The President Obama’s Foreign Policy on Syria
The President Obama’s Foreign Policy on Syria The article, “Obama to make case for Syria Strikes in prime-time speech Tuesday, won’t say if he’ll act without Congress’ OK,” is talking about whether President Obama is going to take military action on Syria without Congress’ support. Different guesses are argued in this article about what decision will be made by Obama. Olivier Knox, the author of this article, does not report his opinion for or against the military strike on Syria, and he does not even make any speculation on the President’s decision-making. America’s military strike on Syria is probably not going to be approved by Congress, and public opinions are strongly against military action. According to what we learned in chapter 2 “The Constitution” Article II: The Executive Article, we know that the US president “acts as commander in chief of the military.” In this case, although Congress does not support him, President Obama still has the right to go to war. He will deliver a national address from the East Room of the White House to discuss the situation in Syria. “The president has said that Syrian strongman Bashar Assad must be punished for an alleged Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack by his forces that left an estimated 1,400 dead, including hundreds of children.” (“Obama to make case for Syria strikes in prime-time speech Tuesday, won’t say if he’ll act without Congress’ OK”) Obama has a strong desire to use force in Syria, and he is trying his best to get as much support as he can from Congress. However, more Americans oppose than support conducting military airstrikes against Syria in response to reports that the Syrian government used chemical weapons. I am one who opposes President Obama’s military strike on Syria. In my mind, wars always cause negative effects on people and nations. In wars, a country must spend a lot of money to send troops, supplies, and artillery (tanks, rockets, missiles). This