Unlike several of his colleagues in the South Carolina congressional delegation, U.S. Rep. Mick Mulvaney is not a guaranteed “no” vote against American military intervention in the Syrian civil war.
We find that surprising (and a little bit disappointing) given the disputed intelligence, reservations expressed by our military leaders, lack of support from our allies, the terrorists we’d be fighting with … oh, and the total absence of a compelling national interest in the outcome of the conflict.
But Mulvaney is a thoughtful guy, so it doesn’t surprise us he’s going through this vote point-by-point. In fact we’ve obtained an email circulated by Mulvaney to roughly three dozen of his GOP colleagues in the U.S. House outlining his concerns with the Syrian intervention.
Mulvaney’s first reason for leaning against supporting military action in Syria? The lack of international support for the enforcement of a prohibition against the use of chemical weapons.
“International law is supposed to be ‘international,'” Mulvaney wrote in his email. “When the world got together to declare that chemical weapons were in fact a different and unacceptable form of warfare … it did so with as close as a unified voice as you could probably get in the early 20th century. ALL the major powers agreed. Do we have that today? The Chinese clearly do not think this is against the law. Nor do the Russians. More critically, perhaps, neither do the British apparently. The French say the right things, but have already tipped their hands that they are willing to go soft as well. So I ask, is it really international law if it is just the U.S. who says that it is?”
Mulvaney’s email – which has reportedly thrown the GOP leadership in the House (as well as the White House war room) in a tizzy – makes another critical point. Specifically, it asks whether the same drumbeat for war would be underway in the event a stronger nation – or one of America’s allies – had engaged in the same sort of attack.
“Would we be having this same conversation if China had gassed its own people?” Mulvaney asks. “What about South Africa? Germany? A rhetorical question, for sure, but I think it proves a point: if we are NOT willing to consider cruise missile attacks on Beijing if they use gas on their own people — but we ARE in Syria — are we setting up an international system where there is one law for the poor, weak nations, and another for rich, strong ones? Is that acceptable?”
Another excellent point …
As we’ve noted on numerous prior occasions we have very strong feelings against American engagement in this conflict. Not only can America not afford it financially, but more importantly we cannot afford to incite anti-American extremism around the globe – at least not without a compelling reason to do so.
We hope Mulvaney eventually sees it that way, but however he votes it is refreshing to see a member of the U.S. Congress intelligently thinking through a major vote – and challenging his colleagues – as opposed to blindly doing as he is told.
I’m impressed with his thoughts on this troubling situation.
Dear US Senator Lindsey Graham…….
Do you understand why Wil Folks has published this article? This article is really about YOU..! Just think Senator Graham..!?
When Mulvaney states….” if we are NOT willing to consider cruise missile attacks on Beijing if they use gas on their own people — but we ARE in Syria — are we setting up an international system where there is one law for the poor, weak nations, and another for rich, strong ones? Is that acceptable?”
Us Senator Graham, you do realize how Nancy Mace can torpedo you in a debate by using Mulvaney’s words against YOU…don’t you.? She can also send tons of web hits to this very website at the same time.
Us Senator Graham…is Syria a POOR country? IS Syria a weak Nation..? If so, then why are “troops” and mercenaries fighting over it..?
Senator Graham, do you seriously think that Nancy Mace does not understand the value of OIL Pipelines and “investment” to the world economy and US taxpayer pensions..? Senator…you have a BIG problem.
If you think Nancy Mace can torpedo anyone in a debate, you’re even more delusional than you appear.
Ya know………the only thing she has to do is look Graham in the eye and SMILE….and say…..” Its the OIL, stupid “…..!!
“are we setting up an international system where there is one law for the poor, weak nations, and another for rich, strong ones? Is that acceptable?”
I thought that is what being a Republican was all about? Oh, I guess that only applies to poor, weak people and rich strong ones.
US Rep Mick “Haney” Mulvaney……you are one big S.O.B….!!
We wonder if you ever watched Green Acres…? Do you remember Mr. Haney..?
“..Mr. Haney (given name Eustace Charleston Haney) is a local farmer turned salesman and con man in the rural Hooterville community who was a supporting antagonist character on the 1960s CBS television series Green Acres….”
Ya know….”Mick”, we highly wager that you treat Syria like an episode of “Green Acres”..!
Question is….does Nancy Mace understand how to use your words to LUBE her donors and do what to the support of Graham in the BELTWAY..?
Nancy Mace is a complete and total LIGHTWEIGHT as is the rest of congressional goons from South Carolina. Just what does she know about foreign relations? She is so wet behind the ears that it’s embarrassing that the tea baggers put her up in this upcoming race. But, hey what do you expect from the SC tea baggers?
Fred, my friend, your divisive words reveal your political qualities. Have you ever stepped back and realized that Tea Baggers and Democrats and Republicans are all slaves to foreign energy here in South Carolina..? Do they all realize that they pay taxes..?
Question is Fred, do all parties realize how to win a WAR..? If so……do their members know..?
Syria is just an easy and convenient target for the MIC, that’s all. The government is perfectly willing to allow all sorts of mass killings and genocide under normal circumstances, regardless of how poor the country in question is.
What does lil jeffy duncan, “I PLAYED FOOTBALL AT CLUMSON” say about Syria? Hell I bet he can’t find it on a map.
We wonder if “Mick” has read this Politico piece today….?
We wonder if Mick understands why Politico would run this article today……of all days..?
We wonder if Mick would ask Wes if he ever reads the comment section of FITSNEWS and considers ….what..?
As goofy as Ms. Lindsey, Ol’Enos and Ol’Joe are, the rest of our delegation seems to have approached this issue from the appropriate thoughtful perspective. Duncan wore Kerry out yesterday – Kerry bloviated in response but Duncan drove home some powerful point and threw Benghazi in his face very effectively. Even Wilson was unusually thoughtful in his questioning of Kerry – tying the sudden urge to “attack” to Obama’s desire to draw attention away from domestic issues..
I for one don’t want to see us involved in Syria’s (un)civil war but the evidence is abundantly clear that Assad is the perpetrator of the chemical attack. All the rest of it; whose side we’d be fighting on, our allies stances and the lack of a clear military objective are more than enough for me to want to sit this one out.
The evidence is abundantly clear that it was not Assad. The “rebels” backed by McCain, Graham and Obama in Syria are Al Qeada and they are killing Christians. Lindsey Graham is: For Al Qeada, For Amnesty, Protects Obama at every turn and is for ObamaCare.
Colonel – all of these wars have been total bullsh*t that have killed and maimed innocent people and American soldiers. No objectives have been reached. The war on terror is a farce because: 1. The borders are wide open. 2. We are backing Al Qeada in Syria.
Dear Mick……We wonder if you have read this article…?
If you haven’t,,,,,,,,then you may want to consider how you are going to respond when Nancy Mace Asks you about it in her debate with Lindsey Graham…!!
Fancy that Mick….being asked a question in a debate by a candidate before she ever gets elected..!? How would you respond to certain questions when it is public knowledge that you knew the answer before a WAR started..?
Mick….you may want to review your donor list…..
Sorry idiot. About 97% of Americans do not want yet another war. Go away war head.
Americans want to …… WIN…!!!!
i am a democrat and opposed the attack on Iraq and now to any intervention in Syria. my question for jeff Duncan and the rest is, what would you be saying if a Republican was in office?
Didn’t Saddam Hussein employ industrial strength paper shredders on his people and other atrocities?
But at this stage, without an attack on the homeland, democrats and republicans alike are weary and skeptical.
Unfortunately, I wouldn’t put it past this or any President and their special interest groups, to do what they had to do to get the American people on board. Afterall, aren’t there some credible rumors out there that the Rebels actually did the gassing? Not unlike the start of prior wars….
The American people do not want this war and neither do the soldiers in uniform. Stop the wars. Assad did not gas his people. The Al Qeada rebels who are killing Christains in Syria are gassing innocent Syrian people.