General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLeahy: Senators ‘Very, Very Wary’ Of Syria Strike
<snip>
Leahy says the White House will face its biggest hurdle if it appears that we are going it alone, in Syria, and that Congress will be asking, is it going to change things if the United States gets involved, and how long and how thoroughly will we be involved?
Leahy says he was one of the minority who voted against the Iraq War, because he did not believe the evidence presented then.
Now, a lot of these senators who voted to go to war in Iraq wish they hadnt. They realize it cost us a couple of trillion dollars, and nothing was gained by it. That experience, just like the experience a generation ago with Vietnam, makes a lot of senators very very wary.
<snip>
HOBSON: Senator, what would be the goal of military action? Is it really about dismantling Syria's ability to use chemical weapons, or is this about sending a message to Iran or Hezbollah, as it's been reported?
LEAHY: You ask the perfect question. I don't think there's a perfect answer, and that's going to be really part of the debate. What do we accomplish by this? Is it horrible what happened? Of course it is. But so were the deaths of tens of thousands before that. You know, the United States is not always consistent.
When Iraq killed tens of thousands of people by gas during the Reagan administration, President Reagan sent Donald Rumsfeld over to tell Saddam Hussein don't worry, we're on your side because you're opposed to Iran. And then we went ahead and sold weapons to Iran in Iran-contra.
<snip>
http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2013/09/02/senator-leahy-syria
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)I hope Senator Leahy votes against any military action against Syria.
avaistheone1
(14,626 posts)Thank you Senator Leahy.
k&r
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)You know, the United States is not always consistent.
I hope he votes, NO.