Syria in US sights?

[ITW [the irish boy]]

Yesterday was a big day in world politics. Let me break it down for you...

1. America declares the war is as good as over.
2. Rumsfeld says Syria is a terrorist and rogue state
3. Bush and Powell join in the onslaught.
4. Jack Straw twice has to re-iterate they do not believe Syria has WMD but has questions to answer.
5. Blair states that syria is not "next on list" and that they maintain good relations with them.
6. Israel claim they were feeding demands of syria through the us in order to wipe out hezbollah, islamic jihad and hamas.
7.Syria replied that if the US attacked, Israel would pay the price for supplying fake information
8. Liberal Democrats call on the US to "butt out" of UK business, as they have worked long and hard to build up a relationship with syria (the syrian leader met the queen last year) and that it was about time the US stopped throwing stones at them.

What do yiz think of that? It seems to me there was no correspondance between the US and UK over this with the us seemingly looking to hit two birds with one stone while in the gulf and the british hoping to secure the middle east peace process.

The BBC said that the main reasons were perhaps to keep the war effort in the publics mind as long as possible so the us public would back a president at war, or perhaps they were simply sabre-rattling. Whatever it was, from this side of the atlantic, the US got terrible press, especially when Israel came out as saying they were behind the drive against syria.

What do you all make of it? Is it just a conspiracy theory or do the US have different plans from the uk?

[Don Seer]

never israel....

shits all messed up....... middle east is gonna be even more unstable for a while

[Jay ay Beee]

They will try for sanctions against Syria, Blair should stop them, seeing as he's good friends with Bassad (?) and he visited Downing Street a couple of months ago.

[Dr._Funkenstein]

Here's a quite interesting article about this topic.

http://www.gnn.tv

A Syria Primer
Stephen Zunes,  April 15, 2003
Recent statements by top Bush administration officials have accused the Syrian government of aiding senior Iraqi officials to escape, possessing chemical weapons, and committing "hostile acts" against the U.S. by allegedly supplying military equipment, such as night-vision goggles, to the Iraqis. On April 10th, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz told Congress, "The Syrians are behaving badly. They need to be reminded of that, and if they continue, then we need to think about what our policy is with respect to a country that harbors terrorists or harbors war criminals, or was in recent times shipping things to Iraq." People should keep in mind the following points in response to administration claims:


Syria, despite being ruled by the Baath Party, has historically been a major rival of Iraq's Baath regime. Syria was the only Arab country to back Iran during the Iran-Iraq War. It was one of the only non-monarchical Arab states to have backed the United States against Iraq during the first Gulf War. Iraq and Syria backed rival factions in Lebanon's civil war. As a member of the United Nations Security Council, Syria voted this past November in favor of the U.S.-backed resolution 1441 that demanded full cooperation by the Baghdad government with United Nations inspectors, with the threat of severe consequences if it failed to do so. However, Syria--like most countries in the world--has strongly opposed the U.S. invasion of Iraq.


Syria's long, porous border with Iraq has been the entry point of hundreds of volunteers from around the Arab world, many of whom are Iraqi exiles, who have come to fight what they see as the conquest of an Arab country by a Western power. There is no evidence that the Syrian government has been directly sending mercenaries or other soldiers into Iraq to fight U.S. forces. Allowing armed individuals to assist a neighboring state against an invading army is considered legitimate under international law.


There is no evidence that Iraq has moved any weapons of mass destruction or related technology and raw materials into Syria. With open deserts, mostly cloudless days, and detailed surveillance by satellites and aircraft, the movement of such material would likely have been detected. The United Nations Monitoring and Verification Commission (UNMOVIC), empowered by the United Nations Security Council to verify the destruction of Iraq's WMD programs, disputes Bush administration claims that such proscribed materials have made their way out of the country.


There is no evidence that Syria has developed chemical weapons of its own. While it certainly cannot be ruled out, Syria is no more likely to possess such weapons than Turkey, Israel, Egypt, and other regional powers, underscoring the need for a multilateral approach to arms control by the international community. Syria has never used--nor has it ever threatened to use--chemical weapons or other weapons of mass destruction.


The Bush administration has not presented clear evidence that large numbers of Iraqi leaders have escaped to Syria. Even if they have, Syria has no legal obligation to hand them over to U.S. authorities, given that the U.S. occupation of Iraq has not been recognized by the international community. Until an internationally recognized authority in Baghdad, the International Criminal Court, or other duly-constituted body makes such an extradition request, Syria is not obliged to turn over any suspects from the former Iraqi government. Syria, with less than half of Iraq's population and only a tiny fraction of Iraq's oil resources, was never as powerful militarily as was Iraq during the height of Baghdad's military prowess in the 1980s. Syria's military strength has declined since that period, as a result of the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, which had supplied the Damascus regime with large-scale military aid, including armaments, training, and other military assistance. According to U.S. State Department officials, the Syrian government has not been directly involved in any acts of international terrorism since the 1980s. Damascus has been the home base of a number of small and largely moribund radical Palestinian exile groups, some of which engaged in terrorism in the 1970s and 1980s.


The United States initially supported Syria's 1976 invasion of Lebanon, which was authorized by the Arab League as a means of preventing victory by the radical Lebanese National Movement and its Palestinian allies in the civil war. Syrian forces have remained in Lebanon ever since and Syria exerts enormous political leverage over the Lebanese government, particularly regarding the country's foreign affairs. During much of Lebanon's civil war, Syria actively supported Amal, a militia based in the country's Shiite community that engaged in military campaigns against the Palestinian Al-Fatah militia, the Iranian-backed Hizbollah militia, and the Maronite Phalangist militia, among others. Since the end of the civil war in 1990, the Syrians have provided limited support to Hizbollah in its ultimately successful campaign to force Israeli occupation forces out of southern Lebanon, and is believed to continue to back the radical Shiite group's scaled-down militia today. There is still some periodic fighting between Hizbollah militiamen and Israeli occupation forces in the disputed Shebaa Farms area on the border between Lebanon and the Israeli-occupied section of southwestern Syria.


Syria has agreed to grant full diplomatic relations with Israel, demilitarize border areas, allow for international peacekeepers, and provide other security guarantees to Israel, as part of a peace agreement where Israel would withdraw from Syrian territory seized by Israeli forces in the 1967 war. A peace agreement between Israel and Syria based upon this formula came close to fruition in the late 1990s until talks broke down over a relatively minor dispute on the actual placement of the border resulting from conflicting demarcation maps from the colonial era. Since then, a right-wing Israeli government has come to power and has rejected such a peace treaty, refusing to resume negotiations.


Syria has an authoritarian government that has been charged by reputable human rights organizations with widespread and systematic human rights violations. The government has liberalized somewhat in recent years, however, both economically and politically. While still denying its people basic democratic rights, the current level of repression by the Damascus government is less than it has been in previous decades, less than that of Saddam Hussein's Iraq, and less than that of Saudi Arabia and other American allies.


These talking points were compiled by Stephen Zunes, Middle East editor for Foreign Policy In Focus, associate professor of politics at the University of San Francisco, and author of Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the Roots of Terrorism (Common Courage Press). This article is reprinted with permission from our friends at FPIF, online at www.fpif.org.

[King Tech Quadafi]

^ nice article. I sincerely hope those cowboy hawks dont start with Syria. Bashar Assad is young, this is his chance to take his country and move it ahead, at the same time, he has his fathers stubborness and distrust of Americans.

[Jay ay Beee]

As I said Assad has visited Downing Street and Blair has visited him in Damascus.  They like each other. If America fucks with him then they will have zero support from Britain.

[Doggystylin]

IS everyone BLIND? do yall not see the US just tryin to come up with reasons to take over the middle east area 1 by 1? it started with afganistan, dont think iraq was the first.

[Don Jacob]

i seriously doubt we're trying to take over the middle east, seriously,i'm sorry but afghanistan and iraq's colors on their flags arn't red white and blue

[TheSheriff]

Fuck Syria.

FREE ABDUL HAMIL!

Fuck Iraq. Fuck the Israelis, who abandoned us to our fate. Fuck Jordan. Fuck the US, who supported the Syrian occupation. Fuck all y'all.

"If the Western world turns its back on Lebanon, it must change its name"

[_That_Cracka_J]

IS everyone BLIND? do yall not see the US just tryin to come up with reasons to take over the middle east area 1 by 1? it started with afganistan, dont think iraq was the first.

I better get some of those dark big ass glasses and one of those canes so I can make my way around....

[E. J. Rizo]

i seriously doubt we're trying to take over the middle east, seriously,i'm sorry but afghanistan and iraq's colors on their flags arn't red white and blue

yo don jacob nice signature especially since i made that horry shot last year and now i see it everywhere on the internet....feels good that so many people like it...LOL...cool shit i got all my laker shit too cant wait til the playoffs

[KING VerbalAssaulta]

they're a nation that supports terrorism, and is helping harbor war criminals(iraqi leaders)...it only took the u.s. less than a month to defeat iraq...syria could be defeated in a ocuple of weeks.  maybe we should just conquer the whole middle east...thats a good idea....
though i think they'll just use economic sanctions/political pressure on syria

[ITW [the irish boy]]

Why? Coz they disagreed with you over iraq??

Take this....  imagine the middle east as a working class neighbourhood. Now you dont get on that well with your neighbours, but at the end of the day, they ARE your neighbours. Now there has been a shooting across town and a rich guy got hurt, and now the rich have come together with a vigilante group to take out the lowlife they believe is your neighbourhood. Your next door neighbour is a thug. No doubt. But they accuse his of being a big drug dealer. So the vigilante group comes into town and burns down his home and starts looking for the drugs.none found. But this group want this guys blood, and he's your neighbour. Do you let him in? Or do you at least ask for a warrant to arrest him, or do you let this vigilante group do what they want, setting a precedent for future operations in your neighbourhood? If you do, you will be also accused of being a drug dealer, and perverting the course of justice, even though its not a legit police force. what do u do???

[King Tech Quadafi]

they're a nation that supports terrorism, and is helping harbor war criminals(iraqi leaders)...it only took the u.s. less than a month to defeat iraq...syria could be defeated in a ocuple of weeks.  maybe we should just conquer the whole middle east...thats a good idea....
though i think they'll just use economic sanctions/political pressure on syria

1. the Syrians support the Palestinians, while America supports Israel. So how can they be accused of assisting terrorism? they're assisting a faction in  a war like the Americans.

2. Despite what youve been told puppet, the Iraqis who MAY have snuck into Syria are NOT war criminals. Since your president launched a war without international jurisdiction, backing, or suipported by international law, your president cannot claim that the Iraqi leadership is war criminals.
Furthermore, designating them as war criminals requires them to be tried in the International court which your President pulled out of because of the fear of....oh no!....Americans being prosecuted. Once again the Americans spit in the face of the world , then makes up when it suits their interests.