With the validity of President Obama’s impetus for military intervention in Syria now called into question, the crisis surrounding Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons on his own citizens has gotten a lot hairier. “I think [an attack] would be uncalled for without actual evidence,” sophomore Milo Wittenberg said.

“I don’t think we should be attacking unless we have evidence,” senior Charlie Rosenblum agreed. But even if there was clear evidence, Rosenblum added, “I still don’t think we should attack unilaterally. I think we should take it up with the [United Nations].”

“I think any military intervention without the support of another country is a really bad idea,” junior Mansuda Arora said. “But on the other hand, I know the UN isn’t going to support anything because Russia won’t let that pass.”

“Generally speaking, I agree with the stance Russia is taking on this,” senior Bilal Askari said. “They’re not going to advocate an attack until they have definitive proof that the chemical attack was carried out by the Syrian regime.” Askari continued: “Otherwise, Obama yelling aggressive things might come back to bite us.”