Last week, my good friend Donald Trump followed the proud tradition of presidents past by playing his "Go To War" distraction card and lobbing some missiles at a Syrian airfield. It was his response to Syria using chemical weapons on its own people, which as we know, is a lot worse than shooting, bombing, or burning some other country's innocent civilians in a botched military raid.
Naturally, the attack has divided our party-over-country political system, and given our US Senators – James Lankford and Jim Inhofe – an opportunity to let their hypocrisy shine. Check out what Jim Inhofe said about Syria in 2013:
An Oklahoma senator says he is opposed to U.S. military action in Syria.
Sen. Jim Inhofe issued a statement calling on President Obama to present a detailed plan of action to Congress.
It stated, “What we are seeing in Syria is abominable as thousands upon thousands of innocent children and families are being murdered while millions more are being driven from their homes. Today, I told the administration that I cannot support military action in Syria unless the president presents to Congress his broader strategy in the region that addresses our national security interests and the budget to support it.”
President Obama has said he has not made a decision yet about a strike on Syria but says he is evaluating his options.
Okay. So Jim Inhofe was against military action against Syria in 2013 because "Obama didn't have a plan in place?" Makes sense. Considering Trump doesn't seem to have a plan in place either, I bet Inhofe's against this most recent attack... right?
Here's his statement on the recent airstrike via NewsOK.com:
The immediate and proportional airstrike against the Syrian’s Shayrat Airfield was a justified and appropriate response to the Assad regime’s indiscriminate and heinous chemical attack on Syrian civilians. Through this strike, President Trump signaled to Assad, Russia and the rest of the world that egregious violations of international law and norms of behavior will not go unanswered by the new administration. The United States, under the Trump administration, will play an emboldened leadership role worldwide; the days where our enemies don’t fear us and our allies don’t trust us are over.
The world is as dangerous now as at any time in my lifetime and the complex situation in Syria highlights that danger. These strikes underscore the requirement to immediately begin to repair the damage the Obama administration did by slashing military budgets and gutting military readiness, weakening the position of the U.S. globally. We must rebuild our military and national security so that we may achieve peace through strength. I applaud the president for his action.
Wow. What a surprise! Now that we have a Republican president, Jim Inhofe thinks an attack on Syria that's not part of a congressionally approved broader strategy is a great idea! In fact, he applauds the action. Hard to believe such an honorable, respectable man who likes to sadisticly kill pigeons would do such a thing.
Not to be outdone, Senator Skelagingator Lankford showed that he can play the hypocrisy game, too. Here's what he had to say about the conflict in 2013:
“I remain opposed to U.S. military intervention in Syria’s civil war,” said Lankford, whose correspondence from constituents has been overwhelmingly against U.S. action. “It is my belief that U.S. military involvement in Syria’s civil war is not in our national interest. I will review the classified materials in Washington, DC, but from what I have heard to date, the proposal on the table does not achieve our larger goal in the Middle East of stability or a reduction of chemical weapon threats. A limited missile strike will only weaken our hand in the Middle East when Assad claims a year from now that he beat the rebels and the Americans. We must continue to engage diplomatically and with our allies to ensure our strategic goals in the region remain achievable.
Wow. US military involvement in Syria's civil war is not in our national interest? That's a strong stance. He has to be against Donald Trump's airstrikes, too. Right?
Via NewsOK.com:
Bashar al-Assad is a ruthless tyrant who kills his own people and breeds terrorism throughout the Middle East. The latest chemical attack on innocent people is another chapter in a tragic pattern that has gone on for far too long. No one should expect the United States to ignore a dictator that commits war crimes and uses chemical weapons against his own people. Russia assured the international community that Syria was free of chemical weapons, but the Russian promises have proved false and they have demonstrated their inability or unwillingness to restrain Assad. It's time for the international community to join the United States and demand that Assad step down and allow the refugees scattered around the globe to return to their homes and be able to pursue peace.
Ha. I wonder what would Skelagingator would have said if Syria used chemical weapons on its people and President Hillary Clinton authorized the attack? He probably would have condoned it and brought up Benghazi.
Anyway, I guess you can't blame our Senators for acting this way. They're basically mimicking the behaviors of the hypocrites who voted them into office:
Editor's Note: While this draft was sitting in our drafts folder, the non-profit Tulsa Frontier published a similar write up. You can read it here.
