Sarin in Syria

This past Thursday, there has been evidence that sarin gas has been used by the President of Syria,  Bashar al-Assad, against the rebels who want to overthrow him.  But first off, what is sarin gas?  Sarin is a man-made chemical warfare agent which is classified as a nerve agent.  These are the most toxic and fast acting of the known chemical warfare agents.  It's a clear, colorless, and tasteless liquid that has no odor, in its pure form, and can evaporate into a gas (not cool!)  In the past, it has been used during Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s and in two terrorist attacks in Japan in 1994 and 1995. People can be exposed to sarin through skin or eye contact, by contaminated food or drink, through the air, and even through clothing if that other person has been in contact with it.  What is does is prevent the body's "off-switch" from functioning properly and it makes glands and muscles be constantly stimulated.  Large exposure to the gas can cause paralysis and respiratory failure.

Now that we know more about sarin, let's get back to the topic of it being used in Syria.  We've been discussing a lot about the war going on in Syria, and now with this chemical gas being used, Obama needs to make a decision on whether the United States will be involved. This video from ABC News gives a little explanation about what's happening overseas.

US News | Entertainment News | ABC News Videos

CNN reports that the Obama administration is working to gather more information on the reports of the sarin gas use, and now the UN is doing further investigation.  So how is the U.S. involved with what's happening in Syria anyways? We first got involved by offering food and medicine to the country.  Obama has also signed off on non-lethal aid to the country and those supplies include body armor, night-vision goggles, and other military equipment.  Just last week there were 200 U.S. troops sent to Jordan.  NATO has also stated that there will be no military intervention is the U.S. decides to get involved.  There are a number of different options that the military has for the Syria situation. These included targeting the Syrian aircrafts, airstrikes, and ground troops.
But what do politicians say about getting involved?  Senator John McCain of Arizona is really pushing at finding a strategy to secure all of Syria's chemical weapons if their government were to fall.  Though he is quick to secure the weapons, he states that the U.S. still needs to take caution if they plan on sending troops to the country of conflict, because that could lead to the Syrians resentment of the "aid." This video is a small clip of McCain's interview and it also leads to other videos with his discussion.

     Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

My thoughts on U.S. involvement? I agree with the no-fly zone that have been brought up.  It stops troops from being on the ground and ensures that Syria won't use any type of air defenses on the rebels.  It also prevents the Syrian nation from being upset with the United States for getting too involved.  I also agree with McCain saying that if the government is overturned the U.S. should go in and secure the chemical weapons that way no one else is using them. However, President Obama did state that if chemical weapons were used it would be a "red line for us" to take action and move in.  Ultimately, the decision is up to our government leaders, but a decision needs to be made quickly to prevent any other chemical, or even biological, weapons from being used.


Posted by: Kara Rivas