Rand Paul: Obama Speech Unconvincing, Popular Resistance— Not Military Threat— Temporarily Averted Strike
September 10, 2013 by Sam Rolley
Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) offered a rebuttal Tuesday evening to President Barack Obama’s speech on the possibility of an American strike against the Syrian government, saying that the President failed to convince him that a strike would of any benefit to the American public.
“It didn’t quite convince me,” Paul told on Fox News after the speech. “I think what he needed to lay out for the American public was a compelling American interest or national security interest in Syria.”
Syria, Paul contended, poses no legitimate threat to the United States and “has nothing to do” with U.S. national security.
The Senator didn’t deny that atrocities have been committed by the Syrian government, but was quick to note that Syrian rebels are also guilty of such acts.
“I see no clear ally for America on either side of this civil war,” Paul said.
Paul also refuted the President’s claim that a chemical weapons disarmament deal worked out between Syria and Russia was the result of the threat of U.S. military intervention.
“Some will say that only the threat of force brought Russia and Syria to the negotiating table,” Paul said. “But one thing is for certain. The chance for diplomacy would not have occurred without strong voices against an immediate bombing campaign. If we had simply gone to war last week or the week before, as many advocated, we wouldn’t be looking at a possible solution today.”