Catastrophe in Syria: World Powers push for peace.

The agenda of the United Nations consist of coercing feuding forces into peace talks between syria's president Bashar Assad, and opposing entities. 30,000 casualties have been reported during the conflict in Syria. The 30,000 reported incidents dont do justice, there are countless more deaths that have occured that have not been accounted for, both of innocent people and opposing forces. The goal of the U.N. is to bring together Syria's (Bashar Assad's) Regime, and rebels. Consisting of nine representatives from both Assad's regime, allies of syria (a few are the U.S., European Union, and the Arab league) and Anti-assad group's spokesmen. The movement is backed by mainly western powers. Russia and China have vetoed three "western-backed" resolutions, causing a setback for inhabitants of Syria and the rest of the world who is watching. Millions of dollars are being provided for rival groups in syria to promote cooperation.

An excerpt from the article : "Clinton pledged $15 million in new non-lethal equipment -- mainly communications equipment -- and $30 in million humanitarian assistance to Syria's opposition. In total, the U.S. has offered $130 million in humanitarian supplies and about $40 million in equipment such as including satellite-linked computers, telephones and cameras. Britain and France have also offered millions of dollars worth of aid supplies and equipment."

The question I ask is where do we the United States government get the money to be handing out to other nations when we as a country have trillions of dollars worth of debt. Who are we indebting ourselves to, where is the money coming from? How can our country afford to provide such currency? Are there not any cost efficient resolutions besides giving millions of dollars away to people whom may use it for what it was provided for, or defect and use it where they see fit? Giving money away like this has no assurance that the funds will be used as intended, in fact, more harm maybe done. We maybe giving rival groups the means to afford more arms and military goods to further their feud and make the conflict much more catastrophic. There are many other ways we, the United States and the rest of the United Nations could help the situation. We need to get involved and prevent more deaths from occuring, we cant always be peacemakers and get everyone to get along, that takes time. But in the meantime, we sure can keep the peace by bringing bigger guns to the party with no intentions of using them to cause harm. The power of intimidation is underestimated, if there is an overwhelming force within the area the smart wouldnt dare to oppose a superior militaristic presence. Perhaps retain the peacekeepers in Syria until the peace talks have ended and a resolution has been reached, or dont intervene and let the civil war spread throughout other middle east nations. Handing money over is the easy way out, and there is no guarentee it will achieve anything other than putting us into more debt.

-Bryan Trepanier

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2012/09/29/un-syria-assad-opposition/1602315/