Flip-floppers - Republicans who opposed Obama's strikes on Syria in 2013

Congressional Republicans were opposed to President Obama's request to approve a similar action against Syria in 2013

Many of the congressional Republicans were opposed to President Obama's request to approve a similar action against Syria in 2013.

"A vital national security risk is clearly not at play, there are just too many unanswered questions about our long-term strategy in Syria, including the fact that this proposal is utterly detached from a wider strategy to end the civil war there, and on the specific question of deterring the use of chemical weapons, the President's proposal appears to be based on a contradiction. Either we will strike targets that threaten the stability of the regime — something the President says he does not intend to do — or we will execute a strike so narrow as to be a mere demonstration."
Congressional Resolution for a Use of Force in Syria, Remarks of Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, September 10, 2013

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan in 2013, opposed Obama's proposal to attack Syria, saying, "I believe the President's proposed military strike in Syria cannot achieve its stated objectives. In fact, I fear it will make things worse."

Senator Marco Rubio said of Obama's proposal in 2013, "While I have long argued forcefully for engagement in empowering the Syrian people, I have never supported the use of U.S. military force in the conflict. And I still don't." He added, "I remain unconvinced that the use of force proposed here will work. The only thing that will prevent Assad from using chemical weapons in the future is for the Syrian people to remove him from power. The strike the administration wants us to approve I do not believe furthers that goal. And in fact, I believe U.S. military action of the type contemplated here might prove to be counterproductive."

Sen. Orrin Hatch in 2013, said in a statement, "What is clear is that launching a few missiles will do nothing to end Syria's civil war, and is neither a real strategy to stop the deployment of chemical weapons in Syria nor a guarantee that chemical weapons won't be used in the future by the Assad regime. That is not a plan for the region." "That's why I continue to have strong reservations about authorizing the use of force against Syria."

House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz, repeatedly issued statements in 2013, declaring his opposition to attacking Syria saying he saw "no clear and present danger to the USA to justify going to war in Syria."

And, for a dessert :

​ And don’t forget the biggest flip-flopper ...