There were arguments that intervention in Libya was not in the U.S. national security interest [View all]

[ProSense]

As with Libya, there is a debate to be had about Syria, and not everyone who supports intervention in critical times is a RW tool of the MIC or a "warmonger."

SENATE RESOLUTION 85--STRONGLY CONDEMNING THE GROSS AND SYSTEMATIC VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN LIBYA, INCLUDING VIOLENT ATTACKS ON PROTESTERS DEMANDING DEMOCRATIC REFORMS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES -- (Senate - March 01, 2011)(PDF)
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2011-03-01/pdf/CREC-2011-03-01-pt1-PgS1068-4.pdf#page=1

Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself, Mr. KIRK, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. DURBIN, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Mr. SANDERS, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. CASEY, Mr. WYDEN, and Mr. CARDIN) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:

<...>

Resolved, That the Senate--

(1) applauds the courage of the Libyan people in standing up against the brutal dictatorship of Muammar Gadhafi and for demanding democratic reforms, transparent governance, and respect for basic human and civil rights;

(2) strongly condemns the gross and systematic violations of human rights in Libya, including violent attacks on protesters demanding democratic reforms;

(3) calls on Muammar Gadhafi to desist from further violence, recognize the Libyan people's demand for democratic change, resign his position and permit a peaceful transition to democracy governed by respect for human and civil rights and the right of the people to choose their government in free and fair elections;

(4) calls on the Gadhafi regime to immediately release persons that have been arbitrarily detained, to cease the intimidation, harassment and detention of peaceful protestors, human rights defenders and journalists, to ensure civilian safety, and to guarantee access to human rights and humanitarian organizations;

(5) welcomes the unanimous vote of the United Nations Security Council on resolution 1970 referring the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court, imposing an arms embargo on the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, freezing the assets of Gadhafi and family members, and banning international travel by Gadhafi, members of his family, and senior advisors;

(6) urges the Gadhafi regime to abide by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1970 and ensure the safety of foreign nationals and their assets, and to facilitate the departure of those wishing to leave the country as well as the safe passage of humanitarian and medical supplies, humanitarian agencies and workers, into Libya in order to assist the Libyan people;

(7) urges the United Nations Security Council to take such further action as may be necessary to protect civilians in Libya from attack, including the possible imposition of a no-fly zone over Libyan territory;

(8) welcomes the African Union's condemnation of the ``disproportionate use of force in Libya'' and urges the Union to take action to address the human rights crisis in Libya and to ensure that member states, particularly those bordering Libya, are in full compliance with the arms embargo imposed by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1970 against the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including the ban on the provision of armed mercenary personnel;

(9) welcomes the decision of the United Nations Human Rights Council to recommend Libya's suspension from the Council and urges the United Nations General Assembly to vote to suspend Libya's rights of membership in the Council;

(10) welcomes the attendance of Secretary of State Clinton at the United Nations Human Rights Council meeting in Geneva and 1) urges the Council's assumption of a country mandate for Libya that employs a Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Libya and 2) urges the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations to advocate for improving United Nations Human Rights Council membership criteria at the next United Nations General Assembly in New York City to exclude gross and systematic violators of human rights; and

(11) welcomes the outreach that has begun by the United States Government to Libyan opposition figures and supports an orderly, irreversible transition to a legitimate democratic government in Libya.

Involvement in Libya had the benefit of NATO's support. There is a stronger case for involvement in Syria, but many want this action sanctioned by the UN. Everyone paying attention understands the dynamics of the UN Security Council. Others are leery of the risks.

The administration is making its case to Congress for a limited strike. If they go foward with the strike, I doubt anyone will be disappointed when Assad loses his ability to launch more chemical attacks.

The debate in Congress is being driven by an attempt to discern the facts. The Obama administration is making the case based on the evidence it has gathered. Those facts, including the relevance to U.S. national security, are guiding people's support or opposition to involvement. No one in Congress disputes that Assad is behind the attack. Members of Congress will determine their support based on their assessment of the facts.

Senators Boxer and Durbin voted against the IWR, but voted for the Syria resolution:

Who voted for the Syria resolution?

By Ed O'Keefe

Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted Wednesday to approve a resolution authorizing U.S. military action against the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

<...>

Final tally: 10 to 7, with one senator voting present.

Who voted yes?: Committee Chairman Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) (by proxy — was absent due to the Jewish holiday), Benjamin Cardin (D-Md.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Christopher Coons (D-Del.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.). Ranking member Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Sens. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.).

Who voted no?: Sens. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Christopher Murphy (D-Conn.), James Risch (R-Idaho), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.)

Who voted present?: Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.).

- more -

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/09/04/who-voted-for-the-syria-resolution/

Citing Need For More Information, Markey Votes ‘Present’ On Syria Resolution To Authorize Force

Newly-elected Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) raised a lot of eyebrows Wednesday afternoon when he voted "present" on a resolution to authorize military strikes in Syria, a position advocated by his predecessor Secretary of State John Kerry, who testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee the very same day.

“A `no’ vote would have indicated I had sufficient information on which to base the decision. Which I did not," Markey explained after the vote, as quoted by the Boston Globe.

“I want to make sure I make an informed, correct vote,” he added. “The people of Massachusetts expect their senators to have analyzed all the facts, and I want to make sure I have all the facts before I cast that vote.”

The committee ultimately passed a revised authorization for military action in Syria, including new language effectively making regime change the goal of the intervention, by a margin of 10 - 7, with Markey voting present.

- more -

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/markey-voted-present-on-syria-resolution-due-to

There was a debate about Libya. Some who supported that intervention, now oppose this one, and vice versa.