That is why, he said, he will vote
against a proposed military strike in Syria .
“I have come to a conclusion that
there is not an imminent threat to America or Americans and we need to
give diplomacy a chance to work,” said Manchin. “If money or military
might would change that region of the world, we would have changed it by now
after 12 years of war.”
Manchin has proposed an alternative
to a proposed U.S. military
attack on Syria in response
to the Assad regime’s alleged use of chemical weapons against civilians on
August 21 near Damascus .
As proposed, it would give Syrian
President Bashar Assad 45 days to sign on to the Chemical Weapons Convention,
which already has the support of more than 90 other nations. The Chemical
Weapons Convention was developed in the 1990s and prohibits the development,
production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons.
Manchin said that 45 day window
would allow time for more diplomacy along with the development of a long term U.S. plan for Syria .
After that, “A lot will
depend on what happens in the 45 days for me to say that ‘Yes, I
would (support a military strike)’ or ‘No, I wouldn’t (support a military
strike),’” said Manchin.
“I’m telling you, right now, I do
not. I do not believe that we should strike (Syria ). I believe that the
risk that we take, the reaction is greater than an inaction at this point
in time when we have not explored all diplomacy.”
U.S. Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)
has said he would talk about his stance on possible U.S.
military action against Syria
early this week.
President Barack Obama was
scheduled to make a case for a military strike in Syria in an address to the nation
on Tuesday.