My Rep wrote me back: He DID listen; And, 20 Need-To-Knows re Syrian Rebels

September 5, 2013



Dear wildtimes,


Thank you for taking the time to contact me regarding the Syrian conflict. It is an honor to serve the people of Kansas in the United States Congress and your communication is a vital part of our legislative process.

Like you I believe the U. S. should be cautious and deliberate in the way we approach this difficult situation.

I do not think the President has made an adequate case for American military intervention. The tangled political picture in Syria complicates any intervention. We do not know who our friends and allies are, and who our enemies are in Syria right now. There are atrocities going on that are heartbreaking. But when I talk or listen to my constituents, there is a palpable fatigue with having men and women overseas in harm's way, in body bags coming back. I've been to too many funerals and memorial services for folks that have come back.

The President, as you know, has requested Congress' approval on U.S. military action against Syria. I will oppose the use of American military action in Syria. There is no issue of American national security at hand. Neither the United States nor its allies have been attacked or threatened. It is not clear that the rebel forces, who we would be assisting, are our allies. In fact, it appears clear that the Syrian Opposition Forces are backed by Al-Qaida. It is certainly possible that a U.S. bombing campaign would increase the threats to the United States and its allies, rather than decrease them. ...

So, again, I urge you all to contact YOUR Congressmen....

It's simple to do; easy peasy....
or, call them.

Every time we reach out, they have to pay attention.

My Senator hasn't written back yet; this was our House Rep....he's MUCH more responsive than the Senator;

Another thing I was thinking this morning, after reading the "20 things to know" on CNN
Syria's rebels: 20 things you need to know

7. There have been efforts to unite the rebels, but still there's no central figure leading them. And if the regime falls, it's anybody's guess what could happen next.

An organization known as the Supreme Military Council, which formed late last year, now unites many rebel groups.

And for now, the rebels are working together to achieve a common goal -- toppling al-Assad's government. Here's how one local al-Nusra front leader put it to CNN in April: "In the period after the regime falls, our main goal is to create an Islamic state that is ruled by the Koran. It can have civilian institutions, but not democracy. We look at the other Free Syrian Army rebels as one of many groups defending religion, so we support them. In the future, we will handle this differently."

They DON'T WANT A DEMOCRACY. Why would we help them install an Islamic state?

8. Religion motivates many of them.

The rebels are largely made up of Sunni Muslims battling against al-Assad's minority Alawite sect, which is associated with Shia Islam. Weapons and funds from Iran's Shia rulers have helped the Syrian regime, while Sunni states like Saudi Arabia have reportedly supported Syrian rebels.

"The conflict has become increasingly sectarian, with the conduct of the parties becoming significantly more radicalized and militarized," the UN said earlier this year.

That doesn't bode well for Syria's future. Studies have said religious civil wars are longer and bloodier than other types of clashes. They're also twice as likely to recur and twice as deadly to noncombatants.

They (the rebels) have the support of several Middle Eastern countries of non-Shiite sects; why can't THOSE countries help them? Why can't Israel take care of herself?

WHY SHOULD WE DO ANYTHING???

It's just adding gas to the fire.
What an idiot Obama has turned out to be.

In the face of the WHOLE WORLD, he's making a stupid move - to support an Islamic NON-DEMOCRATIC state.

reply to post by wildtimes


Good for you. That's the spirit!

S&F

reply to post by wildtimes


My hat is off to you for doing your part!

Having said that, unfortunately, the president and the senate and all of "them" do not care about what anyone else says...This is not a FOR THE PEOPLE government, again unfortunately, and I wish we could take it back!

Steps like this are the baby steps we need to make the people stand up for what we believe and maybe, just maybe, hundreds of thousands of voices won't go unheard THIS TIME!!!

Good job again!!

Yes thank you.



I'm seeing a lot of replies to the people from representatives here on this site. But will it be enough?

Wow Wildtimes !

Not only did you get a response ... it was an independent response regardless of POTUS efforts !

Power to the people right on !!

reply to post by Timely


And his reply was sent about 3 hours after I wrote him! The SAME DAY!



*************************

Please, everybody - let's at least be part of the flood on Capitol Hill - tie up their phone lines, hell, crash their emails if that's what it takes...
THEY NEED TO LISTEN TO US!

Thanks to you all for your responses...

Originally posted by Wildmanimal
reply to post by wildtimes

 

Good for you. That's the spirit!

S&F

Love the DR. Strange love background. Sums up the clusters of war. One guy. Fluoridation. And some one owes Coke a new machine.

reply to post by Bigburgh

I'm seeing a lot of replies to the people from representatives here on this site. But will it be enough?

Remains to be seen, I guess. But at least we're trying - and the U.N. and major players are ALSO telling him to stand the EFF down!!

That's a whole lotta push-back - I wonder, in the face of all of this, if he's afraid of a JFK-style "demise"? Or is he just too prideful and self-absorbed to say, "Okay, okay, bad idea." ??

Someone posted his response to the Swedish reporter's question about the Nobel Peace Prize; he blathered on about the "moral dilemma" of "not doing anything", and how no matter what happens anywhere in the world,

"the question is always 'what will the U.S. do about it'?"

What a pompous ass. He thinks he holds the only high moral ground here?
Preposterous.
He's in a crisis (and has been for 5 years now), and can't think clearly....LISTEN TO THE REST OF THE WORLD, YOU TOOL!!

reply to post by wildtimes


3hrs.! You obviously have more clout than you realised !

Keep fighting the good fight !!

( with updates please )

AWESOME!

It's a lost cause here in Delaware. It's Joe Bidens back yard.
These guys don't dare go against him.

At the risk of being ganged up on and beaten severely, I would like to post an article from Time that put some things in perspective for me. Specifically, this part:

Skeptics may wonder why nerve gas is any more inhumane than explosives that blow off limbs and rip bodies open, or the organ-crushing thermobaric bombs used by the U.S. and Russia. Some even question whether chemical weapons really can kill on a “massive” enough scale to be considered weapons of mass destruction. But along with the instinctive revulsion toward poison is the fear that the more Assad mixes and transports his chemical arms, the more likely they are to fall into the hands of terrorists who might try to use them against Israel or Western targets. And it is true that a well-executed terrorist attack with nerve gas could be terrifyingly lethal.

Obama could serve his two goals with limited strikes on a handful of military targets, probably by means of cruise missiles that involve no risk to U.S. personnel. The goal would be to impose a cost on Assad that outweighs whatever he thinks he gained by gassing hundreds of people near Damascus last week, as he is accused of doing. In doing so, Obama could hope to deter Assad from using his chemical arsenal again. And to demonstrate to the rest of the world, and especially to Iran, that he means what he says. Anyone hoping for more will likely be disappointed.


Read more: swampland.time.com...

If Obama really is planning to only have limited strikes on military targets only, with no risk to military personnel or civilians, and no ultimate goal of toppling the regime, then I would support it. Of course, that is assuming that Assad is really responsible for the chemical attack. If it were proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Assad did it, would you guys support limited strikes? I am definitely against an all-out war, but a slap on the wrist I can deal with.

reply to post by kaylaluv

If Assad is proven to have ordered a chemical attack on the people of Damascus -

He should be tried as a war criminal.

The full force of the U.N. should be employed to bring him to justice.

Likewise any other player who may find themselves implicated in this ongoing ME constipation !

( as confusing and elusive as that may be )

That is great news. I wrote to mine as well but time will tell. I like how he also said, there is no imminent threat to the US. That tells me congress will do something if Obama overrides them on a "no" vote.

Originally posted by Timely
reply to post by kaylaluv

 

If Assad is proven to have ordered a chemical attack on the people of Damascus -

He should be tried as a war criminal.

The full force of the U.N. should be employed to bring him to justice.

Likewise any other player who may find themselves implicated in this ongoing ME constipation !

( as confusing and elusive as that may be )

Unlikely to ever happen, at least according to this:

Unfortunately, international law is once again protecting Assad’s violations of international law. Syria is not a state party to the ICC (neither, for what it’s worth, is the United States) and therefore its prosecutors don’t have jurisdiction over crimes committed there. For Assad to be charged by the ICC, he would have to be referred by the U.N. Security Council which, as with an authorization for military intervention, isn’t going to happen as long as Russia and China have seats. Marc Lynch discussed a few other possible avenues for Assad’s prosecution a few weeks ago, but for now, a prosecution seems extremely unlikely, even as the Syrian government commits exactly the sort of crimes the court was set up to deal with.

www.slate.com...

reply to post by Timely


Well, I don't know if it's "clout" - more like being "naggy" - I write him every time something gets stuck in my craw.
Still, he's doing well with keeping me posted - and he's written personally to me every time I've contacted him.

Years ago, in the late 80s, I wrote to my reps about health care issues. One of them never responded, ever, the others sent form letters...

but yeah, this guy seems to take his job, and his ROLE, seriously.

Also, I suggest looking at your reps's websites to see what committees they are on. If they're on a committee for an issue that concerns you, they're kinda obliged to "listen" to us 'constituents.'

This guy, though, has impressed me so far. I'd probably vote for him next time; good to be an independent - party lines I don't care about anymore, now that I know how it really goes down. If the PERSON stands for what I believe in, they get my vote.

If I vote for them and they turn out to be lying, duplicitous tools, I dump support of them. (Obama being one of those).

@kaylaluv:
No, I wouldn't support a strike. Two wrongs don't make a right. He can send GAS MASKS for every citizen if he wants to do something useful.

reply to post by kaylaluv

Limited strikes with missiles from off shore .... has turned into strikes with B-2s and long range bombers from the USA to be included. That's US service members flying over hostile territory and being shot at. (reported by TV news today). This can't stay small ....

I didn't bother contacting our senator. He was on TV chattering away about how he supported Obama's strike. I did call and email our rep - John Carney. The call was to his office in DC. They took my 'request that Carney vote NO'. I also EMAILED just to be really sure. I don't know if it will do any good .. but you never know.

reply to post by kaylaluv


Time for a U.N. makeover.

Until there is a hard line resolve in the U.N. - the power of veto makes it a farce.

You are probably right.

Originally posted by Timely
reply to post by kaylaluv

 

If Assad is proven to have ordered a chemical attack on the people of Damascus -

He should be tried as a war criminal.

The full force of the U.N. should be employed to bring him to justice.

Likewise any other player who may find themselves implicated in this ongoing ME constipation !

( as confusing and elusive as that may be )

So on the Same token if Obama Strikes without UN Security Approval
Would he be tried as an War Criminal...???

Riouz

reply to post by wildtimes

You guys in the US have the right idea when it comes to voting.

Here in Australia it is compulsory. Unfortunately that can muddy the waters - so to speak.

Nice to hear of someone with a local representative - representing his locals !

You keep him honest !!