It increasingly seems like the US is on the edge of war in Syria, and the new Congressperson will be involved with oversight for any actions we take. We deserve to know where the CD-5 candidates stand on this important issue.
I could only find a statement from one candidate. Will Brownsberger posted this on his website.
While chemical weapons are truly gruesome, so are conventional explosives. Perhaps 100,000 have died all together in the Syrian civil war and most of them through conventional weapons. It isn’t clear to me that the objective argument for intervention has suddenly gotten better. I view the intervention argument with great skepticism. All that said, at this point, I think we have created a problem for ourselves by identifying a red line. That red line has clearly been crossed — we probably have to make some kind of move. What that move is exactly and how we choose to follow it through remains very unclear. Hopefully, the response will be very measured and the follow through very restrained.
I’m glad he has addressed the issue, but the answer is not particularly satisfying to me. I hope he will expand on these comments on his website, and I expect the other candidates to issue statements soon.
If I’ve missed a statement from any of the other candidates, please share in the comments. This is a critical issue that does not seem to be getting the robust public debate it deserves. Let’s make sure the candidates are on the hook and forced to join the conversation. (I’m glad to see the discussion in jconway’s post.)
I emailed #ma5 candidate Paul John Maisano on this issue, and he sent me this reply:
Paul John Maisano:
I believe your question is…., Do I support a military strike in Syria ? The short answer is NO, not at this time.
The next question may be… why not? I agree that any individual, group, or country that uses chemical weapons, in any capacity within a conflict, commits a crime against all international rules and humanity itself. However, we must begin to work with international leadership within the U.N. This is a global problem, not exclusively a U.S. concern.
We must stop playing the role of the worlds policing agent. To unilaterally involve ourselves within any international conflict is ill advised. It’s time that Congress restrains the President for any military efforts until Secretary of State Kerry begins a meaningful exchange with the balance of the worlds leadership. We must understand the words ‘global economy’ must also fall in alignment with ‘global responsibility’. Haven’t we learnt that war is easy to get into, and difficult to get out of ???
I will post the issue to markeyseat.com if at least 3 candidates state their postion.
Courageous, bold leadership is what I am looking for in the CD-05 race. Dodge ball has become chapter 1 in the political playbook far too often. If others do not respond……why not post the two that had the gumption to do so?
The president is waffling. This is not a bad thing. At 9% public approval of war with Syria, there are social diseases that are more popular. Then there is the release that the good ol’ US of A aided Iraq with chemical weaponry against Iran… We really should try to wash the blood off our own hands first. Whatever road a candidate chooses has big potential downside. The smart politicians are hiding under the bed for good reason. Sometimes “it’s better to remain quiet and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.”
“Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men.” –Martin Luther King, Jr.
I am quite proud and impresses by the courageous bipartisan majority that rebuked David Cameron on his push to war. Had they done that to Tony Blair we may have avoided the Iraq quagmire. I hope our own Congress, particularly members of our own delegation, share that courage.