Is Syria next?

[bluedawg12]

**** was just on TV saying that the newly released inquiry by U.N. investigator Detlev Mehlis into the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri is deeply disturbing.

The neoconnivers have been salivating over this piece of real estate for a while.

Here is a newer release from the neoconnniver international: The Weakly Standard
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/215dokxq.asp

Next Year in Damascus
Syrian democracy is thriving--in exile.
by Jeffrey Gedmin
10/24/2005, Volume 011, Issue 06

............

Will this wag the dog ploy appeal to shrub?

A welcome distraction to domestic disaster and a chance for military redemption and turkey dinner photo-ops, this Thanksgiving in Damascus?

Please tell me this can't happen- de ja vu all over again.

Reliable freedom loving exiles wanting to reclaim their homeland?

Can anyone say Ahmed Chalabi?

Could the US even mount an invasion with current force strength?

[TallahasseeGrannie]

1. They wouldn't freaking DARE

I believe that.

[Rick Myers]

2. If an attack on Syria was even discussed

Half the REAL military men and women in the Pentgon would resign!

[MarsThe Cat]

3. It's certainly starting to look that way.

i guess it all depends on how bad the kkkarl rove thing will get.

[ewagner]

4. ** is keeping it in his hip pocket

That's an old political bromide for keeping something handy in case you need it....

If Cheney is indicted
If Dubya is named as an un-indicted co-conspirator
If Bolton is named
If Condi is named

then, he'll take the info out of his pocket and use it as an excuse to launch a "Shock and Awe" stike against Syria.

[bluedawg12]

5. The neoconnivers have been at this almost as long

as Iwreck.

They must be crazy to think Damascus...but then they were crazy to think Baghdad as it was executed-on the cheap and with insufficient troops.

[Ken065]

6. You betcha...

CNN breaking news: President Bush calls for United Nations to convene after "deeply disturbing" report implicates Syrian officials in assassination.

[LynnTheDem]

7. No.

[AValdoux]

8. Breaking on CNN

No story just the banner. Bush calls for UN to convene. Report implicates Syrian officials in assassination.


I can't believe they would even think about stretching this army even further. I guess this could be an Iraq exit strategy, "we've got another country to invade".


AValdoux

[DoYouEverWonder]

10. I hope the UN does convine

so they can deal with the US problem and BushCo's agressions. I think this could backfire on Bush big time.

[sarcasmo]

25. Syrian Invasion would almost have to mean a DRAFT.

They up the Draft age to 42 for a reason.

[bluedawg12]

36. I think the draft would be a real possibility if the war in Syria

spread.

Just had a nephew sign up for the selective service, I guess it's a must these days?

From the looks of it the French would join in on this war- so there would be another "coalition" dount the Brits would bite.

[meisje]

9. We'd have to nuke them as our conventional army is depleted.

[bluedawg12]

14. Shadow perznit Krystalcon bravely points out that our Air force

is not depleted.

All this from behind the safety of his key board.

[LittleClarkie]

11. I believe someone asked Condi that during her testimony this week

Is there a Syria group to match the WHIG group?

[bluedawg12]

16. It's the same guys it was never to end with I-wreck

hey had their sights set on Syria and Iran from the gitty up.

[bluedawg12]

19. What about the draft?

The money for war is a problem.

But, the selective service is alive and well.

I-wreck started with UN resolutions, also with a group of really reliable ex-pats :sarcasm:

If we are not going to get more involved then why make so much noise about Syria's internal problems and an assassination?

Unless, this tme they hope to foment an internal revolt against Bashir- you know like the one poppy almost put over with the Shi'ites before he abandoned them?

[bluedawg12]

12. A look at the real power behind the curtain shows

that the real shrub's brains are still there and working hard.

OK kids- let's read my Pet Pig and find a way to do just a little bombing with out occupation of big bad Syria.

Holy cheeze whiz- calling the UN was what got my pet goat.

I'm getting a bit worried about desperate times calling for desperate measures. Meaning his polls are down.


http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/986uesrd.asp

The War Presidency
From the September 5 / September 12, 2005 issue: The success of the Bush presidency depends on his success as commander in chief.
by William Kristol
09/05/2005, Volume 010, Issue 47


>Meanwhile, the estimable George Will proclaimed last week that U.S. hopes for democracy in Iraq were "delusional," and that we had to be wary of further "overreaching." In particular, he took aim at a suggestion made in these pages some seven months ago that we consider bombing Syrian military facilities and/or occupying Syrian border towns in order to prevent terrorists from using Syria as a sanctuary from which to enter Iraq in order to kill Americans and Iraqis. No. Will said, "U.S. forces already have quite enough bombing and occupying chores."

Really? Occupying--maybe. But bombing? Is our Air Force overextended right now? Are we so weak that we can't deter or punish Syria?<

[On the Road]

13. Per Someone in the DoD World,

Syria is next but "it will look different" from Iraq.

[tnlefty]

21. Please tell me this isn't true!

Please??? If different, how would it be different?

[On the Road]

28. I Think He/She Meant that

pressure would be brought to bear on Syria to fall in line short of an all-out invasion. It could include economic sanctions, dark ops, saber-rattling, IMF pressure -- the whole range of tricks that Washington typically uses on countries perceived as hostile.

Not my preferred course of action, but much better than a hot war.

[bluedawg12]

40. Dark ops- or covert ops- still war and still can spin out

of control.

I think the neohawks are looking at bombing with USAF, as well.

[Behind the Aegis]

15. I seriously doubt it.

First, the US is horribly over extended militarily. Second, we don't have the funds and as seeing Shrub won't cut those sill tax "breaks," we just don't have the cash. Third, the UN is preparing action against Syria, and, although, the US shows little respect for the UN, the rest of the world has taken note. Fourth, as crappy as Syria is and not well-liked, it still has strong ties to Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations.

[imouttahere]

17. Invasion? No...carpet bombing? probably...

neocons will bring the end of times, one way or the other

[bluedawg12]

23. The unintended consequences of bombing Syria?

How would Iran take it?

Would it drive them to nukes- if they don't have them yet, that is?

Would Iran retaliate? The Iranians have money and a large army.

[imouttahere]

37. It's like smacking a hornet's nest with a stick....

knowing full well what will occur...this will affect the whole world and if we aren't already on our way to being isolated as a pariah state, this will certainly escalate it.

[bluedawg12]

42. Every time we meddle in the ME we make it worst.

Iran after the Shah, now the mess-o-potamia, we can only make things worse by forcing things with out knowing the consequences.

[RaleighNCDUer]

18. Hey! We're pulling out of Iraq!

Via Damascus!

[bluedawg12]

22. Bellus interuptus? n/t

[MadisonProgressive]

20. Wouldn't he have to go back to congress for authority?

[Pithy Cherub]

24. Condi testified ealier this week and would NOT answer

that question! This is going to be a republican power grab - AGAIN!

[bluedawg12]

27. Talk about mission creep. Geesh.

But Condi said the international community will want an answer about the murder.

Does anyone know who besides the US, in the internatinal community, is asking for an answer?

[bluedawg12]

30. This time it's US and France going to the UN, the UK is out?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/syria/story/0,13031,1598038,00.html#article_continue

The Gaurdian

>Earlier this week, a US official and two UN diplomats said the US and France were preparing new security council resolutions critical of Syria over its alleged involvement in the Hariri assassination and the alleged supply of arms to militias in Lebanon. <


http://www.guardian.co.uk/syria/story/0,13031,1576596,00.html

Middle East tension rises as UN prepares to accuse Syria of Hariri assassination

>The report will almost certainly lead to a showdown between the UN security council and Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president. The security council is likely to demand that Mr Assad - whose hold on government is fragile - hands over Syrians accused of involvement.

Mr Assad is virtually isolated internationally, with little support even among his fellow Arab leaders, so action from the security council could be swift, unlike its approach to countries such as Iran...."I think the Americans and French basically feel this is a chance to get rid of the Syrian regime." <
<

[thinkingwoman]

26. Dammit!

I told my repuke friend that IRAN would be next! :grr:

[walldude]

29. According to this article we are already fighting in Syria

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05292/590727.stm

[bluedawg12]

32. Yep, Amb. Simpson says we are fighting there already!

With out war powers or congressional consent?
WTF???

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05292/590727.stm

Dan Simpson: Invade Syria? Insane
U.S. forces have started fighting Syrians at Iraq's border. Can anybody say 'Cambodia'?
Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

"The parallel with the Vietnam War, where a Nixon administration deeply involved in a losing war expanded the conflict -- fruitlessly in the event -- to neighboring Cambodia, is obvious

On the U.S. side, no declaration of war preceded the invasion of Syria, in spite of the requirements of the War Powers Act of 1973. There is no indication that the Congress was involved in the decision to go in. If members were briefed, none of them have chosen to share that important information with the American people. Presumably, the Bush administration's intention is simply to add any casualties of the Syrian conflict to those of the war in Iraq, which now stand at more than 1,970. The financial cost of expanding the war to Syria would also presumably be added to the cost of the Iraq war, now estimated at $201 billion."

[The_Casual_Observer]

31. They are probably already in there.

There were reports of fighting between Syrian and US troops earlier in the week. I have no doubt that bush will invade Syria before this whole nightmare is over.

[bluedawg12]

34. I had heard of border skirmishes but not a real attack.

Is this UN report just a convenient way to retro-actively justify an attack another ME country- if that is truly what has already happened?

[spuddonna]

33. We've already started ops in Syria...

see this link...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5110277&mesg_id=5110277

And here's a NYTimes article that talks about the 'incursions'...
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/15/politics/15syria.html?hp&ex=1129348800&en=636231786980e5e8&ei=5094&partner=homepage
excerpt:
"The firefight, between Army Rangers and Syrian troops along the border with Iraq, was the most serious of the conflicts with President Bashar al-Assad's forces, according to American and Syrian officials.

snip

One of Mr. Bush's most senior aides, who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject, said that so far American military forces in Iraq had moved right up to the border to cut off the entry of insurgents, but he insisted that they had refrained from going over it.

But other officials, who say they got their information in the field or by talking to Special Operations commanders, say that as American efforts to cut off the flow of fighters have intensified, the operations have spilled over the border - sometimes by accident, sometimes by design.

Some current and former officials add that the United States military is considering plans to conduct special operations inside Syria, using small covert teams for cross-border intelligence gathering."

[bluedawg12]

35. If we must have military ops in Syria because of trans-shipment

of insurgents then shouldn't this be discussed publicly, and in Congress, and shouldn't there be some sort of Congressional vote on this?

If the cause is just and legal and properp shouldn't it be public knowledge?

Like them or not- Syria is a soveriegn country and we, on the other hand, are a representative democracy where- in the people should have some voice when we go to war with yet another nation besides I-wreck.

While we get distracted by domestic issues like Tommy DeRoach the war expands.

[spuddonna]

41. Yes, Congress should be screaming about this!

... But Rummy is still using the GOP war playbook from back in the 60's, so until a new scandal about this breaks, or we out and out declare war on Syria, the GOP leadership won't talk about this...

I'm not holding my breath about the MSM either... :(

[paparush]

38. Maybe this time Congress..

will grow some balls and vote NOT to authorize the use of force. Maybe this time the Dem '08 candidate can be on the record as having NOT supported Bush** and his war of lies.

[bluedawg12]

39. It may be too late- if we are already fighting there.

It seems our governement is on auto pilot while unelected pundits press foreign policy.

>Shouldn't it be the case that if Assad can't police his border, we won't respect it either, since we have to defend ourselves and our Iraqi friends <


I am concerned that we are being lulled into thinking that ****'s low poll numbers and his other problems have somehow stopped the neoconniver agenda. Don't think it has. They are still calling the shots if, as has been pointed out, we are actually in ground combat in Syria.

Te RW hawks have been pushing for this all along and goading us into action.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/736lqpii.asp
Springtime for Dictators?

From the June 27, 2005 issue: America shouldn't reward gross acts of dictatorial oppression or give free passes for the aiders and abettors of tyrants.
by William Kristol

Springtime for Dictators?

>As are the terror facilitators: ... Abu Ibrahim, a Syrian who, with the tacit approbation of his government, has been for months shuttling Saudi money, and Saudi and other jihadists, into Iraq to kill Americans and Iraqis. Yet it seems Syria remains a safe haven for terror sponsors. The Defense Department apparently refused a CIA request to launch an attack on a Syrian terror-sponsoring target within the last two weeks. Shouldn't it be the case that if Assad can't police his border, we won't respect it either, since we have to defend ourselves and our Iraqi friends against jihadists infiltrating Iraq from his territory?

Surely our inaction with respect to Syria is a poor precedent if we're fighting a war on terror.... How much pressure have we put on either government? Wasn't it a big mistake of the 1980s and the 1990s not to make the friends and enablers of terror pay a real price for their activities?<