Is Syria the latest target on the U.S. hit list?

In three weeks, U.S. and allied forces launched a massive invasion of a thirty-year totalitarian regime, ousted its notoriously tenacious leader, and brought forth the genuine, albeit chaotic, liberation of a long-suffering populace. But as Iraq attempts to rebuild its infrastructure and government, yet another question remains: What about Syria?

The home of Hamas, Hizbollah, and a new wave of ex-employees of the Hussein regime, terror-happy Syria would seem a natural target for invasion – if the idea of another U.S.-led incursion in the Middle East didn't send a special kind of shock and awe throughout much of the world. While some members of the Bush administration seem ready for action, cutting pipelines and U.N. ties with equal fervor, others plead for caution. What does the rest of the world have to say?

"Bush is acting worse than Hitler. The world, in the foremost among whom being all advocates of peace and democracy, must build their alliance to stop the new Hitler. The West, China, Japan and other freedom-loving nations elsewhere must close ranks to stop the Chief Cowboy, Bush. We believe that this Cowboy is able to light his cigar without putting the whole forest on fire!!! Don't let this war criminal at large!"

"Syria should draw the correct message from recent events — that support for terrorism is intolerable, that it is expected not to play spoiler as the Bush administration considers restarting Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. Mr. Hussein's regime is gone. Mr. Assad doesn't serve his citizens' interests by acting like a brother-in-arms."

"These are ominous signs that what many feared has come true: The Bush administration has been emboldened by the alacrity with which the Iraqi military collapsed and now feels confident that it can bring about similar results in other Arab countries that fail to heed its diktats."

"If the United States succeeds in forcing Iran and Syria to cease their support for these organizations that are trying to harm Israel inside its borders, in the territories and overseas, it would be another substantial contribution - following the removal of Iraq from the circle of hostile countries - to Israel's security."

"There is no mistaking the alarm at the threats against Syria, not least in a Europe divided by the Iraq crisis. The EU's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, who speaks for all 15 member states, including Britain, spoke plain common sense yesterday when he urged the US to 'cool down.' Excellent advice."

"What we can call the Rumsfeld doctrine-extensive use of Special Forces, the deployment of highly flexible divisions, the real-time integration of air and ground offensives, and, above all, the use of overwhelming speed-worked against Iraq. But it doesn't necessarily mean it will work against other countries, or that Syria, too, will fall in three weeks."

"This assumption by the US — that it has a right to change the government or regime in another country it considers a threat or disapproves of — demonstrates a frightening use of brute power. Washington has become not so much a superpower as a hyper-power, setting itself up above the rest of us. That is why the principle was repudiated by most of the world; it places the entire world in crisis — something we now see beginning to happen."

"Powell said Monday that Washington would consider diplomatic and economic measures to influence Syria. Unless someone shows that nation to be a clear danger to the U.S., that approach remains the best option -- and the best way to avoid playing into the perception of many in the world that the U.S. is an imperialist power trying to remake the Middle East at gunpoint."

"The speculation that Syria may be the next target needs to be denied in clearer terms. Not only the Islamic world, but the rest of the international community also anxiously desires assurance from the Bush administration that this will be the last war of its kind. The entire global village hopes that America will abandon its horrifying strategy in its war with terrorism, and return to its once admired role as a generous guardian of peace and democracy."

"As he sought to do with Iraq, Bush should first make a case diplomatically for military action against Syria. That would include offering proof that Syria has weapons of mass destruction and/or supports terrorists who would use them. He has yet to provide concrete proof that Iraq had such weapons, a critical factor in defusing international opposition to the war. Until he makes such discoveries public, he cannot justify invading another country on the same grounds."

"The US has reserved the right to attack any country where conditions in its view threaten its security. 'Attack', of course, is not limited to military engagement. The considerable diplomatic weight of the United States can be brought to bear. It is to be hoped that, for the sake of world peace and its own reputation, Washington confines itself to the war of words."

"Bush is acting worse than Hitler." The Syrian Times, 4/9/03

To paraphrase Dennis Miller, some people see Hitler everywhere, except for the guy with the mustache actually slaughtering people. He's not Hitler.

"...it doesn't necessarily mean it will work against other countries, or that Syria, too, will fall in three weeks." Philippine Daily Inquirer, The Philippines, 4/13/03

Most of the three weeks were spent traveling from the border to Baghdad. You can drive across Syria in about 30 minutes. Should go a lot quicker.

"This assumption by the US ... demonstrates a frightening use of brute power. ...That is why the principle was repudiated by most of the world; it places the entire world in crisis — something we now see beginning to happen." Arab News, Saudi Arabia, 4/9/03

Note that the world is not in crisis when Saddam is killing people. The world is in crisis when Saddam stops killing people. This is what happens to people's judgement when they can no longer distinguish between good and evil.

"The entire global village hopes that America will abandon its horrifying strategy in its war with terrorism, and return to its once admired role as a generous guardian of peace and democracy." The Korea Herald, South Korea, 4/14/03

Sometimes the generous guardian has to actually confront the people who threaten peace and democracy. North Korea doesn't stay on its side of the line because they admire us, but because our words pack a nuclear punch and they know it.

Clearly, though, the "admired" guardian of peace and democracy can expect little help from its admirers when it goes into a fight.

Thats easy. Hezbollah is based there.

He has yet to provide concrete proof that Iraq had such weapons, a critical factor in defusing international opposition to the war. Until he makes such discoveries public, he cannot justify invading another country on the same grounds." Bradenton Herald, Florida, 4/15/03

Notice the logical sleight of hand. Our reasons for going into Iraq were numerous. The WMD issue was the only issue the UN was interested in, so that is obviously the one we discussed with them. But that is not our justification. Our justification goes well beyond "WMD" and is not limited to that.

"...It is to be hoped that, for the sake of world peace and its own reputation, Washington confines itself to the war of words." The New Zealand News, 4/14/03

If words are to have any meaning at all, they must be backed up by action. If diplomacy is to have any value at all, it must be backed up by the willingness to act on your words. So, far from hurting its reputation by acting, Washington would in fact have no reputation at all if it were unwilling to act against its enemies. No one is frightened or deterred by words alone.

Is Syria the latest target on the U.S. hit list?

If I were in the White House, it certainly would be. But as I tell Mrs. Gridlock, it's a good thing that I am far from the seat of power, because all of my decision trees have just three steps, and step three always involves nuclear weapons.

All of these arguments about hyper-power, and the US reserving the right to pre-emptively strike ignore the obvious fact that we had a cease-fire agreement with Iraq that allowed, even compelled, us to attack. Iraq agreed to a resumption of hostilities if they did not do certain things and stop doing other certain things. They demonstrably failed to meet their obligations, so the US had every right and responsibility to invade.

As near as I can tell, Syria has not given us permission to invade their country. If we were to go into Syria now, then it really would be pre-emption, and the US reserving the right to eject any government that we don't like.

Sounds good to me! But as Mrs. Gridlock always tells me, it's a very good thing that I have my fingers nowhere near the nuclear button!

"The speculation that Syria may be the next target needs to be denied in clearer terms.

No, let them worry.

Not only the Islamic world, but the rest of the international community also anxiously desires assurance from the Bush administration that this will be the last war of its kind.

Not a chance.

The entire global village

Nice try Hillary

hopes that America will abandon its horrifying strategy in its war with terrorism,

Winning?

and return to its once admired role as a generous guardian of peace and democracy."

As a sugardaddy-victim with deep pockets.

But not under the guidence of this president.

The Korea Herald, South Korea, 4/14/03

Their opinion.

Whatever.....

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.