Posted on 09/30/2005 5:42:52 PM PDT by jmc1969
WASHINGTON - President Bush and his top aides are weighing new steps against Syria, according to U.S. officials involved in Middle East policy.
Bush's national security team is due to meet Saturday to review policy toward Syria, the officials said. Options range from tougher economic sanctions to limited military action.
The meeting comes as a United Nations investigator nears completion of a report that's expected to provide evidence that Syrian security agencies were involved in the February assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
The investigator, German prosecutor Detlev Mehlis, is drawing on debriefings from one or more defectors from the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad. The defectors have provided evidence of Syrian government complicity in Hariri's death, according to two U.S. officials.
Syria represents a complex challenge for Bush and his national security team as they wrestle with the war in Iraq.
The Bush administration, he said, calculates that the Mehlis investigation is putting significant pressure on Assad and is helping to build an international consensus to isolate Syria. "We don't want to blow that," he said, in explaining why military action isn't likely now.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
A couple of block-busters might get their attention. Short of that I doubt much will. Syria has been cruising for a bruisin for a long long time. So has Iran.
MOAB? I second the motion.
Is the one in the middle of you pic a suicide bomber?
Waiting for UN approval to hit Syria militarily is a fool's game.
They have been warned several dozen numerous times to stop the flow of terrorists into Iraq.
They were warned several dozen numerous times to quit screwing with Lebanon.
There has been enough warnings already and it is time for the actions to start.
We don't have to go "military" at this point. UN economic sanctions will cripple the country and I suggest we start there now.
Syria has no friends anymore (maybe the Russians will extract a price for their vote at the Security Council but that is it.)
We would have about the number of Iraqi troops ready in order to take action against Syria about this time next year. The problem is if we collapse the Assad regime with airstrikes you end up having several Baathist generals in Syria fighting for power along with Abu Musab al-Suri (a relative of Zarqawi) and the leader of al-Qaeda in Syria vying for power. A failed state in Syria would be pretty bad, if we could free up a few divisions we could deal with the problem.
My 1st thought as well
There will be NO limited military action. Assad and the other assorted clowns KNOW that. The ME despots will continue along their merry way, with the explicit backing of SA. Restraint will once again be construed as weakness on the part of the USA. In the end, nothing will happen, other than a diplomatic nasty-gram.
Syra is a Terrorist state and will be toppled.
I agree with you all. Let's show them what terror is........a heavy duty airstrike.
Turn Hammas into Hummus
I wouldn't say there will be "no limited military action", I could see SF teams be sent in to deal with Zarqawi's bases in Syria.
I third the MOAB motion....make a statement about "those regimes who harbor and finance terrorists"..
We should beating the snot outta the freaks in Tehran, as well. When are we going to fight-to-win? Does it take the loss of an American city, or two, before we pound these 7th century knuckle-draggers into the sand?
Good Lord! I'm a patient man, but I have my first-born, and all her friends, in the military and I think it's time we stop trying to postpone the inevitable. Smash the friggin Axis-of-Evil! Now!
I am not a betting man. If I was, I would wager a $200 donation to the Salvation Army or Samaritans Purse that there is zero military activity towards Syria in the next 8 months :)
Like I said before it depends what you difine as military activity, we are training Kurds to go on missions, collect data, and blow stuff up, I wouldn't be suprised if we send some of them to deal with some al-Qaeda camps in Syria. Beyond that you are probably right.
I said that when I was discussing if the US chose to use military force to topple Assad we could do it late next year and have the troops to make sure al-Qaeda can't take over in the failed state left behind.
But, yes a CIA coup would be better.
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.