* Updated below with new comments and video from Sen. Bernie Sanders. *
In his first public comments since last month’s chemical weapons attacks in Syria, Congressman Peter Welch (D-Vt.) said Wednesday he’s “still in the process of deciding” whether to vote in favor of responding with air strikes.
“It’s obviously a very wrenching decision,” Welch said. “I mean, I’ve strongly opposed the U.S. getting involved in the civil war in Syria. That tragedy is something that I don’t think we can control. We can’t micromanage the outcome.”
But, he continued, “There’s a new question as a result of [the chemical weapons attacks of] August 21st — and that is when the Syrian state uses chemical weapons in violation of an agreement signed by 98 percent of the countries, there’s a legitimate and moral basis for punitive action.”
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Rep. Welch,
You opposed the Iraq war even though Saddam Hussein gassed 600,000 Kurds, and yet you believe there is a moral obligation to do something in Syria for the gassing of Syrians… which is it? Did we have a legitimate reason to go into Iraq or do we not have one to attach Syria…. Or is this partisan bullshit. Support Obama but use Dubya as an election tool…
The people seem to be leaving by the millions. Maybe the idea is to get them out or let them leave and then the attack.
I can imagine some 17 year old kid in Damascus, his mother sends him out to scrounge up some food. Walking down the road, he’s press-ganged by a truckload of soldiers and told he is now in the Army.
They take him out to the airport and hand him a shovel, telling him to start digging pits for anti-aircraft guns. Under armed guard he toils away in the sun. One day, he hears an odd sound, not the usual jet engine noise, and looks up. Here comes a cruise missile, US NAVY printed on the side. Before he can process this, it explodes and obliterates him.
Later that night in Washington, President Obama addresses the world, talking of the limited strikes that have been carried out against “regime forces”. Justice has been done and we can all feel better.
Tim, keep going with your story…
…the missile explodes and obliterates him. The pit for the anti-aircraft guns isn’t finished. Regime forces are unable to defend the airport which is destroyed and becomes unusable. Lives are saved.
It is unfortunate a civilian was caught up in a conflict he didn’t want to be a part of. That’s the nature of war, it isn’t fun, it isn’t fair, and it should not be entered into lightly. However there is a time for war, when the deaths and suffering from inaction are greater then the deaths and suffering from taking action.
WHat I’d like to see is that since we have (secret) evidence that Assad is responsible, we launch that missile right through his bedroom window. Instead we inflict a lot of death and destruction on a people on the bottom of the hierarchy.
The message we should send is ” Assad nerve gassed children and now he will live every second of what remains of his miserable, evil existence wondering if a smart bomb is homing in on him.
That’s what should happen… but then we have this long standing rule of not assassinating other world leaders… It’s a shame, really…
Obama doesn’t seem to care much for precedents though so maybe that’s an option he would consider…
I don’t think Obama knows what he has planned, beyond being looked upon as “strong”. He is being hectored into this by guys like John McCain telling him he’ll look weak and indecisive if he doesn’t attack (hint: giving in to McCain IS being weak and indecisive).
No amount of striking will bring back the dead, and nobody has explained how hitting Syria-while leaving in place the guy who actually gave the order to gas children, is going to make anything better.