Cruz vs. Rubio: Disagreement over foreign policies

Share on Facebook
Tweet on Twitter

The fifth Republican debate held late Tuesday night have been an eye opener on the lack of a united Republicans stand on America’s mission abroad. The debate revealed a deep rift in the party on how America should approach the Middle East dictatorship troubles. Even though many of the candidate have similar ideas on dealing with the Islamic state, a deep disagreement was evident in the clash between Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio on what should be the fate of the Assad regime in Syria and other strong antagonist of Islamic radicalism in the Middle East.

Cruz: Obama made America less secure

In his argument, Ted Cruz argued from a realist angle asserting that the push for the ouster of Arab dictators which Bashar Assad is inclusive will undermine America’s national security interests. The Texas senator was quoted by Politico saying; “if we topple Assad, the result will be ISIS will take over Syria and it will worsen U.S. national security interests. “ He further redirected his tirade to his emerging rival, Rubio, linking him to Obama’s policies in the region offering a concise summation of the fall out of the neoconservative promotion of American democracy of the George W. Bush era.

Rubio: Not a tear if Assad is toppled

In his response to Cruz, Marco Rubio said he would not shed a tear if the Assad regime is toppled due to the regime link with the Iranian backed terrorist group Hezbollah and the attacks on Americans during America’s occupation of Iraq. He furthered by saying toppling of Assad would be part of a trifecta of Obama’s administration errors. He summarized his argument on a different tone: “Libyans had “legitimate demands for a better future, America has unique moral responsibilities and obligations. Instead, we will have to work around the world with less than ideal governments.”