September 2nd, 2013
04:06 AM ET

The debate on Syria: To bomb or not to bomb?

U.N. evidence that could show whether chemical weapons were used in Syria will head to a lab Monday, but the answer may just be a formality.

The American president has already said there's no doubt Syria's government killed hundreds of civilians in a chemical weapon attack. Independent tests have revealed "signatures of sarin gas" in blood and hair samples from Syria, Secretary of State John Kerry said.

President Barack Obama wants Congress to sign off on limited strikes on Syrian targets - but some lawmakers bristle at the idea of getting ensnared in another overseas conflict.

Post by:
Filed under: Barack Obama • Politics • Syria • U.S. • United Nations • World
soundoff (40 Responses)
  1. Joey Isotta-Fraschini ©™

    If President Obama decides to strike Syria without the approval of Congress, I shall support him.
    This administration has led in matters that intimidated former presidents into paralysis. President Obama is strong.

    September 2, 2013 at 7:46 am | Report abuse |
    • Juan Jiminez

      I Strongly disagree. What will lobbing a few bombs into Syria solve? Not a thing. The an imals will continue to ki ll each other long after our ships set sail

      September 2, 2013 at 12:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • Zandie

      If Mr. Obama orders a strike in Syria, he may be breaking international law, and he knows it.

      September 2, 2013 at 12:20 pm | Report abuse |
  2. William Shakesphere

    To bomb or not to bomb. That is the question.

    September 2, 2013 at 9:10 am | Report abuse |
  3. Greek American

    As much as I hate to say it, I believe that by next week at this time the bombing will begin. I don't support another war but the use of chemical weapons by Syria has trumped my opinion. It's ridiculous to me how other countries just sit around and let this happen and beg the US to once again intervene, only to complain and mock us after we do decide to take some type of action. This is a very messed up situation.

    September 2, 2013 at 9:46 am | Report abuse |
  4. Drewe

    I'd like to know where the evidence is that the government is the one who used the gas. Why would Assad do that when his bombs and weaponry did just as efficient job? Is it so ou of the realm of possibility that on of the rebel sects (al quaeda) did it to blame the government and foster US sympathy?

    September 2, 2013 at 11:10 am | Report abuse |
  5. Drewe

    Why shouldn't a citizen of the US live in the US? What a silly statement.

    September 2, 2013 at 11:12 am | Report abuse |
  6. Hamsta

    Get him troll!!! I don't need to be here, my troll has my back, so I have been on vacation. Looks like I can take another day! Keep those PC liberal, jew hating, socialist, prog, brown shirt wearing, Nazi wannabes in line troll!!!!

    September 2, 2013 at 12:07 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Hamsta

    If you live in a country that considers the Muslim Brotherhood moderate muslims while the NSA and DHS spies on it's own citizens, you might be in OBAMA'S AMERICA!
    If you live in a country that makes people wait for decades in their own country while they file for a visa but to illegally enter the border is a fast track to citizenship, you might be in OBAMA'S AMERICA.
    If you live in a country that fixes the finest medical care in the world with taxes, fines, rationing, inflation and death panels, you might be in OBAMA'S AMERICA.
    If you live in a country that makes a veteran of war wait 6 months to a year to see a doctor if he/she is straight but puts gay soldiers to the front of the line to recieve government funded hormone therapy and s?x change operations, you might be in OBAMA'S AMERICA


    September 2, 2013 at 12:26 pm | Report abuse |
  8. chrissy

    Agreed @ Juan. Won't change a damn thing except kill more civilians.

    September 2, 2013 at 12:27 pm | Report abuse |
  9. saywhat

    Facing a tough sell on evidence and strike on Syria to skeptical Congress the admn has come up with "a strike would protect Israel" strategy. Knowing historically that if its all about Israel a landslide vote can be expected.

    September 2, 2013 at 12:59 pm | Report abuse |
  10. saywhat


    September 2, 2013 at 1:00 pm | Report abuse |
  11. saywhat

    facing a tough sell to a skeptical Congress both on evidence and authorizing war, the admn has come up with "it would protect Israel" strategy.
    Knowing historically that this could win a landslide vote.

    September 2, 2013 at 1:02 pm | Report abuse |
  12. saywhat

    A limited strike to make a political point would indeed achieve zilch. In fact any military involvement would favor Alqaeda.

    September 2, 2013 at 1:05 pm | Report abuse |
  13. saywhat

    To win a skeptical Congress to their side the admn is now getting the "it would protect Israel" word out. Knowing historically that this might get a landslide vote.

    September 2, 2013 at 1:07 pm | Report abuse |
  14. saywhat

    The "Independent" reports today that the Bristish govt authorised a company to export two chemical agents that are used in producing Sarin to Syria a year ago. The govt is now facing a back lash in Parliament and the public.

    September 2, 2013 at 1:10 pm | Report abuse |
  15. chrissy

    Now is the time to call your state representatives and make your voice be heard!

    September 2, 2013 at 1:15 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3