President Barack Obama this weekend said he will let the U.S. congress decide on whether to attack Syria after an alleged chemical weapons attack by Syrian President Bashar Assad that is reported to have killed more than 1,400 people and violated international rules of war.
As Americans are "weary of war," the president said in his Saturday address to the public that putting the decision in the hands of the people's representatives was more in line with the country's democratic ideals. "I know that the country will be stronger if we take this course, and our actions will be even more effective," he said.
So as Congressional committees grill Secretary of State John Kerry and Congress prepares to vote on whether or not to strike Syria, how do you think your Congressman, Rep. James Langevin, should vote? Langevin is in favor of a response, but unsure about putting troops on the ground in Syria.
"The use of chemical weapons is unacceptable, and I agree with President Obama that the Syrian regime must not be allowed to carry out these horrific attacks without a firm and unequivocal response from the international community," Langevin wrote on his website. “My constituents have expressed a strong objection to any U.S. military response that would involve American boots on the ground, and I share that position. Any response should be targeted, limited in scope and duration, and the result of international cooperation."
Now is the time to tell him where you stand. Should Langevin vote in favor of the Syria attack? Vote in the comments section below and share your thoughts on the crisis.