Alex Fisher is a Freshman Cortina Student, studying Philosophy and Political Science. He is from the Overland Park, Kansas. This is where he stands with regard to the possibility of the United States’ intervention in Syria.
Syrian intervention would not be humanitarian and the claim that it would be so is false for so many reasons, but Ill just list the two biggest reasons to me.
1) We are not Intervening in Response to the Syrian Government’s Use of Chemical Weapons.
This claim that we are intervening in response to chemical weapons being used in Syria is ridiculous especially when there has been no proper investigation into it. As well this claim seems to fall even shorter when we support many countries that actively use chemical weapons and when we ourselves have used them just as recently as 2004. We used both Depleted Uranium and White Phosphorus on the city of Fallujah, Iraq in 2003 and 2004. The effects of Depleted Uranium still continue today as many Iraqi babies are born with defects (over half in Fallujah), Cancer rates have gone up, and infant mortality as well. When it comes to White Phosphorus we indiscriminately used it against the city of Fallujah, and we support Israel’s military, with over 3 billion dollars in grants, who actively up, until this summer, used White Phosphorus. No one has gone to prison for this, but when the Syrian Government possibly uses chemical weapons we must bomb them.
2) Intervening in Syria would lead to indiscriminate killing of Civilians and would further resentment against the U.S.
The current U.S. policy on appropriate targets for strikes is very low, it only requires that it be a male over the age of 16 who is close to other known insurgents. This policy has already led to many civilian deaths, a lot of which are still unknown, especially when we have struck weddings, funerals, whole villages, and city squares. We have done this in Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, and Iraq and it has made Al-Qaeda and its affiliates more powerful in these regions. In Iraq, Yemen, and Somalia Al-Qaeda was never able to establish a foothold until the U.S. came into the picture, and now they are some of the largest political entities in these countries. In Somalia Al Shabaab, an Al-Qaeda affiliate, was able to gain nearly 50% of the land, which was the first time Al-Qaeda had any land under its control, they where only able to do this after the U.S. destabilized the region after aiding an Ethiopian invasion which destabilized the government led by local tribal leaders called the Islamic Courts Union (ICU). In Yemen AQAP (Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula) is now one of the largest entities even though Al-Qaeda for years was unable to establish a foothold due to the tribal make up of the country, and who made all this possible the U.S. by killing civilians and supporting the very corrupt government of President Saleh. In Iraq we saw the same thing Al-Qaeda had no foothold in Iraq until we invaded, but after the invasion it grew quickly, and continues to destabilize the region today with continuing sectarian and ethnic violence. If our goal is to kill civilians and help Al-Qaeda recruit then we should intervene, but if our goal is to help civilians and stabilize Syria then we should provide medicine, food, water, clothes, etc.… not bombs, guns, and violence.
1) Scahill, Jeremy. Dirty Wars. New York: Nation, 2013. Print.
2) Messamore, Wesley. “10 Chemical Weapons Attacks Washington Doesn’t Want You to Talk About.” Policy Mic. Policy Mic, 4 Sept. 2013. Web. 4 Sept. 2013.
3) “Executive Summary and Recommendations.” Living Under Drones. Living Under Drones, n.d. Web. 4 Sept. 2013.