- Eye on Money: Stock Market and Syria
- Syria accepts Russian proposal to surrender control of chemical weapons
- Local Expert: Syria must be monitored
- Quotes from President Obama's address on Syria situation
- White House tries to gain support for Syria strike
- Round 2 of Syria debate
- How international law applies to crisis in Syria
- Local representatives weigh in on Syria
- Local expert talks about Syria
- UN weapons inspectors prepare to leave Syria
- NATO chief: No plans for alliance action in Syria
- Closer to confrontation with Syria
- Money investing in light of crisis in Syria
- Obama: Only missiles, no US troops will be deployed if strike ordered on Syria
- UN envoy to Syria says chemical 'substance' used
- Details on crisis in Syria
- US lays groundwork for possible Syria strike
- Syria's effect on financial markets
- Rep. Chris Gibson discusses Syria
- Local man hopes for peace in Syria
- Expert weighs in on Syria's impact on US
- UN inspectors in Syria
- Top lawmakers call for military response in Syria
- US forces move closer to Syria as options weighed
- US could attack Syria
Closer to confrontation with Syria
Updated: Saturday, September 7 2013, 11:29 AM EDT
SCHENECTADY -- Moving closer to a confrontation. The Obama administration is making its case to Congress that our country should take military action against Syria.
The White House maintains that Syrian forces killed hundreds of civilians using toxic chemicals last week. The administration also alleges Syrian president Bashar Assad was behind the massacre.
But if the US takes action, it may have to do so without the help of British allies. Prime Minister David Cameron says his country is waiting for the UN's report with evidence of an actual chemical assault.
Closer to home, we learn that there is a great deal at stake should the US attack Syria.
A local woman familiar with Middle Eastern politics encourages the US to use caution in deciding whether or not to strike Syria, because an attack against one country could include a response from more than one.
"The list starts with Russia and China," said Union College political science professor Michele Angrist.
That list includes the countries who may wish to retaliate against the United States if it launches an attack on Syria. Angrist says our relationships with those two countries could be strained.
Then, there's Iran. "The Iranians have threatened that there would be consequence," Angrist said. "Iranian Naval vessels can cause trouble in the Persian Gulf and complicate the movement of oil out of the region in to the global market."
Angrist also fears US intervention can also encourage Hezbollah to attack Israel. But, she believes any attack would likely happen overseas.
"I don't think Iranian fallout would happen on US soil," Angrist said. "The much more likely scenario would be regional destabilization."
US officials or interests in the region then could be at risk. But this is a volatile time in the Middle East. Countless innocent lives have been caught in Syria's conflict, including those killed in a suspected chemical attack. The US should be cautious, Angirst suggests, and recalls a thought shared by those familiar with the culture and politics in the Middle East.
"They would say, 'you don't know what kind of uncertainty, what kind kind of Pandora's Box may be opening by launching cruise missiles in to a very destabilized region,'" she said.
A fifth US destroyer ship is headed to the Mediterranean Sea right now. Still, the pace has slowed in talks to attack Syria, Angrist says.
Analysts initially believed some action might be taken Thursday.