As I noted last night, the U.S. media have largely played along with the White House tune on Syria and chem agents and the "red line" and all (with McClatchy an exception, at least to date), so it was refreshing to read an analysis in Politico, of all places, today that suggests (actually declares) that the chem angle is just an excuse and the real reason for acting now is simply that Assad is suddenly winning and Obama is taking a beating from hawks outside and inside the administration (even Bill Clinton) for doing nothing. The red line actually = Assad victory.
And here's Patrick Cockburn on Democracy Now! raising doubts about chem agent evidence and media coverage: "Well, I was rather amazed and depressed by some of it that I have seen, particularly CNN,
that was an—seemed to be an immediate acceptance that whatever was said
about Syria employing chemical weapons was accepted as if it was
written in stone, despite all of what happened in Iraq in the past, and
an almost total lack of skepticism about the claims now being made."
UPDATE Good Kevin Drum take on dangers of these steps on Syria--and he posts recent five-minute video with Fareed Zakaria explaining same.