President Obama took questions from the press Tuesday on the 100th day of his second term in office. (AP)
May 01, 2013
Despite a recent clamor within Washington policy circles and troublesome commentary in the US media regarding further military intervention in Syria's ongoing civil war, a new survey of US opinion shows little appetite for another war of choice in a region far from home.
The poll, conducted by CBS News and the New York Times, shows 62 percent of Americans believe "the U.S. does not have a responsibility to intervene in Syria."
As CBS News reports:
Sixty-two percent of Americans continue to say the United States does not have a responsibility to intervene in the fighting in Syria, while 24 percent of Americans think the United States does have a responsibility to do something about the fighting between government forces and anti-government groups there - a four point increase since last month.
Most Democrats, Republicans, and independents agree that the U.S. does not have a responsibility to get involved in the conflict in Syria.
Progressive foreign policy analysts, for their part, have been consistent in their warnings against such involvement.
Phyllis Bennis, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, says that a growing push for war in Syria should remind US citizens of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, which was was largely fueled by an uncritical press and a barrage of false information by some of the same power brokers now pushing for intervention in Syria.
"Now, we don't know that there is any fake information going on [in Syria]," Bennis said in an interview with Al-Jazeera. "But we certainly know that there is no valid information yet. So I think it is way premature to be talking about whether this should result in a 'game changing' scenario--whether it be boots on the ground, or helping the rebels with more weapons."
And Seumas Milne, foreign affairs columnnist at the Guardian, has described how "intervention by the western powers" could "increase the death toll," warning the possibility of "blowback" in Syria is extremely high and could push the region into "a still more devastating conflict."
Simply adding more arms to the region, Bennis argues, will make things worse, not better.
"We need to move towards demilitarizing, deescalating the number of weapons of all kinds that are flowing into the region, not sending in more weapons and escalating the civil war," she said. "Killing more Syrians on any side with conventional weapons in a so-called search for alleged chemical weapons that may or may not even exist...this is just making everything worse."
Watch the full Bennis interview below:
_______________________
Why Your Ongoing Support Is Essential
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Jacob Chamberlain
Jacob Chamberlain is a former staff writer for Common Dreams. His website is www.jacobpchamberlain.com.
Despite a recent clamor within Washington policy circles and troublesome commentary in the US media regarding further military intervention in Syria's ongoing civil war, a new survey of US opinion shows little appetite for another war of choice in a region far from home.
The poll, conducted by CBS News and the New York Times, shows 62 percent of Americans believe "the U.S. does not have a responsibility to intervene in Syria."
As CBS News reports:
Sixty-two percent of Americans continue to say the United States does not have a responsibility to intervene in the fighting in Syria, while 24 percent of Americans think the United States does have a responsibility to do something about the fighting between government forces and anti-government groups there - a four point increase since last month.
Most Democrats, Republicans, and independents agree that the U.S. does not have a responsibility to get involved in the conflict in Syria.
Progressive foreign policy analysts, for their part, have been consistent in their warnings against such involvement.
Phyllis Bennis, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, says that a growing push for war in Syria should remind US citizens of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, which was was largely fueled by an uncritical press and a barrage of false information by some of the same power brokers now pushing for intervention in Syria.
"Now, we don't know that there is any fake information going on [in Syria]," Bennis said in an interview with Al-Jazeera. "But we certainly know that there is no valid information yet. So I think it is way premature to be talking about whether this should result in a 'game changing' scenario--whether it be boots on the ground, or helping the rebels with more weapons."
And Seumas Milne, foreign affairs columnnist at the Guardian, has described how "intervention by the western powers" could "increase the death toll," warning the possibility of "blowback" in Syria is extremely high and could push the region into "a still more devastating conflict."
Simply adding more arms to the region, Bennis argues, will make things worse, not better.
"We need to move towards demilitarizing, deescalating the number of weapons of all kinds that are flowing into the region, not sending in more weapons and escalating the civil war," she said. "Killing more Syrians on any side with conventional weapons in a so-called search for alleged chemical weapons that may or may not even exist...this is just making everything worse."
Watch the full Bennis interview below:
_______________________
Jacob Chamberlain
Jacob Chamberlain is a former staff writer for Common Dreams. His website is www.jacobpchamberlain.com.
Despite a recent clamor within Washington policy circles and troublesome commentary in the US media regarding further military intervention in Syria's ongoing civil war, a new survey of US opinion shows little appetite for another war of choice in a region far from home.
The poll, conducted by CBS News and the New York Times, shows 62 percent of Americans believe "the U.S. does not have a responsibility to intervene in Syria."
As CBS News reports:
Sixty-two percent of Americans continue to say the United States does not have a responsibility to intervene in the fighting in Syria, while 24 percent of Americans think the United States does have a responsibility to do something about the fighting between government forces and anti-government groups there - a four point increase since last month.
Most Democrats, Republicans, and independents agree that the U.S. does not have a responsibility to get involved in the conflict in Syria.
Progressive foreign policy analysts, for their part, have been consistent in their warnings against such involvement.
Phyllis Bennis, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, says that a growing push for war in Syria should remind US citizens of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, which was was largely fueled by an uncritical press and a barrage of false information by some of the same power brokers now pushing for intervention in Syria.
"Now, we don't know that there is any fake information going on [in Syria]," Bennis said in an interview with Al-Jazeera. "But we certainly know that there is no valid information yet. So I think it is way premature to be talking about whether this should result in a 'game changing' scenario--whether it be boots on the ground, or helping the rebels with more weapons."
And Seumas Milne, foreign affairs columnnist at the Guardian, has described how "intervention by the western powers" could "increase the death toll," warning the possibility of "blowback" in Syria is extremely high and could push the region into "a still more devastating conflict."
Simply adding more arms to the region, Bennis argues, will make things worse, not better.
"We need to move towards demilitarizing, deescalating the number of weapons of all kinds that are flowing into the region, not sending in more weapons and escalating the civil war," she said. "Killing more Syrians on any side with conventional weapons in a so-called search for alleged chemical weapons that may or may not even exist...this is just making everything worse."
Watch the full Bennis interview below:
_______________________
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.