- Posted September 6, 2013 by
This iReport is part of an assignment:
Are chemical weapons a ‘red line’?
Intervening, not refraining from action, endangers U.S.
- Jareen, CNN iReport producer
As President Obama prepares to address the nation Tuesday in a speech he hopes will win support for his plan for limited strikes in Syria, it’s important to ask ourselves as Americans what this means for our own country.
The U.S. has long been looked at as the world’s police force, stepping in and intervening when other countries won’t.
But are we obligated to uphold this informal title when we aren’t the direct targets of war?
In his statement on Syria on Aug. 31, President Obama said: This attack is an assault on human dignity. It also presents a serious danger to our national security.
But I argue that intervening endangers our own country, as it will likely prompt Syria allies to take defense.
It is against the safety of the United States to even consider taking action in Syria based on alleged uses of chemical weapons and based on a moral support for human dignity.
When President Obama delivers his speech to the nation Tuesday, he has to remember what’s at stake: the well-being of our own country and the citizens we fight to protect every day.