Skip to main content

Senator Pat Toomey on Syrian Involvement

Recently, I sent a letter to Senator Pat Toomey expressing my concerns about the U.S. becoming involved in Syria.  In essence, I stated that a) I don't believe the U.S. has much of a strategic interest there, and b) that we are broke and can not afford another adventure.  Here is his reply:

May 10, 2013


Dear Mr. Morphis,
Thank you for contacting me about U.S. assistance to the opposition against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. I appreciate hearing from you.
With regard to foreign assistance, one of my concerns is the national security implications of our policies, as well as ensuring that such expenditures meet a rigorous test for fiscal responsibility. Especially during these challenging fiscal times, we should not be wasting taxpayer money and providing foreign assistance dollars to corrupt entities that abuse such aid. However, carefully focused funding supports the security interests of the United States.
As you know, the Syrian government, led by President Bashar al-Assad, has committed large scale human rights violations against the Syrian people since he assumed power in 2000. His oppression increased dramatically in 2011 as his forces conducted a brutal crackdown against widespread dissent. Tens of thousands of Syrian citizens have died since the uprising began. Additionally, a number are reported to have been casualties of chemical weapons. The Obama administration and many members of Congress have denounced these acts. Additionally, President Obama has called for President al-Assad to step down. Since the civil war began, the U.S. has provided hundreds of millions of dollars in nonlethal assistance and humanitarian aid.
I understand your concerns regarding U.S. financial assistance to the Syrian opposition and value your input. I remain concerned about providing lethal aid to the Free Syrian Army because of the danger it could fall into the hands of radical Islamic organizations. Please be assured that I will keep your concerns in mind as I continue to evaluate the relationship between the U.S. and the Syrian opposition.
Thank you again for your correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of assistance.
Sincerely,

Signature
Pat Toomey
U.S. Senator, Pennsylvania

While Senator Toomey and I don't see eye-to-eye on this issue, I appreciate the prompt reply, and I've become increasingly impressed by the PA Senator.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Book Review: What Matters Now by Gary Hamel

Interview of Eric Schmidt by Gary Hamel at the MLab dinner tonight. Google's Marissa Mayer and Hal Varian also joined the open dialog about Google's culture and management style, from chaos to arrogance. The video just went up on YouTube. It's quite entertaining. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Cover of The Future of Management My list of must-read business writers continues to expand.   Gary Hamel , however, author of What Matters Now , with the very long subtitle of How to Win in a World of Relentless Change, Ferocious Competition, and Unstoppable Innovation , has been on the list for quite some time.   Continuing his thesis on the need for a new approach to management introduced in his prior book The Future of Management , Hamel calls for a complete rethinking of how enterprises are run. Fundamental to his recommendation is that the practice of management is ossified in a command and control system that is now generations old and needs to be replaced with somethi...
1 comment
Read more

Stimulus Plan

Mr. President: The House stimulus bill is awful. Dangerous. Counter-productive. It has a very high probability of making things worse!. Your man Rahm Emanuel is supposed to be a tough guy: turn him loose on the House Dems - they are selling you down the river. Some simple tests: the spending will improve long-term productivity; the spending will reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and the spending will happen fast; very, very fast. There may need to be some legislation to enable spending without years of environmental review. For example, spending on wind farms would improve long-run productivity and reduce dependence on foreign oil. But let's say the wind farm is a couple of miles offshore. You can't have environmental groups stopping the development to see if some fish will be harmed. This spending has to happen now. And, no tax cuts with the possible exception of AMT. People aren't going to spend any tax savings; they are going to pay their credit card bills or r...
10 comments
Read more

Romney/Thompson dream ticket?

The role of Fred Thompson in yesterday's SC primary is as murky as his next step. Did he divide the religious vote and thereby hand Huckabee a loss? Or would those votes, had he not been there, have gone elsewhere? My instinct is that more of those votes would have gone to Romney or McCain than to Huckabee. Fred comes across to me as the thinking person's conservative: thoughtful on positions, a sense of history, a Federalist, serious about the war on terror and prepared to take the long view on it. His addresses have content, not sound bites - which may, unfortunately, be a drawback in 2008. Mitt is quickly seizing the stage as the most knowledgeable in the field on economics, growth and job creation. With a war still consuming dozens of billions, it isn't clear that the race will be won on voters' views of candidates job creation prowess. However, he gives off as much energy as Fred seems to absorb - Mitt's electron shell could power Fred. So, Mitt may be drawi...
5 comments
Read more