Attack into Syria

I was tied up most of yesterday with a local Obama fundraiser, so I missed a lot of news.  But a couple of folks at the event mentioned that we had “attacked” Syria.  My initial reaction was to look at the calendar and count the days until the election:  9 (as of yesterday).  As my new friend Jay pointed out, the military woulnd’t attack Syria as a political move, manufacturing an October surprise to make foreign policy and national security *the* issue and move McCain’s poll numbers.  But an attack into Syria probably has to come with approval from someone living in a really big white house, or at least hanging out there a lot with his buddy who does, so who knows?  Here’s the skinny on the “attack” from VetVoice:

This is interesting:

 

DAMASCUS, Syria – U.S. military helicopters attacked an area along the country’s border with Iraq, causing casualties, Syria’s state-run television and witnesses said Sunday.The TV report quoted unnamed Syrian officials and said the area is near the Syrian border town of Abu Kamal. It gave no other details on Sunday’s attack.

Local residents told The Associated Press by telephone that two helicopters carrying U.S. soldiers raided the village of Hwijeh, 10 miles inside Syria’s border, killing seven people and wounding five.

Obviously if it took place “10 miles inside the border” it wasn’t a mistake.  David Shuster just confirmed this on MSNBC, and the way he described it is pretty much as a deliberate, targeted raid of some sort.  He also made note of the most significant aspect here: U.S. forces have never launched cross-border raids into Syria before.

Have any thoughts?  Anyone?

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

One response to “Attack into Syria

  1. Art V.

    I’m curious why your friend Jay writes this event off as a political move. It seems to me that a small, rural village poses no immediate threat that couldn’t have been addressed later. With that in mind, why attack Syria so close to the election?

    Maybe the attack wasn’t exclusively political in nature, but I have a hard time believing that the timing of it wasn’t. McCain needs a boost in his slipping numbers and his strong-point is (in the minds of the American people) national security. This clearly shifts the national discussion.

    Your thoughts? And your friend Jay’s, as well?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s