« Recognizing the Chaos We Already Have | Main | Obama's "Tough Love" for Black Community »

Pelosi's Opening to Syria May Have Worked

Those who've been itching for a confrontation with Syria have to be sorely disappointed by this stunning announcement:

SHARM EL-SHEIK, Egypt - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will meet Syria's foreign minister Thursday in the first high-level talks between the two countries in years, a U.S. official said.

Warmongers will be even more depressed by this statement by a US military spokesman:

"There has been some movement by the Syrians," a US military spokesman said in Baghdad. "There has been a reduction in the flow of foreign fighters into Iraq" for more than a month, Major General William Caldwell said.

A "month" you say General? Hmm....Wasn't it just a month ago that Nancy Pelosi was heading to Syria:

"We do not encourage and, in fact, we discourage members of Congress to make such visits to Syria," said White House deputy spokeswoman Dana Perino. "This is a country that is a state sponsor of terror, one that is trying to disrupt the (Prime Minister Fouad) Siniora government in Lebanon and one that is allowing foreign fighters to flow through its borders to Iraq.

What a difference a month makes. Don't get me wrong--I'm not complaining about this turn of events. I've long believed that the opportunity existed to split Syria away from Iran and dramatically change the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. Neocons who have argued for regime change in Syria have clearly lost out inside the administration to cooler heads who understand that toppling the regime of Bashar Assad could result in the establishment of a Sunni Islamic fundamentalist state in Syria that would magnify our problems in the region dramatically.

This is another sign that neocon influence is on the decline and that the realists have reasserted control of American foreign policy.

Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!

  • Currently 2.6/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 2.6/5 (5 votes cast)

Comments (5)


I am passionate about the military but almost anything that reduces the numbers of foes that they face I would count as a good thing,no matter the source.

Rep. Pelosi was still wrong to have done what she did. That it had some large, positive effect is a bug not a feature of her travels. Yes, I would say she has thawed the relationship between the two countries. But her personal diplomatic initiative is wrong.

Similar case: In the midwest, a schoolbus driver was flagged down by a woman in distress. She boarded the bus, full of children, and told the driver that her husband was waving a gun, kicked her out of the car and was going to come back and kill her after he killed her lover. Bus driver called police and stayed there until they arrived.

Bus driver was fired for endangering the children, WHICH WAS HER PRIMARY RESPONIBILITY. Yes she did very well, being civic minded and helping the woman. I would have done the same and suffered the same consequence.

Nancy Pelosi went outside her primary responsibility when she went to speak on behalf of the United States with Syria. I would hold that she is at least guilty of the appearance of treason as defined in the US Constitution ("...enemies in a time of war..") but the President should issue a Pardon for that trip. She broke the law, and if she is not willing to suffer the punishment for it, she is nothing more than a spoiled teenager wondering why her parents are so uncool and mean as to not give her her own car until she can pay for it.

Steve Crickmore:

The right wing got in a dither over this issue about Speaker Pelosi and Syria, including predictibly our big brother Wizbang, April 6th Did Speaker Pelosi Commit a Felony By Going to Damascus? The answer seemed to be yes .. that is, except for a few trolls like Larkin "It's always refreshing to see the mock outrage and raging hypocrisy of the Wizbang crowd exposed." and myself (and this was my own idea) that "it is useful for the administration to have Pelosi and company, have these exploratory talks with the Syrians..these Congressional overtures might pave the way to some future direct diplomatic negotiations with Syria which possibly could improve the situation with neigboring Iraq." Hey far from a pardon, Pelosi should receive a pat on the back, from the State Department and Rice, for trying to help bail out Bush and Cheney.... Maybe she already has?


You say she broke the law? Why then did the State Dept brief her and her travel group, which included at least one Republican. Why then did the State Dept have people with that group at all times? Nobody from the State Dept claimed she broke the law, just the BS from Cheney and Rove.

I will give you credit for your nice SPIN on trying to smear the Speaker. And your ("... enemies in a time of war..") manure is also cute. Please tell us when the US went to war with Syria?
Must have been sleeping when that war was declared.

That is the problem both sides have, they try to SPIN BS to make one side look good and the other side bad. More and more people are waking up to the spin bs, and it seems like I just caught you trying to spread manure around.


A month after Pelosi went over there and, well, didn't really accomplish much except look bad in a scarf. She didn't go over and negotiate a reduction in anything, she didn't get any commitments for anything - all she did was go over and show everyone in the Middle East how the Democrats can screw things up.

On the other hand, it's a couple of months after the "Surge," and it's much more probable that they finally figured out that they're losing too many "freedom fighters" to replace.

...and it's a funny thing. Just a while back, one of the big claims from the left was that there weren't many foreign fighters in Iraq, anyway. So there were either a lot (enough that the flow could be turned off pretty much at a whim), or there weren't many (so a reduction in fighters from Syria wouldn't be noticed)

P. Bunyan:

I have to agree that its a good think that the administration is talking to Syria and attempting to do the same with Iran.

To think that Pelosi had anything to do reduction in the flow of foreign fighters is biased opinion and unsupported speculation at best.

I think it's unlikely, as neither Pelosi nor the Democratic Party as a whole, would benefit from a successful resolution to the Iraq war. The Democrats need America to suffer a crushing defeat in Iraq, which is why I question Pelosi motives and actions.

I believe both the Democrats and the Syrian goverment consider President Bush to be their enemy. As the saying goes "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]





Add to Technorati Favorites


Publisher: Kevin Aylward

Editors: Lee Ward, Larkin, Paul S Hooson, and Steve Crickmore

All original content copyright © 2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark. Wizbang Blue™ is a trademark of Wizbang®, LLC.

Powered by Movable Type 3.35

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.