Rhapsody on every channel at once, I'd say he is standing with the neocons and Obama on this Syria war thing.

Then he must have crafted a message that allows everybody who reads it to hear what they want.

 

[Lightweis]

weak statement. He should be blasting Obama left and right. Only nine percent of Americans support this war. Rand needs to go on the offensive.

 

[chudrockz]

I much preferred Justin Amash's response to the possibility of war with Syria.

 

[brandon]

Why is Paul holding back on this one? What is he afraid of?

 

[tsai3904]

I much preferred Justin Amash's response to the possibility of war with Syria.

I think Justin has only commented on the Constitutionality of military strikes without Congressional authorization.

Rand states: "The war in Syria has no clear national security connection to the United States"

 

[compromise]

Justin probably feels more strongly, being a Syrian Christian himself.

 

[ManOfSteel]

weak statement. He should be blasting Obama left and right. Only nine percent of Americans support this war. Rand needs to go on the offensive.

I much preferred Justin Amash's response to the possibility of war with Syria.

Why is Paul holding back on this one? What is he afraid of?

 

[green73]

Thanks, Matt.

 

[Christian Liberty]

At least Rand seems like he's opposed to it. Ted Cruz wants to dive right in.

I wish he would have attacked harder, but I have no doubt he'll be against it at the end of the day. (If ManofSteel asks me if I'd bet a million dollars against a penny on this, I'm going to neg rep him)

 

[specsaregood]

I think Justin has only commented on the Constitutionality of military strikes without Congressional authorization.
Rand states: "The war in Syria has no clear national security connection to the United States"

And that interview recently posted he strongly suggested he didn't think it was assad launching those attacks.

 

[brandon]

At least Rand seems like he's opposed to it. Ted Cruz wants to dive right in.

Where did you get that from? Cruz's statement on Syria is very similar to Rands, even including the same language "United States shouldn’t attack Syria because it has no national interest calling for it to do so"

http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2013/08/28/ted-cruz-attacking-syria-isnt-in-our-best-interest/

 

[LibertyEagle]

You didn't "call" anything, but you did prove yourself to be disingenuous, at best.

In the other thread you declared that Rand would not respond at all about Syria. Now that he has you change your story to something else.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Why is Paul holding back on this one? What is he afraid of?

It's a good statement. He's not done with the issue. What do you want him to do, run around waving his hands in the air and screaming like a lunatic?

 

[Lightweis]

It's a good statement. He's not done with the issue. What do you want him to do, run around waving his hands in the air and screaming like a lunatic?

He should be calling for the impeachment of Obama. only 9 percent of americans support the war. This is a perfect time to slam a vulnerable pathetic president.

 

[specsaregood]

He should be calling for the impeachment of Obama. only 9 percent of americans support the war. This is a perfect time to slam a vulnerable pathetic president.

Impeachment over what issue? Are we publically attacking Syria already?

 

[Lightweis]

Impeachment over what issue? Are we publically attacking Syria already?

Any minute now bombs will be dropping. Where is the urgency?

 

[specsaregood]

Any minute now bombs will be dropping. Where is the urgency?

Well I'm pretty sure calling impeachment for a crime he hasn't committed isn't the way its done. Actually, its probably a sure fire way to get liberals against the war to instinctively switch sides and support bombing.