About those Syrian Scuds

They are in the news again today. The "desperate" Assad regime "may" have unleashed up to six Scud missiles against the al-Qaeda rebels.

Here's analyst Mark Perry in an interview from Al Jazeera a few days ago discussing Assad's use of the missiles. Note that while Perry refers to the use of Scuds as a "profound escalation" his only reference point is reports in the NYT.

Mark Perry is not a reflexive Arab hater like too many of the "experts" we see on the evening news. In fact, he was once an adviser to Yasser himself. He knows his stuff, but he doesn't actually know anything about Assad's use of Scuds.

And here's Joshua Landis' take on the Syrian Scuds. Like Perry he is well regarded and well connected in the Middle East. Yet all his insights into Assad's use of Scuds seem to come from the New York Times.

All of the Times' info about Assad's Scuds seem to come from unnamed sources in the State Department.

Which is not to say they're not true, but one should certainly not assume that they are.

The bigger question should be why is the State Department promoting this story? If they intend to not support the rebels any more than they already have, what is the point of publicizing this "profound escalation?"

The think tank here at Falling Downs believes that in the absence of verification from the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and in-country
sources, the Syrian Scuds story is most likely bogus.

So why is the State Department busy spreading a bogus story?

At this point it is imperative that the US keep its options open. Boots on the ground will mean going head to head with the very rebels that America has winked and nodded into the country. Leaving al Qaeda in charge of Syria is a non-starter both in Washington and in Israel.

It cannot be allowed to happen.

These "last days of a desperate dictator" stories are meant to prepare the public for something the public has absolutely no appetite for.

Another US war in the Muslim world.