Syria Doesn't Get It!

Syria thinks it's safe; shall we teach them a lesson?

Syria cannot imagine a scenario that would warrant moving its troops back to Lebanon, and will avoid giving the United States any such "pretext" to attack, Syria's ambassador to Washington said on Monday.

"If we send back our troops, this is a dream, a wish list for the Bush administration. ... We're not going to put ourselves in a confrontation with the tiger."

Sadly, Syria (aka Iraq Lite), there are some problems with your reasoning. Like, it's totally fallacious. The United States doesn't attack on mere "pretext," but when there is an overwhelming cause to start armed conflict. Iraq was a rogue state, supporting terrorism and possibly possessing WMDs (even the liberal New York Times said so!). Since Syria is just another Islamofascist state in the Iraqi model, and has supported terrorism, and may be holding those weapons that the Russians moved out of Iraq, I'd say we have more than "pretext" for attacking Syria. Perhaps, a moral imperative?

But I'm not sure - does Syria have lots of oil? If they do, French, German, and Russian oil companies may not want us attacking, since those greedy countries can't pass up a chance to make brown people suffer for the enrichment of Europe. "No Blood, For Oil!"

The second problem - going to war is not on Bush's wish list. Please, I know savage warmongering is familiar to those backward, militaristic states in your immediate area, Syria, but in the civilized world, that gave up such barbarism in...what, 1200?...war is an unfortunate last resort and not anything to be wished and hoped for.

I guess the only other problem is with the article itself. Is that Reuters betraying the interests of the civilized world in favor of obvious lies and propaganda? How about we imprison them in Gitmo with their terrorist buddies?