Share This Page

Momentum for Syria strike builds

| Tuesday, Sept. 3, 2013, 9:54 p.m.
AFP/Getty Images
Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Martin Dempsey, Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel answer questions on Tuesday, Sept. 3, 2013, during a hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in Washington.

WASHINGTON — President Obama gained ground on Tuesday in his drive for congressional backing of a military strike against Syria, winning critical support from House Speaker John Boehner while key Senate Democrats and Republicans agreed to back a no-combat-troops-on-the-ground action in retaliation for a suspected chemical weapons attack.

Officials said the emerging Senate measure would receive a vote on Wednesday in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Approval is likely.

“You're probably going to win” Congress' backing, Rand Paul of Kentucky, a conservative senator and likely opponent of the measure, conceded in a late-afternoon exchange with Secretary of State John Kerry.

The leader of House Republicans, Boehner emerged from a meeting at the White House and said the United States has “enemies around the world that need to understand that we're not going to tolerate this type of behavior. We also have allies around the world and allies in the region who also need to know that America will be there and stand up when it's necessary.”

Boehner spoke as lawmakers in both parties called for changes to the president's requested legislation, insisting it be rewritten to restrict the type and duration of any military action.

In the Senate, the compromise was the work of Sens. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., and Bob Corker, R-Tenn., among others. They are the chairman and senior Republican, respectively, on the Foreign Relations Committee, which held a lengthy hearing during the day on Obama's request for congressional legislation in support of the military reprisal he wants.

The measure would set a time limit of 60 days and says the president could extend that for 30 days unless Congress has a vote of disapproval.

The measure also bars the use of U.S. ground troops for “combat operations.”

Kerry, testifying before the committee, signaled earlier that the troop restriction was acceptable to the administration. “There's no problem in our having the language that has zero capacity for American troops on the ground,” he said.

“President Obama is not asking America to go to war,” Kerry said in a strongly worded opening statement. He added, “This is not the time for armchair isolationism. This is not the time to be spectators to slaughter.”

Obama said earlier in the day he was open to revisions in the relatively broad request the White House made during the weekend. He expressed confidence Congress would respond to his call for support and said Assad's action “poses a serious national security threat to the United States and to the region.”

The administration says 1,429 died from the attack on Aug. 21 in a Damascus suburb. Casualty estimates by other groups are far lower, and Assad's government blames the episode on rebels who have been seeking to overthrow his government in a civil war that began over two years ago. A United Nations inspection team is awaiting lab results on tissue and soil samples it collected while in the country before completing a closely watched report.

The president met top lawmakers at the White House before embarking on an overseas trip to Sweden and Russia, leaving the principal lobbying at home for the next few days to Vice President Biden and other members of his administration.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.