Is the US headed toward a confrontation with Syria?
The Bush administration has accused Syria of possessing chemical weapons and harboring fugitives -- charges similar to the White House's case for war with Iraq. Is the administration starting down the same path with Syria?
How serious do you think the situation is? And what do you think will be the ultimate resolution? Should the US go so far as to threaten military action if Syria does not comply with the Bush administation's demands?
why not??!! We've already completely pissed the world off so we might as well keep going!
Let's do it right while we have the forces in place. Talk tough while we have the troops to enforce our will. WMD's and war criminals cannot be allowed safe haven in Syria. I don't want a replay of this in another 10 years. We should have killed Saddam 10 years ago! Iran's nuclear program should be questioned while we're in the neighborhood too.
I would hope so. At the very least we should have a sustained bombing campaign to show them we mean business because obviously they still havn't gottent the message. Do not screw with Uncle Sam, not now not ever again. You have suicide bombers and we have nuclear bombs. Game, set, match.
For those who pay attention we knew that this was the neocon plan all along... and when Syria is done (if the russians haven't nuked us yet by then) we will move on to Iran. The interesting thing will be how the folks around here who ate up any excuse to go after Iraq (because I suspect many American's felt it was unfinished business) feel when we start lining up other sorviergn nations to overthrow at the administrations whim. Imagined Boston Globe Headline 3-04: "Damascus Falls No WMD Found, Wolfowitcz says they must be in Iran"
I wouldn't be surprised. As the Bush Administration fails to find a major cache of WMD in Iraq...I suppose it will "have just been smuggled" to every other country they don't like. Sounds like a joke, but it seems like they're already saying that...They were moved to Syria! Iran! Yemen! Uh oh, now they're in China! Wait, France! Canada! Taxachusetts!
We're definitely headed for a confrontation with someone, because it suits the Bush Administration very well to be at war. People tend to overlook the miserable economy and it gives them more of a pretext to keep on shredding the U.S. Constitution. Read Howard Fineman's recent Newsweek article about how Bush genuinely enjoys the role of "war leader". The piece isn't even anti-Bush really, but it leads to some *very* scary conclusions.
No way!!--This would deepen the world's perception of US being an imperialist power--In addition, it would not allow our economy to recover-If we continue this policy--then, someday, the nations of the world will come together to against us, and we will have become the axis of evil! Mary
Mary , Newton, MA
The recent actions by the U.S. around the world have been of a Super Power unchecked. Hopefully it will not continue in Syria (and these are small warning embers that are being fanned by the media) I think it would be a huge mistake to start invading any country we don't agree with. Countries will start to realize the only way to protect against us is to get nukes.
The King George II regime's thirst for empire is second only to Rome or Germany circa 1938. This madman is going to plunge the world into a third world war with his selfish ambitions. I pray for the innocents that will suffer and die under this new world order.
No. We are moving our aircraft carriers out of the area and we have no real justification to act against Syria. They are more rational than Saddam so they can be handled diplomatically. After our demonstration of force and overwhelming success, they and others will respond more quickly to diplomacy and other peaceful pressure.