The Case For Military Action

By  | 

Members of both the Senate and the House, including U.S. Senator Joe Manchin, have been hearing the administration's case for military action in Syria.

Congressman David McKinley (R-WV) says a survey he conducted of his constituents favors a continuation of economic sanctions against Syria, but overwhelmingly opposes military action. Of more than 3,000 responses, 1,632 said the U.S. should not respond to the Syrian chemical attacks, 1,578 said economic sanctions against Syria should continue, and 202 favored military action.

McKinley himself issued a statement:

“The use of chemical weapons against civilians in Syria is unconscionable and should be condemned. That being said, America should only take military action when there is a clear national security interest at stake – as well as a clear endgame. I’m not convinced that is the case here. I’ll continue to review the facts and listen to the debate on this issue, but right now I am not comfortable putting Americans in harm’s way.”

A sentiment also voiced by people across the Ohio River from McKinley's district.

"They don't see the national security risk. They don't see Americans in danger," said U.S. Representative Bill Johnson (R-OH) in a telephone interview with WTAP Wednesday. "They don't think the president has made his case on what's going to happen to those chemical weapons if he makes this attack. What is his overall comprehensive strategy in the region."

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee Wednesday voted to authorize a limited attack, one which would not involve combat troops. the full senate is expected to vote on the measure next week.

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station. powered by Disqus