Why Military Action in Libya and Not Syria?

This article explores the reasons why America was so quick to become involved in the situation in Libya but has been largely reluctant to become an active part in the rebellion in Syria. The stakes in Syria are a lot higher than those in Libya. Washington worked quickly against Moammar Gadhafi with devastating air power striking against his forces. While many claim that since Libya happened first the international community responded there first, other have stated that the Arab League is much more willing to allow the Syrian leader to do as he pleases as they are very close to him. Gadhafi had been accused of attempting to assassinate Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah in 2003, America is very closely tied to Saudi Arabia and Saudi interests are American interests. This attempt lead to antipathy between Gadhafi and the other Arab leaders, making the intervention in Libya a greatly supported action. Syria's leadership is much more protected by other Arab countries. They have close ties to Israel, a country that the U.S. is wary of going against. Syria is also closely linked to Iran and Hezbollah. While getting rid of the Syrian leadership would be in the best interests of the United States, they are not willing to go against the other Arab leaders who are largely unwilling to be on Assad's bad side.