U.S. could go it alone in attack on Syria after U.K. rejection

The U.S. is reportedly still considering military intervention against Syria for the latter country's suspected use of chemical weapons despite Britain's parliament last night ruling out such action.

The Obama administration moved to strengthen domestic support for intervention by providing congressional leaders with intelligence findings that pointed to the Assad regime's culpability.

The U.S. could even take unilateral action, although it may not have to, as French President Francois Hollande reiterated his support for action.

Oil is -1% to $107.69 following the U.K.'s decision, with Citi strategist Tim Evans saying that while a strike against Syria is still possible, it's "certainly looking less likely than it did a day ago."


From other sites
Comments (10)
  • John Cusack's Pancreas
    , contributor
    Comments (70) | Send Message
    Of course a criminal government would be willing to go in alone. It sure didn't stop W those years ago. This is all about petro-dollar protection and natural gas for Europe by way of Qatar.
    30 Aug 2013, 06:08 AM Reply Like
  • Ray Lopez
    , contributor
    Comments (1828) | Send Message
    I doubt that petrodollars are driving this, anymore than the Iraq invasion. Instead, like the "Domino Theory" of Cold War intervention, it's based on a misguided theory that democracy in these countries is in the best interests of the USA. In truth, these countries are best left alone, though in this particular case I would try and arm the rebels, as do the Saudis, and maybe target some of the Syrian military targets by remote strikes. But if the opposition in Syria does not do the heavy lifting they should be allowed to lose, sad but true.
    30 Aug 2013, 06:35 AM Reply Like
  • mickmars
    , contributor
    Comments (1312) | Send Message
    Eh, it's not about "spreading democracy".


    There was democracy in Egypt, we supported a coup to overthrow it.


    There is democracy in the west bank and gaza. We hate them both.


    We blindly support Saudi, Qatari, Jordanian monarchies.


    Supporting Christian murdering rebels in Syria is not my idea of "spreading freedom" anyway.
    30 Aug 2013, 07:57 AM Reply Like
  • User 353732
    , contributor
    Comments (5166) | Send Message
    This is an exercise in vanity not morality.
    There is not even a pretense that the US is supporting democracy in this Civil War: it is, in fact, supporting Islamic terrorists against a typical ME tyrant. The US Regime is supporting the mortal enemies of the American people against a lesser enemy..
    How Russia, Iran, Cuba and North Korea must be laughing knowing that a few dozen cruise missiles might render the Syrian air force inoperable but will do nothing to change the strategic balance .
    30 Aug 2013, 06:56 AM Reply Like
  • Brian Bobbitt
    , contributor
    Comments (2087) | Send Message
    Oil aside, why are we the only ones who are outraged by use of chemical weapons? What happens to the free world if America goes isolationist? Why do I have to pay for an internal problem in Syria? Isn't there someone outside the USA who cares enough to go in with us? Are we off base trying to be the world's judge and jury and executioner? Or just plain stupid? I say, if the entire world is standing by doing nothing, then let them fight it out internally. IF they kick our shins, then slam them but good.
    Capt. Brian
    The Lost Navigator
    I have NO idea what is the correct course of action,but I do feel the entire world should be up in arms and afraid of regimes like this that even HAVE those weapons.
    30 Aug 2013, 07:07 AM Reply Like
  • mickmars
    , contributor
    Comments (1312) | Send Message
    The correct course of action is to support Syrian refugee camps in Jordan and Turkey. Picking a side in this civil war is foolish.
    30 Aug 2013, 07:59 AM Reply Like
  • Sammy Lee
    , contributor
    Comments (339) | Send Message
    The U.N. investigation hasn't even been concluded yet, and the U.S. already made its mind up days ago! There's atrocities that happen all around the world every single day. Iraq and Afghanistan are about to spiral into Civil War because of the power vacuum left by none other than U.S. forces.


    Where's the moral outrage for Africa? Oh, that's right, no strategic interest for U.S. because they don't have oil. Get it through your thick skull. I love this country, but we crossed the Rubicon when W. went into Iraq on a "slam dunk" suspicion of WMDs.
    30 Aug 2013, 08:06 AM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4442) | Send Message
    Africa actually has a lot of oil.


    Long XOM, COP
    30 Aug 2013, 08:16 AM Reply Like
  • pman6
    , contributor
    Comments (270) | Send Message
    If syria wiped themselves off the map, we would just carry on like nothing happened. So the US government should stop wasting our tax dollars on other countries' business.


    China's air pollution is worse than these alleged chemical weapons, and has killed millions of chinese already. The US should take the same stance of inaction against the syrians as they do the chinese.
    30 Aug 2013, 08:40 AM Reply Like
  • Morrison International Acco...
    , contributor
    Comments (452) | Send Message
    The fields of Brittania, Germania and Gaul are looking like the Middle East right now for the Roma... I mean, American empire.


    The people responsible are so sadistic and exist in some sick megalomania fantasy of changing the world, or making a buck.


    If we go to war, more and more people here will pay for something going on almost exactly on the other side of the planet.


    We have all this natural gas, alt energy and other sources. It is not energy.


    You may be asking yourself, well why is our government willing to throw itself at the whim of a conflict in the Middle East.


    2 reasons.


    The US dollar, and Israel.


    These are our supposed masters and deciders of what happens. These charts and talk on the news supplements and customizes the approaches.


    We need to pull out of everywhere. Japan, S. Korea, Germany, UK, Scotland, Russia, India, Paki/Afghanistan, M. East and Africa especially.


    We have plenty of allies and power here in the Americas. We have many allies, nobody will willingly face us in battle.


    We need to sit back and play the markets, not the battlefield. The battlefield is good for M&A activity, I guess you can say, but not long term growth. The market is the place to sustain our empire.


    All of this reminds me so much of Machiavelli's "Discourses on Livy", where he outlined the reasons men had become corrupt in the later years of the Roman Empire. It seems wealth was a disease, even in those days and the Romans tried to curb it, but when their old institutions/constitution (Not people, Institutions and constitutions) were altered or abandoned, decay ensued.
    30 Aug 2013, 10:11 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs