By Les Masterson
U.S. Sen. Edward J. Markey took heat last week when he voted “present” in a Senate Committee on Foreign Relations vote to authorize military force in Syria."Markey said he needs “to review all of the relevant classified materials relating to this matter before I make a decision as important as authorizing the use of military force.
U.S. Rep. John Tierney is taking a similar stand and has not made a decision on how he will vote on the Syria matter.
"There is justifiable concern being expressed throughout the world about the deaths said to have been caused by the use of chemical weapons in Syria. Obviously, I join others in finding this deeply troubling. I also find it troubling that, although countries with the greatest interests in the region and at greatest risk – like Arab League nations and Turkey – seem to attribute atrocities to Bashar al-Assad’s forces, they have failed to take the lead in any action. The best response would be one from the international community.
"Before any military intervention is pursued by the United States, I believe the Constitution requires that congressional action is necessary. In the coming days, the Administration must present to Congress its strategic, legal and national security considerations as well as articulate objectives, costs, duration, and ramifications. Only after Congress has been fully informed and the matter fully considered and debated can its Members make any determination on the question. I believe, only with Congress’s approval should any act of war be initiated by the United States,” said Congressman John Tierney.
Where do you stand on Syria? Do you think U.S. Rep. John Tierney should vote in favor of military force in Syria or should he vote against it? Let us know in the comments section.