(CNN) – Former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, who previously favored potential military strikes in Syria, forcefully argued Tuesday on CNN's "Crossfire" the United States has no reason to take military action in the war-torn country.
"The bottom line here is we have no national security interest," the 2012 GOP presidential candidate said, just hours before President Barack Obama is set to explain in a televised address the stakes for the United States in Syria.
Santorum, who hasn't ruled out another run for president in 2016, co-authored the Syria Accountability Act, a law passed in 2003 that sought to use economic sanctions to end support for terrorism in Syria and the country's alleged collection of weapons of mass destruction.
He said he favored possible military action last year but now argues it's too late, arguing the Syrian regime has grown stronger while the opposition force has seen an increase in extremist elements.
Van Jones, co-host of "Crossfire," pointed to disturbing videos of adults and children dying from an August 21 chemical weapons attack in a Damascus suburb, and asked why those shocking images shouldn't fall under U.S. interests.
"Then we should be in Darfur," Santorum replied. "Then we should be in 50 other countries around the world."
"We have no moral obligation to use military force when it comes to a humanitarian situation," he added.
For his part, President Barack Obama says the security interests lie in the potential for Syria's chemical weapons to get into the wrong hands and be used against U.S. troops. In an interview Monday with CNN, Obama said international norms that ban chemical weapons are good because they shield U.S. troops and innocent people around the world.
"It's something that protects women and children and civilians, because these weapons by definition are indiscriminate. They don't just target somebody in uniform," he said.
But Santorum argued the U.S. has no security interest when the two sides of the conflict "are both enemies of the United States," pointing to Al Qaeda elements in the Syrian opposition, and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Russia, Iran and Hezbollah on the other side.
Former Sen. Joe Lieberman, on the other hand, said he supports military action and wished the president was "not pausing" as the Obama administration now seeks a new Russian proposal that could lead to a diplomatic solution.
"I think President Obama made the right, moral decision when he drew the red line and then when he said, after we had proof that chemical weapons were used to kill almost 1,500 innocents, including 426 children by Assad in Syria, that he was going to take military action," the former senator from Connecticut said. "I was really surprised and disappointed when he decided to toss it to Congress."
"He was right," he continued. "He had the legal authority to do it himself. I wish he had done it. If he had, I think the American people would have been happy now."