If the WMDs were in Syria, why didn't we go get them... or at least unveil
them FOR REAL (I mean, does anybody except a few far-rightie whackos
believe this news you quote)?



NOYB wrote:
Because it was the Russians who helped smuggle the weapons to Syria...and
dealing with Russia is a little bit more complicated than dealing with Iraq.


Oh, are the Russians our pals now? Maybe because of the nuclear material
they're selling to Iran, we should keep a "hands off" approach?

And besides, I've personally watch US missiles on a scope as they
slammed into Syrian and Jordanian anti-air sites, killing Russian
technicians. Perhaps a bit of a risky power play, but they took the risk
of backing the loser.

Frankly if the Iraqi WMDs existed in the post Gulf War era (which the
best US intel now doubts strongly) and if they went to Syria (which
nobody except a handful of fascist half-wits believe) then your
"reasons" are little more than lame excuses. Those WMDs (if they exist)
constitute a SERIOUS threat, perhaps an even greater one if laying
around in Syria where there are all kinds of uncontrolled half-baked
fundie hellraisers instead of Iraq, where a very strong & well
disciplined force controlled by a very secular gov't kept the terrorists
out.



Regardless, the latest revelation of Syrian ties to the assassination of
Hariri will now force Russia to sit on the sidelines as a case for regime
change is made before the UN against Assad.


I thought the UN was ineffective? I thought the UN was corrupt?

Can't you "neo-conservatives" make up your minds?

BTW I am glad to hear that you pulled thru the hurricane OK.

DSK