PDA

View Full Version : Need Help with Letter to Congressman (re: Syria strike)




orenbus
09-03-2013, 06:35 AM
Hey all, was wondering if you could help to read a email I am planning on sending out today to my congressman today and let me know if anything should be added or removed. Will give +Rep to all that provide constructive feedback, Thanks in advance.

################################################## ###


Congressman,

First I would like to thank you for your response to my recent email asking that you sign Rep. Scott Rigell's letter
requesting that the President ask for congressional approval on the Syria strikes. Less than 24 hours after I sent
the email I saw your signature on the letter which made me feel very proud of having a representative from my state
that is thoughtful and cares about the processes laid out in the constitution and congress's responsibility when
it comes to the separation of powers as it pertains to declaring or otherwise authorizing our country to get involved
in military action or war.

In regards to the Syrian strikes you will be voting on, I have to ask that you vote no to the authorization. This
attack plan presented by the White House only has options that are bad and worse for the world. The attack proposed will not deter, neutralize, suppress or destroy they enemy capability. It is just going to provoke a larger response in
middle east region and the victims of that response will be the United States and Israel I recommend against this course
of action as this is not good war making and further will most likely suck us into yet another conflict in the middle east
that will have no end in sight. I understand the arguments being presented for it, but I do not think defending the
President's red line is worth one drop of American blood. The fault of any embarrassment on the White House lies with
the President alone which I do not believe Congress or the American people should now be forced to bail out based on
ultimatums made by the President which at the time were never really thought through.

Finally I strongly believe that the United States should not have to shoulder responsibility for any action on alone.
In light of the recent parliament vote by one of our closest allies England to not support military action and the
response from some of our other allies to not be directly involved in the attack I think that should send us a signal for
a moment of pause. We need to not be rushed on any decision regarding action against a country that has not attack us directly or any of our allies, and at this time I sense that the pace this is going is very fast in comparison to other military actions we have been involved in, in the past. One thing to consider is that recently Carla del Ponte, a member
of the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria during an interview with Swiss TV was discussing a chemical attack that happened in March and attributed that attack to the rebels. Also Turkey news sources had made reports back in June of this year that rebels had been caught by local authorities trying to cross the border with Sarin gas. In light of Iraq "curveball" reports dealing with WMD evidence on the run up to war in Iraq this unfortunately leads me to question the validity of the evidence regarding the chemical attack in Syria. I do not hold that Assad's regime did not carry out the attack only that I think a decision as important as this should be made with caution (especially as U.S. national interests are not directly involved) we should consider carefully and garner support from as many of the countries in the world if any punitive action is to be made. One thing we need to consider is that if we go it alone, by definition we will be breaking International Law regarding an attack on a sovereign country against UN charter. There is much more that needs to be considered than what I will be able to include in this email, and probable the most important details come not from things we know but from things we don't. Suffice to say at this time it does not make any sense to support military action in regards to a Syria strike and I urge you to vote no on the authorization presented to congress.

Thank you.


Sources regarding chemical attacks on March 2013 attributed to Rebels and Rebels caught crossing the Turkey border with Sarin:
http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXmzBFyXvVI
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/151261/russia-asks-turkey-for-info-on-sarin-terrorists.html

Cheimei
09-03-2013, 10:42 AM
Good letter for the most part, but I like to make things succinct wherever possible.


Hey all, was wondering if you could help to read a email I am planning on sending out today to my congressman today and let me know if anything should be added or removed. Will give +Rep to all that provide constructive feedback, Thanks in advance.

################################################## ###


Congressman,

First I would like to thank you for your response to my recent email asking that you sign Rep. Scott Rigell's letter requesting that the President ask for congressional approval on the Syria strikes. Less than 24 hours after I sent the email I saw your signature on the letter which made me feel very proud of having a representative from my state that is thoughtful and cares about the processes laid out in the constitution and congress's responsibility when it comes to the separation of powers as it pertains to declaring or otherwise authorizing our country to get involved in military action or war.

In regards to the Syrian strikes you will be voting on, I have to ask that you vote against the authorization. This attack plan presented by the White House only has options that are bad for America and worse for the world. The attack proposed will not deter, neutralize, suppress or destroy the enemy capability. It will likely provoke a larger response in the Middle East region and the victims of that response will be the United States and Israel. I recommend against this course of action as this is not good diplomacy and further will most likely suck us into yet another conflict in the Middle East that will have no end in sight. I understand the arguments being presented for it, but I do not think defending the President's red line is worth one drop of American blood. The fault of any embarrassment on the White House lies with the President alone which I do not believe Congress or the American people should now be forced to bail out based on ultimatums made by the President which at the time weren't thoroughly considered.

Finally I strongly believe that the United States should not have to shoulder responsibility for any action on alone. In light of the recent parliament vote by one of our closest allies, England, to not support military action and the response from some of our other allies to forgo attack, I think that should send us a signal for a moment of pause. We need to not be rushed on any decision regarding action against a country that has not attacked us directly or any of our allies, and at this time I sense that the pace this is going is very fast in comparison to other military actions we have been involved in, in the past. One thing to consider is that recently Carla del Ponte, a member of the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria during an interview with Swiss TV was discussing a chemical attack that happened in March and attributed that attack to the rebels. Also, Turkey news sources had made reports back in June of this year that rebels had been caught by local authorities trying to cross the border with Sarin gas. In light of Iraq "curveball" reports dealing with WMD evidence on the run up to war in Iraq this unfortunately leads me to question the validity of the evidence regarding the chemical attack in Syria. I do not hold that Assad's regime did not carry out the attack, only that I think a decision as important as this should be made with caution (especially as U.S. national interests are not directly involved) we should consider carefully and garner support from as many of the countries in the world if any punitive action is to be made. Another thing we need to consider is that if we go it alone, by definition we will be breaking International Law regarding an attack on a sovereign country against UN charter. There is much more that needs to be considered than what I will be able to include in this email, and probably the most important details come not from things we know but from things we don't. Suffice to say at this time it does not make any sense to support military action in regards to a Syria strike and I urge you to vote no on the authorization presented to congress.

Thank you.


Sources regarding chemical attacks on March 2013 attributed to Rebels and Rebels caught crossing the Turkey border with Sarin:
http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXmzBFyXvVI
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/151261/russia-asks-turkey-for-info-on-sarin-terrorists.html

orenbus
09-05-2013, 09:46 AM
Thanks for everyone's support.

I wrote my congressman twice, once to get him to sign Rigell's letter for a vote to go to congress and once for him to vote no on authorization, he signed the letter day after I sent it in and just this morning found out he's now stated publicly he will not be voting for authorization.

Was really worried though for a couple days his vote could have gone either way. :)

For those of you that haven't done this yet and your congressman is undecided please do contact them on voting no to the authorization for Syria strikes.