April 2, 2003
A DAMOCLEAN MOMENT IN DAMASCUS:
Iraq's only the start--Syria & Iran are next (Zev Chafets, April 2nd, 2003, New York Daily News)Syria is an inviting target for the U.S. Taking down the Assad government would rid the Middle East of an aggressive, anti-American fascist regime and also end Syria's occupation of Lebanon. That, in turn, would enable American forces to go after Hezbollah camps in the Bekaa Valley, just as they went after Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Not only would that weaken international terrorism, but the U.S. hasn't forgotten that it was Hezbollah that murdered 241 American Marines in Beirut in 1983.On Monday, Secretary of State Powell took a step toward the Battle of Syria by warning that the Damascus government "bears the responsibility for its choices and for the consequences." The word "consequences" wasn't accidental. It also appears in UN Resolution 1441 as a euphemism for military action.
Still, Assad could get a temporary reprieve. If he does, it will be thanks to Iran. This week, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice publicly called attention to the advanced state of Tehran's nuclear weapons program. Undersecretary of State John Bolton underscored the point, categorizing the Iranian effort as "of equal import" to the North Korean armament push.
If Iran is really as far along as North Korea, there could be nukes in the hands of the ayatollahs within a matter of months - with hundreds of thousands of American and allied troops next door in Iraq. The U.S. has been waiting for the Tehran theocracy to fall of its own internal unpopularity, but American planners can't exercise such patience with a soon-to-be-atomic Iran.
Anyone hoping for an April V-Iraq extravaganza will be disappointed. Beyond Baghdad, the Battle of Iran lies ahead - and the Battle of Syria and Lebanon. Fortunately, these axis dictatorships aren't (currently) more militarily formidable than Iraq. They will fall as Saddam is falling. Only when they are gone will Fifth Ave. be ready for a victory parade.
Syria, because of South Lebanon, is a two-fer and dealing with it would be such a favor to Israel that it would give us great leverage in demanding that they impose a Palestinian state, making it a three-fer. Posted by Orrin Judd at April 2, 2003 8:04 AM
We all know this is coming. How do you all think the administration is going to try to sell this to the American public? Or do they even need too?
Posted by: BJW at April 2, 2003 11:02 AMI'd stay out of the Empire State Building.
Posted by: oj at April 2, 2003 12:08 PMThey definitely need to. The American reluctance to go to war is perhaps our most ingrained trait.
How? I dunno. I expect that, like Hitler helped FDR, we'll have to count on the misjudgments of our foes.
Incidentally, nobody else seems to have commented on it, so I'll belabor the should-be-obvious: the Saddam (or whoever wrote that statement) appeal for jihad ends any possibility of arguing that Islam is a religion of peace.
I believe that some time back here I mentioned the historical rule I learned from John Morris, which is that the "furniture" surrounding a statement, no matter how mendacious the statement itself may be, must be absolutely right for the statement to have any chance of being accepted.
Obviously, whether or not most Muslims actually drop what they are doing to become jihadis, nobody in Islam takes seriously the notion that the religion itself is peaceful.
I don't believe Syria will have to be sold. Without Iraq, the Ba'athists ruling that hellhole are the little brothers waiting for their turn to come.
Syria, to my knowledge has never dared to use the rhetoric they are using now against America. Its just killing the ruling elite that their patron and big brother is getting it in the neck. Paranoia, omens & portends and sheer madness could provoke a desparate regime in Damascus into providing a fait accompli, perhaps before the conclusion of our present military campaign.
Unlike Iran, where a subversive covert program backed by US forces based in Free Iraq could provide the tipping point for a disenfranchised but by no means cowed populace, an extension of the present military campaign or one separated by victory, Syria would be a small piece of cake (see cakewalk).
Are you the real Oswald Czolgosz, who had the letter run on an editorial page?
Posted by: oj at April 2, 2003 7:35 PMUgh, who's going to tell the Europeans?
Posted by: RC at April 3, 2003 1:51 AMNo, I am the Oswald Czolgosz that won the contest but went home without the prize.
But what they hey, I'm just a mouse that roared.
"Who would be free themselves must strike the blow."| Main | SEPARATING POLITICAL MASTERS FROM PRETENDERS (via Arts and Letters Daily): »