White House Reflects on Syria
Early today Obama talked about the ongoing 2-year civil war that has erupted and ravaged the country of Syria. This article that I have chosen, titled Planned as Call to Act, Obama’s Speech Becomes a Plea of Time, by Michael D. Shear posted on the New York Times website, talks about the many aspects the Obama discusses in his speech and further research gone into his views on the current situation.
In their crusade to domesticate all other country’s supply of weapons, both regular and chemical, they came across Syria, and in an effort to cease their war for peace and the greater good (or to gain control of their military force), the United States has tried to confiscate the weapons in use. Their involvement has done little good, giving refugees reason to leave and flee into Germany for example, but it has only made the country cold towards Americans. The United Nations is stymied by Russia and China, so the main issue is Senate trying to put out a bill to enact war upon their country. President Obama stated that he wished to avoid this and to settle the issue through diplomatic means, but he can’t change the Senate’s mind. Although the bill has been dropped momentarily, many believe there is no doubt they will pick it up again, especially considering that the Democrats are trying to even further this claim that all countries must bow to America’s superior military strength, which is the only argument made for The States consideration of “dropping a bomb” on Syria. They wish to advance military force in fleets in order to punish Syria for it’s resistance, not only risking potential war but revealing the simple arrogance in the house.
One can understand the desire for national, if not global, peace, yet they truly believe that they are doing something constitutional, in a word, for America, when the idea of invading another country to gain control of their weapons due to fear is clearly a move for advancement in our own military power, a move simply made for more economic power over all other countries. Not only is it a selfish and contradictory statement, no matter what Obama says it doesn’t seem to appear that he is against total control of Syria’s chemical weapons. He wishes to avoid war, but avoid overall advantage of Syria’s military position? Of course not. It is a dictatorial resemblance, control through fear masked with kindness and peace. The complete lack of ethics and morality, let alone nihilism, is revealed through the government’s obvious inconsideration of civilian life in Syria. The idea that they would be willing to drop bombs on innocent men, women and children in so incredibly inconsiderate and, well, evil. It truly makes me resentful towards not only our government, which many people have a long, deep-rooted hatred of already, but our dear POTUS, who seems to be empty of all and any form of moral alignment.
So in conclusion, while I can see and understand the arguement that they are trying to make for this particular movement, I wholly disagree with the idea that the only way that the Senate and whoever else in the many branches of government is by initiating another attack on a foreign country. We as citizens and our soldiers I think are quite tired of these decisions. My only wish is that the U.N. hadn’t backed out, they might have been able to bring some sense into this by some kind of international discussion of current happenings in Syria.
