Senator Rand Paul delivered his response to President Obama’s speech on Tuesday night critiquing the President’s policies and the vagueness of purpose in his call for a response to Syria.
Senator Paul questioned the rationality of responding with military action just because ‘one man’ drew a red line over chemical weapons. Does this red line mean that America must “act or lose credibility?”
“If our enemies wish to know if America will defend herself, let them look no further than our response to 9/11. When attacked, we responded with overwhelming force, and with a military objective of complete victory over our attackers.”
Paul argued that there are too many unknowns. A strike on Syria may result in Assad feeling cornered, leading to an expanded use of chemical weapons. He further questioned: Would a U.S. bombing campaign make it more or less likely that Assad loses control of chemical weapons? Would a U.S. bombing campaign make it more or less likely that Assad would attack Israel with chemical weapons?
Paul said that the President had failed to outline any U.S. interests in the region and that attack Syria would lead to an “unnecessary war.”