<p>Dear Representative Yarmuth:</p><p>The conflict in Syria is unbelievably horrific, and while there are not many people in the United States who support the use of chemical weapons, the United States should not take military action to the conflict in Syria. It is not the United States’ responsibility to be the world’s policemen, and to end a civil war. </p><p>It is not our place to take action on Syria’s chemical weapon use. America is too war-weary to start a war. We have been in war for the past seven decades. Even if we did take action, who would we help? On one hand you can help the rebels who are mostly jihadists, or you can help Assad, the man who used chemical weapons on his own people. Even if we did would the war really stop? These people have been at war with each other since they were established as a country. There is too much diversity in religion and culture for one country or government. </p><p>President Obama has said that America is not the world’s police, but then why is it that whenever a little uprising begins to stir America is the country that intervenes? For what, nothing America spent $3 trillion dollars in war and has not seen a cent paid back for our help. America cannot be everyone’s savior, we as a country could not stay afloat. </p><p>Seeing what has been the result of America’s help, what is your vote going to be? Help the Assad regime or help the rebels, the fate of our country is in your hands don’t let our country fall as a young one.</p><p>Sincerely</p><p>Jeremy Gibson</p>