What do you think the level of involvement, if any, that the US should take in Syria? Should we launch a missile strike immediately? Should we make sure that the Assad regime was truly involved? Or should we stop playing Empire and stay out of other countries affairs?
That's a tough question not susceptible to pat, easy answers. I'm inclined to agree with the President that a poison gas attack should not go without a firm but limited response.
I think we should mind our own business. These little wars and confrontations only stir up anti-American sentiment and solve nothing in the overall scheme of things. They should be allowed to wage their own war and find out for themselves the horror ad loss of it and gain an appreciation for peace.
I can't say I disagree with you, but I also don't feel comfortable staying out of it if innocent people are getting slaughtered.
Innocent people are always at loss when it come to any war. They are brutalized by it and forgotten when it is over. Syria has been abusing its' people and their rights for years by the "elected" officials in their elections. A film "Bodies of Lies" delved into the corruption of both the US and Syria when it came to espionage. Not that it is a documentarian view I can endorse, it does show you a glimpse of the workings within the powers that be. There are plenty of victims in this war. If you can relate to our own defining Civil War there were many innocent and not so innocent people victimized notwithstanding the slaves and locals who had to bare the terror and clean up and carry on after the ravages of that war.
This is certainly true of any Civil or any other war. There was a gentleman on NPR today who has written two books on Syria and even spent time with Assad a couple of years ago. I am going to have to see if the library carries them so I can get a possible different perspective on this conflict.
I have thought about this problem and the US should do something.
Maybe Drones - sanctions - hunt down Assad and put him in a wheel
chair. One thing about all this mess is that nothing was done quickly
which shows intelligence on our part.
Yes, the US, UK and France should stay out of other countries affairs.
But they wont, because their reason for taking military action has nothing to do with "chemical weapons" or "defense" . . .
. . and Nobel Peace Laureate Obama has started more wars and is responsible for more killing than any of his predecessors.
by Jack Lee18 months ago
Who is responsible for the Syrian Refugee crisis?The images of thousands of people migrating out of Syria is disturbing to say the least. Who do you think is primarily responsible for this?
by Susie Lehto10 months ago
More than 50 tomahawk missiles were launched from US Navy destroyers, targeting an airfield near Homs, the report said, citing a US official.More to follow..* http://www.itv.com/news/2017-04-07/repo …...
by Mazzy Bolero4 years ago
Considering the number of innocent people killed by gunmen, isn't it time guns were banned?The recent murders at the movie premiere were in a long line of multiple murders by gunmen - some occurring in schools. ...
by Charles James5 years ago
The USA is against terrorism. We all know this. In the fight against terrorism the USA will invade countries, kidnap people from countries like Pakistan, and use drones to kill terrorists.When the USA funds the...
by Deforest4 years ago
Is it a "terrorist" who attacked him? Or is it a covered operation?Now that we know that the horrors committed in Syria are signed indirectly by the US, now that we know that the "rebels" are...
by davidkaluge7 years ago
Was there any need for September 11 2000 ,Can it ever be justified ?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.