Well, folks, the violent chaos in Syria continues. Most reading this have some idea of what's going on, though about one in five American adults have not heard of, not seen footage of or even know of the existence of Syria. On the other hand, about the same number of American adults do have a pretty decent idea of what's going on.
Syria has a population of about 23 million people, with a density of circa 307 people per square mile/118 per square kilometer. By comparison, Texas has about 26 million people and a density of 98 people per square mile/38 per square kilometer. Like people in Texas, people exist in Syria, too.
As a result of the Syrian Civil War (2011-present), refugees flee, casualties mount. What next?
According to a Pew Research Center for the People & the Press report released just a few days ago, "Modest Support for Military Force if Syria Used Chemical Weapons/Americans Express Little Interest in Syrian Conflict."
"Since the Syrian conflict began in 2011, it has never drawn much attention from the U.S. public. At most, only about one-in-five have tracked developments in Syria very closely."
Nonetheless, according to the same Pew survey: "By 56% to 24%, Republicans favor the use of military force against Syria if the charges that it used chemical weapons are proven. There is less support among Democrats (46% favor vs. 34% oppose) and independents (41% favor vs. 36% oppose)."
Link to full overview: http://www.people-press.org/2013/04/29/modest-support-for-military-force-if-syria-used-chemical-weapons/
Another very recent survey concluded thusly: "Most Americans are not following the conflict in Syria very closely. In the HuffPost/YouGov poll, only 34 percent of respondents said they had heard a lot about the conflict. Another 48 percent said they had heard a little, and 18 percent said they'd heard nothing at all."
Link to full article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/01/syria-poll_n_3194927.html
Should outside powers send arms shipments to the Syrian rebels?
Should outside powers increase humanitarian aid?
Should the US intervene as it did in Libya, with mostly air and naval support as part of a multi-national effort?
Should a US-led "coalition" invade and occupy Syria as was done in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Should the "Great Powers" "facilitate" a "regime change?"
One thing we can all be sure of: something more is gonna happen regarding Syria in 2013 and it ain't gonna be pretty.
Today's Rune: The Self.
1 comment:
Sad to hear of the daily tragedies here. So many stories that will never be told, and should be.
Post a Comment