One knowledge issue that is very controversial right now is regarding the U.S intervention in Syria. I have to admit, I feel sympathy for our President, he is faced with a huge decision that could result in catastrophic consequences. President Obama is being pushed by the Democrats and Secretary of Defense John Kerry to intervene on behalf of the Syrian people and on the other side are Republicans who are begging the president not to get involved in Syria. President Obama is being pushed from both sides, but the main question that should be asked is-is American security being threatened? If not than why should we risk our troops to go fight in a civil war that doesn't include us?
The knowledge issue is-because we are a major world power isn't it our responsiblity to intervene and protect the innocent and defenseless? Although using chemical weapons on innocent women and children is cruel and ruthless and it makes any person feel compassion and empathy, the main focus should be on American national security. The United States army does not exist to be a police force to the world. We cannot intervene in Syria as if it is a symbolic gesture of dissapproval, the United States needs a plan of action if it was to intervene in Syria...what would it do? teach the regime a lesson? to check the box that Obama "did" something in Syria? to show that Obama's "red line threat" is being carried out? to overthrow the regime?
Another knowledge issue is-should the president act according to his best logic? or should he consult the American people and United Nations in such a desperate moment? President Obama and John Kerry said they will seek United Nations approval to go into Syria, but howabout the American people and Congress? It is President Obama's responsibility as the president of United States of America to foremost look after the welfare of the American people. Pres Obama should give the American people a explanation as to why intervening in Syria is a good idea and is justified.
Any possible intervention in Syria must be given complete thought and consideration about the consequences. For example President Obama's press secretary, Jay Carney spoke at a press conference and said that the U.S doesn't plan on overthrowing the Assad regime if they do intervene in Syria.....so whats the point of intervening if the U.S does't plan on doing anything to the Syrian government? Another fact to be considered is- if the Assad regime is overthrown who will take over? Most likely the rebels, but they are possibly affiliated with radical Jihadists and Al-Qaeda, so now whats going to happen with the Syrian people? More important what threat do they pose for our only ally in the Middle East, Israel?
As one can see the situation reagrding Syria is complex and difficult. It poses many questions about our position in the world as a world power and our definition of morals. The U.S is faced with a difficult decision but in the end it must not create any more conflicts and it must protect the welfare of the American people.
Many questions can be posed when dealing with an issue such as these. I'm not exactly sure if it is our responsibility to intervene. Although we would like to intervene, we still cannot afford to get involved in events such as these just because we are considered a world power. I feel as though other countries should contribute to Syria. This will distribute responsibility and ensure a more effective outcome.
ReplyDeleteConversely, I disagree. The United States, whether it wants to or not, has the obligation to intervene in a case such as Syria. As the first world power,the U.S has the most influence in terms of effecting political change. What happens to the U.S happens to the world, and what happens to the world happens to the U.S. With this in mind, when it comes to Syria, how the United States responds will set a precedent and potentially instigate negative relations/feelings. If the U.S doesn't intervene in Syria, then why should potential countries be afraid to use chemical warfare on civilians? Additionally, other nations would ask themselves the extent to which the U.S has a 'bias' in terms of deciding who to protect. This could cause distrust among nations that have a relationship with the United States and instill fear in terms of security/alliances.
DeleteSecondly, other countries may contribute, but it is critical to ask ourselves in what way will their contributions mitigate the problem(s) in Syria and effect change.
All in all, your statement raised some good talking points!