A Proportional Response

Today our, United States Representatives, are discussing what ought to be done about Syria. Obviously President Obama has chosen to take the high road and give the people a voice through their representatives, but in doing so the ignorance of people seems to come out. It is important that all citizens of our country have an opinion, but it may be to much to ask that they be well-informed. People have taken to social media to note their outrage and disappointment with the President and his plan for action against Syria seemingly without all the facts in check.

Though it may not have the same magnitude it once held, thank you President Bush, but United States Intelligence has demonstrated that Chemical Weapons were used on innocent civilians as a retaliatory strike against a region that sprung an assassination attempt against Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad. This included over four hundred people including women and children. As the images of the deadly attacks spread across the media and onto social media the nation wept and shook their heads, now we turn our backs on humanity as we continue on with our daily routine.


As an American shame is the only word to describe those opposed to action. Beyond the principle of injustice, inhumanity and genocide the purpose of a strike against the al-Assad government is justified as a national security endeavor. Secretary of State John Kerry emphasized the importance of setting precedence to stop further similar attacks and the possibility of putting our direct foreign interest, neighbors and allies in peril. Should we strike back at Syria? It is the definition of a proportional response against non-humanitarian activity. Why else are we the greatest nation in the world, but to set a standard and stand by our moral convictions. Wrong is wrong. The end.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

HIUS 713-Blog Discussion Thread: Growth in the Post Bellum Economy

Widow

Strother West Roberts (1842-1897)