• we were rebels

    We fought for our independence so we should help other countries fight for there independence. France helped us so we must become "France" and Syria is the United States of America. There government is also using chemical weapons and the rebels do not have the firepower to fight. That is why we must help them fight.

  • Of Course We Have To!

    It's time we stand up for what we believe in which is freedom and liberty. We need to fight this battle by ourselves for the freedom of the GOOD people in the rebel community! We cannot send guns to Islamic radicals (yes even the rebels are radicals) and expect then to thank us. No they will turn their backs on us and start firing. We have to take some big time action on this and end this NOW!

  • Protect and stabilize selected geographic regions.

    The U.S. Military should set up bases near Damascus and other key urban portions of Syria and its enemies sort themselves out by choosing to attack, rather than the other way around. It would draw Syrian military fire from rebel and civilian populations, allow civilian populations to find refuge in military bases, and avoid political ammunition and influence for the anti-western propaganda of Islamic militant groups. Such a plan has minimal reliance on mobility, which reduces U.S. Susceptibility to I.E.D.S and allows our superior military training and funding to pay off in more sophisticated battles. It provides damage control and stability for the Syrian people as the Syrian government and military erodes / collapses under its own unpopularity, and places us in a unique position to provide transitional infrastructure without getting involved in Syrian politics. This provides time for the Syrian people to choose their replacing form of government or leaders, while the US-induced stability will inhibit bargaining leverage for Islamic militant groups that are currently aiding Syrian rebels. This plan also does not obligate the United States to get involved in Syrian elections or the training of Syrian forces in the future, as has been a limiting factor in Iraq and Afghanistan.

  • Genocide may happen and the country would still be at risk of falling apart.

    The problem with the rebels are that a majority of them are religious Sunni who if were in power would create the country to be an oppressive religious state. If these rebels in power they would more then likely exact revenge on those against them and purify the population, thus removing the groups such as the Alawites and the Christians. The rebels are not even a unified force, many have different view points then each other and are only together because they have a common hatred for Assad. Helping the rebels could very greatly back fire on us, many new problems could arise and not to mention they would likely still have a hatred for the western world.

  • It could potentially turn Syria's civil war into a much larger conflict.

    If the U.S. Were to invade, or as other's put it "intervene" in Syria. The civil war could grow into a regional conflict. Sectarian violence would spill into a rapidly destabilizing Iraq. Potentially spurring a civil war in that country as well. Iran is allied with Syria, and could potentially commit soldiers to Syria or use Syria as a proxy against the U.S. Of course Israel will be all to happy to flex its military muscles. I could go on much longer but I think this will suffice.

  • Rebels support terrorists

    The Syrian rebels are supported heavily by the Muslim brotherhood and Al-Quadea they aren't the romantic rebels fighting for independence.If anything we should just let it play out without intervening and see if Assad can hold out.If we get involved we could end up fighting both the rebels and Assad

  • Short Answer: No

    History proves this would be disastrous. Not only with this lead to nothing but carnage, but whenever the USA helps these third world, middle east countries, they end up turning on us and become our enemies leading to more war. Also comes to priorities with all the problems going on here, a third world countries problems shouldn't top on our what to do list.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Bullish says2013-05-03T21:26:01.910
The U.S. Meddling in other country's business again? Nahhh...

Look at Iraq. Iran. Vietnam. Etc...

The U.S. Can't decide on anything. War is not like congress. "Hey lets not do anything outside of talking".

My main point: The U.S should either mind it's own business, or go all out help a country. Not just destabilize the whole region by supporting rival factions. Al though I seriously think that's exactly the U.S. Is trying to do.. Destabilize the world to retain Superpower status.