While the Obama administration has been considering an armed intervention in Syria following the gassing deaths of hundreds of Syrian civilians, a vocal movement in Congress and among the general public has emerged in opposition of any U.S. military role. Here are the arguments for and against American involvement in the war-torn Middle Eastern nation:
- It’s the right thing to do, maybe
- Let American people finally sleep at night after years of being tormented by thoughts of innocent Syrians dying
- Will put thousands of honest, diligent American Tomahawk cruise missiles back to work
- We’re the good guys
- Syrian people deserve to be free of a psychotic, oppressive dictator for a few weeks
- Moral obligation to our defense industry
- Footage of missiles being launched off decks of ships, green night-vision images, aerial shots of explosions—all that good stuff
- Have plenty of money, a fresh, rested military—why not?
- Be nice to throw Kathryn Bigelow a bone
- Chance for Obama to put an exclamation point on an already great year
- It’s been a while since we did one of these things
- Someone might be hurt, or even die
- Could turn Russia and Iran against U.S.
- Fear of setting a precedent of military action without U.N. approval
- Slight, almost infinitesimal chance intervention might be a completely ineffectual act that even further destabilizes the region, touching off massive anti-American sentiment while allowing jihadist radicals to take power
- Painful memories of intervening in Rwandan genocide
- It’s hard
- Bashar al-Assad just had a baby. A baby!
- Bush invaded a foreign country. If Obama invades a foreign country, he will be like Bush. It is not good to be like Bush.
- If we ever want to patch things up with Assad, this won’t exactly make that conversation a cake walk
- Situation might work itself out