You've read and watched a variety of information about the Syrian conflict and the history behind it. Now it's your turn to make your case.
Do you think the U.S. should intervene in Syria? Why or why not? When is the use of military force justified?
Comment below to answer the questions above by making a clear claim that states your opinion. Then back up your claim with specific evidence to support your answers. Examples of evidence might include quotations from political leaders or news articles, examples from history, or personal perspectives.
Remember that a strong argument uses multiple pieces of evidence, so make sure your claim is supported by at least two or three specific details. Write clearly, and use classroom-appropriate language that avoids slang or text-speak.
Check out the links below for information that might help you build your case:
Syria Lesson Warm-Up Statements
History as a Guide in Syria (video)
Officials Make Case for Strike Before Senate Panel
I think that the U.S. should intervene in Assyria because we own many things over there and because U.S.citizens live there.the use of military force is justified when the Assyrians take action against us.
ReplyDeleteI think that U.S. should bomb Syria because many things that are there are part of the U.S. and if plenty of are U.S. citizens live there. Military force is justified when Syria trys to bomb us too.
ReplyDeleteI think that we shouldn't bomb Syria but just try to sustain order. Unless things get completely out of hand, then we should just try and either take their nuclear weapons or destroy them. I think this because the more peace you have the the less violence and war we would have.
ReplyDeleteIf we were to invade Syria we should go in peacefully and help them sort things out but also if we were to do that they might react with violence and start WW3 we would also be puting out troops at a very high risk
ReplyDeleteSyria isn't going to make peace just because we ask them to. Sometimes, you need military action to actually make a difference.
DeleteI think we shouldnt intervene in the arguments and affairs over there because we dont need any more violence and fighting against us right now. And the use of military force id justified when the enemies of Syria take action against us.
ReplyDeleteI think that we shouldn't intervene. Because Syria isnt one of our allies, and they have some allies that dont like us very much. If we intervene there could possible be a chain reaction that makes a large war that would result in large amounts of death. Anyway the UN is in charge of making sure no countries break the laws of war (aka: using chemical weapons).
ReplyDelete-Quin P.
There are U.S. citizens in Syria. And just because they aren't our allies doesn't mean we shouldn't intervene. Two people at school could be arguing, and let's say a fight breaks out. If they didn't like you, would you just sit back and let it happen? Why should things be different if someone likes you or not?
Deletei think that if we were to go and intervene in Syria we should go in peacefully and try to make peace and not go in with violence because there is a chance that Syria will react with violence instead of reacting peacefully like we have heard Syria used a chemical bomb to kill over 1400 people and no saying they wont do it again to our troops
ReplyDeletetrue statement
DeleteTrue that. Nice comment.
Deleteif we were to invade syria all of the other countries would join in and we would go into ww3. china and russia would join in and it would be the biigest war that we have been in since ww2.
ReplyDeleteWhy would China and Russia care to join in a war that broke out because of conflict in the Middle East? Where's your evidence of that? And I doubt there will ever be another world war. There hasn't been for a while now, so why would there be one all of a sudden?
DeleteIf a world war broke out, it might not necessarily be "all of a sudden". World relations between World War 2 and now have gotten increasingly strained, however it might seem from the surface.
DeleteI think that the U.S should definently intervene in Syria because if Syria keeps causing chaos the middle east in all will be affected because alot of the U.S has allys in the surrounding areas.
ReplyDeleteBut who's to say that they wont poison out troops and start a war
DeleteI think we should be civil and try to communicate with them. If they don't want to cooperate them we bomb them and destroy their weapons. it would be better for everyone if we didn't start WW3.
ReplyDeleteWe can't just bomb Syria. Not everyone in Syria deserves that. There are citizens of the U.S. there. And you can't simply communicate civilly with Syria. They won't listen.
Deletei thinks that we should not intervene because they could start the next world war, the us has too much debt to began with, imagine what a world war could cause or what if we lost. The us has always had debt even after we won the the war for independence we owed the french for helping us.
ReplyDeleteI think the U.S should definitely not go to Syria. If we were to intervene with them this would cause so many problems in other places than just there. Also, since they ¨started¨ it by a chemical attack then if we responded, Stria´s military would do something else to us and it would never stop.
ReplyDeleteI think that the U.S. military should intervene in Syria because they are causing a big threat to their own people and our allies. To protect U.S. citizens living or working abroad and foreign civilians who are dying. Another reason is if we don't act now it will keep getting worse and they may even attack close to home or strike the U.S.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, military force should be used to prevent the future possible use of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, because the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government directly puts American interests at risk, if we don't act immediately.The government of Syria is using chemicals on there people and then it could spread and they will start using it to kill other people all over the world using it for war. It could kill thousands of people at first and then the use of chemical weapons could kill millions. The goal, Mr.Kerry, is to degrade the Syrian government’s ability to use chemical weapons and deter their future use. “This is not the time to be spectators to a slaughter. Neither our country nor our conscience can afford the cost of silence." said Mr.Kerry, and that's all I am saying we should get rid of the chemical weapons, there's no point in slaughtering/killing people. I also think we need to eliminate a possible threat on U.S. security such as terrorism/terrorists. Like Mr.Hagel said “We cannot afford for Hezbollah or any terrorist group determined to strike the United States to have incentives to acquire or use chemical weapons.”
ReplyDeleteI think that we shouldn't intervene.Right now we don't need any wars.Syria should end this with peace and not violence. If we get involved a war could happen and we would be at risk.The only way the U.S. should get involved would be because of things getting out of hands.
ReplyDeleteI agree
DeleteI think we should stay out of this because it's none of our business, and it doesn't involve us. The US is not an international police force, and another war is the last thing we need right now. We're already trillions in debt and it won't help spending more on a war that's not ours.
ReplyDeleteI cannot fully decide if the U.S. should involve itself in Syria's problems, but topics of reasoning for me to consider the idea of the United States sending help have come to my attention; three men of which have been brought in by President Obama from the senior national security team have announced that the chemical weaponry used on Syria have directly endangered American interests. As well as directing possibly angered reactions from the countries of North Korea and Iran, I am starting to believe acting in hopes of helping the nation would be better than avoiding the situation which could cause an uproar of the other countries.
ReplyDeleteI think that the U.S. shouldn't bomb Syria because there needs to be more peace and I think that will solve a lot of the problems we have with them now.The U.S.needs to destroy all of there nuclear weapons and stop thinking about destroying Syria. The people in Syria just need to chill out or something and be grateful for what they have which is not much.
ReplyDeleteI think that the USA should not intervene in Syria because we are not the world police force, the ones to intervene should be the UN if at all. Why should the USA care if halfway around the world, in a country we have no economic interests in, that hates our guts, if the government kills their own citizens. I am not saying that what the Syrian government did is right, however it does not concern the USA. It is an attempt by the Obama administration to gain publicity by engaging in a time, resource, and live consuming conflict that will earn the USA the reputation of a nosy and meddling county.
ReplyDeleteI think the U.S. should intervene in Syria. Innocent people and U.S. citizens are being killed from the chemical weapons. We have the power to do something, we can't just let this happen. The use of military force is justified when something this inhumane is going on. And yes, there is still debt, unemployment, and education problems, but we need to rise above our own issues and stop the chaos in Syria.
ReplyDeleteI think we should let Syria work this out on their own. Its a terrible thing that all those people died. We just need to focus on our own problems.
ReplyDeleteMy opinion is that the U.S should definitely send military over to help both American citizens and the people living there. I believe this to be true because of the video we saw with the multiple people lying on the ground dead and their loved ones mourning over them. I also disagree with all the chemical bombs which was what killed the people and yet Syria thinks it's a good idea to use that in the future!
ReplyDeleteI think we should intervene to keep them from using chemical weapons again since they have already used them once. We need to maybe not use weapons but maybe take there weapons away with allies helping.Military force should be justified if they do it again.
ReplyDeletei think that we should intervene with Syria because we own some of the same things they do and because some of our people live in Syria too. Force is justified when Syria starts to fight us,
ReplyDeleteI think the U.S. should intervene in Syria because who knows if they will or will not use chemical,biological or nuclear weapons again. You can't read the future. Violence may result in violence, but who knows if peace will result in peace? Secretary of State John Kerry says “the risk of not acting is greater than the risk of acting.” Which is true. Why not act and have a bigger chance of making a good difference then not act at all. When you could act and have a chance of making a good difference in the future then why would you not do it? President Obama said that there would be "no boots on the ground.” We won't lose any troops and Syria's neighboring countries also agreed to help the U.S. So why would we not do it is the question.
ReplyDeleteAnswer1: I think the U.S. both should and should not intervene in Syria because if the U.S. does intervene Syria could possibly kill many americans the way they have already done in Syria with the chemicals and if the U.S. do not go intervene then Syria would continue to terrorize other people and could possibly all war on the U.S. even if the U.S. doesn't intervene.
ReplyDeleteAnswer2: the use of military force is justified when a country attacks us or tries to attack us. I say this because if they try to attack us once then the probably would try to attack us again so its good to be ready than not ready. I also say if they attack us because if a country attacks another country usually the other country is going to attack them back because if they don't the country that attacked them is going to think well I attacked them and they didn't do anything about it so i guess its ok so i'm going to go out and attack them again or they might say i'm going to go out and attack another country and see will they do the same.
I don't think that the U.S should get involved at all, because this could turn out very bad, worse than it all ready is
DeleteWe all should just settle this in peace the United States does not need anymore wars.
DeleteI think the best thing to do is to strongly suggest the UN to intervene we can send our troops to help the UN but if we go into this without more support from other nations it could turn in to another long war like the ones in Iraq and Afghanistan also Russia or another one of Syrias allies could side with Syria but they would not do that if the UN was sending troops in, also if we don't intervene John kerry says it could send a message to North Korea and iran we would not act on attacks and that might encourage them to attack other countries.
ReplyDeleteI think we shouldn't get involved they should solve it on there own.We have already lost many of are soldiers in the wars in Iraq and Iran.They don't have the Americans citizens don't want to go to war so we shouldn't.
ReplyDeleteI think the u.s should leave Syria alone.....If THEY DONT WANT A WAR LET THEM DO WHAT THEY WANT ......ONLY IF THEY START ATTACKING THE U.S THEN YOU GO TO SYRIA
ReplyDeletegood comment
DeleteI Think That The U.S Should Get Involved Because That's Their Job To Protect Us. They Could Probally Stop All Of This Violence If, They Try.
ReplyDeletethis is really hard to know what to do for something like this but yes the army need to go over there and stop this because more people will come over here and take jobs that other people needs and pople r dieing ever day for no reason there fighting each other in the same country and no one can be safe the army should go over there and do something about this before it comes to the USA
ReplyDeletei think they should solve this problem with war because syria has no buisness killing innocent people just beacause they think theyre tow is not being run right we should fight no matter what religion they are still brothers and sisters of christ to us so i think they should go down there and do something to stop all of the cold blooded killers
ReplyDeleteI think that we should intervene against the attacks against Syria killing hundreds with chemical weapons because if we don't go there to intervene and stop the killings of more people than who will stop them. But on the other hand we should try to get other allies to help us stop Syria because these chemical weapons are very dangerous
ReplyDeleteI think we should stay away because Syria clearly doesn't want us. They made a video/protested to keep us away from them. So we should let them handle their own problems. We have our own problems to handle but we need to send a spy to keep an eye out. If they send something our way it would be nice to know ahead of time.
ReplyDeleteI think we should stay away because Syria clearly doesn't want us. They made a video/protested to keep us away from them. So we should let them handle their own problems. We have our own problems to handle but we need to send a spy to keep an eye out. If they send something our way it would be nice to know ahead of time.
ReplyDeleteWe need to leave the conflict alone! We only need to get involved if it becomes clear that a resolution cant be made or if its clear that their government cant control the situation. Until then I think we need to keep a close eye on Syria. Now if it does come down to us having to get involved I'd suggest that we come in fast, smart and peaceful. Rules of Engagement state don´t attack unless attacked first and we need to keep it that way.
ReplyDeleteI don't think we should get involed because we don't won't to loose any more soldiers and I think syria should be able to solve there own problems. No matter how big or small the situation is I think Syria should come down here and see how hard or easy it is to solve problems. I don't think we should loose any soldiers over Syria if we do go down there then it might be a trap for them to find our weakness and whats strong to us.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the U.S should get into this because SYRIA is really going through alot can we just keep PEACE please because i don't want our solider's to go up over.SYRIA just need to keep to there self's so should we.
ReplyDeleteI think the should look out because they can come and something serious
ReplyDeletei think the U.S should not get involved cause if they do they might get in a war with Syria and we don't need to get anymore people killed so i think we should leave it to them to work it out them self and people are already dying so i think we should leave it alone.
ReplyDeleteI think the best thing to do is to transport some of our highly trained professionals to do what they are supposed to do. And that is protect our community,the USA and protect Syria. I CANNOT SAY HOW SAD IT WAS TO SEE BODIES WRAPPED UP IN SHEETS ON THE VIDEOS. THIS IS RIDICULOUS SOMEONE NEEDS TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS SITUATION.
ReplyDeleteI think we should just leave Syria alone but we can help them but i don't like the idea of going over there.It is very sad that all these people are dying and they should be stopped, but they have to protect them selves. We cant start WW3 so we have to be careful.
ReplyDelete- Emma Abston
I think that the US should intervene with Syria but at the same time deal with our own problems in the US. I also think that we should partner with them so they will not attack us with the nuclear weapons.
ReplyDeleteI think that the United States should not get involved with Syria and its problems. We have already lost lives in previous incidents with other countries such as Iraq in 2001. Another reason is that Syria is their own country and the should deal with their own problems.
ReplyDeleteI Don't Think The U.S Should Get Involved With Syria And Their Problems Because What Syria Do Is Not Our Business. I Thing If The U.S Get Involved, Then That Could Start A War Between Us And That's Something We Do Not Want To happen. The U.S Could Also Lose More Soldiers, And That Wouldn't Be Good Either. If Syria Wants To Cause Problems And Kill People We Should Leave That Alone And Let Them Do What They Want!
ReplyDeleteI think that the United States Military should not go over to Syria. I think that we shouldn't go over there because it's none of out business. We are not the International Police, we have no right to bud in where we don't belong.If they want to go to war, let them. We don't need to try to control them. Obama needs to learn that the united states is his only responsibility, not the rest of the world. He needs to stop trying to make world peace and get over it. Syria can handle itself. If they need help, they can ask, but we don't need to just go over there and tell them to stop. That's how we make enemies. We need to worry about ourselves and not others. Let them do what they want and leave them alone. World piece is not an option, for now. THANKS OBAMA!!!
ReplyDeleteI think we should get involved to help Syria because we could help them solve problems that they can't solve themselves and our military could keep it from so many people being killed. Also, we have more resources than Syria so it would be easy for us to help them have weapons and food and keep people from dying.
ReplyDeleteYes I believe the US should intervene with Syria. I think we should bomb Syria like we did Japan. I believe this because if we intervene now we will not have to worry about them later.
ReplyDeleteI think that we should not send our troops to protect Syria. I believe this because when George W. Bush was president he sent our American troops to Iraq because there were many reports of them using chemical warfare. After the U.S had gotten involved we found out that these threats were false. Because of this many American troops lost their lives as well as many American citizens from the terrorist attacks on america. According to wikipedia, it is very likely that the 911 attacks would not have happened if we had not gotten involved with the war. I believe that if Obama decides to send our troops into Syria it will just be a repeat of the past war. I also think that we shouldn't help another country when we need help ourselves. There are so many economic problems that many Americans will go with out a home, food, and clothes. We need to protect the lives of our people before we protect the lives of others. Every country has problems, some more then others, we can't help everyone.
ReplyDeleteI think the best idea for us Americans is to leave the Syrians alone so that our country won't be in danger. But, seeing the graphic footage on the news is truly terrifying, especially observing young children being victims of the chemicals. But, we can't back away and ignore these actions. This is absolutely terrible, and we can't back away now.
ReplyDelete~Meredith Vaughn ��
I do not think that the U.S. should take any military intervention in Syria because of the expressed views of its people. Our country was created with the intent of rule "of the people, for the people, by the people", and if 50% of Americans are opposed to intervening militarily in Syria, then our government should listen to the people that it is sworn to serve and to obey (the wishes of), rather than leaving our fates entirely to a bunch of sweet-mouthed bureaucrats whose validity is worth about as much as their promises. A government for the people must do just that, operate entirely to the thoughts of the people it is set up to govern, as some officials seem to have forgotten, regardless, however brutal this might seem, of one's personal ideas of which topics are ethical and unethical. Can we really guarantee military efforts would in fact, make anything better? It is true, as Mr. Chuck Hagel and Mr. John Kerry would tell us, that allowing the use of chemical weaponry to go unopposed "might allow extremists to find haven in a country with chemical weapons". However, how are they to be so sure that military action would improve anything when concerning the Assad regime, who the U.N. and U.S. reports to have used chemical weaponry against thousands of civilians, including children? Who is to say that military force might not throw them over the edge? Who is to say that an operation intended to save thousands might not kill millions? Syria has alliances with Russia, one of the dominant world powers today. If Syria (or Russia) were to take military action as a further provocation, who is to say that Russia would not intervene in some fashion? President Obama clearly intends military action only, if carried out, as a consequence to a warning that would go unheeded. But would Syria take it like this? Would Syria not look weak internationally if attacks went without any worry of retaliation? Let me remind you that we are not dealing with just Syria. We are dealing with Syria and all of its allies, which do include Russia. Do we really need to be involved in another war now? Can we afford to be in another war now? Would our blundering efforts at help just turn out to be blundering failures? Now, I am not trying to say that the graphic images out of Syria broadcasted worldwide should be ignored. If military action were to be taken, it must be done subtly, not in the current proposed fashion. It also could be taken up in arguments that maybe America is meddling (I am not expressing my personal views). Should we remember moments in history, when America intervened in wars its own people, its supposed source of power, were against? Should we remember Vietnam? Media outlets nowadays seem to regard the people's thoughts as "public polls", but we all know what the people's thoughts are worth today. We are forced to sacrifice our most sacred rights to the ruling class, a group who can't seem to agree to the smallest thing today, and they completely ignore us in their own tumultuous, pitiable babble of trivialities. The use of military force is justified when inhumane actions are taken by another country or state, but if and only if increased welfare is ensured by taking military action, not in situations where the shot of a gun might bring World War 3 crashing down upon all of us.
ReplyDeleteI do no think that the U. S should intervene with a war that doesn't include us, besides having troops over there. We are already in trillions of dollars of debt, and don't need to be in any more. Besides, the people fighting the war are are enemies.
ReplyDelete