Republican Leadership Voices Support for Trump’s Syria Attack

It seems that President Trump may be building some consensus with his foreign policy moves.

Last night CNN’s Fareed Zakaria called the attack “quite intelligent” and “quite effective,” before then wondering if President Trump acted out of intelligence or out of a fit of emotion.

Trending: Creepy Joe Biden One-Ups Hillary’s “Deplorables” Comment, Angers Americans

Today Republicans and Democrats alike are praising the President’s attack on Syria.

Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY):

take our poll - story continues below

Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Constitution updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Making sure Assad knows that when he commits such despicable atrocities he will pay a price is the right thing to do. It is incumbent on the Trump administration to come up with a strategy and consult with Congress before implementing it. I salute the professionalism and skill of our Armed Forces who took action today.”

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA):

Tonight’s strike in Syria appears to be a proportional response to the regime’s use of chemical weapons.  If the President intends to escalate the U.S. military’s involvement in Syria, he must to come to Congress for an Authorization for Use of Military Force which is tailored to meet the threat and prevent another open-ended war in the Middle East.”

Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC):

Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL):

“I don’t believe this is a message. I believe this is actually a tactical action that furthers an objective, which is important. My guess is, and I think you’ll see confirmation of it shortly, Shayrat Airfield, which is where these chemical attacks were launched from with fixed-wing aircraft just a couple of days ago is going to be the target, and that is the airfield from which the chemical attacks were launched. It’s also a critical point in a part of the country where they are battling rebels in the northern part of Syria. So, as I said, I think this is an important decisive step that was taken. It is not a message. It is an actual degrading of the capability of the Syrian regime to carry out further chemical attacks against innocent civilians. This will degrade their capability to launch those attacks from the air, and I think it was an important step, and hopefully it’s part of a comprehensive strategy moving forward to bring to a close this chaos is happening in Syria…
I would say to everybody this is not just some symbolic measure. it is a strategic objective, and…they appear to have dedicated the necessary resources to achieve a specific strategic objective, and that’s the way you conduct these things. [T]onight’s actions show that the days of being able to act with impunity are over, when it comes to Bashar al-Assad, and that there is now an American president prepared to do what it takes to ensure that he does not have the capability — or that his capability to conduct these sorts of heinous war crimes is diminished and that he’s held accountable.”

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT):

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-WI):

“Earlier this week the Assad regime murdered dozens of innocent men, women, and children in a barbaric chemical weapons attack. Tonight the United States responded. This action was appropriate and just. These tactical strikes make clear that the Assad regime can no longer count on American inaction as it carries out atrocities against the Syrian people. Resolving the years-long crisis in Syria is a complex task, but Bashar al-Assad must be held accountable and his enablers must be persuaded to change course. I look forward to the administration further engaging Congress in this effort.”

All of the praise doesn’t mean that everyone was happy with the attack however. Some Democrats believe the President overstepped his bounds in attacking without first seeking Congressional authorization, and Republican Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) cautioned the President on rushing to involve us in yet another world conflict.

Constitution.com 🇺🇸

I am the supreme law of the United States. Originally comprising seven articles, I delineate the national frame of government. My first three articles entrench the doctrine of the separation of powers, whereby the federal government is divided into three branches: the legislative, consisting of the bicameral Congress; the executive, consisting of the President; and the judicial, consisting of the Supreme Court and other federal courts. Articles Four, Five and Six entrench concepts of federalism, describing the rights and responsibilities of state governments and of the states in relationship to the federal government. Article Seven establishes the procedure subsequently used by the thirteen States to ratify it. I am regarded as the oldest written and codified constitution in force of the world.

Please leave your comments below

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.