I get so confused...
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/International_War_Crimes/Taking_Down_7_Countries.htmlSyria, despite its cooperation with the U.S. against al-Qaeda, has been systematically vilified by a U.S. administration that now refuses to even talk to its government. Soon after Bush's infamous "axis of evil" speech in January 2002, John Bolton added a second tier of Syria, Libya and Cuba to the "evil" list. The anti-Syrian propaganda campaign has been relentless ever since. When no WMD were found in Iraq, some (following an assertion by Ariel Sharon as early as December 2002) suggested that they'd been removed to Syria. Immediately after the assassination of Rafik Hariri in February 2005, Washington -- with no evidence whatsoever -- pointed the finger at Syria. It demanded the withdrawal of Syrian troops in Lebanon, depicting them as an unwelcome oppressive force although they had been deployed there at the request of the Christian-led Lebanese government to help end a civil war.
When the Syrian forces expeditiously withdrew, the U.S. expressed its continued dissatisfaction, accusing Syria of continuing to maintain an intelligence network in the country (as though the U.S. doesn't). The U.S. has consistently accused Syria of harboring former Iraqi Baathist officials (as though there would be anything wrong with providing refuge to officials fleeing an illegally invaded country) and of allowing Arab fighters to cross its border into Iraq. The Syrians reply that they've strained their resources to better police their border, but that the Americans, who cannot adequately guard their own border with Mexico, are asking the impossible.
For many years Washington has designated Syria a terror-sponsoring nation because of its support for Palestinian resistance groups and Hizbollah, Lebanon's most popular political party. Although Syria has repeatedly offered to negotiate a peace agreement with Israel, it has been targeted by the neocons for regime change. A key step towards that end was obtained by the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003, passed overwhelmingly by Congress and signed into law by the president. This makes it official U.S. policy that "Syria should bear responsibility for attacks committed by Hizbollah and other terrorist groups with offices or other facilities in Syria, or bases in areas of Lebanon occupied by Syria" and gives the president broad discretion to take punitive actions.
In late 2005 Richard Perle -- one of the most important neocon architects of Washington's regime change policy -- hosted Farid Ghadry, the head of something called the "Syrian Reform Party," in his suburban Washington home. Last June Ghadry met the neocons' chief sponsor, Vice President Dick Cheney, to strategize about regime change in Syria. This gentleman has told the Wall Street Journal that Perle's buddy Ahmad Chalabi "paved the way in Iraq for what we want to do in Syria." Robert Dreyfuss writing in the American Prospect calls Ghadry "a pro-Israeli Syrian who's maintained ties to neoconservatives in Washington and who is close to
Wurmser and his wife, Meyrav Wurmser, the director of Middle East affairs for the Hudson Institute."
In his most recent speech to the nation, President Bush virtually announced his intention to "take down" Syria: "Succeeding in Iraq," he declared, "also requires defending its territorial integrity . . . and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq." 
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
