Pros And Cons Of America's Involvement In Syria

Today, I am here to talk to you about something that everyone should be aware of, and something that should put Trump to shame. On Saturday, April 8, 2017, Donald Trump had sent an order to our military for the approval to send a bomb to Syria. The main question circling around the media is, “Why did we exactly bomb Syria?”. The main reason on why Trump sent out the order was to scare Assad. Assad, first off, is Bashar al-Assad. He is the 19th and current president of Syria. Assad first violated a “red line”, that our previous president, Barack Obama had set in 2013 during the contract to end war. Assad had then signed a contract saying that he won’t use chemicals to tame down Syrian rebels and instead, use different

Syria’s civil war is the worst humanitarian crisis of modern time. The “Syrian Civil war Began in March of 2011, between rebel brigades and government force; economy and infrastructure is destroyed” (Library, 2016). “Divisions between secular and religious fighters, and between ethnic groups, continue to complicate the politics of the conflict” (Corps, 2016). Additionally, the Syrian civil war has taken a significant

The Syrian war is a multi-problematic situation that started within Syrian borders. The Syrian war began in 2010 with something called the Arab Spring. The Arab Spring is a chain of events where people caused aggressive and non-aggressive situations such as protests which created harm in the Middle East. In 2011 people started a non-aggressive protest because children were being abused after spattering graffiti that stated how they agreed with the Arab Spring. The president during this time was Bashar al- Assad. Assad would torment and imprison the people of Syria who protested. The Syrian People wanted to end Assad’s brutal actions so they created a Free Syrian Army which led to a civil war (i.e. the Syrian war). There are several countries

Currently, the world is in disagreement over tensions in the Middle East. A divided country of the Syrian government and rebels has caused horrific acts. Acts that the president of the United States deemed necessary for military retaliation. That has sparked the debate on if it was not only justified but ethical to launch tomahawk missiles into war-torn parts of Syria. In an article on the Huffington Post, Dr. Helen Ouyang argues that it was justified and that military intervention is needed. She uses different forms of arguments to draw comparisons of Syria to other countries around the world, dissociate the scenario with the past military struggles and offers many reasons why the benefit will outweigh the cost.

The parties involved in many civil wars are often not just limited to the country in which the war is actually taking place. Often, other countries will give aid to one side of the conflict or even involve their own military forces. Recent examples of such occurrences include Russian, American, and Turkish involvement in the present Syrian Civil War and the NATO bombing campaign during the Kosovo War. These countries expend massive amounts of resources and lose great numbers of troops in these conflicts often to uncertain ends. This begs the question: Why do foreign powers involve themselves in the civil wars of other countries? It is possible that such interventions occur because the intervening party believes that they could make strategic gains by doing so. Another theory is that countries intervene when they feel that there is a moral obligation to get involved in the conflict (Kim 2012, 19). However, even when circumstances seem to be in favor of a foreign power intervening, they do not involve themselves. This paper will test these hypotheses by examining the intervention by the United States and Russia primarily in the current Syrian Civil War and attempt to discern their motives for

I feel it is my responsibility as an American citizen to offer you a critical perspective, in regards to the crisis in Syria, perhaps not seen through the eyes of someone in your distinguished position. Let me speak the words that a share of our fellow citizens have had silenced by the authority of power figures who claim that the United States has an obligation – an obligation to seemingly “mother” other countries, providing protection against any and all harm. I will admit that the conflict overseas is undoubtedly a tragedy and by no means should it be overlooked. However, it is not the responsibility of the United States to play peacemaker among nations, and it certainly does not allow for the disregarding of our own immediate issues.

There is an increasingly growing global controversy about whether the United States should intervene in the Syrian conflict, and whether this intervention should be military or strategic. The U.S. has recently avoided interfering militarily in Syria or providing the rebels with direct support, but admitted the presence of the Syrian opposition.

The Persian Gulf, the critical oil and gas –producing region that we fought so many wars to try and protect our economy from the adverse impact of losing that supply or having it available only at a very high cost. (John Bolton, George w. Bush’s ambassador to the United Nations) (Gibson,2014) It is essentially true that Syria is a country with abundant natural resources. This can be illustrated by the comment mentioned above that America has always taken a keen interest to the Middle East to reap the benefit of huge oil and gas industry. Since Syria is the second largest oil producer after Iraq, a huge political economy worked behind America’s decision to wage war on Syria, which left a disastrous impact on overall development of Syria. America’s foreign policy focuses predominantly on interest- seeking for them even at the expense of the entire world. President Barack Obama’s secretary once said ”US foreign policy is not driven by actually what people want, but by what is best for America”(Gibson,2014) Syria with all its natural resources could have been one of the leading economies in the world, but due to interest seeking so called super powers of the world they are experiencing a painful nightmare that their country has ever seen before. Nearly all major cities coupled with their all infrastructures have been demolished. Hundreds and thousands of people fled the country

Imagine. The world around you is falling apart. Turmoil and chaos surround you as you are awoken by explosions, firefights, screaming, and crying every morning. You go to bed every night wondering if someone will break into your home and steal anything valuable that has not been taken by the civil war already. You think about the dead bodies you saw on the side of the road; how they got there, what they did to deserve such a punishment, how their loved ones are doing and if they have found out the horrendous news yet. You are left with the choice to either continue to take your chances in your war torn country or you can accept the unknown and attempt to run away from all the chaos that you have known for the past few years. The latter might sound like the obvious choice, but where will you go? Every country surrounding Syria has closed its borders, so where do you? How will you continue to feed yourself? Your children..? This is just the average day in the life of a citizen of Syria. The Middle East has seen turmoil for years, and this civil war is not going to make anything better. Therefore, I find it crucial to continue to maintain the same amount intervention with Syria as the world has been. Success in the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) will depend on a clear, effective U.S. strategy in the region. It is in the best interests of the U.S. to ensure that ISIS is

"I shall try my very best to lead our country towards a future that fulfills the hopes and legitimate ambitions of our people," (Bashar al-Assad). By doing so, the Syrian president has evoked more violence than good. In Aleppo, (a major city of Syria) the terrain has quite literally been reduced to rubble as result from the civil war. Taking over this city was the last major hope for the rebels, but overtime the regime has taken over. Barrel bombs have been dropped throughout Syria resulting in great devastation. It has been estimated that over 6,000 barrel bombs have been dropped throughout the war, with their use escalating. Aleppo is just one out of the many cities that Bashar has been waging a war in. Even through Assad has been promising geographic reform, it has been shown that he has brought his people the opposite with the collapse

Over the years, United States-Syrian relations has gone back and forth between somewhat peaceful and outright hostile between both the US and Syria. But even when the relationship between the two was very hostile, the United States view on the policy toward Syria within regard to the coexisting Arab-Israeli conflict has remained consistent. The United States endorses United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, which would allow for the return of the Israeli-annexed Golan Heights to Syrian control.

Over the last few years, the Middle Eastern nation of Syria has been the location of a brutal, nationwide conflict. Governed for the last fifteen years by the Syrian dictator, President Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian people began an armed rebellion against the oppressive regime during the spring of 2011. For four years, the bloody conflict has waged between pro-Assad forces, and various factions of rebel groups. In 2013, pro-Assad forces deployed rockets with chemical warheads into rebel controlled neighborhoods, killing many non-combatants indiscriminately, showing the world Syria’s complete lack of humanitarian considerations, and Assad’s willingness to stop at nothing to remain in power. This use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime has

United states president, Donald Trump, launched a major missile attack against the Assad government earlier this week. Launching a number of tomahawk missiles in to an Assad/Syrian government run airbase. This was in response to the chemical attack, reportedly ordered by Adssad. Killing 80 civilians and injuring many more. Among the dead were numbers of children and innocent people. There are two sides/opinions about Trumps response, some say that it was over the top and not needed, while others praise Trump, calling it his best military decision since taking office.

In this essay’s scope, the Syrian war has been analyzed using the just war theory. The just war theory highlights situations where waging a war can be justifiable and also provides guidelines on how a war should be fought. In as much as the theory recognizes the need to protect innocent human life even when it involves the use of force, the theory puts in place several principles that need to be met to qualify a war as being just. As for the Syrian situation, the bone of contention is whether the proposed US military intervention is justifiable or not. Those who are for a US military intervention observe that the enormity of the massacre in Syria justifies an external intervention. They point out that an intervention would protect further loss of innocent human life. Those against such a move point out some guidelines that have not been met to merit such an intervention as a just

The “just cause criterion is central in the “just war” doctrine. When assessing the sufficient “just cause” reasons the principle of self-defence is undoubtedly tolerable. It can be extended to the reason of assisting aid to victims of oppression or external threat (Moseley n.d.). Following this principle, the mass murder of the Syrian civilians by the government forces that reached nearly 40000 (Aloyo 2014) create a justified cause for the USA and the international community in general. However, in the case of Syria using forces against the aggression as a whole will be an impossible task, as both parties