On Sept. 5,  pews were packed with students, faculty and staff alike, ready to hear about the mounting concerns facing Syria in the  College’s Bucher Meetinghouse. On Aug. 31. President Obama addressed the Aug. 21 attack on Syria’s capital, Damascus, emphasizing the need for action.

“The world watched in horror as men, women and children were massacred […] in the worst chemical attack of the 21st century,” Obama said. “Well over 1,000 people were murdered. Several hundred of them were children — young girls and boys gassed to death by their own government.” He proposed to take limited action against Assad regime targets, but will not go forward without approval from Congress.

“I will seek authorization for the use of force from the American people’s representatives in Congress,” Obama said. “This would not be an open-ended intervention. We would not put boots on the ground. Instead, our action would be designed to be limited in duration and scope. But I’m confident we can hold the Assad regime accountable for their use of chemical weapons, deter this kind of behavior and degrade their capacity to carry it out.”

In his closing statements in the White House Rose Garden, Obama made a plea of action. “I’m ready to act in the face of this outrage. Today I’m asking Congress to send a message to the world that we are ready to move forward together as one nation.”

Dr. Oya Dursun-Ozkanca, associate professor of political science and director of the international studies minor, addressed the crowd in the lecture, “Syria – What to Do?.” Ozkanca provided an overview of the situation in Syria, leaving the second half open for comments and questions.

Dursun-Ozkanca described the start of the Syrian conflict as being sectarian, meaning the nation has been divided between different parties. Not only has Syria been divided since the initial conflict two years ago, but the global response had also been equally split.

“The international community’s response was similarly disappointing to both of these humanitarian tragedies,” Dursun-Ozkanca said. They have not done much “besides sitting on the sidelines and watching different parties killing each other and observing bloodshed. We have not learned our lesson in terms of protecting innocent lives and protecting civilians that are being killed” in the wake of this violence.

According to Geneva Convention guidelines, countries like Syria were prohibited from using chemical weapons. Dursun-Ozkanca stated that before the recent Damascus attack, it was unclear whether the Geneva Convention guideline had been violated before.

Dursun-Ozkanca stated three main reasons for intervention in Syria. One reason is America’s responsibility to protect the civilians in Syria. Another reason is to counter terrorism to prevent Syria from becoming a “failed state” where the government no longer has control of certain areas because terrorists have taken control. The third reason is to protect the countries surrounding Syria.

Though there are a few reasons to intervene with Syria, Dursun-Ozkanca said there are an equal number of reasons to abstain from the conflict. The targets to attack are very unclear and also lead to another issue. “If the goal is to bomb chemical weapon sites, it will be very dangerous,” Dursun-Ozkanca said.

With Obama’s claim of a limited operation, Dursun-Ozkanca braught up the question of what exactly is a limited operation and what does it entail? Would the U.S. be in Syria for longer than planned? If the Assad regime fell, would it benefit the U.S. in any way? Would Syria become a failed state? Due to the regime’s current power, Dursun-Ozkanca predicted that the U.S. would most likely not take down the Assad regime.