There's little new news coming out of Burma. The junta, having shut down Internet access inside the country, has all but stopped the flow of information to the outside world. It's difficult to know exactly what is going on there now, but it seems more likely than not that the Burmese push for democracy has been violently suppressed, with hundreds, and possibly thousands, of protesters slaughtered. This has caused much hand-wringing from across the political spectrum, but beyond empty talk of boycotting the Beijing Olympics, there has been no serious course of action recommended by anyone on either the left or the right. And this includes the Bush administration, which has only mustered the courage to condemn the ongoing atrocity while implementing toothless sanctions against a regime that needs nothing from the United States.

But there is something that can be done. Senator Lieberman first raised the possibility of military action last week, urging the Bush administration to "investigate how else our military and intelligence capabilities can be used to put additional stress on the regime," and to examine "how the junta's ability to command and control its forces throughout the country might itself be disrupted." And yesterday, WEEKLY STANDARD editor Bill Kristol published a piece in the Washington Post calling for the Bush administration to put its money where it's mouth is. Under the headline "Talk is Cheap," Kristol wrote:

Couldn't we use other military and intelligence capabilities to put more stress on the regime? As Sen. Joseph Lieberman has suggested, "The junta has tried to cut off the ability of peaceful demonstrators to communicate to the outside world through the Internet and cellphone networks; we should be examining how the junta's ability to command and control its forces throughout the country might itself be disrupted." What about limited military actions, overt or covert, against the regime's infrastructure -- its military headquarters, its intelligence apparatus, its rulers' lavish palaces? Couldn't such actions have a deterrent effect, or might not they help open up fissures in the regime? Have we really done all we can to avert the disaster that is unfolding?

In his second inaugural address, President Bush, quoting Lincoln, put "the rulers of outlaw regimes" on notice: "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and, under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it." Couldn't the Bush administration do more to give that just God a helping hand?