Dear Washington Post,

is the Jordan king Abdullah asking for a diplomatic solution in Syria or for military intervention?

On April 26 you reported:
Jordan’s Abdullah urges diplomatic action to end Syrian conflict

Jordan is urging the Obama administration to intensify efforts to find a political settlement to the Syrian conflict, …

…
Despite the failure of previous initiatives, the king urged a renewed attempt at a negotiated settlement as the only realistic path toward ending the conflict without splintering the country or condemning it to endless bloodshed.

On April 29 your news report claims:

The Obama administration worked Monday to preserve thinning hopes for a political deal that could end the Syrian civil war and to hold off rising pressure from lawmakers and Syria’s Arab neighbors for more direct U.S. involvement.

…
Several of Syria’s Arab neighbors, led by close U.S. ally Jordan, are lobbying for a more forceful U.S. role in Syria. There is no consensus about what the United States should do, however. Options include giving heavier gear to the rebels, providing protection for refugees or rebel fighters with missile batteries or aircraft, or authorizing precision airstrikes to destroy chemical weapons stockpiles or key air defenses.

So now you claim that "several of Syria’s Arab neighbors" want a U.S. war on Syria. Only Lebanon, Iraq and Jordan are Arab countries which share borders with Syria. None of then, according to your own reporting, has indeed asked for a military intervention. So how come you are now lying to your readers with such nonsensical claims?