Quantcast
Published On: Wed, Sep 4th, 2013

John Kerry doesn’t consider a strike on Syria ‘going to war in the classic sense’

During questioning in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Tuesday, Sec. of State John Kerry responded to a line of questioning from Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) concerning authorization to use military force against Syria by turning the tables on Paul–

photo donkeyhotey donkeyhotey.wordpress.com

photo donkeyhotey donkeyhotey.wordpress.com

Concerning the chance of Assad using chemical weapons again, Kerry asked Paul, “If the United States of America doesn’t do this, Senator, is it more or less likely that Assad does it again? You want to answer that question?”

Paul responded by saying “unknown”.

Kerry disputed Paul’s answer by saying, “Senator, it is not unknown. If the United States of America doesn’t hold him accountable on this, with our allies and friends, it is a guarantee Assad will do it again–a guarantee–and I urge you to go to the classified briefing and learn that.”

Kerry, a hawk in his own right, then proceeded to explain what the President was seeking was not to go to war–

“When people are asked, do you want to go to war in Syria? Of course not. Everybody, 100% of Americans would say no. We say no. We don’t want to go to war in Syria either. That’s not what we’re here to ask. The president is not asking you to go to war, he’s not asking you to declare war, he’s not asking you to send one American troop to war. He is simply saying we need to take an action that can degrade the capacity of a man who’s been willing to kill his own people by breaking a nearly 100-year-old prohibition, and will we stand up and be counted to say we won’t do that. That’s not–you know, I just don’t consider that going to war in the classic sense of coming to Congress and asking for a declaration of war and training troops and sending people abroad and putting young Americans in harm’s way. That’s not what the president is asking for here.”

Sen Paul issued the following statement Wednesday after a committee business meeting expressing his disapproval of military action in Syria:

“We are told there is no military solution in Syria, yet we are embarking on a military solution. The President has failed to demonstrate a compelling American national interest in the Syrian civil war.

“To be sure, there is a tragedy of a horrific nature in Syria, but I am unconvinced that a limited Syrian bombing campaign will achieve its intended goals. I frankly think that bombing Syria increases the likelihood of additional gas attacks, may increase attacks on Israel and turkey, may increase civilian deaths, may increase instability in the Middle East and may draw Russia and Iran further into this civil war.

“By pre-announcing a limited attack, we pre-announce limited effect.

“Our brave young soldiers should not be asked to risk their lives and limbs in a civil war with no certain ally. On the one hand, we have a tyrant who gassed his own people. On the other hand, we have radical Islamists and al-Qaida. When no compelling American interests exist, we should not intervene. No compelling interests exist in Syria.”

On the DISPATCH: Headlines  Local  Opinion

Subscribe to Weekly Newsletter

* indicates required
/ ( mm / dd ) [ALL INFO CONFIDENTIAL]

About the Author

- Writer, Co-Founder and Executive Editor of The Global Dispatch. Robert has been covering news in the areas of health, world news and politics for a variety of online news sources. He is also the Editor-in-Chief of the website, Outbreak News Today and hosts the podcast, Outbreak News Interviews on iTunes, Stitcher and Spotify Robert is politically Independent and a born again Christian Follow @bactiman63

Tags

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Sign up for our Weekly Newsletter



Categories

Archives

At the Movies

Pin It