If they could infiltrate a government facility or in some other way make it appear to be agovernment action and launch the mortars where they wouldn't do signifigant damage but might provoke Turkey into further action against the government?
Given the potential for that to backfire against them, coupled with the fact that they'd be better served by simply taking those mortars and using them against the Syrian military, and the fact that Syria has already fired on Turkish soil and equipment before, that sounds highly unlikely.
Also what was said about Libya, which was said by the current president.
next step- Obama decides how to respond then Romney puts his foot in his mouth denouncing the president's response- regardless of what it is.
Isn't that exactly what was said before going into Afghanistan or Iraq?
I can't speak for Iraq... but Afghanistan had precidence: Russia in the 80's. There was no way it wasn't going to degenerate into prolonged guerrilla warfare. And that's exactly what happened.
NATO (well, the US) is very good at obliterating large armies. It's not equipped or trained for guerrilla warfare. Which won't be an issue in Syria, since those types of people would be on NATO's side, not the governments.