ISIS poses a danger to America, lawmakers from both parties say
WASHINGTON — Islamic terrorists' growing influence in Iraq and Syria is a threat to Americans, lawmakers from both parties agreed on Sunday even as they sharply split on what role the United States should play in trying to crush them.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said the militants threaten not just Iraqis, but Americans as well.
He said the airstrikes President Obama authorized were insufficient to turn back the militants and were designed “to avoid a bad news story on his watch.”
“I think of an American city in flames because of the terrorists' ability to operate in Syria and in Iraq,” Graham said on “Fox News Sunday.” “This is just not about Baghdad. This is just not about Syria. It is about our homeland.”
Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said the militants pose a threat “in our backyard” and are recruiting Westerners.
“Inaction is no longer an option,” she wrote in a statement.
The Islamic State is “getting stronger all the time,” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said on CNN's “State of the Union.”
“This ISIS is metastasizing throughout region, and their goal, as they've stated openly time after time, is the destruction of United States of America,” he added.
Lawmakers from both parties largely agreed that a war-weary America has little appetite to send military forces back to Iraq.
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 â 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.