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:

FOR:

• 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

AGAINST:

• Someone might be hurt, or even die
• Could turn Russia and Iran against U.S.
• History
• 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