Yahoo asked Americans to react to President Barack Obama's address on Syria on Tuesday evening. Here's one perspective.
COMMENTARY | President Obama's address clarifying the current position of the executive branch on a potential Syria strike did not alter my opinion about limited American military involvement. Both senators representing my home state of Illinois and my representative serving East Dubuque, Ill., in the 16th congressional district, Adam Kinzinger, also support the action.
However, I think President Obama could have offered greater commentary when addressing the reasons why this action is so debatable.
If the United States had not entered into an unjustified war in the Middle East that helped send our economy downhill and left us with 4,488 fewer soldiers, fewer citizens would be protesting this action. People are weary of war as the president noted, and that makes it easier to turn a blind eye on actions that need to be taken, particularly when past wars billed as moral causes ended up as immoral quagmires.
In his speech, the president referenced a famous quote from FDR, "Our national determination to keep free of foreign wars and foreign entanglements cannot prevent us from feeling deep concern when ideas and principles that we have cherished are challenged."
This quote is particularly relevant as FDR needed to remind an America tired of a previous war and recovering from economic turmoil of an inherent moral obligation people face when they have the legal capability to right a wrong, such as the gassing of innocent men, women and children.
While the United States remains poised to lead an exacting strike against Syria, I remain hopeful that the Assad regime will turn over the remaining chemical weapons and join the Chemical Weapons Convention. If diplomacy doesn't eliminate the need for military involvement, I will continue to support authorization of the military action President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have requested.
- Politics & Government
- Barack Obama
- Adam Kinzinger