McCain Wants More War in Syria

To call Senator John McCain a “war hawk” is kind of like saying President Obama is liberal… it’s an understatement of ridiculous proportions. There has not been a military engagement since he’s taken office as a Congressman in 1982 that McCain has been against. The current conflict in Syria is no different.

Senator McCain was on CNN recently calling for the transfer of heavy weapons to the Syrian opposition. This comes only days after the President’s announcement that we would be getting personally involved in the conflict by supplying “light” guns and ammunition to the rebels fighting the government of Bashar Assad.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Eagle Rising updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The President’s announcement came on the heels of our government’s statement that Syria had crossed a “red line” and used chemical weapons to kill between 100 and 150 of their own citizens. Chemical weapons are of course monstrous, but some 93,000 Syrians have been killed by government forces since the Civil War started. It leaves one to wonder: do the Syrian people care about how they are murdered or just that they are murdered? This question of semantics isn’t really what I care about here, but my question has more to do with why.

Why is Syria different than the Sudan? What makes this situation so important that we need to become involved? Horrible things happen all over the world every day–wars, famine, pestilence, disease. We do not personally involve ourselves in every one because we don’t have the resources to help everyone. So why should the Syrian rebels gain precedence over Christians in South Sudan who have no way to protect themselves?

The rebels in Syria are extremist Sunni militia, some of whom are loyal to Al-Qaeda. In fact, some of the rebel military units are Al-Qaeda! While Bashar Assad is an evil monster, I would contend that both sides of this fight are quite evil. There are better battles to involve ourselves in.

John-MccainWe also don’t have the resources to win in Syria. McCain is wrong about entering this fight, but he is right about the fact that the support we plan to give will be meaningless in this fight. Hezbollah entered the fray weeks ago and as soon as our government announced its involvement we learned that Iran would begin providing support for the Syrian government as well. Lebanon and Syria are providing man power, heavy weapons, and financial support. They are in this fight to win because they understand the importance of propping up the Shia friendly Assad regime in the midst of many nations that are predominantly Sunni.

By involving ourselves, all we are doing is once again alienating about 200 million world Shia. In a fight between two bad guys who both hate us, wouldn’t it be better to not get involved at all? Perhaps to simply say we stand ready to offer humanitarian aid if requested? There is a better answer for the United States in Syria, and that is to do nothing.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

About the author


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Send this to a friend