Home > Notable Peace News > Obama’s flawed case for a Syria strike | The Great Debate

Obama’s flawed case for a Syria strike | The Great Debate

We should not bomb Syria without a vital national security interest and a precise foreign policy objective.

Right now, the Obama administration has not established either.

Under the United States’ legal and historical precedents, a president faces the highest burden for justifying military attacks that are essentially optional: actions not required for self-defense and which are not in response to an attack on the United States — or imminent threat of such attack. Intervening in the Syrian civil war fits that difficult category.

For more on this story, visit: Obama’s flawed case for a Syria strike | The Great Debate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

What is 12 + 4 ?
Please leave these two fields as-is:
IMPORTANT! To be able to proceed, you need to solve the following simple math (so we know that you are a human) :-)
I footnotes