.
August 27th, 2013
02:33 PM ET

U.S. Intervention in Syria?

Do you think the U.S. should take military action in Syria?
The Obama Administration has been considering limited, U.S. military strikes against Syria, following the news that chemical weapons might have been used in Syria's civil war.  Both the Syrian government and the rebels fighting it blame each other for using these weapons.  But President Obama says that if it turns out that the Syrian government used them, it would have crossed a "red line" - which may mean that the U.S. military could get involved.

Do you think it should?


Filed under: Feedback • News Coverage
soundoff (309 Responses)
  1. Carlye

    I feel somewhat undecided on this because what is happening in Syria is extremely wrong.... but I don't want our army members to die so I would prefer if the USA does not get involved.

    August 27, 2013 at 6:23 pm |
    • nate

      It states Obama is after a military strike and not putting soldiers on the ground. So why wouldnt we do something for the people of Syria?

      September 3, 2013 at 12:14 am |
  2. Jim

    Wrong question. Do you believe your son or daughter should risk their life in Syria? This "send in the troops" thing is way out of control and not contributing to U.S. safety or security. And it's not contributing to our global reputation – which is pretty poor already. Maybe I would reconsider if the President and the members of Congress sent their kids. With no skin in the game they are the wrong people to be making these decisions. Thanks/CDR USN Ret.

    August 27, 2013 at 8:34 pm |
    • Mike

      I agree! In addtion to having "skin in the game" we need to question why the USA needs to be the cop for the world. Maybe its time for others to step up.

      August 28, 2013 at 1:12 pm |
      • Dylans

        We NEED To stop the use of chemical weapons IMMEDIATELY. They are harming WOMEN AND CHILDREN. We need to give them a message that says we WILL NOT tolerate this.

        August 28, 2013 at 4:52 pm |
      • Carlos

        Why do we have to go and protect Syria yeah its nice but, as long as they are not attacking us we are fine! there is no need for us to sacrifice our own troops for a country that's killing its own if they kill our people then its war but for now lets stay out of it!

        August 29, 2013 at 9:21 am |
    • Anonymous

      Figures a USN would say this,................ having been "boots on the ground" myself i'd proudly go to protect people from mass murder, you can sit on your boat as an 04 and relax and let Es do all the work.

      September 3, 2013 at 9:10 am |
    • james

      we wouldn't be sending troops to Syria. we would be firing missiles at them from destroyers at sea.

      September 3, 2013 at 3:57 pm |
      • Remy

        Yes, true, not immediately, BUT do you really think that once we go ahead and intervene in their civil war, do you REALLY think that they are just going to forgive us, and move on?
        NO!
        Our actions will cause yet another unnecessary war. And I'm not saying that war is unnecessary, or even bad, because if not for war, we would all be subjects to the British Royalty. But to be the International Police is just wrong. I hate to say it, but this war is an internal Syrian affair.

        September 10, 2013 at 5:09 pm |
    • Jessica

      I don' agree with you people in Syria have no ability to fight back the government , so if the situation didn't change it is necessary and a responsibility for stronger countries such as U.S, France, UK.... to take military interventions. The goal of a military intervention is to help people although a lot of countries didn't do so just to help people but even if stronger countries can't benefit from having military interventions against Syria they still should help people in Syria to get rid of a ridiculous government that would use chemical weapons to its own people.

      September 15, 2013 at 7:53 am |
  3. Lian

    What will be the impact if the United State take over Syria , and what is the plan after did take over?

    August 27, 2013 at 9:43 pm |
  4. Trent

    Chemical weapons are SERIOUS, and in that region of the world they cannot be ignored. The U.S. has a responsibility to exert influence in this situation.

    August 28, 2013 at 7:54 am |
    • Mike

      exert influence ... OK. Lead or become a "major" participant in a military action ... I don't think so.

      August 28, 2013 at 1:14 pm |
    • Jeffrey

      I do not agree; that's the problem with the United States now we to busy putting our business in other peoples problem. And if you want WWIII to happen then that's on you and I am a service member of the U.S. Army and I don't agree at all.

      August 29, 2013 at 11:25 am |
  5. Dylan

    All I know is this: if world war 3 starts, I'm moving to Canada until it's over.

    August 28, 2013 at 8:13 am |
    • Dylan

      I meant to say that I'm moving to an underground bunker until it's over

      August 28, 2013 at 8:15 am |
    • Rafael

      I agree, but we should send troops and attack,

      August 29, 2013 at 6:44 am |
    • kaity

      You wont be safe if its a nuclear war.

      August 29, 2013 at 2:23 pm |
  6. kaleb

    It will just start anuther war

    August 28, 2013 at 9:02 am |
  7. trey

    try to get allies and then take out the targets of interest and then take out what else you want to.
    sincerely,trey

    August 28, 2013 at 9:10 am |
  8. kaitlyn

    i believe that the us should not take military action because it is just going to cause more problems.

    August 28, 2013 at 9:47 am |
    • Amie

      I couldnt agree more, all this is going to do is start world war 3 and nobody wants gas prices go up because of the amo this would take. Think about all the men in Afganistain who havent seen their familys, maybe they would like to go home once. So i totally agree with your oppinion.

      August 29, 2013 at 2:24 pm |
  9. Cathy

    I believe that the U.S. shouldn't get involved with the war in Syria because we have nothing to do with what is going on there and we shouldn't get involved even if the chemical weapons were involved.

    August 28, 2013 at 9:48 am |
  10. Devonte

    Yes because we dont really know if Syria will use chemical weapons in war. That would be so wrong because we/ anyone can use chemical weapons. We need to make sure that everything would be okay. The Syrian president lied saying that everything is going well in Syria but thousands of people are dying

    August 28, 2013 at 9:50 am |
  11. Becky

    Yes, they are people, just like us fighting for what they believe in and they need help figuring how to find a solution.

    August 28, 2013 at 9:55 am |
  12. Noah and Lailanie

    We believe that the U.S. should take military action in Syria. Their civil war could get way out of hand soon and we need to control it before it does.

    August 28, 2013 at 10:01 am |
  13. jacob

    i believe that the U.S. should get in involved because chemical weapons are against the geneva convention that all countries agreed not to use due to its mass destruction that could wipe out a hole city like Chicago and New York.

    August 28, 2013 at 10:01 am |
  14. Lexi

    I believe that the U.S should not attack Syria, and get us involved in this situation. What Syria may have done was wrong, but it may hurt our country in the long run.

    August 28, 2013 at 10:03 am |
  15. Lilly

    I feel that we should take military action in Syria to protect the citizens that are innocent and have not cause any harm especially the children. In my point of view the children have not hurt anyone and are being killed for no reason.

    August 28, 2013 at 10:03 am |
  16. Shelby and Noah

    I believe that the U.S. should get involved because it will help end the civil war that is currently going on over in Syria.

    August 28, 2013 at 10:03 am |
  17. Teashya

    I think we should do something because that's not right of people to do that to little kids or even anyone matter of fact. They should be punished for what they did to those people that got hurt by it or even died from it.

    August 28, 2013 at 10:04 am |
  18. Jacqueline

    I believe that the U.S should take action in Syria. If we don't do anything at all, they won't think that we're serious.

    August 28, 2013 at 10:04 am |
  19. Zach

    yes I believe that the us should be involved with the fight for Syria because if you cross the red line in the real world we will make sure you get behind it again.

    August 28, 2013 at 10:04 am |
    • jason

      yes we need to nuke them

      August 28, 2013 at 2:03 pm |
      • Daniel

        NO! we do not need to nuke them cause it could start WW3, & they could have something stronger than what they got now.

        August 30, 2013 at 2:23 pm |
      • Juan

        Jason, if we do that we could start WW3.

        August 30, 2013 at 2:35 pm |
      • Daniel

        That would not start WW3 because we can send three battleships and whip them off the map and they dont have any thing powerful enough to whip us out

        September 3, 2013 at 10:01 pm |
      • Robert

        your right jason we need to take charge and nuke its th ONLY WAY!!!

        September 13, 2013 at 1:33 pm |
  20. Anna

    I believe that the U.S. should not get involved in the Syrian civil war because sometimes we need to put ourselves before others. If we can't even help ourselves then how can we help them. Plus, that could get us too involved and start a war between the U.S. and Syria.

    August 28, 2013 at 10:04 am |
  21. michael

    I believe the u.s shouldn't get involved because we don't need to lose any more money in military action.

    August 28, 2013 at 10:05 am |
  22. Aaron & Kayla

    We believe the U.S. should take military action. If the Syrian government produces to many chemical weapons, it could be the start of a WWIII.

    August 28, 2013 at 10:05 am |
  23. jose

    i think the U.S should take action because there crossing the red line

    August 28, 2013 at 10:05 am |
  24. nivin, tori

    I believe the U.S should attack Syria because their attacking their own people, which kids are involved and people are dying.

    August 28, 2013 at 10:06 am |
  25. Kalon

    America has enough problems on our own that we need to focus on and fix first.

    August 28, 2013 at 10:47 am |
  26. Mr. Shawn

    I don't think we have all the evidence and facts in place for whatever they are accused of.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:12 am |
  27. Archie

    Because I don't like the use of chemical weapons.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:14 am |
  28. Emery

    The U.S should focus on it's own issues instead of worrying about Syria.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:39 am |
  29. Holden

    No because i dont like syria

    August 28, 2013 at 11:40 am |
  30. Mallory-Hunter

    no because if we did that boming the chemicals will nuke syria killing children and civilians

    August 28, 2013 at 11:41 am |
  31. Nick and Cody

    i believe the U.S. should if there was any chance not to start a war with anybody besides Syria

    August 28, 2013 at 11:43 am |
  32. Makenna and Elton

    I believe we should take action. Not for us, but for the innocent people of Syria. The US Military is extremely strong and we could help end the violence in Syria. This could create an alliance between us and the Syrian government, which could help our military as well.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:43 am |
  33. Noah

    I believe the U.S should help them because if we help them, we could get a new nation to help us.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:44 am |
  34. GeorgiaRose

    I dont think we should get involved, because of all the violence happening there. That violence could be transferred to America and we could end up in the same condition as Syria.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:44 am |
  35. Amanda and Jolie

    I believe the U.S should because it doesn't matter were you live we should help people no matter what.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:44 am |
  36. Gabbie & Morgan

    I believe the U.S. should not because they could attack the U.S.A. and people could get hurt especially little infants.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:45 am |
  37. Bryce

    I belive the us should not go and attack cause it could make things worse and russia dose not agree and we don't have enough information.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:45 am |
  38. Dylan and Jared

    I believe the U.S. should get involved but not with violence I think they should sit down and talk like civilized people. The U.S. already has other gargantuan problems that we should worry about.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:45 am |
  39. Georgia

    Let's forget about violence and work on the economy. We've got enough on our plate.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:46 am |
    • Carlye

      Georgia, I agree with you but I disagree with you.
      I do agree that no MILITARY action should be taken.
      BUT I don't think we should just forget what horrible things are happening in Syria we need to take other actions,
      Like not allowing them to participate in Olympics OR cutting off our fund that Syria is reportedly using to purchase chemical weapons.
      We need to stop fighting not create it!

      August 28, 2013 at 6:19 pm |
  40. Josephine & Dale

    I don't think they should attack because we're already so much in debt, we don' t need to spend anymore money on fighting.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:46 am |
  41. Nathan and isaiah

    the usa should be prepaired incase of any more nuclear weapons

    August 28, 2013 at 11:47 am |
  42. kwaliyah

    i believe the U.S. should not because it may cause more trouble and it may cause a bigger commotion then it is right now.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:47 am |
  43. Caleb

    Yes they should fight in the war, because i don't know

    August 28, 2013 at 11:48 am |
    • Michael

      No they US already has its own problems and wars.And it ALWAYS thinks that to has to get involved.Helping out I'm not against but getting involved with civil wars I disagree look what Jhon did.And the possible risks of putting the US in danger.

      August 30, 2013 at 12:58 am |
  44. Joya & and Joi

    I don't think that U.S. should involve military action unless this gets out of control then we need to put our foot down.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:49 am |
  45. dick

    Obama opened his mouht and threatened Syria. Now who is going to pay the price? Our troops.! It;'s not right what
    happened there, , but we have no place in Syria. Stay out.

    August 28, 2013 at 11:57 am |
  46. Landen

    I believe that we should take action. Chemical weapons are cruel and wrong.

    August 28, 2013 at 12:10 pm |
  47. Ryan

    I think that the US should definitely get involved in Syria. We can't just sit here while innocent civilians in Syria are suffering from the aftermath of chemical weapons attacks. No more isolationism like we had back in the WW1 and WWII era.

    August 28, 2013 at 12:22 pm |
  48. alexius and jade

    i believe that the military should go to Syria because maybe they could help them and make things better than worse.

    August 28, 2013 at 12:28 pm |
  49. Brittney

    I believe we should get involved because people are going to be seriously injured. Also, it is bad for the environment because it releases chemicals into the atmosphere.

    August 28, 2013 at 12:28 pm |
  50. Keeley + Kaytlin

    I believe in helping other people, but in this case, we should definitely not send in weapons. We should be the peace-keepers, not the war instigators. If we send weapons in now, we will be involving ourselves in a war that should not be taken into our own hands.

    August 28, 2013 at 12:28 pm |
  51. Noel

    I think that United States should not jump in because that would just start another war. And I don't like war.
    Nope.Nope.Nope.

    August 28, 2013 at 12:28 pm |
  52. Mya

    I believe that the U.S. should not get involved in the war with Syria because we don't have anything to do with the war. All it would do is start more attacks on the U.S.

    August 28, 2013 at 12:29 pm |
  53. Brandon & Mason

    I believe that the U.S should not launch an attack on Syria. President Obama already has a lot of issues so getting involved in a war will just add more stress to him. Also, getting involved will just mess up the economy even more because the government will be funding the war which will cause us to lose money and basically restart anything we have accomplished

    August 28, 2013 at 12:29 pm |
  54. Regan and Neethu

    I do not think that the U.S should take action in Syria because if we do, it could start another war. If they take action, it will cause more problems and we don't know for sure if chemical weapons are being used.

    August 28, 2013 at 12:29 pm |
  55. mariah and aailyah

    I believe that we should not send troops to Syria because if they are using chemical weapons we shouldn't join a new war with the other ones we are still in.

    August 28, 2013 at 12:29 pm |
  56. Zack& Mya

    I believe we should keep the peace.We shouldn't attack.

    August 28, 2013 at 12:29 pm |
  57. `Anthony & Nick

    I believe we should not attack until they truly involve us in this potential war break out. we are still slowly trying to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan. we don't need to jump into another war right now. we need to focus on helping our problems.

    August 28, 2013 at 12:30 pm |
  58. Nick & Alec

    We believe that the United States should take action against Syria. Everyone has the right to life and using chemical weapons crosses a line. The rebels in Syria are putting their lives on the line every day and using chemical weapons against them is just cruel and wrong.

    August 28, 2013 at 12:30 pm |
  59. lucas and dakota

    i believe that the military should get involved because so they can stop the violence, also if they are using chemical weapons we could stop a lot of deaths just breaking it up. In school when you see people fighting many just watch but the good ones stop it so noting that bad starts to happen also if a teacher sees it they get in trouble so if other country's see it they will get nerves and no good can come of it.

    August 28, 2013 at 12:34 pm |
    • Lauryn and Brandon

      When we had the American revolution, it was greatly appreciated when other countries helped us fight the best military in the world at that time, and we should help people who's weapons don't even compare to their military. And weapons of mass destruction against vulnerable people is wrong. Even though America did it to Japan it is still wrong.

      August 28, 2013 at 1:21 pm |
  60. Jennah

    I think we should just let it be. Yes, Syria is next to Israel but they should be able to take care of themselves just as we should do. we should just mind our own and bring EVERYONE home and stay put.

    August 28, 2013 at 1:12 pm |
  61. Mekenzie and Savannah

    i believe we should because if they threaten us then we should defend our selves .

    August 28, 2013 at 1:14 pm |
  62. Hannah

    I believe we should because what if Syria attacks us before we can attack them.

    August 28, 2013 at 1:14 pm |
  63. Kelsie & Dillon

    We don't need to unless we are threatened multiple times, then we should defend ourselves. We already have problems with the US that we need to fix first

    August 28, 2013 at 1:15 pm |
  64. nicole

    I believe we shouldn't get involved because chemical weapons are bad.

    August 28, 2013 at 1:15 pm |
  65. chelsi

    I believe we should become involved with syria because we should be able to defend ourselves and our country.

    August 28, 2013 at 1:16 pm |
  66. Brooke,Kristin

    I believe we should be involved in Syria because they are a threat to us and we should defend our country!!

    August 28, 2013 at 1:16 pm |
  67. Vinny and Jimmy

    We believe we shouldn't because what if we start something and take the governments side and then China takes the rebels side then BOOM world war three in front of our eyes!

    August 28, 2013 at 1:16 pm |
  68. Caden and jaylen

    We believe the U.S should get involved because they crossed the line so they should get punished for lying to the U.S.A

    August 28, 2013 at 1:16 pm |
  69. C.J.

    I believe that we should fight back, if they used chemical wepons that would cross the line and we need to stop this!

    August 28, 2013 at 1:16 pm |
  70. Robert

    I believe we shouldn't get involved. Nobody interfered with our civil war. why should we interfere with theirs? Also they didn't threaten us. so tell me why we should jump into a fight? As Ben Franklin said, "those who impose will tend to get a bloody nose".

    August 28, 2013 at 1:17 pm |
  71. Kevin and Caleb

    We both think that they should take military action because if Syria threatens us then we at least need to pay attention in case they launch an attack so the military needs to be ready because at any moment it could happen.

    August 28, 2013 at 1:18 pm |
  72. cole

    I believe we should get in with syier because if they have chemical whepns they might try to strike first.

    August 28, 2013 at 1:18 pm |
  73. Tyonna

    I believe the U.S should take action because they are crossing the Red Line.

    August 28, 2013 at 1:18 pm |
  74. olivia and callie

    I believe we should become involved in Syria because who else will stop them from injuring others and perhaps STOP from making a colossal war? WE as a country should stand up for what is right and not just stay as safe as possible and not get involved. This is our world that we're talking about. We all have responsibilities, and this is one of ours. Protect our world. Chemical weapons are very hazardous to everyone. We all should stop Syria!

    August 28, 2013 at 1:18 pm |
  75. jacob

    I believe we should not get involved with Syria because of the chemical weapons. Because the chemical weapons are dangerous to be near, someone could get hurt.

    August 28, 2013 at 1:19 pm |
  76. Sam

    I believe that the United States should use military forces in Syria because if there is a war that bad then Syria might think they are very powerful and try to take over other countries and we need to takeover and take care of it. It is also not fair for everyone who lives in Syria to have to live in war all the time. The United States has very powerful military resources and I believe the United States should use it to help our fellow nations.

    August 28, 2013 at 1:20 pm |
  77. Isaac

    I don't think that we should cause if we get involved and they might tern around and do the same to us

    August 28, 2013 at 1:20 pm |
  78. Josh

    I believe we should take action because, many children died in the chemical attack. So Syria cant just get away with all the deaths of those innocent people can they?

    August 28, 2013 at 1:21 pm |
  79. Anastasia & Sebastian

    The United States should take action in Syria because they have been using chemical weapons on their people and its cruel to be using it against your own country. Also it has crossed the red line of warfare rules. The United States should at least go and take action to make sure if they are using chemical weapons and the U.S. should at least send people to watch over Syrians in the country at risk of these violations.

    August 28, 2013 at 1:21 pm |
  80. casiana

    To be honest, I am not really sure we should get involved. This might cause more issues. If we just do nothing that maybe be a problem too.

    August 28, 2013 at 1:22 pm |
  81. Austin

    Yes because we got in involved with afghan Iraq and other countries and they are killing our people with chemical weapons that are illegal.

    August 28, 2013 at 1:22 pm |
  82. Mike

    When will our leader(s) learn to properly consider the pronouncements they make that box them into a future corner ( eg "red lines" ... ). These statements often degrade the credibility of the USA or yield future actions that are unwise ( or not strategic ). While there are many tragic situations in the world, I question if the the USA should always feel like it must step up and lead a response.

    August 28, 2013 at 1:26 pm |
  83. Stephanie

    I think not because the U.S. has a lot of problems to tend to – whether they're a big concern of the U.S. citizens or not. To list a few off for those not agreeing: the economy is still in recovery, U.S. involvement in other wars are still in resolve, rumors of terrorism, etc. Increasing involvement just means higher chances of terrorism. Do we want another burden on our shoulders? ... I didn't think so.

    August 28, 2013 at 2:07 pm |
  84. katie

    i think we should not. we dont want syria to get mad at us then we will cant get good things from them that we need. if we were to maybe they would want to start a war with us then we have a big problem and it would just get bigger.

    August 28, 2013 at 2:20 pm |
  85. Carly

    I believe we should take action. Not for us, but for the innocent people of Syria. The US Military is extremely strong and we could help end the violence in Syria. This could create an alliance between us and the Syrian government, which could help our military as well.

    August 28, 2013 at 2:21 pm |
  86. Arianna

    I think it is extremely important that US STAYS OUT of Syria's business. That is going on very far away from us and we have noting to do with it. We depend on Syria for our gas, and also we might end up being sorry for getting into something that we had no business getting into in the first place. I would really hope that president Obama, would realize that going over there, isn't the right decision!

    August 28, 2013 at 2:21 pm |
  87. Alex

    We need to attack then. Why you say?????? Because we are the big brother of all the other countries. We need to stop the violence people don't have anything to but fight and kill. If we attack they will higher gas prices this week. But still violence need to stop chemicals if they want to attack us with anything like tourist or gas prices let them because we a strong union.. We are the United States of America we deafened people who need are help and Syria needs help.

    August 28, 2013 at 2:22 pm |
    • kaity

      We need to we are the big bad brother there only hope. Do you know how many people we have in the us? OVER 316 BILLION! You know how many syria has? A little over 22 million. And about 3 million are under 18.

      August 28, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
      • Dave

        This is why the US army is so big. Statements like that.

        Are you kidding?

        August 29, 2013 at 4:16 pm |
      • Anonymous

        The US population is 316 Million, young lady.

        September 12, 2013 at 1:17 pm |
    • Carlye

      Just Because we have 316 Billion Doesn't mean we should kill them.
      We need to try a nonviolent approach like cutting off their funding.
      But if they attack us I am all up for self defense.
      Until Syria becomes a threat to the United States I think we should maker a difference from a distance.

      August 28, 2013 at 7:16 pm |
  88. kaity

    We should get involved because we have the recourses and they dont. Plus we are Americans we've never been defeated we could help! Also there are children out there who need us!

    August 28, 2013 at 2:31 pm |
    • Amie

      I think your to prideful, I know we never lost a war yet that doesnt mean anything with the cheimicals they may or may not be using can wipe our tropps out. Yes their are children and women down there but if we go through with this the we will lose lives and we may be forced into the feild at 14 years old.I some what agree with you like about the kids and women.

      August 29, 2013 at 2:34 pm |
  89. Edwin

    NO! I think that the us should not because some other countries that already have problems will have more problems.

    August 28, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
  90. Kevin

    Bottom Line... We can't afford to get involved with Syria, with all the budget cuts going on... What we need to do is quit playing world police and start taking care of the problems that we have inside our own borders. Why is it always the US to come to someones defense, this is big world and plenty of other countries out there.. why don't they step up!? Then if we do step in Syria... once it is all said and done, then the US will get all these negative complaints/comments about collateral damage and civilians being killed and whatever else... We had our own Civil war back in the day... they can manage there's!!! Nuff said...

    August 28, 2013 at 3:07 pm |
    • Caz

      I agree 100%

      August 30, 2013 at 2:15 pm |
  91. Gilberto

    No cause then Siria will get mad and as a result of the intervention we cause a war between this 2 country's and we don't want anymore war

    August 28, 2013 at 3:15 pm |
  92. Leslie

    I feel that the U.S. needs to not get involved because yes using of the chemical weapons is wrong, but if the United States gets involved because there could be a very large chance that we could be a target of Syria's next chemical weapon attack. The Syrian government needs to handle this on their own.

    August 28, 2013 at 3:17 pm |
  93. Nate

    I don't think it should. If we get involved, we could start another world war, we don't know where this could go, and it could be very dangerouse.

    August 28, 2013 at 3:17 pm |
  94. Emily

    I am undecided about this. I would say yes because after WWII all nations came up with the United Nations. This states that if a country has used weapons that are not approved of, then someone must step in and stop the act of weapons of destruction. I also say no because if we get involved then we can worsen relationships that the U.S. has with countries like Russia. This could end up in stopping our friendships with other countries that are on the side of Syria and it could start what we as all people have tried to prevent.

    August 28, 2013 at 3:23 pm |
  95. Katie

    We should not intervene. The reason why we would send troops over there is because the govt. of Syria is killing people, but sending troops will result in more killing. Besides, if we overthrew Syria's govt., I believe that some greedy American official would try to claim the new,"Independent" country for himself, leading to even more war. Even if they are killing people, it is still not our problem.

    August 28, 2013 at 3:54 pm |
  96. Bryan

    I think this war has been going on for too long, and weather or not we like it, it is going to happen.

    August 28, 2013 at 5:47 pm |
  97. Rio

    I think that the United States shouldn't get involved because our relationship with other countries will worsen and even if Syria is using chemical weapons, their leader should take care of it.

    August 28, 2013 at 5:57 pm |
    • Ethan

      But this might be a leader who uses chemical weapons against his own people. What then?

      August 28, 2013 at 9:05 pm |
    • Danny

      But the leader is the one using the Chemical weapons!

      August 30, 2013 at 10:16 am |
  98. Sydney

    I don't think that we should get involved it might start another war with us. If we do get involved with Syria because chemical weapons are dangerous and if we get involved with them and it starts a war then we could be there new target

    August 28, 2013 at 5:58 pm |
  99. Nehemiah

    Yeah, because the Syrian gov't are using weapons of mass destruction I'm not saying go to war lets go and take or do something about the illegal things that they are doing.

    August 28, 2013 at 5:58 pm |
    • Dave

      And what proof of that do you have? You might want to give it to the US government because they have none. Just like with Iraq.

      Do you realize how brainwashed you are?

      August 29, 2013 at 4:14 pm |
    • Jade

      But what proof do we have that it is even the Syrian government using the weapons? Sure there was an announcement by our government that it was the government... but it's not like they have never been wrong before. They where wrong about Iraq.

      Think about who the rebels are, they are Sunni Muslims. They are working with Al Qaeda. Why is it out of the question that the rebels could have used the weapons. Pointless assumptions made by sheeple, what a shame.

      August 29, 2013 at 6:51 pm |
  100. Dakota

    Yes I believe we should interveen in the war in Syria because this war has been going on for too long. It could save more people's lives in Syria if we help out with one side of the war.

    August 28, 2013 at 5:59 pm |
    • Del

      Please feel free to hop a plane and help your side. don't just feel we should and send others. get some ____ and do it

      August 30, 2013 at 1:32 pm |
  101. Garisson

    I don't think the u.s. should take military action because that is not your government you could make them take hostile action.'

    August 28, 2013 at 6:00 pm |
    • samantha

      But about the people's live. Theirs lives are at stake!!

      August 29, 2013 at 6:08 pm |
  102. Cerena

    I think that the U.S should not take military action because I don't like blood and people dying.i also think that they shouldn't go and interfere with the chemicals I don't think that our soldiers should go and start war in Syria at all... They should build a case military allies in Syria but that is all.

    August 28, 2013 at 6:04 pm |
  103. Joy

    I personally believe taking military action would be pointless and stupid. Once we take action there the people are going to want us out. Why should we waste our money, our troops, and our weapons on a country that hates us? Lets be honest here, Obama would be an idiot if he takes military action.

    August 28, 2013 at 6:10 pm |
    • Carlye

      Joy,
      The President is trying to make the best decision not only for our country,
      but for our world. I agree that we should not take action but I can see the other point of view... think of the innocent children in Syria..... So I will respect and support the President whatever his decision.

      August 28, 2013 at 6:32 pm |
    • Danny

      I think that we should go to war against Syria. They used chemical weapons, which are against the Geneva Convention, and the are killing innocent people. We don't need to send in soldiers, just pelt them hard with Tomahawks and drones, and show Syria that we can keep our word about the "red line".

      August 28, 2013 at 9:35 pm |
    • Valdis

      I am sorry but I totally disagree with you, Joy. The country there wants democracy and the United States is one of the leading countries of democracy. Plus, we should get involved because we have the British assisting us and Syria can be a promising ally. Our military highly out ranks their military and we will not be alone.

      August 29, 2013 at 1:02 am |
    • wade

      i couldnt agree more joy.

      August 29, 2013 at 2:31 pm |
    • anthony

      well joy i agree

      August 29, 2013 at 2:32 pm |
    • bob

      its not stupid

      August 29, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
  104. Taylor

    I understand that chemical weapons are a huge problem, but I'm tired of America entering wars left and right. This wouldn't benefit us at all, it would just anger the people in Syria. We need to take care of our own problems before shoving ourselves into other nations' quarrels.

    August 28, 2013 at 6:40 pm |
  105. caroline

    I think we should not get involved, because this is not our fight and this could then be pointed at us and we will be the ones in chemical warfare.

    August 28, 2013 at 6:52 pm |
  106. Damauri

    This is a hard thing to decide if we do send military to Syria we can probably stop what they doing.But also it could probably start a war.

    August 28, 2013 at 6:56 pm |
  107. Yaohui

    We Should get involved non of our soilders will die because the US is sending missiles We must do this some may die but if we dont do this more may die.

    August 28, 2013 at 7:04 pm |
  108. Haden

    I think that we should not intervene with that is happening in other countries unless it involves us. I mean, why should we take action if they don't use Chemical Weapons against us? If they used the weapons against us or any of our Allies, then it's perfectly fine. It would just seem wrong if we took action against something that poses no specific threat to us.

    August 28, 2013 at 7:06 pm |
  109. Samantha

    I think that this is just a sticky situation!

    August 28, 2013 at 7:07 pm |
  110. Harmony

    I think what happens I Syria should stay in Syria its none of our business we should let them work out their own problems and not get involved.

    August 28, 2013 at 7:42 pm |
  111. Anthony

    no we shouldn't intervene with Syria we should just stay out, because if we go in we take troops who were going home and instead take them there. we also have the threat of them having to launch their missiles on us and that would be an act of war, we would also have the russians on the Syrian government's side and it would just end up having countries pick sides. if that happens it would be WORLD WAR III.

    August 28, 2013 at 8:03 pm |
  112. Eduardo

    I think the government should take action on Syria. Using chemical warfare on your own people is against national law, and its just not right. Syria needs a warning and should listen to that warning. Syria has crossed many people's lines, and needs to stop.

    August 28, 2013 at 8:13 pm |
  113. Ethan

    Military action should be taken for two reasons. One, we must ensure that the Assad regime won't use chemical weapons again. Two Al Qaeda is fighting for the rebels in Syria. If the rebels win Al Qaeda could get it's hands on WMD's, in this case we would have to get involved to prevent said WMD's from being used. Don't get me wrong, we don't need a full on ground war. My dad's in the Air Force and it would suck to see him get sent to Syria. We just need to fire a missile here and there and keep a watchful eye on the Syria.

    August 28, 2013 at 9:00 pm |
  114. Anthony

    The US should not take military action. If the Syrian goverment are willing to use chemical weapons on there own people what would they do to some Americans. It would only become another Iraq wasting money time and American lives. The president should try a more diplomatic approach.

    August 28, 2013 at 9:00 pm |
    • anthony

      Well good becouse we are already in enough debt.

      August 29, 2013 at 2:29 pm |
  115. Jesse

    I totally think that the U.S. should intervene.I'm not sure how many of you notice, but this was a pure act of Mass Genocide. Oddly enough, that's EXACTLY what started WWII. It needs to be stopped. NOW.

    August 28, 2013 at 9:34 pm |
  116. Danny

    War! We don't need to send in our soldiers, just use drones and missiles. Hit them were it hurts. Besides, what would happen if we don't? Obama told the whole world about the "red line", and we should keep our word. Beside, chemical weapons are against the Geneva Convention, so other nations should intervene as well! It's the right thing to do!

    August 28, 2013 at 9:39 pm |
  117. andrei

    I think America should figure out how much a potential war in Syria would cost, then take those trillions of dollars and do something to help the millions of people who are loosing their houses and try to create jobs built factories do something good for the american people! And let the world know that we are busy fixing our nation! Someone else should police the world for a while!

    August 29, 2013 at 9:32 am |
  118. Max and Mikey

    Max and I both agree that the U.S. should send soilders over to Syria. We think this becuase we dont want the threat of a nuculear bomb having the chance to bomb us. If we do react to this issue we will not have to worry about us getting bomb on and wont have to use as much money in are bad economy time.

    August 29, 2013 at 10:07 am |
  119. Rafael

    I'm for the warangal think we should attack, but If world war 3 starts I'm moving to Canada,

    August 29, 2013 at 10:38 am |
  120. Nathaniel

    The Syrian government has been using chemical weapons to murder its helpless citizens while they were sleeping!
    This definitely calls for some immediate intervention.

    August 29, 2013 at 10:39 am |
  121. Jeffrey

    I don't think we should get involved because it's not our problem and this can cause an economic collapse and WWIII amongst vulnerability to another terrorist attack.

    August 29, 2013 at 11:37 am |
  122. Edwin

    no i think that the us should not because the USA already has enough problems but if the us stars a war I DONT CARE its not my problem

    August 29, 2013 at 2:16 pm |
  123. Briana

    I don't think we should get involved because the U.S. already has enough problems as it is. We don't need to fight.

    August 29, 2013 at 2:22 pm |
  124. kaity

    We may have alot on our plate when it comes to the economy but we have never let that get in our way before. Also if this gets out of control it could become a Nuclear war. And just one of those could kill the planet. Thats why we have got to get a firm grip on this while we can.

    August 29, 2013 at 2:22 pm |
  125. wade

    I think it would be point less to attack them.

    August 29, 2013 at 2:22 pm |
  126. hunter

    it is pointless becase they are just going to retalleyat

    August 29, 2013 at 2:23 pm |
  127. anthony

    I think we should let them fight there own war.

    August 29, 2013 at 2:25 pm |
  128. Dominik

    I think that we should attack because if this got out of hand then it might affect the whole world, so we should just go and bomb the factorys that make the weapons

    August 29, 2013 at 2:29 pm |
  129. Daniel

    I dont think we should take action because Syria could attack us & other countries could be teaming up with Syria witch would make it more difficult to win this fight

    August 29, 2013 at 2:31 pm |
  130. Tyler

    I don't think the United States Goverment should intervene in the Syrian conflict. If we did, it would only anger the Syrian allies.(Namely Iran, and Russia)

    August 29, 2013 at 2:32 pm |
  131. MaKayla

    I believe that the U.S should not take military action because I personally don't like fighting wars or anything like that.

    August 29, 2013 at 2:35 pm |
  132. juan

    I think we should not send our people to Syria, because I would not like to be in WW3.

    August 29, 2013 at 2:37 pm |
  133. Daniel

    I dont think we should take action because Syria could attack us & syria could have other countries teaming up with Syria which would make the battle more difficult to win.

    August 29, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
  134. Dave

    What's extremely wrong? Nothing has been proven yet. This is absolutely nuts. Typical US and UK attitude, bomb the hell out of a country with no proof of wrongdoing whatsoever.

    I wonder what the US is going to do to rally the troops this time.

    Russia and turkey have a stake in this one you know. Are you willing to send your family and friends to be killed and the threat of AN ATTACK on the US to increase with no proof?

    You're all either brainwashed or lunatics. The rest of the world looks at you like you are, because you are.

    August 29, 2013 at 4:12 pm |
  135. Christine

    I think that we should take action since last year Obama made a red line that said, " The red line is if Syria uses chemical weapons the U.S. will take action" That red line has been crossed and if we want to give other countries the impression that we go back on our word we could not take action but if we want to show that we mean what we say and we should take action. Also we have had at least three reports and camera men that have died in Syria. We would be dishonoring those families if we didn't do something about this use of ILLEGAL weapons. Obama would be doing the write thing if he took action.

    August 29, 2013 at 5:17 pm |
  136. Gavin

    NO we are already in debt from the unemployment thing and do we really wanna lose more money then we already have?? we can't let the un handle it their the world police not the us.

    August 29, 2013 at 5:17 pm |
  137. samantha

    I think we should the war is getting out of control. And if we don't do anything about it it may spread to different countries. Simple as that

    August 29, 2013 at 6:06 pm |
  138. Logan

    It is the responsibility of the United States to protect the people against chemical weapons, against their own government, and against the ones who are "fighting for freedom".

    August 29, 2013 at 6:16 pm |
  139. Dylan

    Although chemical weapons are, in my opinion, an act of war, I think we should sit back and wait a bit to see if military action is necessary. Wasting troops, weapons, and expenses on a dead-end war may or may not be one of our options. I doubt it is.

    August 29, 2013 at 6:29 pm |
  140. Ken

    No we should not get into a involvement with syria. we helped out with the civil war in egypt where we over threw egypt president hosni mubarak and elected a new goverment. We let them be and they elected an new goverment a year later not even the egyptians citizans go protest and there is more violence. Our country is in enough debt as is and we have other problams. action in this country is stupid and if we do it will be another conflict worth worrying about

    August 29, 2013 at 6:30 pm |
  141. Jade

    It's fine if we want to get involved when the UN takes action, UNDER THE UN. I think we have become more than a bit overbearing invading every country that WE SUSPECT has broken the laws of war. They break the UN charter of using chemical weapons? Let the UN deal with it. If we wanna help the UN that's fine, we shouldn't invade by ourselves though. We are not the policemen of the world.

    August 29, 2013 at 6:47 pm |
  142. mckenzie

    i think we shouldn't the united states has enough problems of its own. if we get involved all it means that it can back fire on us and they know that people can't see or spell it so its as if it is a death trap for every one here in the US. stay out of it if it comes this way then worry but don't put a nation in dangerous just to save a country. Obama is a great president but focus on not just our safety but economy.

    August 29, 2013 at 7:20 pm |
  143. Kylie and Cathy

    We believe that the U.S. government should not take military action in Syria because once we attack Syria, they have the right to fight back to defend themselves.The last thing we need is to get into a war with another county. On the other hand, they would be breaking the international law about chemical weapons...but still we do not think U.S. should take action in Syria.

    August 29, 2013 at 8:44 pm |
  144. joe

    I say we stay out...mostly. the main force against Assad are Al-Qaeda mercenaries. I say we protect the people and let our enemies kill each other

    August 29, 2013 at 9:13 pm |
  145. Makenzie & Katey

    We believe they should attack. I mean if they are killing innocent people then we should do something about it. They dont have to right to use something the people cant fight back. This is a serious situation that needs help from other people. They are to stubborn to listen to us or do anything so. We cant just let them keep killing people for no aparrent reason, its dumb. And we are way stronger economiclly and physical that if they attacked us they would be destroyed.

    August 29, 2013 at 10:42 pm |
  146. Garvin

    We should just utilize our combined arms and do airstrikes on the Regimes command posts and weapon caches

    August 29, 2013 at 11:58 pm |
  147. max

    we are here to have a free country and if we bomb Syria then we all will be in trouble. We will have more money spent on repairs the the bombing.

    August 30, 2013 at 9:48 am |
  148. phil

    i think that the U.S. should take action because if we dont then more people can become injured and bigger conflict may appear. So if we dont go in now we will eventually have to go in later and it could get worst than before. Espeacially with them usiung chemical weapons it could potentially endanger,affect or hurt the U.S.A or one of our allies.

    August 30, 2013 at 9:55 am |
  149. Cole

    I disagree with the military wanting to take action in Syria because the attack could start a war with Syria and then there would be a lot of people dying in the U.S. and Syria and the blood would immrotally stain the ground with more peoples inoccent lives of peace.

    August 30, 2013 at 10:05 am |
  150. Leroy

    I do and don't think that we should take military actions. I do think we should because there are a lot of innocent people dying. And I don't think that we should get inolved or else the taxes will rise even more, which we all know that we don't want that. So yeah 🙂

    August 30, 2013 at 11:49 am |
  151. Leroy

    I do and don't think that we should take military actions. I do think we should because there are alot of innocent people dying. And i don't think that we should get involved or else the taxes will rise even more, which we all know that we don't want that. So yeah 🙂

    August 30, 2013 at 11:49 am |
  152. lapis

    we do not need to start a new war.

    August 30, 2013 at 11:50 am |
  153. tyrone

    syria needs to stop now if merica doesnt do anything i will personally do it myself

    August 30, 2013 at 11:50 am |
  154. Harley

    The U.S has always portrayed the big brother role. I feel that we shouldn't get involved because of the many factors that can affect us. What happens to the rest of the U.S when and if we go to fight in Syria. I get soldiers are built to be "Army Strong" but what about the families. Think of this, what if it starts another world war.

    August 30, 2013 at 11:51 am |
  155. Dale

    I think that we will need evidence if we want to take action. Some countries do not like us and this will just make it worse if we take action.

    August 30, 2013 at 11:53 am |
  156. Del

    VN vet. The NVA showed the will of the people can prevail. Let them settle their own problems. we have many killings-drug&gang problems which we need to solve . Many inocent killed here. lets clean our own act up. Sorry for syria-egypt-africa etc. If someone sees need to intervine- by all means-get a plane and join the side you want

    August 30, 2013 at 1:27 pm |
  157. Daniel

    We need to take time & observe Syria because they could have something special in store for us.

    August 30, 2013 at 2:14 pm |
  158. Madi

    We do NOT need to take millitary action!!!!!!!!!!! The last thing we need is WW3!! We are in too much debt and the UN is not fighting and Syria has CHEMICAL WEAPONS.! The last thing we need is to invest our money into a war we can't win!!!!!!!!!!!!

    August 30, 2013 at 2:17 pm |
  159. wade

    i hope we do not attack

    August 30, 2013 at 2:35 pm |
  160. Caz

    I am pretty undecided at this point, but honestly I agree that we do have too many problems going on in America right now; we don't need a new one. But which ever choice we choose we will always wish that we did the other. If we attack people are going to wish that we should have not attacted; and if we don't people are going to wish that we would have.

    August 30, 2013 at 2:36 pm |
  161. Dominik

    I think that we should strike because if this got out of hand it could spread to other countries. Then every one will end up using cemical weapons

    August 30, 2013 at 2:39 pm |
  162. Polly

    I personally feel taking military action will not help anything. America doesn't need to keep being the "big brother" to everyone else, we have our own issues here that we could be working on. Yes we could help out every now and then but if we keep trying to get in business that doesn't concern us it's going to cause so many problems for us. Chemical weapons are colorless and odorless and if it is a high enough dosage it can kill you in under a minute.

    August 30, 2013 at 2:41 pm |
  163. bob

    i don't think we should cause we have other things we need to worry about.

    August 30, 2013 at 4:25 pm |
  164. Madison

    The USA is making a regretful decision by sticking our noses into stuff that isn't our business. Considering we have no one to back us up if our plans of military action don't go right.

    August 30, 2013 at 4:26 pm |
  165. carmen

    I don't think we should go to war with Syria because we already have our own problems to deal with.

    August 30, 2013 at 4:26 pm |
  166. MaKayla

    i do not think were should go to war because we do not know for sure if they are using chemical weapons .

    August 30, 2013 at 4:27 pm |
  167. Chandler

    I believe we should not send troops over because don't we have enough problems in our own country. We should take care of ourselves. If anything I believe it is time to back off of other countries and care about our own.

    August 30, 2013 at 4:27 pm |
  168. MaKayla

    I don't think we should go to war with Syria because we have our own problems to deal with.

    August 30, 2013 at 4:29 pm |
  169. August

    I don't think we should do anything in Syria as of now because of the situation.Although I don't think we should be selfish enough as to focus just on our problems because if we leave this problem then research and development could be done to make the gas more effective. I don't think we should act right now because, from what I know, we don't know for sure who is using these chemical bombs.

    August 30, 2013 at 4:29 pm |
  170. Jacob

    I think that we should not join in. We already have enough problems of our own. And if we invaded syria it would just cause more problems and more casualties. Thanks

    August 30, 2013 at 4:30 pm |
  171. That Guy

    No we shouldn't because it could just cause more trouble.

    August 30, 2013 at 4:32 pm |
  172. Kristen

    I do not think we should go into Syria because it may cause a war. If we do it will cause a lot more deaths.

    August 30, 2013 at 4:33 pm |
  173. Josi

    I don't think they should send in troops. I personally believe taking military action would be pointless and stupid. Why should we waste our money, our troops, and our weapons on a country that uses chemical weapons against their own citizens. No offence but our government would be pretty stupid to go waste more money on another country, when our own country needs major improving. (OUR ECONOMY AND CITIZENS!!!!!) 🙂

    August 30, 2013 at 4:33 pm |
  174. Jordan

    I think that the military should not take action. The U.S. already has enough problems, and I think going into Syria would just add to all of our problems.

    August 30, 2013 at 4:33 pm |
  175. Haylie

    I say No because we need to deal with our own problems ( like debt) we aren;t even positive that the government is the one using the chemical weapons. plus if we did go to syria and something happened we would not have any backup.

    August 30, 2013 at 4:35 pm |
  176. Erial

    I dont think we should because it will cause more war.

    August 30, 2013 at 4:35 pm |
  177. Keeli

    We already have quite a bit on our plate. I think we need to deal with our own problems (like our debt for example) before we go and get ourselves involved in another country. We aren't 100% sure that Syria government was to blame for the weapons. If we attack and it wasn't them, they could start a war and that's the last thing we need right now. I could see why Obama would want to defend his country, I just don't think we should quite yet.

    August 30, 2013 at 4:35 pm |
  178. Alexa

    I want the U.S. to take military action. Chemical weapons are like biological and nuclear weapons- they are all WMDs. It's wrong to use WMDS against your own people. There's a line in the sand and it has just been crossed.

    August 30, 2013 at 6:41 pm |
  179. Ishan

    I think that since the Syrian regime broke international law by using chemical weapons against their on people, as shown in the news, I feel the U.S. and the rest of the U.N. should take action, by Enforcing a no fly zone. However if, the U.S. deploys troops in Syria, then it would be another 8 year war. Yes Syria needs help but this is not the U.S. responsibility. The most that they can do is combine forces with the U.N. and either aid the rebels and civilians with medicine, food, and refuge, or at most enforce a no fly zone over parts of Syria. You cannot fight bad with bad.

    August 30, 2013 at 7:27 pm |
  180. Marvin

    The situation in Syria has many facets to it. Although the use of chemical warfare was banned since 1925 because of it's use in world war I, it should not be tolerated but to commit the US into another war that has serious ramifications to it would leave us in a dire situation with the rest of the world. Even within our own government it could lead to presidential empeachment or the US being charged with war crimes because of attacking a soverign nation without provication or being attcked. I agree that the Arab League should step up and take control of the situation with American support. The US needs to make it clear to other nations that it's their time to step up and stop relying on the US to solve the worlds' problems. We have enough of our own. But we still can't sit back and do nothing.

    August 31, 2013 at 9:10 am |
  181. Jenn

    No. I don't know about the rest of you, but I am tired of the economical decline from the overall cost of paying for war. High gas prices, groceries.. even our vets come home and do not receive proper care. It sickens me. what kind of example is this for our children?? It will be them that will continue to pay. I am the wife of a retired Army veteran, who undoubtedly proudly served his nation. But at what cost?

    August 31, 2013 at 3:04 pm |
  182. Tim,Ky

    Let the u.n. take care of it we have absolutely No right to jump in and take control of the situation the Russian threat and the thought of WIII should be enough to stay out of it

    August 31, 2013 at 7:38 pm |
  183. Anonymous

    Yes,i would load the rebels up with hi technology weapons to over throw Assad.no boots on ground campaign,its there civil war, so i fund the good side.no missile strikes,its waste of money. I would run a drone campaign as well,to strike targets n give Intel to the rebels.leave three carriers n the region n tightened i mean tightened homeland sercurity.he uses them again, immediate strike.

    August 31, 2013 at 7:51 pm |
  184. Joe

    Ongoing wars (civil wars) such as Syria is a force driven by people who want change. If the US interferes with this process, this would only prolong the solution from occurring.

    September 1, 2013 at 7:00 am |
  185. tristan

    Its astounding that our country jumps of our rocker to help when another country has a disaster, how many deaths I mean murders happen In Chicago a year, how about the border wars down south that aren't resvoled. We can't go buy ammunition at our local sporting good store, but Obama is supplying rebels with guns and ammo explain that. Now people want to go fight another man's war when are we going fix our own countries peoblems. You can't fix stupid

    September 1, 2013 at 12:52 pm |
  186. Juan

    The government should just keep a close eye on Syria, but focus on the problems we have. the government should not take action until threatened. Like when President Washington wanted to not interfere with other countries when he gave his farewell address he said not to interfere in foreign affairs. Meaning that he wanted us not to fight battles for other countries.

    September 2, 2013 at 8:32 am |
    • Logan

      When my teacher asked me that question i also mentioned the farewell address. The U.S. isn't threatened so why would we intervene? Also, we are in so much national debt that we shouldn't even think about taking any kind of military action! we need to try to better our country instead of fix someone else's

      September 2, 2013 at 10:21 pm |
  187. Paige

    I think the US should take military action because we are a country who wants to help other people. If we would help Syria, we would not only be helping save innocent people's lives, we would also be standing up for Syria. Sure, we would have to sacrifice, but it would be for a great cause. Wouldn't you help someone who was in trouble? I know I would.

    September 2, 2013 at 10:11 am |
  188. peace

    Obama and anyone who wants to fire one bullet or missile is SICK!

    September 2, 2013 at 11:00 am |
  189. Matt

    I think that the U.S. military should take action in Syria for world benefit. Chemical weapons are against the Geneva Convention and the chance of the second deadliest kind of weapon on earth falling into the hands of Terrorist factions is to dangerous to overlook. 9/11 was bad, think about what will happen if any global major city center undergoes a chemical attack. The casualties will be utterly catastrophic. The U.S. and others members of the U.N, should join up to combat the danger, over throw the oppressive government, and help rebuild the country. Not only will it be combating terrorism but also bettering relations with the Middle East, since helping Syria would be an act of caring, and would help change the Middle East's perspective of the U.S.

    September 2, 2013 at 11:24 am |
  190. Dave

    America has no business policing the world. Why don't you solve your own problems first?

    September 2, 2013 at 12:44 pm |
  191. David

    Giving Military support would be a horrible decision. America already has problems to deal with. we are in debt, we already have troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and there is poverty and hunger in our nation! one of the worlds most powerful countries should for once, take time for peace and sort out our own problems. Let the middle east fight their own wars. But no matter what happens, i wish nothing but the best for the United States of America!!!
    GO USA!!!!!!!!!!!

    September 2, 2013 at 10:36 pm |
  192. Brandon

    I was taught we should always help someone who can't protect them selfs. I was a marine. My son is leaving for basic soon, and we both agree we need to help them, I would give my life if it ment protect innocent women and children,

    September 3, 2013 at 2:25 am |
  193. Tyler

    Using chemical weapons is against international law, but I don't believe that the U.S should get involved. If the U.N were to ask us to then we should. We have enough problems at home to deal with like the debt, budget cuts, and no telling how many more. Charity begins at home!

    September 3, 2013 at 5:38 pm |
  194. Tori

    I don't know if we should or not because I think there's already enough war going on as it is. It would help in some ways, but it would also possibly harm others in the process.

    September 3, 2013 at 5:41 pm |
  195. Shane

    we should not intervene for a simple reason this is a civil war this is not our war if we go in then this will turn into something much bigger.

    September 3, 2013 at 7:53 pm |
  196. chance

    i think we shouldn't have too take action unless the u.s is being treated by syria an or we know for sure there using chemical weapons.

    September 4, 2013 at 8:54 am |
  197. zion

    yes I think we should take action because Syria people r attacking us with chemical and deadly weapons and I think we should not let that happen we should strike back!

    September 4, 2013 at 11:45 am |
  198. Hana

    This topic will be more decidable once we get more information. But if other countries are on the edge of wanting to use chemical weapons we should to show that its not ok and its not acceptable. If we do strike though it should not be on innocent people or effect anyone to much, and just saying back off thats not ok, so it doesn't make Syria to mad to start a war.

    September 9, 2013 at 6:24 pm |
  199. Grace

    So hard to decide what i want us to do. If we take action, that will further hinder our already shady global image, but if we don't and the government-or the rebels- used chemical weapons, this could seem like a free pass to the people who used them- if any. I would hate to see more men be called in to service and die, but what would happen if Syrians used chemical weapons on us? Then again- why is it our job to enforce laws in Syria? So many questions... I hope Congress thinks of- and asks- all questions possible.

    September 9, 2013 at 8:15 pm |
  200. Lourdes

    Why start conflict? We don't want them to hurt us, right? So why are we going to fight back and make them tempted to. The U.S doesn't need to get involved because it states at using chemical weapons is against international law. But are we for sure we know what were dealing with?

    September 9, 2013 at 9:22 pm |
  201. Lindsey

    We already have a a lot on our plate. I think we need to deal with our own problems (like our debt, poverty, hunger) for example) before we go and get ourselves involved in another country. We aren't 100% sure that Syria government was to blame for the weapons. If we attack and it wasn't them, they could start a war and that's the last thing we need right now. I could see why Obama would want to defend his country, I just don't think we should quite yet. Because, right now that would not be the right thing to do. For once U.S military should have peace, and let the East fight their own battles. But no matter what happens, I wish the best of luck for the United States Of America.

    September 10, 2013 at 9:49 am |
  202. Claudia

    No in think that U.S. should not fight Syria. Well first of all if the U.S. does fight them then there will be conflict with other countries trying to go against us. Then also it will create more violence at that country.

    September 10, 2013 at 9:50 am |
  203. Diana

    We should NOT get involve. If another country wants to blow each other up with chemical weapons, then let them. We are NOT the united states of Syria. We are in America and we should stay here. We don't own any other countries, and we certainly do not own Syria. Let the Syrians finish their own civil war. If America gets involved, it gives Syria a reason to attack us.

    September 10, 2013 at 9:50 am |
  204. Anonymous

    If Syria have or are going to be using chemical weapons I think that the military should get involved just so that they would not be able to use them, but we don't need to take actions so far that we get them angry with us.

    September 10, 2013 at 9:50 am |
  205. richard

    well i dont think we should be going to other countries and helping them, let them help there selfs. Some of our people die over there trying to help them. i think helping other countries is just a lost cause.

    September 10, 2013 at 9:50 am |
  206. Kassandra

    I feel that taking military action will not help anything. America doesn't need to keep being the "big brother" to everyone else, we have our own issues here that we could be working on. Yes we could help out every now and then but if we keep trying to get in business that doesn't concern us it's going to cause so many problems for us. Chemical weapons are colorless and odorless and if it is a high enough dosage it can kill you in under a minute. Chemical weapons are SERIOUS, It could harm a lot of people. Therefor, If America gets involve it could just cause them to have an excuse to us them.

    September 10, 2013 at 9:50 am |
    • Jaye

      You're absolutely right !!

      September 10, 2013 at 11:30 am |
  207. David

    with the crisis happening in Syria its crazy. it does not matter with what is happening to me. I love America but I don't think we should get involved in anything else.

    September 10, 2013 at 9:52 am |
  208. Riley

    I think that the president should do what he feel best for the United States and if that is to attack Syria then he should do so that is why we elected him as the President!!!!

    September 10, 2013 at 9:53 am |
  209. Austin

    I feel that if they have used or will use chemical weapons we need to get involved to stop them, but not as far as getting in a big argument with them. lets not start another war with them.

    September 10, 2013 at 9:53 am |
  210. Maliq

    I think that our soldiers shouldnt get involved in whats going on in Syria. The reason being is beacause it costs money to go over there just to start another war. However I think it would be pointless , period !

    September 10, 2013 at 9:57 am |
  211. Dreamer

    Im between yes and no, becoause of the face if we strike back then the gov. will spend too much money. Then again it would be good to strike back to let other places know that the u.s. will not back down.

    September 10, 2013 at 9:57 am |
  212. lazaro

    i think they made just leave the along so that we don't starter a war and so we can have to so i think we don;t get in more toubther and we don't have to starter war

    September 10, 2013 at 10:00 am |
  213. samson

    i think its a waste of money to start a war with syria. we owe alot of money to people and we dont have the funds. why rock the boat when were siting still?

    September 10, 2013 at 11:21 am |
  214. shantana

    I think it would be pointless to attack

    September 10, 2013 at 11:23 am |
  215. Ron

    i think its a waste of time and money with war of syria.we dont need no more war with no one.we can work together to change the world

    September 10, 2013 at 11:24 am |
  216. stephen

    No because we do not need no more wars because we do not have the money.And i think theres no reason to go over!!

    September 10, 2013 at 11:24 am |
  217. Luke

    I say no we should not , because we are in enough of debt to other countries so why go over their and wast money on one country when our on country needs the help.So what im saying is take the money you would invested going over their an invested it in some of our own problems .

    September 10, 2013 at 11:25 am |
  218. Kaye

    I feel as if we shouldn't take military action towards Syria because we're already in enough debt. What Syria does is their business not the United States. We've took action towards Iraq and our troops have sacrificed their lives for 12/13 years. If we plan to attack Syria I'm afraid that war will last just as long. We need to keep to ourselves and not worry about Syria at all.

    September 10, 2013 at 11:25 am |
  219. Ro'darius

    I think that if it don't involve the u.s then we shouldn't be in the problem with this county because it could harm the united states if we get involve with this problem and aware troops start to go into that county that county might want to attack the united states that's why we shouldn't be involved

    September 10, 2013 at 11:26 am |
  220. Alysia

    I think our soldiers shouldn't get involved to what's going on in Syria. because that's their business not ours !!!!!!!!!

    September 10, 2013 at 11:26 am |
  221. Tori

    I Dont Think The U.S Should Get Involved In Whats Going On In Syria We Dont Need Another War And U.S Is Already In Debt.

    September 10, 2013 at 11:26 am |
  222. Sierra

    I think our soldiers shouldn't get involved in what's going on in Syria because its their business they handle their own they don't need us , and we don't wanna start a war with them anyway !

    September 10, 2013 at 11:26 am |
  223. Sofi

    I think we don't need anymore war. We need peace in the world. War equals enemies and we don't need any enemies. We would spent too much money, when we could save it up for another occasion/event.

    September 10, 2013 at 11:27 am |
  224. Andrew

    This is one of those situations that I am on the fence with. It is just one of those things that could end with a problem no matter what choice you choose. I believe in standing up for other people and I wish there was a way that we could without the repercussions. If we launch a military strike then we start another war. Maybe if there was more proof of chemical weapons being used, then I would support taking action.

    September 10, 2013 at 11:51 am |
  225. TeNeil

    I am in between yes and no. I think yes because with our army, we could help them stop this. No because its not our war, we shouldn't get involved.

    September 10, 2013 at 11:52 am |
  226. BaRonnie

    Well in my opinion I think that we should not join the fight because, if they don't pose as threat why would we attack Syria in the first place? On the other hand I would see why they would go and attack Syria because, they might gain enough nucleur power to attack the U.S. Most likely they would go into the fight but, if the do it would be nucleur warfare. My question to YOU America what would you do if you where the person who makes the decision on if you should attack or, stay put. What will it be America?

    September 10, 2013 at 11:57 am |
  227. Brent

    I admire our willingness and able ness to go to war and fight for freedom and the disuse of chemical weapons, but really we should focus on ourselves. As has been said many times before, we need to take care of our own problems before taking care of other or else we'l do an even worse job helping them. It's not an easy decision, but we can't police the world and I think we should take a break.

    September 10, 2013 at 12:00 pm |
  228. Isaiah

    Yes I do because they could help stop it.
    They could help fight them.
    They could give them stuff to help.

    September 10, 2013 at 12:30 pm |
  229. Carmen

    I believe the U.S should get involved, because if it's illegal to use chemical weapons then the U.S. should go and check it out. It's not fair they do illegal things.

    September 10, 2013 at 12:31 pm |
  230. janay

    I think that the US should stay out of the syria problems.I think that they should just leave it alone maybe that would solve the Problems.i think that if the us back off then their will be less problems.

    September 10, 2013 at 12:31 pm |
  231. zach

    i think that when war starts you cant cheat in any way or it will make it worse. and make you look really dumb because your letting them know that your cheating. if it goes worldwide and all over the news and now that the seen that so now its gonna look bad on us that where trying to cheat.

    September 10, 2013 at 12:32 pm |
  232. Abdi

    I think the U.S should not go in to war because thats just jeapordizing the lives of your U.S millatry and thats going to war with people haveing nounthing to jeapordize and the going to war with some VERY deilly weponds.

    September 10, 2013 at 12:35 pm |
  233. Aaliyah

    I dont think so because one we already have troops out in afagahnistan who haven't seen their familes in 6 or 7 months and plus the us has no business worrying about what goes on in other countries.

    September 10, 2013 at 1:26 pm |
  234. A'Kauryana

    This War Or Rebellion Has Nothing To Do With Us . We Should Not Be Getting Involved In This War . Let This Be Between Syria And The Rebels . They Need TO Solve There Own War .

    September 10, 2013 at 1:27 pm |
  235. Taylor

    no, we shouldn't go in military action with syria cause it causes to much trouble and it has nothing to do with us. I dont think that we are prepared to go into war with syria. A war with syria will cause alot of people to lose their lives. the world will be more peaceful without wars.

    September 10, 2013 at 1:28 pm |
  236. zaria

    I think they should get to the bottom of it. But I think if they respond the Syria it can cause a war. Placing our lives in danger . And it could also cause a war to break out.

    September 10, 2013 at 1:29 pm |
  237. bobby

    I think that we should take military action in Syria because we went into Germany during the holocaust so what the difference between Syria and Hitler nothing so I think we should go in its not right all those people who's life ended for some country too murder its people.

    September 10, 2013 at 1:29 pm |
  238. romana

    U.S. should get involved because Syria is killing their own people. If we don't get involved Syria might attack the U.S with their weapons. It could also be the beginning of a WW3

    September 10, 2013 at 1:30 pm |
  239. Anonymous

    i think that the u.s should get invole because syria is killing their on people

    September 10, 2013 at 1:31 pm |
  240. Sha-Tara

    The US should not go into war it will only make things worst. We should try to compromise with them first. Then if it do not work take action.

    September 10, 2013 at 1:31 pm |
  241. Hayden

    I think that if it does not involve the U.S. then we should not get involved with it. Why get involved with something that doesn't involve us? That's a waste of money, time, and lives.

    September 10, 2013 at 1:31 pm |
  242. stephen

    i think we should stay outta their business. and let them handle their on mess. cause if we help them we'll end up in it and then we'll have to do something about it.

    September 10, 2013 at 1:32 pm |
  243. Catilyn

    I think that U.S. military should not be involved in Syria's conflict. For these reasons, if they are using chemical weaponry or not , it still would affect the economy, U.S. citzen's safety and piece of mind. The reason why I posted 'piece of mind' is because people will think that the world will come to a huge war caused by a civil war in Syria or people will thimk that their safety, rights and independence is affected.

    September 10, 2013 at 1:35 pm |
  244. marquise

    I Don't think the U.S intervene in the Syria situation because, it wouldn't be beneficial for the U.S people. also it would cause a lot of conflict with other countries trying to take the U.S. down...

    September 10, 2013 at 4:30 pm |
  245. rutta

    I think they shounld because people are geting killed . they shounld not get invond beacuse were just speding money that we dont have. people are geting hurt and no homes or money food, am yes or no not sure .

    September 10, 2013 at 4:31 pm |
  246. Dean

    I believe that the U.S. should not get involved in the Syrian civil war because sometimes we need to put ourselves before others. If we can't even help ourselves then how can we help them that could get us too involved and start a war between the U.S. and Syria. If Syria wants to start a war with the U.S. then we will have get involved.

    September 10, 2013 at 4:31 pm |
  247. casiana

    Well, I think that we should take military action in Syria. The military basically invades other foreign countries anyway. Why not add another one to our list? Who next Asia?

    September 10, 2013 at 4:32 pm |
  248. Elijah

    No they shouldnt. It is Not Our Buisness To go over there .They Dont Need Help.

    September 10, 2013 at 4:32 pm |
  249. david + alex + maggie

    no he shouldnt because if we send a missle over there they are just going to send 1 back then it will be a war with the u.s and our allies and syria and their allies and plus when ewe get our militaty out of other places we can save more money so we can pay china back and we can then create new jobs and solve all of the u.s problems before we worry about the world problems

    September 10, 2013 at 4:36 pm |
  250. Morgan

    I don't think we should get involved in Syria's business. It doesn't involve us and we shouldn't jump into it, because that will make us an easy target for an attack. Besides, would anyone jump in on our government if we started a civil war here, or would we be left to sort it out?
    I also don't think we should be supporting and saving possible terrorists!

    September 10, 2013 at 6:40 pm |
  251. paris

    USA should lauch a strike against Syria, otherwise the chemical weapons will fall in the hands of terrorists, i can't imagine what will turn out then

    September 10, 2013 at 8:48 pm |
  252. Emily

    I believe that the U.S. should not get involved with Syria's conflicted. We should mind our own business, or let other countries take care of it. It feels like we are always getting involved with other countries problems, when we should be worrying about our own country. If we do attack then they will attack Israel and we can't let that happen. No to attacking Syria!

    September 10, 2013 at 8:54 pm |
  253. Joshua

    no because we dont need a ANOTHER world war

    September 11, 2013 at 5:33 pm |
  254. Dylan

    The US just needs to stay out of it, because if we don't, before you know it, World War 3 is coming on.

    September 11, 2013 at 7:54 pm |
  255. Justin

    Why is this even a hard decision? There are innocent people being gassed and we have the capabilities to stop it. Putting "national interest" before human life is not us, that is not America.

    September 11, 2013 at 11:56 pm |
    • Josh

      I agree totally. There's innocent people in Syria!!!!

      September 12, 2013 at 5:15 pm |
  256. Natalie

    To bomb or not to bomb should not be the responses we feel limited to. Dictator Assad should be held accountable and tried as a war criminal.

    September 12, 2013 at 11:24 am |
  257. Josh

    I think that we should take action. Syria says there's no proof of weapons but the UN found traces. The US needs to take action, innocent people are being poisoned!

    September 12, 2013 at 5:14 pm |
  258. becca

    I think we don't need to because the Syrians have chemical weapons and I think we should because we can defuse or mess-up all of the chemical weapons from them so they cant use them on us and we wont die!!??

    September 12, 2013 at 6:21 pm |
  259. Brielle

    I think the U.S should take action in Syria. Syria is most likely using chemical weapons. People think that we're going to invade like we did in Japan but that is not how President Obama wants to take action. He wants to do a targeted strike on government territory in Syria not harm civilians. It's not really our place to take part but we can't just let innocent people who have done nothing wrong keep being killed or be left in critical conditions.

    September 12, 2013 at 7:45 pm |
  260. Drew

    I don't want anyone else to die from military action, but I don't think a diplomatic approach will work.

    September 12, 2013 at 7:58 pm |
  261. Nick

    Syria has Russia behind them. Do we really want that? Starting a war with Syria will not just be with them, it will be with Russia and any other countries that support Syria. Nuclear weapons are not (or shouldn't be) a soultion or an option to this problem. My point is that we could be getting into a lot more than just a problem with Syria. We should not get involved with Syria, bottom line.

    September 13, 2013 at 1:15 pm |
  262. Bob

    We shouldn't take action because if Syria is using chemical weapons and it is Assad's fault he should go to jail.

    September 13, 2013 at 5:11 pm |
  263. Anonymous

    No. Just no.

    September 14, 2013 at 4:02 pm |
  264. Maya

    I don't think we should attack Syria or even destroy their weapons because doing that will probably make the Syrian's mad at us. There's no telling what they'll do next if we interfere. It could just lead to a terrorist attack on the US or our allies.

    September 14, 2013 at 5:05 pm |
  265. arber

    it is a new day in age and america which led the world into a more peacefull free and democratic time must not allways push the attack button but practace what one preaches and democratically come to a desicion

    September 15, 2013 at 11:56 am |