Leaders of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee said they reached an agreement on Tuesday on a draft authorization for the use of military force in Syria that was much narrower than the request made by President Barack Obama, paving the way for a vote by the committee on Wednesday.And that's good - no boots on the ground, limited engagement. If we have to do something (and I'm not convinced we do), that's a good start. But, you know, I think there's more that could be done there.
Among other provisions, the draft, which was obtained by Reuters, sets a 60-day limit on U.S. military action in Syria, with a possibility of a single 30-day extension subject to conditions.
voted against disaster relief following Hurricane Sandy (and we'll ignore the fact that he frequently requests disaster relief for his own people).
So, I went to his web page, armed with the address of a couple of people with my last name in Morristown, TN (yeah, I'm impersonating a Tennessee native, but at least I'm using my own name, right?).
Senator Corker,No, I don't think it'll do any good. But this is the type of logic he's used before - maybe it will strike a chord in that tiny little brain of his.
I will admit that I don't agree with you on a lot, but I like the agreement you reached with Sen Menendez, for no American troop involvement, and for no involvement longer than 60 days. Thank you for that.
But I don't think you went quite far enough. I think that any military intervention needs to be funded, so it doesn't add to the budget deficit. This can be through money already promised to the military budget for 2013, or special "war taxes," or possibly even from monetary donations from organizations and private citizens.
(I really like the idea of a free-market solution to funding military strikes, but I'm not sure it will go over well with some people.)
In an age where crippling budget deficits are being passed on to our children, and the fiscal cliff is looming over us again, how can we, in good conscience, add to it?