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

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

No Steve No

To:Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer: Please, please don't spend my money on Yahoo. Spend $4 billion per year for the next 10 years building something new and better. This has to now be an ego deal, not an economic deal. If you withdraw the bid, YHOO is a $15 stock. You are too smart for this. Many times the best deals are the ones you don't make. This is one of those times. Don't spend my money on this. Sincerely, gene
1 comment
Read more

So Who Wins?

Every recession plants the seeds for economic advantage in the future recovery. In the very tough 1973-1974 recession, prices fell so low that it enabled the creation of the leveraged buyout industry. With many manufacturing companies in particular trading at 3-4 times cash flow, new market entrants like KKR, Forstmann Little and Dyson Kisner Moran came in and created gigantic wealth for themselves and early investors. In the 1991-1992 downturn, engendered in part by the massive office space overbuilding funded by Savings and Loans (Resolution Trust Co, anyone?) made it possible for telcom and internet start-ups in Austin, San Jose, Northern VA, Boston's Route 128, Dallas, etc. to rent offices at a fraction of the cost had those communities not been overbuilt. And the 2001-02 downturn gave us cheap fiber and bandwidth, and bargain-priced software to feed productivity gains in corporations everywhere. So, where is the upside? At this moment, all that I can project with some confid...
Post a Comment
Read more