As Congress continues to analyze the data and debate the implications of a military strike against the Syrian regime, "Piers Morgan Live" invited a live studio audience, almost half of which were Syrian-American, to share their perspectives.
A notable discussion about Assad's regime developed between one such audience member and panel guest Nick Kristof of "The New York Times."
"We want to show America and the world the other side of the story that is not being covered," Tom Sarcon, a Syrian-American told guest host Cuomo.
"We are happy with our regime. We've been very happy with it."
The New York Times' Kristof rebutted Sarcon's statement:
"If President [Bashar al-]Assad thought the majority of people would support him, he would have an election," Kristof notes.
"There is no doubt that there are significant communities within Syria that support the president. A great portion of the Christian community supports President Assad. There's also no doubt that the majority of the country is Sunni and is very unhappy with Assad. And he would lose an election."
Standing by his statement, Sarcom pushed back against Kristof's explanation:
"I think it's our right to decide our future and our regime," he emphasized. "It's no one's business to decide."
From the U.S. administration's perspective, Pentagon spokesman George Little explained the case for a strike.
"Many countries around the world have come out and rejected what the Syrian regime has done and condemned the regime for their actions. This is about standing up for that norm and we believe that it's rooted in the legitimacy of what the international community accepts as responsible behavior. And we expect the Syrian regime to stop their use of chemical weapons and we should send a clear message that what they did last month was absolutely intolerable."
SEE FULL INTERVIEW:
CNN's Newt Gingrich explained why he's against the plan of using U.S. military actions in Syria:
SEE FULL INTERVIEW:
FOR MORE VIDEO FROM THE SPECIAL, VISIT: "PIERS MORGAN LIVE"