Should NATO intervene in Syria?

5 Comments

  • Mark Anthony - 12 years ago

    NATO has no legal authority to intervene in internal affairs of a sovereign country. NATO already stand culpable in a court of JUSTICE for destroying a peaceful and most prosperous country in North Africa that was once Libya. NATO had no mandate what so ever for air strikes in Libya. Syria poses no threat to any of the NATO member countries, therefore, NATO has no right to threaten or intervene.

  • Klime Kovaceski - 12 years ago

    The time is running out ... this has to stop, NOW!!

  • Roe Helm - 12 years ago

    We should not intervene in Syria until two points are met. First we understand exactly who we are supporting, so as not to arm an enemy. Secondly we should not do anything unless the rest of the is willing to support and back the intervention. We as Americans cannot afford to be the worlds police force while the rest of the world sets back and reaps a reward. If they are willing to let a power that is corrupt exist then let them deal with it in the long run.

  • Kam - 12 years ago

    It is too soon for any kind of intervention in Syria. Besides, US can really use the postponement of NATO's intervention in Syrian as leverage in coming to an agreement with Iran on Iran's nuclear program. After all, Syria is Iran's most valuable strategic ally.

  • Doc - 12 years ago

    All of our interventions in the Middle East have only caused more problems; the people there hate us much more than ever before.

Leave a Comment

0/4000 chars


Submit Comment