Peyton Manning
Gold Member
- Dec 19, 2012
- 14,534
- 18,686
- 🏆 Honorable Mentions:
- 1
- Detector(s) used
-
MXT-PRO
Sandshark
- Primary Interest:
- Metal Detecting
CONFLICT IN SYRIA
Syria Vote Sets Up Foreign Policy Clash in G.O.P.
By JONATHAN MARTIN
Published: September 2, 2013
FACEBOOK
TWITTER
GOOGLE+
SAVE
E-MAIL
SHARE
PRINT
SINGLE PAGE
REPRINTS
WASHINGTON — The Congressional vote on whether to strike Syria will offer the best insight yet on which wing of the Republican Party — the party’s traditional hawks, or a growing bloc of noninterventionists — has the advantage in the fierce internal debates over foreign policy that have been taking place throughout the year.
Enlarge This Image
Timothy D. Easley/Associated Press
Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican minority leader, left, and Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, in Kentucky in August.
Multimedia
Video
Obama Seeks Support on Syria
Multimedia Feature
A Broader Look at the War Across Syria
VIDEO: History as a Guide in Syria
DOCUMENT: U.S. Assessment of Syrian Use of Chemical Weapons
Related
McCain Urges Lawmakers to Back Obama’s Plan for Syria (September 3, 2013)
Washington Memo: History Aside, Obama Bets on Congress (September 2, 2013)
Russia Rejects U.S. Evidence on Syrian Chemical Attack (September 3, 2013)
Israeli President Voices Strong Support for Obama’s Decision on Syria (September 3, 2013)
Republican divisions on national security have flared over the use of drones, aid to Egypt, and the surveillance practices of the National Security Agency, and the tensions have played out publicly in battles between Senator John McCain of Arizona, the former Navy pilot and Vietnam prisoner of war, and Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, the libertarian-leaning freshman. Mr. McCain memorably called Mr. Paul and his compatriots “wacko birds,” and Mr. Paul suggested that Mr. McCain and the hawks were “moss covered.”
But those intermittent spats could pale in comparison with the fight over whether to attack Syria, an issue on which Mr. McCain and Mr. Paul — a former Republican presidential candidate and a possible one in 2016 — are almost certainly going to be the leading spokesmen for their party’s two wings.
Mr. McCain has long advocated intervention in the Syria’s civil war, and after meeting with President Obama at the White House Monday, he said it would be “catastrophic” if Congress did not approve the president’s proposal and that it would result in the United States’s credibility being “shredded.”
Mr. Paul made clear his opposition to Mr. Obama’s proposal on Sunday, taking to Twitter and the talk shows to taunt Secretary of State John Kerry. “John Kerry is, you know, he’s famous for saying, you know, how can you ask a man to be the last one to die for a mistake?” Mr. Paul said. “I would ask John Kerry, how can you ask a man to be the first one to die for a mistake?”
A top aide to Mr. Paul said Sunday that the senator would mount a lobbying campaign in the House, where senior leaders like Mike Rogers, Republican of Michigan and the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, will face off against a new vanguard of members like Justin Amash, Republican of Michigan, who are opposed to what they see as risky foreign entanglements.
But even Republicans who are not active supporters of Mr. Paul recognize that both the country and their party are susceptible to a come-home-America message at a moment of war weariness and, among conservatives, profound distrust toward Mr. Obama.
“Americans have become increasingly inured to events thousands of miles away, within a distant and disconnected culture,” said the longtime Republican strategist Alex Castellanos, citing a nation “exhausted by crises.” “They know our country is already overextended and doubt leaders who tell them there are ‘no good options’ but demand we choose one anyway.”
The result, Mr. Castellanos said, is that “Rand Paul is actually in sync with a crisis-weary America and a fatigued G.O.P.”
Mr. Paul is very much aware that the vote offers just that chance to reorient, at least for now, the Republican center on foreign affairs. And the debate gives him the chance to re-establish himself as the leading voice of the libertarian-leaning Tea Party movement after months in which Senator Ted Cruz of Texas has won significant attention.
To Republicans concerned about next year’s midterm elections, such a divisive public battle amounts to a distraction. They would prefer to focus on issues that voters say they are most interested in: taxes, spending, Mr. Obama’s health care law.
But the Syria measure also has important implications for the 2016 Republican presidential contest. White House hopefuls in Congress will be forced to choose between the wishes of Tea Party activists opposed to a strike and the wishes of more traditional Republicans, whose ranks include some major donors and Israel supporters with whom presidential candidates typically align themselves.
Syria Vote Sets Up Foreign Policy Clash in G.O.P.
By JONATHAN MARTIN
Published: September 2, 2013
GOOGLE+
SAVE
SHARE
SINGLE PAGE
REPRINTS
WASHINGTON — The Congressional vote on whether to strike Syria will offer the best insight yet on which wing of the Republican Party — the party’s traditional hawks, or a growing bloc of noninterventionists — has the advantage in the fierce internal debates over foreign policy that have been taking place throughout the year.
Enlarge This Image
Timothy D. Easley/Associated Press
Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican minority leader, left, and Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, in Kentucky in August.
Multimedia
Video
Obama Seeks Support on Syria
Multimedia Feature
A Broader Look at the War Across Syria
VIDEO: History as a Guide in Syria
DOCUMENT: U.S. Assessment of Syrian Use of Chemical Weapons
Related
McCain Urges Lawmakers to Back Obama’s Plan for Syria (September 3, 2013)
Washington Memo: History Aside, Obama Bets on Congress (September 2, 2013)
Russia Rejects U.S. Evidence on Syrian Chemical Attack (September 3, 2013)
Israeli President Voices Strong Support for Obama’s Decision on Syria (September 3, 2013)
Republican divisions on national security have flared over the use of drones, aid to Egypt, and the surveillance practices of the National Security Agency, and the tensions have played out publicly in battles between Senator John McCain of Arizona, the former Navy pilot and Vietnam prisoner of war, and Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, the libertarian-leaning freshman. Mr. McCain memorably called Mr. Paul and his compatriots “wacko birds,” and Mr. Paul suggested that Mr. McCain and the hawks were “moss covered.”
But those intermittent spats could pale in comparison with the fight over whether to attack Syria, an issue on which Mr. McCain and Mr. Paul — a former Republican presidential candidate and a possible one in 2016 — are almost certainly going to be the leading spokesmen for their party’s two wings.
Mr. McCain has long advocated intervention in the Syria’s civil war, and after meeting with President Obama at the White House Monday, he said it would be “catastrophic” if Congress did not approve the president’s proposal and that it would result in the United States’s credibility being “shredded.”
Mr. Paul made clear his opposition to Mr. Obama’s proposal on Sunday, taking to Twitter and the talk shows to taunt Secretary of State John Kerry. “John Kerry is, you know, he’s famous for saying, you know, how can you ask a man to be the last one to die for a mistake?” Mr. Paul said. “I would ask John Kerry, how can you ask a man to be the first one to die for a mistake?”
A top aide to Mr. Paul said Sunday that the senator would mount a lobbying campaign in the House, where senior leaders like Mike Rogers, Republican of Michigan and the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, will face off against a new vanguard of members like Justin Amash, Republican of Michigan, who are opposed to what they see as risky foreign entanglements.
But even Republicans who are not active supporters of Mr. Paul recognize that both the country and their party are susceptible to a come-home-America message at a moment of war weariness and, among conservatives, profound distrust toward Mr. Obama.
“Americans have become increasingly inured to events thousands of miles away, within a distant and disconnected culture,” said the longtime Republican strategist Alex Castellanos, citing a nation “exhausted by crises.” “They know our country is already overextended and doubt leaders who tell them there are ‘no good options’ but demand we choose one anyway.”
The result, Mr. Castellanos said, is that “Rand Paul is actually in sync with a crisis-weary America and a fatigued G.O.P.”
Mr. Paul is very much aware that the vote offers just that chance to reorient, at least for now, the Republican center on foreign affairs. And the debate gives him the chance to re-establish himself as the leading voice of the libertarian-leaning Tea Party movement after months in which Senator Ted Cruz of Texas has won significant attention.
To Republicans concerned about next year’s midterm elections, such a divisive public battle amounts to a distraction. They would prefer to focus on issues that voters say they are most interested in: taxes, spending, Mr. Obama’s health care law.
But the Syria measure also has important implications for the 2016 Republican presidential contest. White House hopefuls in Congress will be forced to choose between the wishes of Tea Party activists opposed to a strike and the wishes of more traditional Republicans, whose ranks include some major donors and Israel supporters with whom presidential candidates typically align themselves.
