Leahy, Sanders and Welch express "grave concerns" about bombing Syria

[cali]

They all say they're undecided but they all expressed strong reservations about the proposed military action.

Welch:

<snip>

“There is, I think, a legitimate rationale and moral basis for the use of force when a state is using chemical weapons,” Welch said. “But there’s a very serious concern about the law of unintended consequences. And we have to ask, ‘Can the action that is taken be effective, and will it make the situation worse or better?’”

The specific action being proposed by Obama, according to Welch, has proven especially unsuccessful in the past.

<snip>


Sanders:

But the independent said he has grave concerns about the allocation of resources, both political and financial, to a foreign military operation that would deflect attention from pressing domestic issues.

<snip>

“And I worry very much that with this rush into war, the very serious problems facing Vermonters and people all over this country … will be pushed aside,” Sanders said. “So there will be less discussion about creating jobs, less discussion about making college affordable, less discussion about protecting the social safety net of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.”

<snip>

Leahy:

Leahy was unavailable for an interview Wednesday but has said in numerous news outlets this week that he has serious concerns about unilateral military action being undertaken by the U.S., and the slippery slope toward the kind of full-fledged military involvement that transpired in Iraq.

<snip>

http://www.timesargus.com/article/20130905/NEWS03/709059902

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. I hope they express they (and others) express their concerns with their votes against it.

[cali]

2. Me too. I'll be bitterly disappointed in them if they vote for it

I suspect that none of them will, but who knows. It would be very odd if Welch voted for it. He's been involved for quite some time in fighting against authorizing arms or training for any of the rebel forces.

If any of them do vote for it, it demonstrates nothing so much as the power of partisanship- and a lack of character.

[ProSense]

3. Further Comments Of Senator Leahy On The Senate’s Upcoming Debate On Syria’s Use Of Chemical Weapons

Further Comments Of Senator Leahy On The Senate’s Upcoming Debate On Syria’s Use Of Chemical Weapons

“The Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons – and in this case, against innocent civilians, the Syrian people – was a heinous act and a clear violation of international law and standards.

“Last weekend I made clear my opposition to the White House’s proposed resolution, and I was among the first in the Senate to do so. I criticized that proposal for being far too broad and open-ended. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has now reported a new version, which will be debated by the Senate, and further changes and amendments are possible.

“I remain skeptical of the United States going alone, and about what comes after. But this will be an important Senate debate, on deadly serious issues, about a resolution that may well see further changes. It makes sense to have the debate and then decide, not to decide and then have the debate. The Senate, and each senator, will be called upon to apply the facts, the views of our constituents, and our judgment in reaching a decision that is in the best interests of our nation and the security of the American people.”

http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/further-comments-of-senator-leahy-on-the-senates-upcoming-debate-on-syrias-use-of-chemical-weapons_--

[cali]

4. I suggest you read the Here & Now interview with him, pro

His comments are not supportive of an interventio