Some Republicans who want to succeed President Barack Obama in the White House are voicing concern that his request to Congress for a limited authorization to use military force against Islamic State terrorists in the Middle East isn’t robust enough.
Obama, saying he was determined to avoid another long ground war in the Middle East, submitted a use-of-force proposal Wednesday that would bar the sustained commitment of U.S. ground forces and would expire after three years, requiring Congress to revisit the matter early in the term of the next president.
Potential Democratic candidates, including former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and former Sen. Jim Webb, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, said he was opposed.
Here’s a look at how some potential candidates responded:
Republicans
MARCO RUBIO: The Florida senator said it was “good news” that Obama had submitted a request to Congress, but he faulted the president for seeking such a limited ability to respond to the Islamic State group.
“What we need to be authorizing the president to do is to destroy them and to defeat them, and allow the commander in chief — both the one we have now and the one who will follow — to put in place the tactics, the military tactics, necessary to destroy and defeat ISIL,” Rubio said on the Senate floor, using an acronym for the Islamic State group.
Rubio said it was unprecedented for a president to seek to put constraints on his ability to use military force against an enemy.
RAND PAUL: The Kentucky senator would not say one way or the other whether he would support the president’s request.
“The only way this battle ultimately is won is with boots on the ground. But they need to be Arab troops. They need to be Iraqis. They need to be Kurds,” Paul said during an interview with Fox News. “The Kurds are the best fighters over there. I think we really need to incorporate them and give them the goal of a homeland and I think they’ll be even more fierce fighters.”
Paul blamed potential Democratic rival Clinton for the rise of the Islamic State, saying Libya was “a breeding ground for terrorists and it is also a breeding ground for armament.” Clinton was secretary of state when a NATO-led military campaign ousted Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi.
SCOTT WALKER: Earlier in the month, the Wisconsin governor said he was open to sending U.S. troops to the Middle East to combat Islamic State fighters, but said he wasn’t calling for them immediately. And he said Obama hadn’t been aggressive enough in confronting threats from Islamic State fighters.
JEB BUSH: The former Florida governor declined to comment Wednesday. But in comments to reporters in Florida on Tuesday, Bush didn’t mince words about the threat Islamic State poses.
“We should not be timid about expressing exactly what their goals are … to challenge our way of life,” he said. “And I think we need to develop a world strategy to take them out.”
LINDSEY GRAHAM: The South Carolina senator called the president’s proposal “fatally flawed” and inadequate to destroy the Islamic State.
“My goal is to destroy ISIL, not to drag out the war but to actually get a strategy that will destroy them,” Graham said at the Capitol. “I want to get after these guys before they hit the homeland. They’re not going to surrender. They’re not going to give up.”
Graham said the authorization should make clear that Syrian President Bashar Assad would face penalties if he stands in the way of eradicating Islamic State fighters. And he proposed giving the United States power to defend rebels fighting Assad’s forces.
TED CRUZ: The Texas senator said Obama’s request would spark animated hearings that would force the administration to outline a strategy. Asked if he would like changes to the language, Cruz said there were bigger problems than the authorization.
RICK PERRY: The former Texas governor said in a statement that Obama’s proposed resolution was “a start — but not an end — and Congress has been negligent in not advancing this issue before now. We must defeat ISIS. I’m concerned that the war authorization may limit the use of ground forces” and contain other limitations.
MIKE HUCKABEE: The former Arkansas governor said the resolution “demonstrates a broad understanding that the war against ISIS will require a sustained military effort and the support of the American people.
But he added that the three-year limitation and the commitment against sustained use of ground forces “place counterproductive restraints on our national power, and the military’s ability to accomplish the mission.”
RICK SANTORUM
The former Pennsylvania senator said the president’s proposal “puts our nation in an untenable position.”
“To limit our commitment to fighting this existential threat to just three years is shortsighted and shows a complete misunderstanding of who our enemy is, what they believe and what motivates them.”
