Donald Trump’s sudden concern for the same Syrian children he condemned to remain in a war zone caused him to flip his policy on Syria 180 degrees in less than 24 hours. It absolutely couldn’t have had anything to do with Devin Nunes standing aside in the House investigation into collusion with Russia, record low poll numbers, and a sneak peak at job numbers showing a sharp decline in business activity.
However, Trump wasn’t the only one who had a change of heart on Syria. Because while Trump and other Republicans are quick to point out that President Obama stepped back from enforcing his “red line” in 2013, they’re not so speedy when it comes to mentioning why.
In 2013, when a sarin nerve gas attack left more than 1,400 dead outside Damascus, President Barack Obama went to Congress to get approval to strike.
In a whip count from ThinkProgress, 183 Republicans were against bombing the country. Only 12 Republicans, including then-House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), sided with the president to launch a strike. Ultimately, Congress did not appear to approve the strike, with 243 Congressional members swaying towards voting “No.” Obama ultimately decided to postpone the vote.
That was for an attack with the same agent used in Idlib, with a body count many times higher. That was the attack about which Donald Trump himself was so dismissive and so aggressive in arguing against US action in Syria.
Republicans that were definitively against any action when 1,400 were killed with Sarin under President Obama are suddenly ready to join Trump in weapons-grade flip-flops now that “a win” is so desperately needed. If there’s a Republican cheering Trump for “doing the right thing” today, that Republican was almost certainly railing against President Obama for proposing to do anything about an attack almost twenty times more devastating.
The list of flip-floppers includes the usual “reasonable” Republicans, like John McCain and Lindsey Graham, as well as those who, like Marco Rubio, waffle more than a box of Eggos on a weekly basis.
Rubio 2013:
“While I have long argued forcefully for engagement in empowering the Syrian people, I have never supported the use of U.S. military force in the conflict. And I still don’t. I remain unconvinced that the use of force proposed here will work,” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said in 2013, explaining his no on the Obama strike authorization.
Rubio 2017:
On Thursday, he struck a different tone: “By acting decisively against the very facility from which Assad launched his murderous chemical weapon attack, President Trump has made it clear to Assad and those who empower him that the days of committing war crimes with impunity are over.
That impunity? Republicans put it there. President Obama didn’t enforce that red line, because Republicans made it clear they would not back an American president in the use of military force.