There is a fork in the road coming in regard to the conflict in Syria. Soon we will be forced to decide whether we will enter the conflict stay out of it and protect our interests here at home. If we choose the former, we then have another choice: Do we join the side that has the support of Iran and Russia (neither of whom are particularly fond of the United States), or the side that boasts the support of radical Islamic groups like al Qaeda and Hamas (also not fond of the United States). It is therefore in our best interest to stay out of the Syrian conflict altogether.
At this point, it’s clear which side we would join should we decide to enter the Syrian conflict; but I just want to clarify something. Neither side is or ever was worth joining arms with. Assad and his regime are supported by Iran and Russia. With Iran continuing to taunt us daily by pursuing nuclear weapons (I know, I know, we don’t know if they’re really pursuing them, but let’s just pretend they are), we can’t afford to risk letting our weapons fall into the hands of Iran; nor can we let them fall to Russia, who seems to have something up its sleeve should Obama win a second term that will cause us to decrease our number of defense missiles. Both of these countries are enemies of the United States; by supporting the government in Syria, we leave to chance the fact that some of the most advanced weapons in the world could fall into the hands of these countries to be later used against us.
Now to the opposition forces (the “Freedom Fighters”). They have the support of al Qaeda and Hamas; shouldn’t that give us a hint as to what type of government will be ushered in once Assad is gone? It will be Libya all over again– we help rid this country of its oppressive government, and that country turns around and elects a new government led by the Muslim Brotherhood (or some other radical group). Going even further, even if we refuse to send troops but settle with sending weapons to the opposition– can we afford to risk letting those weapons fall into the hands of al Qaeda? Have we forgotten that this is the same terrorist group that flew planes into the Twin Towers on 9/11? Sending weapons into the same country as al Qaeda is a dangerous plight.
President Obama is being pressured to enter the Syrian conflict and come to the aid of the Syrian people, who are being brutally murdered by the hundreds each year. It’s absolutely true that the situation is horrendous and must be stopped; but this isn’t our war to fight. When we engaged in our own civil war in the 1800s, how many other nations lined up in the trenches with our soldiers as they fought? None. A civil war is one between two opposing sides of one country. I sincerely hope that the situation in Syria improves for the sake of the Syrian people– but I’m not willing to risk American soldiers to do so. Regardless of the outcome in Syria, our intervening will not cause them to become a potential U.S. ally; they stand for ideals that we do not. “Helping” them elect their new government will not solve it, since, as I said before, the circumstances here will closely mirror those of Libya.
Say no to entering the Syrian conflict. It’s a lose-lose situation for the United States, and American lives will be lost by intervention. This isn’t our war to fight.