Should the US or other nations help the Syrian Rebels?

I am the decision maker of my country, i stay out of it unless it affects me. But this is much bigger than that. America wants to take Syria by installing a pupped regime like they did in so many other countries, while Russia wants to keep Syria. So its actually still America VS Russia. There are no rebels in Syria, maybe few. It's mostly US funded mercenaries. If America stayed out of the situation. There would not be a situation at all to begin with.

Its great for every nation to help each other. But the usa has many that need help, before the usa helps others. Sorry just my opinion on the matter.

no, people like that in the past have turned on us. think of bin laden when when the U.S. aided him against the soviets. he turned on us. we can't trust them. why is it necessary for america to get involved anyway? why can't we just mind our own business?

No, we don't even know who are these group of rebels fighting inside Syria, there is no unifying voice and goal coming from those rebels groups fighting against Assad dictatorship, some of them are belong to Al-Queda organization and other Islamic terrorist groups, while others may have legitimate concerns on toppling a dictatorship in establishing a free society and a political system within Syria. Until UN and US have a handle on this civil war within Syria, they should never get involve into an in fighting of some armed militants that may turn out worse than Assad regime after the unrest. There is more works need to be done by UN; US and international community before the world should get involve right now.

My country, Israel, has a common border with Syria. Some of the fights there even threat to reach our area. Well, I don't know who all the rebels are and what they all want. I wish the killing would stop and that we can live in peace with them side by side. Syria is not a friendly country with Israel and no one is allowed to get there. The fight there has been going for more than a year and I think it is even 2 years now. I guess no one can tell what will happen when one of the sides defeat the other. Many of the rebels are Sunists, and they are less hostile. Nevertheless, a chemical weapon artillery may fall into the rebels hands and who knows what they will do with that. I guess they want to live life of peace and dignity like everyone else.

To be honest I don't know, also it depends on the kind of country and kind of rebels. I am getting sick and tired of all countries who Always seem to think they have to interfere in other countries their business (or wars). Pesonally I don't see the reason for it (ít's fine with me if we put a wall around them and they kill eachother if they love to keep fighting, in so many cases people fight already for years and even don't know the reason why they do so at all). I am also getting sick and tired of all those people who claim to fight for freedom, their rights but in reality don't know what it means at all plus are forcing their opinion upwards to someone else. People who are not able to respect others, will end up with the same kind of dictator they once hated and want to get rid of. Why? Because they are not raised with the knowledge and experiences of what a democracy is for real. What it means to have freedom of speach. On the other hand if it comes to Mali (for example) I am happy the French army went over there. But still I can't help thinking how come we live in 2013 and so many countries still live (including their opinions) in the middle ages. Might be there would be way less wars we we let everybody fight his own one and would not interfere at all. I am afraid the answer on your questions are just not that simple.

I've thought about this since the whole thing started. I lean towards no. The reason being that there is no benefit for us. Yes, Assad is a dictator. Yes, he's more than happy to use the military to murder his own people. So getting him out should be a good thing right? It should make the country better right? Wrong. We tried that in Egypt. We supported their revolution and now, instead of having a brutal dictator who is friendly towards the US, they are ruled by a dictator who hates the US. He'll still take our money and our planes, but he's NOT our ally. Our decision to oust Gaddafi didn't go so well either as evidenced by the Benghazi attack. There's a reason these brutal dictators rule these countries. That's the kind of ruler these people CHOOSE. The only difference is who they want their dictator to be brutal towards.

the u.s. need to stopped getting involved in other people's affairs. we are not the police of the world. we need to tend to our countries national debt.

Simple answer - NO. We need to keep our nose out. Only Assad can bring stability to that country at the moment. The US provided weapons and money to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan to assist their fight against the Russians.... Those weapons are now being used against allied troops. The French supplied weapons to the Libyian revolutionaries in their fight against Gaddafi... Those weapons are being used by warring factions in Libya now. Those weapons have now also found their way to Algeria and Mali The UK and France want to lift an embargo, this could lead to weapons being provided to the rebel fighters.... WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG? There is also the assumption that the rebels are fighting under the same agenda or are united - That isn't the case. Assad by some strange way is preventing the country from descending into a countrywide bloodbath and land grab.... keep out of it