Read through the following article, at least up to the "Q and A" section.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/obama-defends-geneva-chemical-weapons-deal-as-syria-claims-victory-8817774.html
In at least a paragraph, explain what has been going on in Syria and why the US has been considering a military attack there. Then, in another sentence or two, tell me whether or not you agree with how President Obama handled the situation (as it is outlined in this article).
What has been happening in Syria is that, Syria is using nuclear warfare on their own country. It is not a wild guess or someone just starting a conspiracy, it as been confirmed. Which was decided by the United Nations to never be used again in warfare, and that consequences would come if chemicals were used. I don't think President Obama has handled the situation at all and to be honest I don't think he will be able to. ~ Jordan Chestnut
ReplyDeleteThere have been chemical weapons in use in the Cival war in Syria. THe US has been considering an attack tnere because they want to put an end to the uses of these dangerous chemicals. I do agree with President Obama's wishes to go in and attack Syria as soon as possible.I do not think that we should have waited for the UN to make a decision. I think that if we dont stop this now then it will only get worse and worse. I think that if the rest of the UN wants to wait then we should be the ones to take action.
ReplyDelete-Taylor Burge
The article discusses the chemical attacks in Syria. Syria has been using chemical arms on the civilians, including children, and no one knows who launched it. France, United Kingdom, and the United States are uniting together to try to stop the chemical outbreaks. They have asked Mr.Assad to give up the chemical weapons but he declines. It's not right for Syria to use chemical weapons on its own people. Although, if President Obama uses military force against the situation then new world war could erupt.
ReplyDelete~April McCool
Demetrius Smith p.m.
ReplyDeleteSyria has been using chemical weapons on its own civilians. The UN think that if he won't give up all of their chemical weapons that they will have to go to war with Syria. The use of chemical weapons is banned and is against the rules of war. The president in his decision to wait before they take their vote is right because we don't want to get in a war with Russia even though we might not lose it would cause trouble in the years to come. But if Syria is to continue using chemical weapons we should continue with our plans and worry about Russia later.
Syria has been accused of using chemical weapons. They are using them in heavily populated areas that are in habbited by not only adults but children. I agree with President Obama in the way he handled the situation. He along with Russia have given Syria a chance to be let go in favor of letting inspectors search an make sure all chemical weapons are captured.
ReplyDeleteKatie Kinder
Austin Levins
ReplyDeleteThe Syrian government have been using chemical weapons on it's own people. They have used chemical weapons to kill their own citizens including children. The chemical they are using tortures you before you die. The U.S is considering a military strike to stop this. We want to do the right thing and afface the onslaught caused to the indigenous people.
I believe that for the first time Obama did the right thing, even though I do not think He did it for the right reason. I like the agreement to force them to relinquish their chemical weapons. We have let them mettle long enough and it is time we solve this dilemma. They can salvage their country by giving us the weapons and if they choose not to, we will make sure Syria is not perrennial.
Syria has been in a Civil War for over three years now in an ongoing conflict being described as an uprising and a crisis. Recently, chemical weaponry was used, though by the rebels or the government, nobody knows. For once I agree with what Obama has done about this serious situation. All out war with Syria is not a good idea since the war in Iraq, Afganistan, etc.. Obama didn't take military action instead, the U.S. and Russia made an agreement to disable Syria's chemical weaponry and take away their ability to maake chemical weapons.
ReplyDelete~Blake E. Lockridge
There is a planned chemical attack that's supposed to be going on in Syria. The US and Russia are forming together to help Syria. Russia and the US gave Syria a week to get everything straighten out. If Syria doesn't meet the deadline the US is going to launch an attack on Syria. In my opinion I don't think they should because I'm sure it's going to take longer than a week.
ReplyDelete-Kionte Taggart
This article about France, The US, and the UK wanting to stop Syria from using Sarin gas in their weapons makes me feel safe. In the article they said they want it destroyed by mid- 2014 which makes it even better. I'm sad that Syria feels the need to have these types of chemicals. I'm very glad though that countries are standing together to keep the rest of the world from these toxic gases that Syria has in its arsinele.
ReplyDeleteJordan Tatum
It has been confirmed that it was chemical weapons were used in the Syrian conflict. The chemical used was sarin gas. The attack on August twenty-first killed more than 1,400 people, children included. The US,UK and France have come to the conclusion that Bashar al-Assad would suffer the consequences if Syria's chemical weapons were not removed. The US is considering military attack because they are not supposed to be using chemical weapons. I do agree with the way Obama handled the situation.
ReplyDelete-Emily Free
Jane Frances Armour
ReplyDeleteSyria is in the middle of a civil war between two parties. During the civil war a party used sarin gas on some innocent civilians including children. The president Bashar al-Assad has a stock of chemical weapons that he could use against his country at any time. France, UK, and the USA are trying to get the president to give over the countries stock of chemical weapons and if he does not then he will suffer severe consequences. I only agree with Obama on this situation because he is taking this matter very seriously and not rushing it along and making a mistake.
Syria has been using chemical weapons such as gases to kill innocent people in their country. The people in Syria are even killing women and children. "The UN warcrime investigators have also are investigating 14 potential chemical attacks in Syria since they began monitoring Syrian human rights abuses in September 2011." (the article). Syria has a certain amount of time to get rid of the chemical weapons before the US attacks them. US has been considering a military attack there to stop President Bashar al-Assad from killing more people.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with President Obama, I think that Assad needs to be stopped for killing innocent people.
The UN has recently been investigating sarin gas (a type of nerve gas) attacks in Syria. The gas has been used on civilians, including children. Obama has been meeting with representatives from other countries to talk about the situation. He recently put a "pause" on the vote to perform military strikes.
ReplyDeleteI kind of agree with Obama. He seems to be doing an excellent job diplomatically speaking, but in terms if actual results, he's not doing too well. While he takes his time, people in Syria are suffering.
Marie Doyle
Syria's president, Bshare al-Assad, had made a chemical weapons attack against his own people. When he did this it killed over 1,400 people,and many of these people were children. Now, I hated the way president Obama handled this situation. The main reason I feel this way is because he was so indecisive about it. First he said that he was going to bomb them on live television. Then after they hid all of their weapons and Russia took Syria's side on the whole ordeal, he stepped back and said he wanted to get congressional approval to launch a strike. This made Obama and the U.S. look very weak.
ReplyDeleteRett Saele
Syria has been using chemical weapons. The US, UK, and France are allies, therefore they are trying to "gang up" on Syria to stop them. These three countries have agreed that Syria's president will suffer severe consequences if they do not stop using chemical weapons. I think President Obama should have launched the targets strikes instead of delaying it to talk to Russia.
ReplyDelete-Mayson McGee
In Syria, chemical weapons are being used against themselves. This happening could have started a civil war. They consider a military attack because they want to bring a "peaceful end to this appalling conflict." So, they try to get as much evidence as they can on this problem. Then, they do their best to solve and finish it. I agree with how Obama handled this because this agreement he made was formed to have peace once again in Syria. -Abby Nelson
ReplyDeleteNikhil Singh
ReplyDeleteLately in Syria there has been many conflicts of Syria releasing chemical gases on their own citizens. The US is considering a military attack there to destroy their chemical weapons, although Russia would veto this. I agree with the way President Obama has dealt with this. He has taken his time to consider things, and although Syria is another country he is trying his best to help Syrians. Instead of rushing, Obama has been talking to Russia, a key regime to Syria. I believe that humanity is the most important aspect. Though the US has been criticize for being the policeman of the world, I believe that killing your own citizens with chemical weapons is a serious matter. President Obama is right in setting the incidence as a red line. I appreciate his diplomatic efforts to contain Syria without getting into a potential WWIII.
In Syria the government has used Sarin gas on their own people. This we UN weapons inspectors confirmed this. The have come to the conclusion that there are potentially 14 chemical attacks that they are investigating. the US and the UN are demanding that at the chemical weapons stock piles be investigated by the UN weapons inspectors. If they refuse, the US has indicated that it retains the right to take military actions. I do agree with Obama however, I think we should consider all options before we attack and start a costly war with Syria.
ReplyDeleteBasically, Syria has been revolting against their own people for not agreeing. Of course America has to get involved, I mean involved involved. Bombing them? Why the honest heck would you do that. I can understand if you wanted to like, warn them with some like aggressive thing. but not a bomb. or more. nuclear attacks to say the least. I think Obama handled it pretty okay, but I still don't understand why they had to get involved in the first place.
ReplyDeleteAndrea Rosario
There has been a civil war in Syria. Recently the Syrian government has attacked its own citizens with chemical weapons. The US has been considering an attack there because many people are upset by the violence and especially the idea of a leader attacking his own people with poison gas. I disagree with the way this situation has been handled, but I don’t just disagree with the president. The majority of world leaders are all hopping on the, chemical weapons are so wrong ban wagon, while they don’t do anything of any importance and don’t even make a fuss about all the people who were killed by other forms of violence. I think that President Obama’s actions may be well intentioned but very misguided. I am glad that he actually sought congressional approval before he tried to take any military action unlike in Libya. However he still is continuing to threaten us air strikes but doing nothing. Also I don’t see what such a big deal is about using chemical weapons in a war. War isn’t always going to be fair. If you’re killed by a bullet through the head or a poisonous gas you still die. If world leaders were really concerned for the loss of life they would be upset over more than just chemical weapons. Furthermore, by threatening more violence the president is not getting very far. Obviously Assad doesn’t care very much, most likely because he noticed that nothing has happened as far as US airstrikes. The rebels wouldn’t care much because they are already getting slaughtered by Assad so one more airstrike probably wouldn’t be a big deal. By removing chemical weapons the US will only create a deadlock resulting in longer lasting violence instead of a resolution. I personally think that if something has been building up to happen in an area for a long time, like a powerful Allowite ruling over many Sunni’s, it will inevitably happen and the US should save itself the trouble of trying to change the inevitable outcome. John McDonough
ReplyDeletenoah barnette- there has been chemical warfare in Syria. the US and Russia are going to try and help Syria. if syria doesn't make up their mind in a week the US is going to strike in Syria. I don't think that we should get into this drama because it could cause WWIII
ReplyDelete