The 2011 year has left the world with plenty of worries about different accidents and catastrophes. There were such huge disasters as floods in Pakistan and Thailand, earthquakes in Haiti, in Turkey and the devastating tsunami in Japan that led to explosion in nuclear power plant. There was another event that took its beginning in February of that mysterious year - the conflict in Syria. To remind, the opposition of Syria rebelled the President Bashar Assad's regime and wanted his resignation. Even though the inception of the rebellion has started in peaceful way, nowadays the situation in Syria raised to the level of civil war. The uprising is going on with firefights between opposition's armed forces and military forces. According to the recent news from Syria there are more than 100,000 dead and 1.5 million refugees. According to the alleged report in August 21 of this year, Syrian government has used chemical weapons on its citizens.
This was the major reason to President Obama and the US congress to show extreme desire to intervene military force in Syria. Obama says that a military intervention in Syria is the only way to stop the uprising war, and a violence of Assad's regime. Is this a justified decision? Or there is another reason aiming Obama to do so? This paper examines the possible answers to these questions by analyzing two different articles which consider possible consequences of military intervention in Syria. Finally, several reasons will be given in favor of solving the conflict in peaceful and diplomatic way.
Something Must Be Done
"Diplomacy would not solve anything; Assad will continue killing civilians, including women and children; the western forces must intervene in Syria to prevent using chemical weapons and further victims", these are...