is not because Syria used chemical weapons, since the UK says that even if the UN team does not find evidence the Syrian government used chemical weapons they may attack anyway.
There is no reason why the Syrian government would use chemical weapons in any case, they have nothing to gain and everything to lose, since they are, with the help of Hizbollah, winning the war now. The people who have something to benefit are the Syrian rebels, who are losing, and who need intervention. If they can frame the Syrian government for a chemical weapons attack, they get what they need.
And that, almost certainly, is why the US and UK will attack, because their proxies, the FSA, are losing. If they don’t attack, Assad is going to win this civil war, not least because the rebels seem to have lost public support.
Z
What Israel wants from the U.S., Israel usually gets … whether or not it is in the U.S.’s best interests or not (exception: attack on Iran) … and they want this. I think that when you don’t include that in the answer as to why the “why the U.S. will atack Syria” you are missing a huge part of the equation.
This chemical weapon nonsense is almost certainly ginned up bullshit … there’s no reason for Syria to go this route when they are winning the war in every way … no reason at all. Shit, I wouldn’t doubt that Israel is even behind the ginned up attack … in fact, they are now claiming that they intercepted communications that “prove” that Syria did the attacks. Just like they knew that Saddam Hussein had Al-Queda ties and WMDs.
Z
Celsius 233
This is about Iran and Hezbollah as well.
It seems inconceivable to me that we’re not driving this whole M.E. debacle; from beginning to the end.
It started long before 9/11; the effort was redoubled using 9/11 as the raison d’être.
“Seven countries in 5 years”;
The YouTube clip below is General Wesley Clark discussing what he was told;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw
Badtux
Likud wants al Qaeda in charge of Syria, rather than the rather sedate Alawiite regime, because Likud’s whole electoral pitch to the Israeli public is “we keep you safe!”. With the Palestinians pretty much starved into submission, Hizballah having decided the cost of attacking Israel in terms of destruction of civilian property in Lebanon is more than they’re willing to risk, and the generals back in charge in Egypt (and let’s not forget friendly Jordan, where Israelis go on vacation), Likud is short of threats to protect Israelis from. So they need to gin one up. What better way than by overthrowing the dentist-dictator who hates jihadis and has shown no inclination of ever attacking Israel, and putting al Qaeda terrorists in charge of Syria?
Of course, this action makes Israel *less* safe, but Likud doesn’t care — it’s all about Israeli electoral politics and they’d rather Israel be unsafe and them in power, than safe and their opposition in power. They’re as patriotic as our Republican Party here in the US, in the end… i.e., they care more about partisan wins than about what’s good for the country.