More Indiana Republicans Say They Need Specifics on Syria Plan
Young: Obama hasn't shown how limited strikes will improve situation
Rep. Todd Young (R-9th)
More members of Indiana's congressional delegation are weighing in on President Obama's request for a green light to bomb Syria.
Ninth District Republican Todd Young says he'd support military action if the White House can explain how it advances long-term goals in Syria. He says he's looking forward to a classified briefing for House members next week. But so far, he charges, there's been no explanation of how the limited strikes Obama has outlined would deter future use of chemical weapons, end the Syrian civil war, or stabilize the region.
Young says there's a danger a missile strike would bring further instability instead of making matters better. He echoes other Indiana Republicans who argue Obama has had a year to map out a strategy since announcing his "red line" on chemical weapons, and charge there's no sign he's done so.
Republican Representatives Larry Bucshon, Todd Rokita and Marlin Stutzman have gone the furthest in opposition, pronouncing themselves "skeptical" of getting involved in Syria. Bucshon says the White House forfeited any deterrent value by waiting so long after the gas attack on Syrian civilians. He says the Assad regime has had time to move any chemical weapons out of harm's way, and says a retaliatory strike now doesn't advance American interests.
Second District Representative Jackie Walorski had issued a statement a week before Obama's Rose Garden address, complaining the administration had turned a "blind eye" to evidence gas had been used, and warning the U-S was losing credibility in the region. Following the address, Walorski said it's unclear how "a limited, narrow act" of retaliation will accomplish anything. Like Young, she says she's looking forward to hearing more specifics.