In Syria, they’re
steadily dying for help with the war that they’re facing, here in the U.S we
just don’t know what kind of help we can give them. Should we push aside
everything that we worked effortlessly for, to help the helpless? Or should we
mind our own business and live on as if nothing is happening? Recently I have
read an article called, “Civil War in Syria Raises Questions About When to
Intervene” by the PBS news hour about how the Syrian war needs some assistance,
so that the violence in Syria doesn’t continue to have many people flee their
homes due to the violence taking place so close to their homes.
In the article PBS news
executives say, “While these countries accept refugees, they have limited
recourses to care for another population. The United Nation estimates that as
many as 2.5 million people have been affected by the crisis, many of them in
need of food, medicine and shelter.” This statement is basically saying that
although there is a major crisis occurring in Syria, they still open their arms
to other countries in need.
Also in the article it says,
“a lot of people trying to figure out what could be an effective intervention
that wouldn’t cause more death and suffering… we are thinking about all of
this. There’s all kinds of both civilian and humanitarian and military planning
going on but the factors are just not there.” I agree with U.S secretary of
state Hillary Clinton because she has made an avid point about if the U.S
should intervene in the Syrian war. In general, I think that the U.S should
extend their arms to Syria and help them in their war, just as well as when
they help build refugees for other countries in need.
Good post. At what point do you think it would make sense to risk our own troops to help the Syrians? 95
ReplyDelete