Demonstrators denounced the US raid as a "criminal act" and "terrorism" [AFP]
This is the "USA's side" of the raid.
This is the "Syrian side" of the attack.
The attack was 'self-righteous' by the USA. To begin the USA military did in fact cross the Syrian border without the appropriate demeanor of international relations. They crossed the Syrian border and killed people. Whether it involved enemies of the USA military or not is still debatable and there in lies the rub.
The USA 'never' worked within the appropriate venue of 'diplomacy' to promote the 'intelligence' of the USA military. In other words, if there was indeed operatives within Syrian borders that migrated freely over the Iraqi-Syrian border there should have been established diplomatic dialogues between the USA and Syria before any attack in the region took place.
In recent months the Syrian government has established a diplomatic consulate with Iraq. An international incident could have been avoided if proper diplomatic channels were taken and it was well established through shared intelligence that there was a 'mutual' enemy of the people of the region that needed to be dealt with. At that point if the Syrian government refused to cooperate and continued to protect 'a well established operative of terrorism' then the USA would have a better platform to launch attacks and/or take their case before the UN Security Council.
Here again, the Neocons of Bush UNILATERALLY take action because they can and not because they should causing irritation of the people and further disintegration of relations between countries that SUPPOSEDLY Bush claims to invite to be a part of the regional support of the Iraqi central government.
The USA policy is that we will not tolerate countries that harbor terrorists. When the USA military is allowed to have free reign to attack anywhere they like, including inside the sovereignty of another nation, how will it ever become established whether KNOWN terrorist activities are sanctioned by the nation in which these terrorists take refuge?
Establishing the guilt of a nation in harboring terrorists that cause the people harm and attack USA military personnel and instillation does NOT require a SUMMIT so much as active and ESTABLISHED diplomatic relations. With alacrity the information regarding a KNOWN terrorist and 'international' criminal could have been brought to the diplomatic channels between Iraq and Syria for resolve of the circumstances.
The BEST possible outcome to such profound realities of the region is that Syrian troops went into the small hamlet and removed the terrorist without deaths of innocent people. The Syrian military could have established a definition of authority in the region and if necessary could have been backed up with American and Iraqi forces if there was a greater threat of retaliation. More than likely the Syrian military and/or police could have handily arrested the 'terrorist operative' without further incident.
When American aggression causes the deaths of innocent people that interprets into anger and uprising of the people in believing their government allows these type of problems to happen within their lives. They fear for their families and children and seek retribution against others for the deaths of innocent people.
We have seen the handy work of terrorists in the region that like to disrupt the government of Lebanon. It is NOT difficult to discern whether a terrorist has been discovered. The governments of the region know fully well the potential for disruption to their governments and actively act on 'tips and intelligence.' The best honed of these governments is Saudi Arabia.
The Neocons of Bush do NOT use diplomatic channels to establish understandings of military operations to gain concensus of its necessity. As a result they have estranged any and all potential to ending conflict through peace and only seek to continue conflict until their demands for economic corporate infrastructure are satisfied.
Bush cannot run a war against the Middle East to solely destroy all that he does not approve of no matter how much munition he throws at it. Bush has been and continues to be the worst Commander and Chief to the military of the USA. His decision making is solely his own without bothering to enlist the support of governments that will be disaffected by aggressive actions by the USA military. The USA cannot simply decide to invade Syria. They HAVE TO enlist the support of governments when 'a border' becomes 'a barrier' to successful dismantling of a terrorist network or cell.
The death of innocent people CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be tolerated in a place that is chronically an international powder keg. In this case, it was the diplomats of Great Britain in discussions with the Syrian President that has resolved this INCIDENT for now. Bush and his military SHOULD NOT engage in any further actions across the Syrian border, but, should establish dialogues with the Syrians to factiliate an understanding that the USA has 'intelligence' regarding people that seek to cause innocent Iraqis and Syrians harm. This incident was 'W'rongfully pursued and can be registered as an unauthorized aggression by the USA against Syria. The USA military needs to be careful of their aggressions as I do believe the Syrians will not tolerate such surprise raids on their people again.
END OF DISCUSSION !
