I thought this started as peaceful protests for change/reform.

Syrian g'ment (al-Assad)will give his answer whether or not to agree to a ceasefire on Thursday (tomorrow 10/25/2012) -from Reuters. Other news- uptp now 72 missiles shot from Gaza into Israel (Hamas particiapating) -still continuing. American Embassay/Cairo issued a dire warning for US missionaries-females-for their lives and safety- Egypt also kicked out 2 aid orgs. Just to keep you updated what is going on and breach the blackout of news being reported.

Unfortunately, the disenfranchised, peaceful, law abiding Muslims came to believe that their "Arab spring" would provide them with more freedom and opportunity than they had under Hussein of Iraq, Qhadaffi of Lybia, Assad of Syria and elsewhere in the Muslim world. Truth of the matter is that these autocratic despots were able to keep the peace and the number of deaths under their regimes was much less than the number of deaths since they were deposed. Historically, Great Britain was to blame for all this because they divided territories along map meridians without regard for traditional frontiers (i.e., geographic logic and sustainability) or the ethnic composition of indigenous populations, thus creating conflicts that were evident in the civil wars in Yemen and Lebanon, as well as in the war between Iraq and Iran, in the gassing of countless Kurds in Iraq, and in the killing of Iraqis by Iraqis, Syrians by Syrians as well as the killing of Egyptians by Egyptians. Unfortunately again, this will not end in the near future. Despite best intentions, no one has a viable solution to this day.

.

eph521: In Muslim nations, everything is peaceful. Look at the Bahrain case!

In Mali and Pakistan, love and peace dancers, Sufis are blown to pieces including their mosques by Sunni al Qaida, Salaffi, Taliban and other militant groups!

i found it funny that they can agree to a holiday truce, yet they cannot agree to a permenant one.

basil best solution is just to stay out of it, while not allowing them into the US untill they grow up. we dont need their oil. we have enough oil on US soil and US waters to provide oil for our own use for the next 100 years even if demand increases 10 fold. in the mean time we can work on green energy to replace it.

Yea, Yea!!!! Happy Days! A truce to pray to our dead Muslim God and get rejuvinated and spirtually aligned to kill some more in the name of Muhammed. Enjoy the festivites while they last!

kill kill kill kill kill kill kill kill "vacation" kill kill kill kill kill kill this is just so fd up.

BE SURE to read Yahoo News or Reuters today:

http://news.yahoo.com/white-house-told-militant-claim-two-hours-libya-010758099.html

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.

The emails, obtained by Reuters from government sources not connected with U.S. spy agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity, specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.

The brief emails also show how U.S. diplomats described the attack, even as it was still under way, to Washington.

U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the Benghazi assault, which President Barack Obama and other U.S. officials ultimately acknowledged was a "terrorist" attack carried out by militants with suspected links to al Qaeda affiliates or sympathizers.

Administration spokesmen, including White House spokesman Jay Carney, citing an unclassified assessment prepared by the CIA, maintained for days that the attacks likely were a spontaneous protest against an anti-Muslim film.

[Related: Benghazi suspect held in Tunisia]

While officials did mention the possible involvement of "extremists," they did not lay blame on any specific militant groups or possible links to al Qaeda or its affiliates until intelligence officials publicly alleged that on September 28.

There were indications that extremists with possible al Qaeda connections were involved, but also evidence that the attacks could have erupted spontaneously, they said, adding that government experts wanted to be cautious about pointing fingers prematurely.

U.S. intelligence officials have emphasized since shortly after the attack that early intelligence reporting about the attack was mixed.

Spokesmen for the White House and State Department had no immediate response to requests for comments on the emails.

MISSIVES FROM LIBYA

The records obtained by Reuters consist of three emails dispatched by the State Department's Operations Center to multiple government offices, including addresses at the White House, Pentagon, intelligence community and FBI, on the afternoon of September 11.

The first email, timed at 4:05 p.m. Washington time - or 10:05 p.m. Benghazi time, 20-30 minutes after the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission allegedly began - carried the subject line "U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack" and the notation "SBU", meaning "Sensitive But Unclassified."

The text said the State Department's regional security office had reported that the diplomatic mission in Benghazi was "under attack. Embassy in Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well."

[Related: Holiday truce in Syria]

The message continued: "Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four ... personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support."

A second email, headed "Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi" and timed 4:54 p.m. Washington time, said that the Embassy in Tripoli had reported that "the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi had stopped and the compound had been cleared." It said a "response team" was at the site attempting to locate missing personnel.

A third email, also marked SBU and sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time, carried the subject line: "Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack."

The message reported: "Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli."

While some information identifying recipients of this message was redacted from copies of the messages obtained by Reuters, a government source said that one of the addresses to which the message was sent was the White House Situation Room, the president's secure command post.

Other addressees included intelligence and military units as well as one used by the FBI command center, the source said.

It was not known what other messages were received by agencies in Washington from Libya that day about who might have been behind the attacks.

Intelligence experts caution that initial reports from the scene of any attack or disaster are often inaccurate.

By the morning of September 12, the day after the Benghazi attack, Reuters reported that there were indications that members of both Ansar al-Sharia, a militia based in the Benghazi area, and al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, the North African affiliate of al Qaeda's faltering central command, may have been involved in organizing the attacks.

One U.S. intelligence official said that during the first classified briefing about Benghazi given to members of Congress, officials "carefully laid out the full range of sparsely available information, relying on the best analysis available at the time."

The official added, however, that the initial analysis of the attack that was presented to legislators was mixed.

"Briefers said extremists were involved in attacks that appeared spontaneous, there may have been a variety of motivating factors, and possible links to groups such as (al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and Ansar al-Sharia) were being looked at closely," the official said.

(Additional reporting by Susan Cornwell; Editing by Mary Milliken and Jim Loney)

Eric1964: Unfortunately, given global geopolitical realities, we cannot espouse an isolationist policy even if we do have enough oil. We need trading partners and to help ensure stable regimes so that no threat is posed to us by nuke toting terrorists. For example, consider the January 29, 2012 "Israel vs. Iran" article in the New York Times were it was noted that, "The Iranian regime will be several times more dangerous if it has a nuclear device in its hands...one that it could bring to the United States. It is not for nothing that it (i.e., Iran) is establishing bases for itself in Latin America and creating links with drug dealers on the US-Mexican border. This is happening in order to smuggle ordnance into the United States for the carrying out of terror attacks. Imagine this regime getting nuclear weapons to the US-Mexican border..." Of course energy independence would be ideal but a terrorist with a nuke on the Mexican border would not. Merely waiting until they "grow up" is, in my humble opinion, a suicidal policy.

Note to Syrians: Does the word "Tet" mean anything to you?

bill....it could work here as well...........

Antidisestablishmentarian: Does your moniker suggest you are? If so, I'm curious what your thoughts are about the Indiana Republican who allegedly said that it is God's will if rape victims become pregnant and that they should, therefore, carry the child to term. Some say he was misquoted.

And what do you call the USA, Turkey, and nato trash that are sending in the weapons to the alQaida rebels to kill everybody ??? nato are the barbarians and baby killers. Assad is only defending his nation against some Syrian Muslim brothers, Chechnyans, Turks, Somalis, Libyans etc. It was the rebels that went into the neighborhoods of Aleppo & Homs ! What do you call the rebels that are beheading the Christians with hillary the witch giving them support ? This is a foreign invasion !

mikey: there were several Christmas ceasefires durring WWI. They even reportedly threw gifts across the trenches to each other.

Mifo

There was only one Christmas cease-fire during WW1 and it was on December 25^th 1914 (it did happen across multiple fronts) and only involved the actual fronts in which they not only shared gifts but also had football matches and visted each others trenches too, ironically it was the generals and politicians behind the lines that were angry about it, and on that note the high commands of both sides organised and deployed massive artillery bombardments on Christmas 1915 to make sure it didn’t happen again. I wonder who’s more barbaric there, the leaders or the soldiers?

If only that were possible.

Good point. I think the Rebels will also be strategizing during this cease fire and getting themselves in a better position too.

In terms of Iraq, I agree... but why bring up Libya and Afghanistan? The USA needed to be there and involved in both cases.

eph521: You have to take a problem in totality and not piece meal!

If one does not know the problem and what one is doing, one does not know the result. You just watch how NATO forces will have to run from Afghanistan.

With all that why jump up and down on Syria and Iran just like before Iraqi wars.

How true, Waynero. Tragically hypocritical, isn't it!?

Middle eastern country's must be very up to-date on American History. America set a good example on how to destroy a nation of people to build one that fit it's own needs.

No mention of this support for the Muslims thugs was brought up in any debate, how Obama sent weapons to thugs to use against a recognized government that we should have been supporting.

Actually, Romney backed all of Obama's actions regarding Syria and Libya in the most recent debate, other than saying more security should have been provided in Benghazi. Weren't you watching? By the way, is the "recognized" government you say we should have been supporting the one in Syria which sent its army out to shoot its citizens demonstrating for political reform or the government in Libya which killed a planeful of Americans in Lockerbie, Scotland?

You see these kids and young men on the news holding up a rifle trying to appear all tough and manly when in reality they look like idiots. Take away that rifle and lets see how tough ya are.