He’s actually a totalitarian state sponsor of terrorism with American, Israeli, Lebanese, Iraqi, and Syrian blood on his hands. And some of that Syrian blood is still warm on the streets.
and as Gateway pundit reminds us:
And, don’t forget that for years this “reformer” Assad allowed terrorists on his soil who had been moving, arming, and funding foreign jihadists traveling through Syria into Iraq in cooperation with al-Qaeda leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi.
The actual difference is that one is an Iranian satellite who’s opposed us in Iraq and the other gave in to us when it came to WMD after Iraq fell.
Of course as Israel matzav writes it could be a question of fear:
Though no one is yet talking about a no-fly zone over Syria, Obama administration officials acknowledge the parallels to Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi. Some analysts predicted the administration will be cautious in pressing Mr. Assad, not because of any allegiance to him but out of a fear of what could follow him — a Sunni-led government potentially more radical and Islamist than his Alawite minority government.
Frankly we aren’t in a position to intervene in Syria even if we want to, but why not simply be ambiguous? Just say: “All options are on the table.” Make Syria and Iran sweat? Make Assard think he has to give concessions?
This is what comes of judging based on what others want than our own national interest. 2012 can’t come fast enough.