The U.S. is contemplating an attack on Syria. Their reason is because they are believed to have used chemical weapons in the suburbs of Damascus, on their own citizens. Such atrocities should not be tolerated; however President George W. Bush was criticized by no President Barrack Obama, for doing the same thing in Iraq.
President Bush had intelligence reports showing possible Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) being at the very least stored in Iraq, if not made there. They were also housing terrorists that had carried out several attacks on U.S. Embassies. President Obama has no such intelligence reports on Syria at this time. Instead he has limited evidence and suspicions.
President Bush had 100% support from Congress and the support of allies such as Great Britain. President Obama has 100 members of Congress questions his plans and demanding that lawmakers be consulted before the administration begins such an attack. President Obama lacks support from Great Britain, a major ally of the U.S.
According to NBC World News, beyond complaints about a lack of consultation, 116 House representatives (98 Republicans, 18 Democrats) signed a letter demanding a vote in Congress before any assault is launched against Syria. Fifty-four House Democrats (some of whom signed that first letter) wrote Obama on Thursday asking him to “seek an affirmative decision of Congress prior to committing any U.S. military engagement” in Syria.
No one is disputing that chemical weapons were used. Rather it seems to be a dispute of gathering all intelligence reports and being sure this is the right action to take before taking it. There are many more civilian lives at stake and the Syrian government has already taken many. It appears the U.S. is trying to avoid taking more lived of civilians and its troops.
Carisa Frisby
