Syrian Conflict
0 view | +0 today
Follow
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Jonathan Lu
Scoop.it!

Same War, Different Country

Same War, Different Country | Syrian Conflict | Scoop.it
Who will prevail in the Arab awakening, Hobbes, Khomeini or Jefferson?
Jonathan Lu's insight:

Freidman is quite accurate about the current situation in Syria being no different from the ones in the past, this topic of "chemical warfare" in Syria is truly none of the United States business. By butting our heads into other nations conflicts we could be calling for trouble upon ourselves. But like I said before we have won many great conflicts and I feel confident that we can resolve this one in a non-violent manor

more...
Mackenzie Hill's curator insight, September 11, 2013 1:28 AM

It's concerning to think that the US's help in Syria could lead to a political and economic recession as tragic as Libya's after American intervention. Friedman's point about how, though we are fighting in different places, we continuously fight over the same things, and thus it is one war. It seems, however, that in every intervention, no matter the strategy, we, as a nation, make some sort of fatal mistake. 

Abe's curator insight, September 11, 2013 2:58 AM

I found this article very interesting and easy to comprehend. It really helped shed light on how Syria is just another war in the Middle East with the same issue just as the other wars that had happened in the region.

George's curator insight, September 11, 2013 3:43 AM

Friedman does a good job persuading people by refering back to past experiences that America has been through. Like the saying goes, "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

Scooped by Jonathan Lu
Scoop.it!

USA TODAY Poll: Opposition to Syrian airstrikes surges

USA TODAY Poll: Opposition to Syrian airstrikes surges | Syrian Conflict | Scoop.it
Jonathan Lu's insight:

Obama should definitely make a speech about our opinions on the conflict on Syria. I feel as if it is necessary for the president to ask the opinion of the public. If Obama just does what he wants without the consent of the nation, riots and rebellions could appear.

more...
Abe's curator insight, September 11, 2013 1:49 AM

Seems like avery presidential address arouses my inner patriotism just a tad bit. 

George's curator insight, September 11, 2013 3:17 AM

It's quite interesting seeing how Obama's address is compared to other presidential addresses all dealing with a request to go to war. Obama is faced with the challenge of persuading a country that's tired of fighting wars to rise up once again to act as the world's policemen. 

Tianna Kelly's curator insight, December 1, 2013 9:13 PM

This poll does not surprise me in the least; in fact, I am among the majority who oppose United States military action in Syria. The United States has its own internal issues to attend to, and spending money and resources on unnecessary actions can only further our troubles.

Scooped by Jonathan Lu
Scoop.it!

Obama Tests Limits of Power in Syrian Conflict

Obama Tests Limits of Power in Syrian Conflict | Syrian Conflict | Scoop.it
President Obama’s approach to Syria is likely to create an important precedent in the often murky legal question of when presidents or nations may lawfully use military force.
Jonathan Lu's insight:

Obama has to be smart on the actions he is willing to take against Syria. Although the US is very powerful, we could also intimidate other groups as well creating an uneasy feeling between nations. Congress has more weight in this decision than the people because of the knowledge it has on the subject. Therefore , in my opinion, Congress knows whats best

more...
Tianna Kelly's curator insight, September 11, 2013 1:23 PM

I don't understand President Obama's statement that we must attack Syria because of U.S. national interests. What interests are these? Also, while Obama does legally have the right to launch a military attack on Syria without Congressional approval, the fact that public opinion says that we should not intervene, and that the U.S. is a supposed Democratic country, mean that he should not take it upon himself to act outside of public and Congressional approval. Otherwise, how is he any better than Assad?

Sammy Masri's curator insight, September 17, 2013 1:13 AM

I think Obama was facing all of this superficial, but ever-growing, pressure to do something about Syria, ANYTHING, as long as he just didn't sit idly by. Then, when he finally chose his only viable path (at the time), most people balked at the severity. Iraq and Afghanistan linger more than Kuwait, Kosovo, and Libya. Saving face became the only possible measure afterwards, and forget the actual politics, weapons, and lives at stake.

My personal opinion, of course.

Adriana Cruz's curator insight, January 18, 2014 12:31 PM

Events like this happen in hundreds of different countries yet the US has never gotten involved. Also, the law against chemical weapons is international, therefore, the United Nations should be dealing with this, not the US alone. Of course, the UN would never go for it seeing as how Russia is an ally of the Syrian government. more importantly the situation is lose, lose. We do not need to be involved in this fight, it's not ours.

Rescooped by Jonathan Lu from AP Government & Politics
Scoop.it!

3: Roundtable: Crucial week for Obama - Video on NBCNews.com

3: Roundtable: Crucial week for Obama - Video on NBCNews.com | Syrian Conflict | Scoop.it
Video on msnbc.com: A Meet the Press roundtable forecasts the pressure on this upcoming week for the president to make his case for intervention in the Syrian conflict.

Via Teresa Herrin
more...
Melissa Aleman's curator insight, September 11, 2013 10:36 PM

Really enjoyed this video in the sense that it gave me more insight to what's going on and different points of view. Several points like the fact that innocent civilians will die on our watch because of the airstrike was one i especially liked because it made me think more deeply into why we shouldnt intervene. It's clear that this is a huge predicament that even the Round table finds difficult to choose a side in the sense that as a nation we are stuck on deciding whether to be or not to be the "world's policemen."

Daniel Guo's curator insight, September 11, 2013 11:49 PM

I think that Newt Gingrich brings up good points about why it's hard for the public to support an airstrike on Syria. I think that this dicussion is a fair representation of the current public opinion on the matter- nobody wants to directly support a strike; there is no clear right answer.

Rachel Murphy's curator insight, October 2, 2013 8:13 PM

All of the politicians here are hesitant about military strikes in Syria. because they aren't sure about the effect that it would cause. Newt Gingrich makes some excellent points about the importance of communication. I believe some action needs to be taken in Syria, but a strike would only unleash more problems for us. Syria's allies are too powerful.