His last push to war in Syria was an embarrassing failure, but President Obama isn’t giving up on the idea, and is said to be pushing for new “military options” for escalating intervention in Syria.
“There is a general sense that it’s time to take another look,” said one official, and it seems the renewed interest in pushing for intervention is mostly about the collapse of the Geneva II talks, which ended when the US demand for unconditional regime change went nowhere.
At the same time, it’s unlikely the administration is going to make another immediate push for a ground invasion, after the American public roundly rejected that last time.
Rather, the high-level talks that are ongoing are said to involve imposing “no-fly zones” or dramatically escalating arms and advisers for the rebels, a back-door way for the US to insinuate itself more in anticipation of eventually finding an excuse for a bigger intervention with ground troops.
I think it’s about time that we turn to military options in Syria. Assad is getting military aid from Hezbollah, Iran and recently ISIS (al Qaeda terrorist group) is helping Assad by killing rebels.
This proves that Assad is supported by terrorists. If we let him prevail, then Israel will be in trouble and we will have no choice but to send out troops to Iran, south Lebanon, Iraq and Syria. Therefore it’s a wise decision to help the rebels now before it gets uglier
You contend that America needs to get involved militarily "before it gets uglier,' as if American intervention would protect lives. Huh?
American intervention in Iraq killed more Iraqis in the first couple of years than were killed in Saddam's entire 20 year reign of terror. Our intervention in Libya has unleashed continuous bloodshed in what used to be a repressive but quiet country. Protecting the Vietnamese involved 'kiling anything that moves,' and Afghanis who hated the Taliban have admitted that they were safer and life was quieter before the American's came to 'protect' them.
How again will our military involvement in Syria make things all better?
Assad has not made any troubles for Israel for many years. What makes you believe that Israel
will be safer with the rebels than with Assad?
"…let him [Assad] prevail…" We really have no business getting involved in this Syrian internal affair. And no, we (the US) assuredly have other choices than sending troops to help Israel. It's their problem, they created it by their own actions and the US has been wrong from the beginning on not calling out Israel for its crimes.
As for Assad supporting terrorists, it's kind of hard for the US to deny doing the same, isn't it? I find it monumentally stupid to be supporting those people who brought us 9/11 and the weakening of our democracy and loss of freedom associated with the implementation of policies and laws to control the American people by using fear and war. But, that's just this old Curmudgeon's opinion…
" if Assad prevail Israel will be in trouble," Joe I think you should do a little more reading. Assad was never a threat to Israel in the past or will be in the future. The real threat to Israel in the near future is when the US backed Al-Qaeda deposed Assad.
"If Assad prevails, Israel will be in trouble".
Isn't that Israel's problem, not ours?
Nice neocon logic. Iran and Russia are terrorists supporting Assad? LOL make it up as you go along I guess.
So the thugs and liver-eaters and child killers backed by the US are not terrorists then? And what would a wise sage such as yourself call them? And will you be the first one on the ground in Syria to fight against the hated Assad? Israel needs you out there, instead of cheerleading for war from the safety of your keyboard.
I got an idea sport. How about you be the very first casualty of American intervention in Syria. Lets see YOU put your life where your mouth is.
I hope Joe Corey is a joke, even if a tiny one.
"Israel will be in trouble and we will have no choice but to send out troops"!!!! aha! We see US foreign policy in action.
America would do better to support Assad; better for Israel too.
It was obvious that the halt in the drive to make war on Syria was temporary at best. Kerry's diplomatic efforts in Geneva have been a complete farce. Interventionists and warmongers, war and oil industries, banks and "valued allies" are all determined to have their "regime change" regardless of what Syrians – or Americans – may want.
Us should take their hands off from Assad
The time to do something was back in September. And even then that was a stretch. No international support or mandate means Obama the Brave will not be that much of a GWB and go it alone
The Obama Administration and those that gave us the war in Iraq and Afghanistan have not given up getting us involved in yet one more Mideast war. What is not being said is the underlying causes. Ron Paul said, “What if the American people woke up and understood that the official reasons for going to war are almost always based on lies and promoted by war propaganda in order to serve special interests?"
We are being lied to. There are those who want this war–and it is not to benefit of America. Saudi Arabia and its kind are not worth one more dead American soldier.
"We have to examine what the alternatives some might be proposing are, and whether they're in our national security interests, and whether a desire to do something about it could lead us, the United States, to take action that can produce the kind of unintended consequences we've seen in the past," Carney told a news briefing.
He did not elaborate,…
But I can guess: They're thinking how they could get all their US opposition to feel 'included,' or at least 'heeded.' To create the impression that public opinion was 'weighed.' The last bit, though, could impress us as an 'admission;' if we assumed prior consequences really were unintended. That could seem to be a warranted assumption if not for the Yinon/PNAC/Clark hitlist that included most nations the USg has struck thus far, and they fund terrorists where they're intervening now. That's right, your taxes are Material Support for Terrorism.
Antiwar.com neeeds to start working on organizing street rallies to prevent this illegal act of war. Something has to be done besides talk.
I often wonder what America's problem is? Who appointed America to be the world's policeman? I don't see the Mexican president planning an attack on Syria. Nobody intervened in America's civil war. Syria is a country of almost zero economic, cultural or strategic interest to the USA. Yet Washington seems determined to attack. Such a bizarro world we live in.