** PREVIOUSLY: “Syria: What Does the Alleged Disruption of an al-Qaeda Chemical Weapons Cell in Iraq Mean for the Chemical Weapons Use Claims in Syria?” **
Condoleezza Rice recently said that the U.S. doesn’t have the option of no action in Syria. But is that really true?
Retired Army officer Brad Taylor, at his Message Traffic blog, provides insight on Syria and what is happening there.
Last week, the foreign minister of Bahrain, a moderate Arab country, called Nasrallah – the leader of Hezbollah – a terrorist. Think of that. An Arab country called the leader of THE RESISTANCE, a man that had been cheered as a savior in 2006, a TERRORIST. . . .
The terrorist group expected its old mantle of The Resistance to matter, and that others would follow its lead just because it said so. Much to Hezbollah’s surprise, the goodwill and political capital it had gained in its fight against Israel evaporated as quickly as snow in the Sahara.U.S. enemies killing one another and earning some enmity against each other is an especially important fact now that some people are worrying about “convergence.”
Some people have expressed similar thoughts. Reuters reported the following:
“A complete victory by either side would not be an optimal situation,” said Uzi Rabi, head of the Moshe Dayan Centre for Middle East Studies. “The current situation is in a way optimal for Israel ... and it will most likely go on for months if not years.”And although France and Britain claim that they have confirmed the use of sarin in Syria, the United Nations believes that more evidence is needed. Additionally, the U.N. believes that both sides have committed war crimes.
Nevertheless, insinuations and outright calls for intervention by U.S. officials persist, as demonstrated by Rice’s recent comments and Howard McKeon seeking military options for Syria.
Therefore, it still appears likely that the U.S. will eventually side with the al-Qaeda-backed terrorists fighting the Assad regime.