Here is the text of a letter I just submitted to the local paper as well as posted to each member of my state’s Congressional delegation.

Dear Sirs:

It is great dismay that I read the news of President Obama’s plans for possible attacks on Syria.  I urge you to oppose any such action.

Firstly, the President should not, and indeed under the Constitution does not, have the authority to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an imminent threat to the nation.  Then Candidate Obama stated as much in a December 2007 interview. (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/specials/CandidateQA/ObamaQA/)

Secondly, even if the President came to Congress seeking authorization for military action in Syria, it should still be opposed.  The sole purpose of the United States military, despite recent practice to the contrary, is to defend the lives, rights, and property of American citizens from foreign aggression.  I have heard no argument even remotely suggesting that American property or lives are at risk in Syria’s civil war.

Considering the fact that at least some of the opposition in Syria, whom our attacks would support, are aligned with Al Qaeda, who most certainly are enemies of this country, there can be no justification for the spending of American tax dollars and potentially American lives in a conflict where no American interests are at risk.

Again, I respectfully urge you to oppose any plans for United States involvement in the conflict in Syria.

Regards,

Patrick Black

Cc: Senator Leahy
Senator Sanders
Representative Welch