Fast Focus: Should the U.S. take military action in Syria? Reasons for no

September 29, 2013 

My answer is an unequivocal "no" and the reasons go beyond the present Syrian debacle. Before it was in our best interest to be involved in the Middle East because of the oil dependency but this is no longer the case. Therefore we should just stay out of their squabbles. As Sarah Palin so wisely advised us, "Let Allah sort it out." If the environmental whackos and their sycophantic liberal pols would just chill out and let us develop our own resources, we would have plenty of oil whereby our long-standing goal of energy independence would be realized and we could quit financing the terrorists.

The more we get involved in the Middle East, the more we muck it up. We keep trying to impose representative government on these people but history and Muslim attitudes have shown that this is probably not possible. Most Muslims desire peace and stability as much as we do, however they realize that because of the sectarian violence this can only be achieved by having a strong authoritarian government capable of keeping the peace. If you doubt me, just look at the Libya, Egypt and Iraq after their despots were deposed, (with probable U.S. meddling).


Tri-City Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service