The Case For And Against Intervening In Syria

The Case For And Against Intervening In Syria
30 August, 2013 – The Onion

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

…source