Syria strikes: Democrats demand congressional approval for further military action
Criticism focuses on the lack of congressional authorization rather than strikes themselves, while Republicans applaud
The air strikes launched by Donald Trump against the Assad regime met a mostly positive reaction in Washington on Friday night. Many Republicans applauded the strikes while Democrats mostly focused their criticism on the lack of congressional authorization rather than strikes themselves.
In a statement, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said “This latest chemical weapons attack against the Syrian people was a brutally inhumane war crime that demands a strong, smart and calculated response. One night of airstrikes is not a substitute for a clear, comprehensive Syria strategy.”
This was echoed by Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader in the Senate, who said in a statement “A pinpointed, limited action to punish and hopefully deter Assad from doing this again is appropriate, but the administration has to be careful about not getting us into a greater and more involved war in Syria.”
Those comments were similar to those of Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts who tweeted “Chemical attacks in Syria are horrifying, and a clear violation of international law. The world must hold Assad accountable for his violence against the Syrian people – and the US should be part of a planned, coordinated multilateral effort.”
She added though “The Constitution gives Congress the power to authorize military action. If @realDonaldTrump wants to expand American military involvement in Syria’s civil war, he must seek approval from Congress – & provide a comprehensive strategy with clear goals & a plan to achieve them.”
Her comments were echoed by Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, who said “I’m deeply concerned that President Trump continues to conduct military operations without any comprehensive strategy or the necessary congressional authorization.”
Key Republicans expressed their support for Trump’s actions. Speaker Paul Ryan said in a statement “Tonight, the United States has taken decisive action in coordination with our allies. We are united in our resolve that Assad’s barbaric use of chemical weapons cannot go unanswered. His regime’s unconscionable brutality against innocent civilians cannot be tolerated.”
Senator Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma went even further, saying “tonight was yet another example of how under President Trump, the United States is once again standing up as the leader of the free world.”
Senator John McCain said “I applaud the President for taking military action against the Assad regime for its latest use of chemical weapons, and for signaling his resolve to do so again if these heinous attacks continue. I am grateful to our British and French allies for joining us in this action.” However, the 2008 Republican nominee did sound one warning, saying “Airstrikes disconnected from a broader strategy may be necessary, but they alone will not achieve U.S. objectives in the Middle East.”
Others, both on the left and right, were concerned that Trump had acted without any action from Congress. Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, who was Hillary Clinton’s vice presidential nominee in 2016, said “Trump’s decision to launch airstrikes against Syria without Congress’s approval is illegal. We need to stop giving presidents a blank check to wage war.” Tom Massie, a Republican congressman from Kentucky, tweeted skeptically “I haven’t read France’s or Britain’s ‘Constitution,’ but I’ve read ours and no where in it is Presidential authority to strike Syria.”
