Poll Position: If WMDs are used in Syria, should U.S. intervene?
Everyone waiting for an “October surprise” from the Middle East has tended to focus on Israel and Iran. But earlier this week, U.S. intervention in Syria’s civil war was put on the table — by President Obama.
Unlike in Libya, where potential mass killings of civilians by forces loyal to then-dictator Moammar Gadhafi prompted Europe and the U.S. to side with the rebels, Syria’s 1.5-year-old conflict has already claimed 20,000 lives, more than half of whom reportedly were civilians. Monday, in a rare Q&A session with the White House press corps, Obama warned both sides in the conflict against using weapons of mass destruction:
We have communicated in no uncertain terms with every player in the region, that that’s a red line for us, and that there would be enormous consequences if we start seeing movement on the chemical weapons front, or the use of chemical weapons. That would change my calculations significantly.
It was the strongest indication from Obama yet about what it would take to pull the U.S. into the conflict, in which Syrian strongman Bashar Assad has received support and/or diplomatic cover from Iran, China and Russia.
If WMDs are used in Syria, should the U.S. intervene?
- No (82 Votes)
- Yes (64 Votes)
- I don't know (13 Votes)
Total Voters: 159
Loading ...Now, an “October surprise” is normally thought to be something one of the presidential candidates does to help his own electoral chances, although it can refer to an event that happens beyond the candidates’ control. Naturally, any military action would happen because Obama ordered it, but not necessarily because he was making a political calculation. In this case, it’s not clear to me whether U.S. intervention in Syria would tend to boost or deflate Obama’s prospects of winning re-election. I tend to think it would hurt him, given that he needs his base to turn out in large numbers, and a new military conflict would be more likely to depress the anti-war left. (Well, at least they’re anti-war when a Republican is in the White House.)
But I don’t want to look at this question from a strictly, or even mostly, political standpoint. If either side in Syria were to use chemical or biological weapons against the other, would that justify U.S. intervention in their civil war?
Consider whatever factors you want, but that’s this week’s Poll Position question. Answer in the nearby poll, and explain your reasoning in the comments thread below.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
143 comments Add your comment
MrLiberty
August 24th, 2012
3:22 pm
Road Scholar – Not just those 3 war criminals. Send Condi too – she can bring her clubs.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
August 24th, 2012
3:26 pm
“Kyle, my respect for you just dropped a bunch.”
Somehow, I don’t think Kyle is going to lose any sleep over this pronouncement . . .
Scott Fresno
August 24th, 2012
3:27 pm
Depends. Does the Syrian army/government have some nice discreet and valuable targets we could bomb to weaken them? If yes, then do it. But, if effective military action means sending in lots of ground troops for a long time, then no.
Just saying..
August 24th, 2012
3:29 pm
After the first 3 posts, difficult to be off topic in this forum. So:
Romney Makes a Birth Certificate Joke While Campaigning in Michigan
Honestly, if Mitt loses, my belief is the overarching reason will be numskull, useless remarks like this. I don’t believe it’s the guy he actually is, but it’s the foot-in-mouth awkward speaking guy he keeps showing in public.
Calvin
August 24th, 2012
3:30 pm
Once again a WMD ploy to intervene in a sovereign nation through military intervention. No wonder the world hates us.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
August 24th, 2012
3:31 pm
That’s pretty SickRick.
md
August 24th, 2012
3:36 pm
Yes…..as long as we use our head and not our kids feet.
We have the most advanced military on the planet…..us it as such. This boots on the ground stuff is too colonial.
Drone the crap out of them until they see the light. And create jobs here by mass producing drones.
And the one factor that needs to be understood by all, we ARE dependent on oil…..no if’s and’s or but’s. With that in mind, OUR economy depends on their oil……..deal with it.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
August 24th, 2012
3:36 pm
And the answer to Kyle’s question is not only no, but Hell NO!
We are the United States of America, and last I checked Syria is neither one of our states nor a strategic partner or ally.
Until Syria becomes one of the three, they can all kill one another in any manner they choose.
@@
August 24th, 2012
3:43 pm
I just read an article about Israel’s options for launching an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Their biggest obstacle is gaining access through unfriendly airspace. Their best option is through Syrian airspace. The rebels have already done substantial damage to Syria’s air defense system. A little more damage…and VOILA…Israel’s free to roam.
Been wondering why no action has been taken against Assad.
hmmmmmmm
My mind wonders.
Just saying..
August 24th, 2012
3:44 pm
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin…–August 24th, 2012:12:48 pm-They should intervene anyway. Syria forfeited it’s right to exist the first time it mouthed off about Israel. You punk liberals are welcome to come back at me with your mealy mouths but I know for a fact the minute some ahole moved next door to you and started threatening your family, you’d call the cops.
No difference.
Same goes with Iran.
You first.
Mitt/Rush/Newt/Cheney/Saxby will be right behind you. I promise.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
August 24th, 2012
3:55 pm
“You punk liberals are welcome to come back at me with your mealy mouths but I know for a fact the minute some ahole moved next door to you and started threatening your family, you’d call the cops.”
I don’t need a cop to defend my property.
Neither does Israel.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
August 24th, 2012
4:01 pm
Js… The maggot infested regime in Syria would scamper off into the desert at the sight of the very first Tomahawk Cruise Missile crashing through the window of their palace.
A couple of B-52’s emptying out their contents upon the “army” headquarters and this war is ova.
What’s Russia gonna do? Squeal at the UN?
grow a pair.
@@
August 24th, 2012
4:06 pm
DAY-UM!
Kyle:
Thanks for leaving my 3:08 up. I would’ve LUV’D it had you left my 2:35 up.
@@
August 24th, 2012
4:09 pm
Tiberius:
Israel could use a coupl’a B-2 bombers equipped with some MOPS.
Michael H. Smith
August 24th, 2012
4:31 pm
“but at this time none of those “arm-chair generals” commenting here have any credibility.”
Can’t say anything for the intelligence of that statement are the intelligence of the condescending person who made it but the credibility of their “narcissistic conceit” is undeniably superior to everyone making a comment on this blog at any and all times.
You are no better or smarter than any one of us with your commenting MarkV. Get over your pathetic self !
My comment: No the U.S. shouldn’t intervene if WMDs’ are used. And I don’t give a rat’s @$$ about your dear leader MarkV, I’m working to get rid of him anyways.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
August 24th, 2012
4:32 pm
@@, Israel can use whatever it wants if attacked or if attack is imminent. And if they need our help, I’m OK with helping them. They are an ally.
Syria? if they wish to kill each other in the worst way possible, it’s no skin off my nose.
getalife
August 24th, 2012
4:33 pm
Yes, if they use WMD’s, several countries will join us in purging the dictator.
Just saying..
August 24th, 2012
4:35 pm
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin…
August 24th, 2012:4:01 pm-Js… The maggot infested regime in Syria would scamper off into the desert at the sight of the very first Tomahawk Cruise Missile crashing through the window of their palace.
A couple of B-52’s emptying out their contents upon the “army” headquarters and this war is ova.
What’s Russia gonna do? Squeal at the UN?
You sober?
Seriously.
Skip
August 24th, 2012
4:37 pm
Must feed the war machine. With someone elses kids.
MarkV
August 24th, 2012
4:49 pm
Michael H. Smith @ 4:31 pm
I can say something for the intelligence of your statement – there is none.
Michael H. Smith
August 24th, 2012
4:51 pm
I agree with your comment Tiberius and not only can Israel use whatever it wants if attacked, Israel will use anything it deems necessary whenever it feels the existence of the nation of Israel or its’ people are threatened.
Michael H. Smith
August 24th, 2012
4:53 pm
Anything you say is worthless MarkV.
MarkV
August 24th, 2012
4:57 pm
Michael H. Smith @4:53 pm
I could not care less about what you think or write about what I say.
independent thinker
August 24th, 2012
4:59 pm
No presidential candidate’s Daddy was targeted for assassination by Assad so the chikenhawks do not have the excuse to attack like we did in Iraq. Neither of them even have a father who is living.
Dusty
August 24th, 2012
5:00 pm
If you want to be an armchair general it is so easy. Just go to (censored) and calll up “War in Syria”.
Let’s see: France is ready to guard Syria’s air space. A no fly zone for all planes or maybe a partial. (Nobody has said they will join the French..) That’s input from Paris..
Then: US has war plans ready for Syria which is ground troops, occupation , etc. etc.
(So good to keep your war plans secret.)
Turkey ready to make war on Syria.
(No cranberries and dressing with this one.)
If you want the details, here’s a clue. (Shhhhh…the CIA says go to Google!!)
I always knew I could be an arm chair general. Have I earned one star with this one?
Dusty
August 24th, 2012
5:08 pm
Independent thinker, 4:50
You just lost any credit for your ID. That insinuation about a “father for assassination”is so worn thin that a blind man could see through it.
Try to give us some fresh propaganda if you must. Bushisms are outdated.
Dusty
August 24th, 2012
5:16 pm
MarkV
I see you are your usual cherry self.
How’s your bird feeder? The squirrels keep kicking the bottom off of mine. I may have to call up my weapons of squirrel destruction, the formidable Sling ‘Em Off Whirlagigs… This is war!
Don Abernethy
August 24th, 2012
5:21 pm
Let’s save our money and troops for Mexico and try to stop the drugs that are a direct attack on the US.
Skip
August 24th, 2012
5:30 pm
Mitts the man? The same man that lost to McSame? Then lost to Sister Sarah? That man?
Michael H. Smith
August 24th, 2012
5:33 pm
MarkV 4:57 pm
Like I said, get over your pathetic self!
Chips in
August 24th, 2012
5:34 pm
Don
It is a supply and demand issue. Same market principles that hold for any product hold for drugs as well.
As long as there is demand, it will be supplied to some degree or another at some cost or another.
We have too many recreational and addicts.
That goes for illegal and legal drugs
The demand is ever present so those ruthless thugs will do whatever to meet the supply.
Until the demand goes down, do not expect anything different than you see now.
War on drugs has been a failure. Sad the US has spent billions and had many killed in this war, yet the demand continues.
No need for drug gang turf wars were many innocent people get killed if there is little to no demand here in the US
Michael H. Smith
August 24th, 2012
5:35 pm
Where is ‘The Hope & the Change’?
Yeah, where is that obamamania?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLelSaD1zHU
MarkV
August 24th, 2012
5:56 pm
Dusty,
You have earned at least one star, in the order of armchair generals. Your analysis has at least as much weight as anything else that can be said about the issue.
To be serious for a moment, I do not envy the President the responsibility of the decision, and I reject the arrogance of thinking that I would know what to do in his boots. Kyle has allowed us to consider whatever factors we want, but that does not make the task any easier.” If either side in Syria were to use chemical or biological weapons against the other.” That still leaves so many variables. What WMD? How much used? When will the use of some chemical agent be classified as WMD? It is so easy to make grandiose statements about these things, when one does not have the responsibility of the result of the decision.
————————
The only problem with our bird feeders is that that have to be refilled too often. They are protected against squirrels, those having their own feeder, which is being filled very sparingly.
getalife
August 24th, 2012
5:58 pm
Syria could use a no fly zone.
Michael H. Smith
August 24th, 2012
6:01 pm
Piffle.
Michael H. Smith
August 24th, 2012
6:09 pm
Try to give us some fresh propaganda if you must. Bushisms are outdated.
These socialist can’t help themselves Dusty. Their dear leader is a failure, so they have to go negative, even when it is no longer apropos.
Lil' Barry Bailout - Vote American
August 24th, 2012
6:14 pm
MrLiberty: the most dangerous country on earth at the moment – the United States.
————————–
But Obozo won the Nobel Peace Prize!
Fred ™
August 24th, 2012
6:16 pm
Why does my post keep getting eaten?
Fred ™
August 24th, 2012
6:18 pm
But Obozo won the Nobel Peace Prize!
Makes you feel cool and important to show such disrespect to my Country and my fellow Citizens by treating our highest office like a clown show doesn’t it? how pathetic.
Anyway it IS rather stupid that PRESIDENT OBAMA was awarded the Nobel. But then we have known for years how meaningless THAT “award” is. I mean Carter got it for gosh sakes as well as Yassar Arafat.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
August 24th, 2012
11:18 pm
Here’s something else the libs will never being showing their dull audiences -
It’s followed by Universal’s The Bourne Legacy in second place and the Rocky Mountain Pictures’ documentary 2016 Obama’s Legacy in third place. That’s stunning because it’s playing in a 1/3 less theaters across North American than the other wide release actioners.
bu2
August 24th, 2012
11:39 pm
Yes. Everyone who has done that has always gotten more bold and become a bigger threat. Assad already supports international terrorism. If he crosses the line with WMD, go after him. But not with ground troops. Just gradually destroy his military with air power (and get him if you can). The opposition would eventually overthrow him. But you don’t set your public goal as his overthrow, as he might manage to survive. Your goal should be the destruction of his ability to wage war, which can be defined any way you want and you can stop anytime you want.
And even if he doesn’t get worse, you just can’t stand by and accept mass murder with nothing but words. You have to make a reasonable effort to stop it and if you destroy his war machine you have a good chance.
Joel Edge
August 25th, 2012
5:32 am
“and a new military conflict would be more likely to depress the anti-war left. (Well, at least they’re anti-war when a Republican is in the White House.)”
Good one. Any kind of intervention right now wouldn’t help president Obama. We’ve done this ‘cavalry to the rescue’ enough.
Cobbian
August 27th, 2012
4:02 pm
NATO should intervene. But we should not do it alone. We should not have intervened in Iraq when we were lied to about WMDs. We, alone, are not the policemen of the world.