ISIS ...not just an ancient Egyptian goddess
It is possible to contact your elected federal officials and receive a response:
September 26, 2014
Dear Mrs. Farrell:
Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns about the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, as well as your opposition to the use of American military force in Iraq and Syria. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue, and I share your concerns.
As you may know, since the beginning of June, the Islamic militant group Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has seized large portions of territory in the north and west of Iraq. This group formed in Iraq in response to the United States-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, and it has been conducting attacks in Iraq since then. From the beginning of the Syrian Civil War, ISIS has also been active in, and has controlled territory in, eastern Syria. While ISIS had never left Iraq, it escalated its activities in early June 2014, culminating in its seizure of Mosul, Iraq's second-largest city.
It is not surprising that as soon as this news broke some members of Congress began calling on the President to send troops to Iraq. However, the United States cannot solve the problems of Iraq, nor is a military solution the appropriate way to address the consequences of a corrupt, authoritarian government that failed to govern on behalf of all the people of Iraq. Since assuming the premiership of Iraq, Nouri al-Maliki has alienated the Sunni Muslim population, exacerbating the sectarian tensions that have led to this crisis.
After demanding in 2009 that U.S. forces leave the country, Prime Minister Maliki is now asking the United States to use military force to save his government. Ending the war in Iraq was not a mistake, but renewing it would be. The United States cannot once again commit itself and its soldiers to endless military operations abroad. For this reason, I oppose military airstrikes and sending even more weapons, and I strongly oppose returning American troops to Iraq. It's time the Iraqi government acted like a government and for Iraqi forces to stand up and protect their people.
This is not to say that the United States has no role to play in resolving this crisis. Since the crisis in Iraq has implications for the entire region, it requires a multilateral diplomatic response to contain it. I have called on President Obama to work with all nations in the region, the Arab League, and the United Nations to address the political concerns threatening stability throughout the region. It is in everyone's best interest that the region not be further destabilized, and I believe that diplomacy can lead to a better result than unilateral military force. I have also asked the President to place a priority on responding to the safety, protection and needs of Iraqi civilians placed in peril in the days and weeks to come.
Only now are the devastating consequences of the Iraq War becoming visible. I voted against the authorization of the use of force in Iraq in 2002, and I refuse to allow our country to repeat the same mistake. For this reason, I joined Representatives Scott Rigell (R-VA) and Barbara Lee (D-CA) in sending a letter to President Obama that urges him to focus on diplomatic and political solutions to the crisis in Iraq rather than on a military response. That this letter was bipartisan gives me hope that both Democrats and Republicans can come together to oppose waging war halfway around the globe. I also voted against the McKeon amendment, to arm and train moderate Syrian rebels, and the Continuing Resolution that the amendment was attached to. Both the amendment and the Continuing Resolution were passed by the House on September 17th. I firmly believe that we must debate the actions of going to war, not simply add them as an amendment to another bill.
Once again, thank you for contacting me about Iraq, and please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other issue.
Sincerely,
(signed)
James McGovern
Member of Congress
JPM/CB
If this congressman thinks there is any stability in the middle east he's got blinders on and ear plugs in.
ReplyDeleteI find it hard to believe he would rather have ISIS/
isil come here with our destruction vs. go there with their destruction.
The thought that there is a chance diplomacy has a role there is a farce,and foolminded way to get through this part of history.
The only thing that ever has and ever will is a strong military force to deter the buildup like we see now in Seria and Iraq with the ISIS allowed to control what it wants to take. One only has to ask a VETRAN what the real story is and the fact is they are the ones who carry out the orders they are given. The problem is they only get to fight with a rule book in one hand and the enemy gets to use both with no rules. It's time for a mercenary force funded by the UN and allowed to engage the terrorist when need be and as a force they will be feared. Thats one of many diplomatic ways if talking to beheaders fails and will be a deterent for the world to be defended no matter who or where. We need to take the politicians out of the military and do the job that needs doing. Could it be the politicians created some of the issues we now face?
By telling the enemy what the USA won't do and when we quit is only for political gains and political poles don't go to battle.
The only good terrorist is a dead one,hopefully before a suicide bomb attack on a plane or shopping mall. If our diplomatic people want to talk to them in the middle of an attack have at it and good luck with that. All we need to do is look at the vaungh food packing plant ordeal and thank those ready to act if needed. Support the gun laws we now have and carry if your able. The more that are ready the greater the determent for those that plan to harm others.