Let us go back to the fall of Mummanar Gaddafi, dictator in Libya who was assassinated by the American government in October 2011. When the U.S. started intervening in Libya without seeing results for over a year, the citizens sighed and lamented about the repeated history. When the totalitarian government fell, the next pressing questions were, "Does the U.S. government have the obligation to become the savior and get rid of the ‘Axis of Evil’? and what is the exact line of distinguishing countries to interfere and not to interfere?"

After over two years of neglecting the Syria state of emergency, the U.S. government announced in early September 2013 that it would intervene in the situation despite the doubtful majority of the voters rejecting the idea. Since that startling announcement, countless confused and hostile responses from the international community poured. U.S. now faces Russia’s disgruntle response who accused it as "making excuses to start another war to exert hegemony." Additionally, Egypt also heavily criticized the U.S. for not considering the situation in Egypt and only interfering with the situation now.

One of the reasons behind U.S. intervention comes from the seriousness of the situation. As both Bush Administrations said before entering war in Iraq and Afghanistan, war is for humanitarian reasons. Such belief originates from the U.S. ideology that it should act as a superhero for the world by spreading democracy, a belief that now is considered old fashioned.

Should the U.S. government really intervene? The humble suggestion is no. Appalling pictures of children dying from chemical weapons are dreadful and the situation in Syria does not seem to end in the near future. Frankly speaking, how would the military intervention alleviate the situation? We have learned the hard way from the long tiresome Iraq war that using guns to prevent guns do not work.

Not only that, it is time for the U.S. to lead the world into a less militarily dependent society by, first of all, not using it for nonimminent reasons . Moreover, the U.S. is not in the situation to display military hegemony when its economy is seriously affecting the nation and its people. The sudden shut down shows the seriousness of the possibility of America falling from power. Obama was not able to attend Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and Association of South East Asian Nation (ASEAN) meetings that gave away the opportunity to show its economic influence to Xi Jinping, the leader of China and to other influential

countries.

The United Nation (UN) also did not confirm the intervention of Syria. If Obama does initiate action in Syria, it would be an uprise towards the international society. The order of our society is important but so is respect. If the intervention is for the well-being of the Syrian people, collaboration of multiple nations through a consensus would be much affective than a single nation’s action against other’s will.

In conclusion, what the Obama Administration is trying to pursue in Syria as a country with humanitarian interest is understandable but it’s action is not permissible. The current situation shows us that history should not be repeated and U.S. should change its policy in its position as the former hegemony and advance its national situation before interfering in others.