[a]sked whether the U.S. administration would go as far as toppling President Bashar al-Assad's government, she said:This was taken as "signaling" that "regime change" is not an option in the case of Syria.
"Every situation is different from the other. Syria is not Iraq and Iraq is not Syria. Iraq was a special case where there was a problem of weapons of mass destruction, backing terrorism and U.N. (Security Council) resolutions. We were also in a state of war with Iraq.
"The Syrian regime is capable of changing itself, its policies and its behaviour with its neighbours. This is the path we hope they will take," she said.
Well, ain't that just big of her. She actually allows as how the US does not plan to overthrow another sovereign government. I guess we're all supposed to be grateful for the US's forbearance. I just wonder if the reason is because they figure that Syria would be a tougher challenge than Iraq - no predictions of a "cakewalk" were made in Syria's case - or that they've decided to focus on Iran.
Footnote to the footnote, one: Uh, wait a minute. Iraq was a "special case" that involved WMDs and support of terrorism? You mean the WMDs that didn't exist and the support of terrorism that didn't happen? Those WMDs and support of terrorism? Is that what it was about? Gee, I thought it was supposed to be about "freedom for the Iraqi people!" You know things aren't going well when people are recycling old excuses.
Footnote to the footnote, two: Rice also "repeated a call" for "international election monitors for the presidential elections expected in September" in Egypt. "Do as we say, not as we do."
No comments:
Post a Comment