Looking for peace better than seeking war

The US President Barak Obama should know well that history's judgment will be that the president who seeks to prevent war and destruction and make peace is stronger than the president who seeks war and destruction; because throughout history we have seen that the first victims of all the wars that happened in the past were children, women and innocent people. He should not forget that he was the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. The Nobel Laureates are presumably advocates of peace not wars and reckless military adventures.

What are the real aims of Obama’s military adventure? It is to strike the capabilities of the Syrian Arab army in favour of al-Qaeda and its affiliates in Syria, like Jabhat al-Nusra, the so-called Ahrar al-Sham brigade and the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham despite the fact that these groups were classified by the US as terrorist organizations, and here lies one main aspect of the US double standard policy in dealing with the crisis in Syria. How can Obama support those who blew up the World Trade Center in New York on September 11th 2011? Who is the most beneficiary of this military adventure? The use of force against sovereign states would increase the terrorists' activities in Syria and the rest of the region's countries and it will increase the number of refugees and displaced citizens.  The US didn't learn from what happened in Afghanistan when it supported Al Qaeda in the 1980s to fight the former Soviet Union and ended up fighting it there now. It seems that the US wants to make Syria a base for Al Qaeda to spread violence and extremism in all the countries of the region.  Israel is the most beneficiary, because extremism serves Zionism and enables Israel to invade the Arab region politically and economically through implementing the notorious new Middle East project which aims to perpetuate the Israeli occupation of the Arab territories and plunder the Arab resources, especially oil and gas.  Instead of thinking of the warmongering campaign and launching a thoughtless military adventure whose adverse consequences would not be limited, Obama and his ilk have to focus efforts on finding a peaceful solution through convening the intended international conference in Geneva and calling on the so-called opposition to take part in the conference without any pre-conditions. Obama and the warmongers in his administration should know well that the Syrian government has agreed on participating in Geneva 2 conference without any pre-conditions, whereas no unified attitude was released by the so-called opposition regarding the conference. The only pre-occupation for this opposition is to seek for more weapons, tools of destruction and call for foreign military intervention in their own country.

The US and European peoples had firmly stood against the aggression; the British House of Commons and the French Senate were a good example to that.

New polls in the United States of America revealed that the majority of the Americans are opposing any military act against Syria. The polls conducted by the New York Times and CBS News showed that 80% of the Americans have stressed that Obama didn't give clear justifications for the real goals of the US administration in Syria while 72% of the American people rejected the role of the US and its intervention in other countries to change their regimes with the aim of achieving political and economic interests.

The New York Times said that the new poll reveals a great change in the American public opinion on the US role in the world and the fatigue it has suffered due to the previous US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The American people seem to call on Obama: Stop your intervention in other countries and pay more attention to your people’s internal affairs and social welfare.