Reid says U.S. has ‘moral obligation’ to take action on Syria

WASHINGTON — Sen. Harry Reid came out on Saturday in favor of a military strike on Syria, saying it is “both justified and necessary” following its leaders’ reported use of poison gas against their own citizens.

“I believe the United States has a moral obligation as well as a national security interest in defending innocent lives against such atrocities, and in enforcing international norms such as the prohibition against the use of chemical weapons,” said Reid, D-Nev.

Syrian President Bashir al-Assad “must be held accountable for his heinous acts and the world looks to us for leadership,” Reid said.

Reid had remained silent this past week as President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry built a case for the U.S. to attack in response to the Syrian regime’s alleged firing of chemical weapons into rebel-held suburbs of Damascus on Aug. 21.

The Senate majority leader made his position clear in a statement in which he also announced the Senate will hold public hearings and briefings next week in advance of a vote during the week of Sept. 9 whether to authorize Obama to move forward.

“Given the atrocities committed by Bashar al-Assad against his own people, including the use of internationally prohibited chemical weapons and the murder of innocent children, it is time for Congress to debate and vote on whether Syria’s heinous actions should be met with a limited use of American military force,” Reid said.

“The decision to take military action is not one to be taken lightly, and this decision will receive the full and open debate it deserves.”

Obama said earlier Saturday he would seek congressional approval to strike in a way he said would be “limited in duration and scope,” and sent a formal request to Capitol Hill later in the day. U.S. warships are poised in the Mediterranean Sea and prepared to carry out the order to launch missiles on selected targets.

Among other Nevadans in Congress, Republican Rep. Joe Heck said on Thursday the administration had yet to persuade him that military action was necessary, or that there were “clearly defined goals and objectives” to the planned strike.

Other lawmakers — Republican Sen. Dean Heller and Rep. Mark Amodei and Democrat Reps. Steven Horsford and Dina Titus — have not indicated whether they would vote for or against U.S. military involvement, but all called on Obama to confer with Congress before cementing a course of action.