While Washington was wrapped with their manufactured debt crisis, the government of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria began a deadly crackdown on protesters timed to coincide with the start of Ramadan.
News reports say more than 1,600 people have been killed, nearly 3,000 people disappeared, and many thousands of people remain in detention or have been tortured and beaten.
Just this past weekend, 136 people were killed in violence throughout the country. The Syrian government has banned the press, but independent footage of the weekend's attack on Hama seem to show indiscriminate attacks on peoples homes by Syria troops. Eyewitnesses say Syrian troops are "firing randomly in residential neighborhoods".
President Obama issued a statement saying he is "appalled by the Syrian government’s use of violence and brutality against its own people."
Ban Ki-moon, United Nations Secretary-General, said Assad has "lost all sense of humanity" and the UN Security Council continues to discuss what to do.
Syrian rebels are calling for oil sanctions to hurt the Assad government.
Syria is a small oil producer and its sector has been in decline, with oil production down to about 390,000 barrels a day, of which the government exports about 148,000b/d. But it still forms a big revenue stream for the regime, with exports worth $3.5bn in 2009, roughly a third of total export earnings.
The situation in Syria seems similar to Libya, perhaps even worse. If Assad follows in the footsteps of his father, then more than 10,000 people may be killed to stop the uprising.
But Western leaders say there are no similarities too. Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said there is unlikely to be direct U.S. involvement to stop the violence in Syria.
The same goes for NATO. "We do not foresee any intervention in Syria. In Libya, we are working on the basis of a UN mandate with the support of countries in the region. The conditions on Syria are not similar," said Anders Fogh Rasmussen, NATO Secretary General.
France, a big advocate to bombing Libya, has ruled out a military intervention in Syria. Britain, has nixed the use of military in Syria too.
Arab leaders are largely silent about the deadly crackdown despite "strained" relations between Assad and other Arab leaders.
Syrian human rights activist Ammar Abdulhamid has accused the international community being "rife with hypocrisy and cowardice" in its response to Syria.
Supporters of involvement in Libya cited a"humanitarian crisis" as reason for intervention. President Obama explained that bombing Libya was in the interest of the United States because it could stop a potential massacre. "I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action," Obama said. Isn't a massacre going on now in Syria? Doesn't the "humanitarian crisis" in Syria rate?
To the supporters of U.S. and NATO involvement to in the Libya, why aren't you loudly calling for a "kinetic military action" "averting a humanitarian crisis" in Syria?