When people look at the civil war in Syria, some see a human tragedy, others see economic and political opportunity.

For weaponsmakers and the politicians who represent them, the war in Syria is money lying on the table. The Wall Street Journal recently published an op-ed calling for bombing Syria and giving shoulder fired anti-aircraft weapons to the rebels. Of course, the problem is that the rebels are a very mixed bag, some with known Al Qaeda links. So, on one front, we are being asked to wage a multi-trillion dollar war against Al Qaeda, and on another front, we are arming them. It would be an insane strategy for anyone other than a weapons maker.

Even if we give our pro-war leaders the benefit of the doubt on whether they are wanting to bomb Iraq for personal benefit, how can we look at the open wound that is Iraq and not consider all who were part of that strategy as incompetent at the very least, and as war criminals by any higher standard? Here is a war everyone knows was fought over manufactured causes, but no one seems to count as evidence against the drum beaters for another war.

By the way, former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, has also recommended this strategy of bombing Syria, and she is very possibly our next president. Our current Secretary of State is not quite as hawkish, but he also has spoken of increasing aid to the rebels. The Obama Administration appears to be against the bombing, but how long can they hold out?

In a very worrying development, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, including most of its Democratic members, are trying to pass legislation to force Obama’s hand on Syria. It’s not likely that the legislative strategy will work, but it’s ugly. Key Democrats, such as Senators Robert Menendez and Bob Casey, are yelping about war against Syria. -Bob Dryfus, the Nation