Top neocon John Bolton pens an op-ed on Syria. I hope you're sitting down:
It would have been one thing to work with the Syrian diaspora to remove Assad and the Baath party when we had a massive military presence in Iraq, right on Syria’s border. In the days just after Saddam’s ouster in 2003, conditions were optimal (if nonetheless imperfect) for overthrowing Assad and replacing his regime with something compatible with American interests. We would not have needed to use U.S. ground forces. Our mere presence in Iraq could have precluded Iran — or, what we see today, an Iraq under Iran’s influence — from trying to protect Assad.
But the dream of a permanent occupation of Iraq and the ousting of Assad is just the start:
Significantly, U.S. intervention could not be confined to Syria and would inevitably entail confronting Iran and possibly Russia. This the Obama administration is unwilling to do, although it should.
Remember what Romney said about Bolton:
John’s wisdom, clarity and courage are qualities that should typify our foreign policy.
Just ponder that for a moment. Are you terrified because Romney believes that? Or because he'll say anything to get elected?