On "The Situation Room" today, we asked viewers the following questions, and here are some of our favorite responses that we didn't get to read on air:

Is sending an international peacekeeping force to the Middle East a good idea?

The solution to the problem is to let Israel, with help from their friends, destroy Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran. A peace keeping force will only delay what is inevitable.
Patrick, Scottsdale, Arizona

Sending international troops into the area won't help the situation. All that will happen is that those troops will be attacked by Hezbollah and Israel will still be threatened. The solution needs to come from within the Arab world, not from without.
Jason, Owings, Maryland

Yes, indeed, there needs to be an international peacekeeping force, but not primarily from the United States. The European Union and U.N. need to step up and take a strong, leading role... I fear the reputation America has cultivated in the region in recent years will have anything but a soothing effect on the crisis.
Tamara, Ponce Inlet, Florida

Sending an international peace keeping force means U.S. and British forces. We need to keep out of this one. It would only make matters worse.
Bill, Litchfield, Illinois

What is Iran's role in the growing conflict in the Middle East?

The United States shouldn't be worried about Iran. After all, our administration fingered Saddam Hussein as the true threat in the region and committed the bulk of our military assets to Iraq. So what if Saddam had no WMDs while Iran was developing nukes and supplying Hezbollah with missiles?
Justin, Mendham, New Jersey

Iran supplies weapons, just like the U.S. and Britain. Until the U.S. and Britain stop selling weapons, I don't think there is any reason to complain about others doing the same. What do you think the U.S. weapons are used for? Just humanitarian stuff?
Tim, Toronto

The Middle East is caught in the middle of a chess game, with Israel seeking to wipe out its opponent's pawns. The only way to win is to wipe out the king, which in this case is Iran; with Syria as the Queen.
Ron

Being part Iranian and seeing all the crimes that they have committed against their own people I can't believe their government when they say that they had no part in supplying Hezbollah. Iran is a country that needs to be dealt with and not in a light manner.
Ryan, Centennial, Colorado

How good an idea is democracy in radical Islamist countries?

The whole idea of democracy in radical Islamist countries is a horrible idea. If you have never heard of a lost cause, then this is it. We have to remember that in Islamic countries Islam is not only the religion, it's the law. This is like asking how good an idea is a radical Islamic government in the United States.
Eric, Deltona, Florida

I don't think it is a good idea to promote democracy at all costs to cultures that have chosen other paths for centuries. I think America would be much better-served if our leaders would focus on promoting capitalism instead. China serves as an interesting model of capitalism integrated into an ancient (and non-democratic) society.
Mark, Overland Park, Kansas

Democracy and radical Islamic government are two philosophies at opposite ends of the spectrum of beliefs. I do not believe that they can co-exist in a country for any extended period.
Rick, Metamora, Michigan

Democracy has clearly failed miserably within radical Islamic nations. We all need to realize that the world is quite beautifully filled with many different peoples and belief systems and what works in one place may not work in another.
Danny, Parsipanny, New Jersey