Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Paul Ryan 2013: Syrian strikes would look weak. Paul Ryan 2017: Assad must be held accountable.

After President Donald Trump ordered a missile strike on a Syrian airbase Thursday in direct response to a Syrian regime–ordered gas attack on civilians earlier this week, many Republican lawmakers applauded his leadership.

For a lot of them, it was an about-face from four years ago.

In 2013, President Barack Obama asked Congress for military authorization to intervene in Syria after a similar chemical attack. But Republicans in Congress said no.

House Speaker Paul Ryan was among them. Under Obama, Ryan said any response from the United States over Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons would be a “feckless show of force,” adding, “Syria’s civil war isn’t our fight, but we have a stake in the outcome.”

Now, with a Republican president in the White House, many of those same voices have changed their tune — including Ryan. In a statement Thursday night, Ryan called Trump’s actions “appropriate and just.”

“These tactical strikes make clear that the Assad regime can no longer count on American inaction as it carries out atrocities against the Syrian people,” Ryan said in a statement.

The House speaker is not the only one who had a change of heart. CNN’s Andrew Kaczynski pointed out the many other Republican lawmakers who flipped in their responses to military intervention in Syria:

Of course, the hypocrisy doesn’t stop with Capitol Hill. Trump himself was highly critical of Obama’s ask for military authorization in 2013, tweeting multiple times that the United States should not intervene in Syria and should focus instead on domestic problems:

More in Politics

Podcasts
The Supreme Court abortion pills case, explainedThe Supreme Court abortion pills case, explained
Podcast
Podcasts

How Louisiana brought mifepristone back to SCOTUS.

By Peter Balonon-Rosen and Sean Rameswaram
Politics
Trump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expectedTrump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expected
Politics

As Trump heads to China, attention and resources are being shifted from Asia to yet another war in the Middle East.

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Are far-right politics just the new normal?Are far-right politics just the new normal?
Politics

Liberals are preparing for a longer war with right-wing populists than they once expected.

By Zack Beauchamp
The Logoff
Flavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA headFlavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA head
The Logoff

Why Marty Makary is out at the FDA, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters
Politics
Virginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymanderVirginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymander
Politics

Democrats just handed the Supreme Court’s Republicans a loaded weapon.

By Ian Millhiser
The Logoff
Can Trump lower gas prices?Can Trump lower gas prices?
The Logoff

What suspending the gas tax would mean for you, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters