I must say that I have been thinking as to why the Yemeni and Syrian and Libyan and Bahraini uprisings did not get the wide Arab support that the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings received. There is very little wide Arab youth support for the Arab uprisings outside of Egypt and Tunisia. The Syrian uprising (outside of the Fath circles among young Palestinians--I would not include the racists of March 14 in Lebanon who are accustomed to exploiting Syrian pain and suffering) did not generate much support on the popular level. I was wondering as to why. Partly, it has to do with blatant demands for NATO intervention: that really discredits a movement. It was unthinkable for the Egyptian and Tunisian youths to call for NATO intervention. Yet, the Syrian uprising has the most support among American academics--even among leftist academics: it is partly because it is an uprising that is directed against a regime not favored by Washington, DC. But you would think that the leftist academics would know better. Don't get me wrong: the lousy Syrian regime deserves only scorn and opposition but the Syrian National Council is not a better version than the lousy NATO council in Libya. Of course, the Syrian uprising should not be equated with the Syrian National Council, but I am afraid that the council with GCC help has succeeded in hijacking the uprising, and the lousy Syrian regime has kept in jail those who could present an alternative (radical leftists and Arab nationalists). Selectivity in cheering bothers me.