The resolution would require a summary of
“attempts to build a coalition; a ‘detailed plan for military action in Syria,
including specific goals and military objectives;’ what would qualify as
degrading the chemical weapons supply; an explanation how a limited military
strike would encourage regime change, prevent terrorists from taking control of
power or weapons, secure the chemical weapons and deter their future use; how a
strike would prevent Iran and Russia from keeping Assad in power; information
about Al Qaeda’s access to weapons; an explanation of whether weapons from
Libya are being used by the Syrian opposition and an estimation of the cost.”
The other resolution, offered by Democrats Rep.
Gerry Connolly (Va.) and Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), is also supportive of a
Syria attack but seeks to narrow the scope of any such action. Their resolution
bars use of ground forces, limits attacks to 60 days while prohibiting a second
series of attacks -- unless the Obama administration has proof Assad used
chemical weapons again -- and says an attack on Syria can only happen to
prevent use, not stockpiling, of chemical weapons.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario