Texas Sen. Ted Cruz on the congressional debate over striking Syria.

[orenbus]

Texas Senator Ted Cruz appeared on This Week With George Stephanopoulos to denounce President Barack Obama’s plan to strike Syria over chemical weapons, arguing that U.S. national security was not at stake and that the military action distracted from real security concerns over radical Islamic violence.

“One of the problems with all of this focus on Syria, is it’s missing the ball from what we should be focused on, which is the grave threat from radical Islamic terrorism,” Cruz said, noting that one year after the bombing of the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, the administration had not made any arrests. “We ought to be defending U.S. national security, and going after radical Islamic terrorists.”

Cruz argued that the U.S. had other viable responses to Assad’s use of chemical weapons that did not involve U.S. troops, proposing revoking Iraq’s aid unless they restricted Syria’s air rights, and putting pressure on Syria’s allies China and Russia by reinstating an anti-missile station in Poland and selling fighter jets to Taiwan.

He also defended his line that a Syria attack would turn the U.S. into “al Qaeda’s air force,” saying Dennis Kucinich said it first and he later saw it retweeted by an airman.

Stephanopoulos asked if Obama proceeding with military strikes without congressional authorization would constitute an impeachable offense. “It would be contrary to the Constitution,” Cruz said, but then added, “This is not the time for politics. This is a grave and serious moment.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zFdMrUpJjU

 

[enhanced_deficit]

Ok has he flip flopped?

Just few days ago Rafael Cruz was pushing for a US led quick war with Syria with boots on the ground:

“We know Assad has used these weapons, and there is good reason to suspect the al Qaida-affiliated rebels would use them as well if they could get their hands on them. This poses an intolerable threat not only to our friends in the region, but also to the United States. We need to be developing a clear, practical plan to go in, locate the weapons, secure or destroy them, and then get out. The United States should be firmly in the lead to make sure the job is done right.”- Rafael Cruz

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rx83YwkLAp0#t=39

CNN.com - 'Old Europe' hits back at Rumsfeld - Jan. 24, 2003
Jan 24, 2003 - The U.S. defence minister calls France and Germany 'old', the rest of Europe 'young' and wants a quick war with Iraq. ...

Or he no longer cares about security of our close allies Saudi Arabia, Israel ?

 

[69360]

He never wanted a war. He had some misguided idea special forces could just march in get the chemical weapons and march out. Maybe he backtracked on that, but he was never for a full scale ground war.

 

[Marky]

Cruz is a snake.

 

[FSP-Rebel]

He never wanted a war. He had some misguided idea special forces could just march in get the chemical weapons and march out. Maybe he backtracked on that, but he was never for a full scale ground war.

Pretty much what I've seen.

 

[Marky]

Get ready for him to be promoted as the “Tea Party” favorite of 2016.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

He never wanted a war. He had some misguided idea special forces could just march in get the chemical weapons and march out. Maybe he backtracked on that, but he was never for a full scale ground war.

There are two denials here, which one is the final one?

So you would prefer"Cruz called for quick ground invasion of Syria with US military boots on the ground to search/destroy WMDs" instead of "Cruz called for quick war with Syria"?