Israel on the other hand would benefit by a weakened Syria and European countries being in a permanent conflict with Syria.
WINEP is transparent as usual.

This is a poorly-reasoned article, but, lamentably, is what passes for serious discourse argument among the intellectual leadership in Washington who do not have to be held accountable for or deal with the consequences of their foreign policy recommendations. Let’s take a close look at Tabler’s article…
In the first paragraph, Tabler sets the scene: there is emerging sectarian violence in Syria (immediately we should be reminding ourselves of the sectarian civil war that occurred as a result of U.S.-led regime change in Iraq and the fall of the secular Iraqi Ba’ath Party) and the government is responding to challenges to its authority and sovereignty. Tabler then warns the reader that there could be a “bloodbath” come Ramadan, presumably because that’s when Muslims are most fervent.
In the second paragraph, we’re informed that this mess is slowing down the Syrian economy. Though this is certainly bad news for the Syrian people who make, on average, only $4,800 a year, Tabler sees a silver lining. A weakened economy would be “particularly” bad for the “regime.” One would think it would be particularly bad for those who make up the country’s lower economic strata and not so bad for the political elite who, as history has shown, are pretty good at clinging onto power even while swimming in dire economic straits . (If you don’t believe me, ask the denizens of Burma, Cuba, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, and Zimbabwe; they’ll tell you). At this point in the article, we should take a moment to notice Tabler’s modern Newspeak. Potential “bloodbaths,” as opposed to “maintaining law and order,” demand foreign interference; “regimes,” as opposed to “governments,” are just begging to be overthrown; and “protesters,” as opposed to “rebels,” are hapless and peaceful.
In the third paragraph, Tabler makes his case. Because violence in Syria is, by his reasoning, likely to increase (remember, at this point we’re still talking about what is essentially a domestic issue), the Syrian people (read: the rebels, er, protestors), the U.S., and the “international community” (notice Israel’s CONSPICUOUS absence despite still being at war with Syria and being the major beneficiary of a weakened Syrian government and military) should work ruthlessly to overthrow a secular Arab government that is not actively targeting American strategic interests. Don’t bother checking your calendar. It’s 2011; not 2002. I know, déjà vu, right?
After making his case, Tabler lists six ways to hurt the Syrian economy by targeting its oil sector, something few states would likely do given the rising demand for oil.
Tabler undermines his thesis toward the end of the article by stating that this strategy could hurt the Syrian population as a whole if it wasn’t applied precisely (and how does one do that exactly?). He also mentions that our usual European sanction partners are suffering from “sanction fatigue” (i.e. the United States could not expect them to reliably cooperate) and that sanctions brought against Iran (a Syrian ally) have had “mixed results” (read: FAILED to achieve their objective of halting Iran’s uranium enrichment program).
To get the Europeans on board, Tabler suggests beginning with “pinpointed” sanction measures, but how does one “pinpoint” sanctions targeted at an industry that is the lifeblood of an economy? He doesn’t say because the details don’t matter. What matters to Tabler and the other Very Serious People in Washington (and Tel Aviv) is regime change.
The article ends warmly by hoping for a “transition to a more humane government for the Syrian people.” Awww.
Typical of Beltway thinking regarding foreign policy, Tabler spends an inordinate amount of attention on the “how” and very little on the “why.” If your political loyalty is to the United States as opposed to, say, Israel, then you might ask, “How does working to topple the Syrian government, and in so doing, sew chaos among its security forces; bring the economy to its knees; inflame sectarian tensions; and tear apart the country’s delicate social fabric, enhance the United States’ position strategically in the world?” I have seen first-hand how doing all of the above has done the OPPOSITE next door in Iraq, so I am loath to see a repeat.
I wish the people of Syria the best, but whatever happens, it is their fight. From a security standpoint, the last thing the United States needs to do is be seen trying to orchestrate (another) regime change in a majority-Muslim, majority-Arab country and create conditions that when violated (and they most certainly would be violated) would have to be either ignored or enforced, the latter of which could pave the road to future hostilities in Syria involving U.S. forces.

the US needs to wait a little bit longer to see where the silent majority in syria comes through on Assad. the middle class is loyal to themselves in syria, not the protestors or the elites.

everyone wants status quo in the middle east...including the US.

I suspect that America's and the West's reticence generally to really up the pressure and make Assad and his government face the music is the question of who will replace him? There are number of active Islamic groups in Syria including the Muslim Brotherhood in Hama. It is difficult to see why we should want to help them given they have been singing the praises of Jihad for many years and threw street parties after 9/11. This of course contrasts with Libya where the rebels are primarily secular. Lets sit this one out.

An aging, former world heavyweight champion, Patrick "Lights" Leary is an extremely proud, good-hearted, Irish American who is struggling to find his identity after retiring from his beloved boxing. After years of wear and tear in the ring, he is diagnosed with pugilistic dementia (a neurological disorder that affects boxers who suffered too many hits to the head, gradually causing memory loss and constant headaches). Now, Lights is struggling to support his family (a wife and three daughters) and their comfortably secure lifestyle in Bayonne, jenny mccarthy, after his amoral and incompetent brother/business manager squanders Lights' life savings.Running out of ways—and time—to earn enough money to re-secure his family's future, Leary must decide whether to either: accept the brutal and demeaning job of debt collector for a local racketeer; or, launch a long shot, health-risking, comeback for the huge payday that would result from becoming "the champ" once again.

It takes the entire world for sanctions to work. It does not do much good if London, Europe or the U.S impose sanctions if China and Middle East countries such as Saudi Arabia violate the sanctions for their political gain.

ChangS