Syria next!

I’m afraid I don’t have a whole lot of opinion about Syria one way or the other yet … but I sure seem to be hearing a lot about them without any cogent explanations/proof from the Bush team

US: Stop harboring Iraqi leaders!
THEM: We’re not!
US: That’s it! You’re asking for it!

The sanctions seem a bit premature, esp. since we haven’t even attempted to make our case re: the Syrians (a) harboring Iraqis … what evidence? (b) having WMDs … what evidence? (c) giving govt. support to Arab fighters (rather than them just being pissed-off free citizens who decided to lend Iraq a hand).

But the main reason for this thread was the following article from WorldTribune.com (hardly a stellar source, I know), which I thought, for a moment, was an Onion article:

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/breaking_2.html

I can see the followup articles now:

U.S. demands Iran give up Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction
U.S. demands North Korea give up Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction
U.S. demands France give up Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction …

:wink:

The US is not going to invade Syria. The world (and probably the rest of the US admin as well) would not allow it.

However, what they are going to demand is some movement with young Assad, to ensure that Syria stands in line to ensure that the coming Palestinian Peace Process works, and that Israel cannot throw any real objections forward.

Actually, I’VE got Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. Found 'em in a box of junk I bought at the Conroe flea market last Saturday.

Rumsfeld and the boys can come and pick 'em up any time they want.

Maybe it’s just me, but the preceding advertisement for “anti-radiation pills, buy 3 get 1 free” just screams journalistic integrity. :stuck_out_tongue:

Well, as of this morning, Powell has exsplicitly stated that military action against Syria is not currently on the table:

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-me/2003/apr/15/041501261.html

So, maybe next year?

WTF??! GET HIM!!!

:smiley: