By Jim Myers

 

 

Washington — After President Barack Obama took his case for a military strike against Syria to the nation, members of Wisconsin's congressional delegation continued to line up Wednesday against granting their commander in chief such authority.

 

So far, five of the state's U.S. House members — Democrat Mark Pocan and Republicans Paul Ryan, Jim Sensenbrenner, Sean Duffy and Reid Ribble — have announced publicly they oppose Obama's request.

 

Democrats Gwen Moore and Ron Kind and Republican Tom Petri remain undecided.

 

Ryan, the Republicans' nominee for vice president last year, used his statement to criticize Obama's approach to the crisis.

 

"I believe the president's proposed military strike in Syria cannot achieve its stated objectives," he said. "The president says a show of force will preserve our credibility. But a feckless show of force will only damage our credibility."

 

Ryan said Obama lacks a clear strategy and pointed to the fast-paced events on the diplomatic front that have put the president in the position of following the lead of Russia.

 

"The events of this week have reinforced our credibility gap," the congressman said, adding that Obama's "ill-conceived, half-hearted proposal will do little to help. It will make America look weak when we need to be strong."

 

Duffy was blunt after the president's address Tuesday night. "I have moved from 'no' to 'hell no,'" he said.

 

"The president's foreign policy stance on Syria has been completely incoherent."

 

Duffy said Obama failed to make his case that he has a workable plan during his televised address to the American people.

 

"Americans are not buying it, and neither am I," he said.

 

After withholding a final conclusion until after he could receive a full briefing with the president's national security team, Ribble said he does not believe it is in America's national security interest to take military measures against Syria, even given the atrocities committed by the Syrian regime against its own people.

 

"Until or unless the situation changes, or America's security interests are truly at risk, I believe we should continue to pursue alternative methods of holding the Assad regime accountable and I would vote 'no' on any authorization of military force if it were presented in the House of Representatives."

 

Sensenbrenner and Pocan also had put out earlier statements opposing authorizing a military strike, and Pocan added to his record Wednesday.

 

"The reprehensible use of chemical weapons is a global problem, and it deserves global action," Pocan said.

 

In her response to the president's address, Moore said she agreed with Obama that "the atrocious actions President Assad has committed against his own people cannot be tolerated."

 

However, she said, the best course of action would be to contain the use of chemical weapons without inadvertently exacerbating the problem.

 

"I am pleased that President Obama has chosen to give the Syrian regime an opportunity to relinquish its chemical weaponry," Moore said. "I await the Syrian response with expectancy and caution."

 

Kind said he has asked the Obama administration for more information about what the "day after" would look like and added that diplomatic developments have provided hope that use of American military force can be avoided.

 

"I believe, however, that the credible use of force is the only reason that Russia and Syria have now come to the negotiating table," he said.

 

Petri said too many questions about a military strike remain unanswered.

 

"I've said before that I don't think we've exhausted all other options," he said.

 

Wisconsin's two U.S. senators, Democrat Tammy Baldwin and Republican Ron Johnson, have both gone on record against authorizing a strike.

 

 

To view this article online, please click here.