Source: Washington's Blog

We noted in February:

The U.S. is supporting the Syrian opposition, considering military options for ousting the Syrian government, American allies Britain and Qatar allegedly already have foreign troops inside Syria, and the U.S. has been planning regime change in Syria for over 50 years.

Indeed, the United States is fighting on the same side as 3 terrorist groups in Syria.

Even Pat Buchanan asks:

If its good for Al Qaeda, can it be good for us?

Indeed, terrorist rebels have been responsible for much of the violence inside Syria. And outside monitors have confirmed that the situation on the ground is much different than it is being portrayed in the Western media. (And according to the large German newspaper FAZ, those recently massacred in Hama were on the same side as Syrian leader Assad).

Russia has repeatedly stated that it would consider an attack on Syria as an attack on its national security. (And Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said that if the U.S. invades the sovereignty of countries like Syria, it could lead to nuclear war.   And see this.)

Now, Russia is allegedly selling attack helicopters to the Syrian government, and defending the sales because the U.S. is supplying rebels with weapons to fight against the government.

Cold War 2.0.  And this time, China may participate.

Of course, Iran and Syria have had a mutual defense pact for years. So war in Syria could well drag Iran into a hot war.

Syrian conflict a proxy war to reshape the Middle East

Kofi Annan, who has resigned as the United Nations and Arab League special envoy on Syria, has had a bad press in certain quarters of late. Whether the plan that bears his name — to bring a halt to the killing and a political transition — was ever realistic in the first place, Annan, at least, was honest in his efforts to bring an end to the violence without widening the conflict.