President Barack Obama has said he will let Congress decide whether the United States should 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.
"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 Congressman Jon Runyan (R-3) should vote?
In a recent statement, Runyan condemned the "senseless slaughter of innocent Syrian men, women, and children seemingly at the hands of their own government" and applauded Obama for seeking Congressional approval.
"As Congress reviews the evidence and begins debate, I know both Republicans and Democrats will have strong concerns about U.S. engagement in what many view as a civil war, and whether doing so is truly in our national security interests," he said. "Additionally, after weekend briefings with the House Armed Services Committee, I also have strong concerns regarding our military readiness based on the fact that billions of dollars have been slashed from the DoD budget—which is just one reason why we must fully debate the issues at hand. To engage in additional missions without doing so would be shortsighted.”
According to the latest analysis, Congress is largely opposed to the use of military force in Syria, with the majority of members expected to vote "No" or leaning that way. Both the Senate and House are expected to vote on the matter later this week. Now is the time to tell Runyan where you stand. Should he vote in favor of the Syria attack? Vote in the poll above and let us know in the comments.