On Tuesday night President Obama decided to act like an elected leader in a democratic republic rather than just a blustering “commander-in-chief.” He tried to make the case before the American people for his intention to bomb Syria.
Obama’s speech was followed immediately by a less publicized reaction from Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky. Paul made the obvious and always ignored constitutional point about Obama needing congressional approval, and laid out many prudential reasons why our bombing Syria would not likely lead to any good outcome, and would likely lead to many bad ones.
Reason magazine Senior Editor Brian Doherty notes Paul’s Syria stance could have legs in national politics beyond this week’s war averted, or postponed. The dueling presentations from president and senator on the politics and policy of warmaking made for a debate that the American people have not been permitted to have on foreign policy for decades.