President Obama's speech Tuesday night took the two-sided argument inside of every American's head and spelled it out for the American public. Should we intervene in Syria? If we do, we might get caught up in entangling alliances and possibly start another war. Plus, we need to focus on the problems at home: the economy, jobs, education, ect. However, if we don't intervene, what kind of message would we be sending to countries around the world? Are we just going to stand idly by as we let Bashar al-Assad's regime use chemical weapons?
President Obama's key point was that we are not going to simply stand idly by as Assad's regime breaks an international agreement on the banned use chemical weapons. To those who are against intervening in Syria, Obama first stressed the terrible nature of what happened on August 21, and then assured the American people that Syria is not a threat compared to the strength of our military and that of our allies. Furthermore, Obama declared that we are not the world's policeman, yet "we must stop children from being gassed to death."
The media's response to Obama's speech was positive for the most part. According to a CNN poll, 61% of Americans agreed with the president on his plan for Syria. In addition, nearly two-thirds of the American public are optimistic that the situation in Syria will likely be resolved through diplomatic efforts, while the other third disagree. However, if diplomatic effort fail, the American people are divided on whether Obama made a convincing argument for U.S. military action in Syria.
Media Source -> http://www.mediaite.com/online/poll-69-of-americans-viewed-obamas-syria-speech-positively-61-favor-his-approach/
No comments:
Post a Comment