Are we seriously thinking about raiding Syria...

...or is news about Syria just something to try and keep the Iraq mess off the front pages? This is what Syrian Foreign military spokeswoman Buthaynah Sha'ban suggested to Al Jazeera after US Undersecetary of State for Arms Control John Bolton on tuesday accused Syria of developing weapons of mass destruction, supporting terrorist groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad; occupying Lebanon, and allowing militants to cross over the Syrian border into Iraq to attack American forces. In fact, a "Syrian Accountibility Bill" with bi-partisan support is going through Congress.

Syria's reply: What about Israel? In describing this position, some will probably accuse me of anti-semitism, so here goes nothing.

A Syrian government official, whose name I forget,was interviewed on BBC Radio Newshour earlier this week, and I caught the interview while was I was on the road. The reporter asked her to answer to the US accusations, and the official did, and the report was handled in a very objective manner.

On the charges of occupying Lebanon, the official pointed out that Israel is in Palestine.

On the charges of supporting terrorist organizations Syria disagrees with the US on the definition of terrorism, and again, asked why Israel is not classified as such for what they have done to the Palestinians.

On the charges of allowing militants to go over their border into Iraq, Syria points out that it's nearly impossible to completely guard a large international border, and points out that drug smugglers are still able to get into the US, so the US is asking Syria to do something so impossible that even the accuser cannot do it in their own country.

On the charges of weapons of mass destruction, it gets more interesting. I believe Syria denied this but also pointed fo Israel for a few reasons. One, how can the US deny Syria the right to defend itself against a country that is their enemy and already has nuclear weapons of mass destruction? Why doesn't anyone speak out against Israel having a nuclear weapons program and the fact that Israel will not allow IAEA inspections? And how come nobody mentions that it was Syria who sponsered a resolution to (I believe) the UN Security Council to make the Middle East a nuclear-free zone, and it's Israel (the same country that still won't sign a non-proliferation treaty, I might add) who refuse to join the nuclear-free zone in the Middle East?

Yes, the anti-semitism of Syrian government and the Syrian media has to be in the back of your mind when you read Syria's reply to the accusations, but can you not agree that some of it makes sense? How can we expect countries like Syria and Iran not to want nuclear weapons when we support Israel having those same weapons? Doesn't the fact that Israel has a nuclear weapons program invent an arms race amongest other countries who are afraid that they might need to defend themselves? Wouldn't getting Israel to disarm help achieve our goal of peace in the Middle East? Why haven't we tried this? Personally, I don't think that's anti-semitism, just common sense. If roles were reversed and Israel was in Syria's shoes, I would be asking the same questions.

From my standpoint as a pacifist, it's in my interests that no countries develop nuclear weapons, whether the country is Iran, North Korea, Syria, Israel, or even the United States. I would love to see the arms race and nuclear proliferation just stop, period. So the US and Israel havng WMDs aimed at these countries isn't helping the situation, in fact, it could be causing it. Which is why I think countries like the US and Israel are playing a part in making other countries like North Korea, Iran, and Syria want weapons of mass destruction. They don't want these weapons to take over the world, they want this weapons to make sure their country doesn't become the next Iraq.