IS SYRIA ANOTHER IRAN?

FIRST IRAN NOW SYRIA APPEARS TO BE COMING NUKE COUNTRY

A recent ABC News item reported on an Israeli air strike that took place early last month inside Syria. This air strike allegedly destroyed a fledgling nuclear reactor being constructed deep in the Syrian desert. What makes this story more than it appears is that it exposes the fact the United States balked, flinched on preventing Syria, a State Department designated state sponsor of terrorism and an ally of Iran, from attempting to attain nuclear capability. Instead, the United States stood by as Israel set the Syrian nuclear clock back.The air strike is still cloaked in secrecy. The Israeli press is forbidden from reporting on it and only a few White House insiders are privy to the details which led to the action. But ABC News reported a “high ranking intelligence official” divulged that Israel had infiltrated the team constructing the nuclear facility. The operative meticulously documented the work being done, gathering evidence that would render impotent any argument that anything but a nuclear facility was being constructed. The operative also gathered evidence that North Korean nuclear technology was being exploited at the Syrian construction site.After weighing all of the evidence the White House indicated that it was not interested in engaging in any military action against the Syrian facility. Those examining this decision, including those at ABC News, believe the White House balked, in a large part, because the evidence presented wasn’t overwhelming enough. They believe that because fissionable material hadn’t actually been created that there wasn’t enough evidence to act.Although the threat of nuclear proliferation by a state sponsor of terrorism should be of utmost importance to us all it is easy – albeit disturbing – to see why the Bush Administration would refuse to take action without actual WMD being developed. It is easy to understand because the world just witnessed the demonizing of the Bush Administration for thwarting the nuclear capabilities of Saddam Hussein’s regime, a regime that was much further along in nuclear proliferation than Syria. This demonizing was the result of political opportunism.Those willing to be honest, listened to or read President Bush’s September 12, 2002 address to the UN General Assembly and understood that the existence of WMD in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was the least among the reasons given for regime change in that country. People of integrity, who chose to familiarize themselves with the facts, understand that there were several more critical reasons why Hussein’s regime had to come to an end, including the genocide of the Iraqi Kurds and Saddam Hussein’s nuclear development program, which was far more advanced than the Syrian or Iranian programs.Of course, all of those elected to office are not honest or people of integrity. Many elected to office are agenda and ideologically driven, simply engaged in the pursuit of power. To these people, the truth is a “good thing” when it aids their cause and something to be spun or ignored when it stands to detract from their agendas. Such is the case with the WMD argument of the Secular-Progressive, anti-war Left.

Armed with a solid understanding of the facts and a genuine accounting of the reasons for military action in Iraq, it is hard to recognize the rhetoric of the Secular-Progressive, anti-war Left as anything but dishonest.

Those with a fact-based understanding of the issue understand the Secular-Progressive, anti-war Left has employed a political tactic (PROPAGANDA) , to effect a change of power in Washington toward a government more favorable to their ideology.

With a faithful "lapdog" in the mainstream media, their disinformation campaign to obfuscate the truth in their quest for power is formidable. Normally this type of behavior is greeted with a roll of the eyes or a sigh of intellectual exhaustion for its ability to drain the will of even the most ardent supporters of the truth.

But this time, deceitful political opportunists have literally put us all in harms way. This time they have intimidated the Government leadership into questioning solid, actionable evidence of nuclear proliferation by a terrorist supporting nation and, in the face of that evidence, ponder to the point of inaction as to whether the evidence was “enough” to justify any military action.

In our government’s hunt to attain enough “evidence” to convince the inconvincible they almost allowed a terrorist friendly nation to move closer to attaining the capability for bringing about a nuclear Armageddon. Thank God for Israel!

Syria has also proved open to Iraqi refugees, with the United Nations reporting that Syria is hosting approximately 1.5 million of them. More than a thousand arrive each day.

In allowing relatively free transit from Iraq, parts of Syria near the Iraq border are not completely under the Iran regime's thumb, providing far more space in Syria for potential opponents, particularly jihadists, to organize.

Bashar has tried to embrace and co-opt Islamists, moving away from his father's emphasis on repression alone, but many Islamists, and all jihadists, see the secular and Alawite regime Assad leads, as heretical and little better than the Zionist(Israel)regime next door.

They may tolerate Assad when they have other enemies to strike, but they will remain potential adversaries, and some will exploit the political space he has opened.
One lesson of Iraq is that massive instability is dangerous for U.S. interests, even when it occurs in the territory of an adversarial regime. Will we continue to talk about the threat or will we decide to do to them what they hope to do to us in the near future?