The Syria Thread 2011 - Present

[DrVolin]

Surely Russia will not lay down on this...

As always, Russia will object until they get the major concession they are after. Every US plan has a price in rubles. China is another matter.

[82_28]

What's funny is is that everything the US.gov does is always legitimized with Great Britain being involved.

[conniption]

RT - Syria 'Chemical Weapons' Crisis: Live Updates

[seemslikeadream]

27 August 2013 Last updated at 05:52 ET

Syria crisis: Russia and China step up warning over strike

UN weapons inspectors in the western district of Muadhamiya. 26 Aug 2013 The UN team spoke to witnesses and survivors in Muadhamiya

Russia and China have stepped up their warnings against military intervention in Syria, with Moscow saying any such action would have "catastrophic consequences" for the region.

The US and its allies are considering launching strikes on Syria in response to deadly attacks last week.

The US said there was "undeniable" proof of a chemical attack, on Monday.

UN chemical weapons inspectors are due to start a second day of investigations in the suburbs of Damascus.

The UN team came under sniper fire as they tried to visit an area west of the city on Monday.

A spokesman for UK Prime Minister David Cameron says the UK is making contingency plans for military action in Syria.

Mr Cameron has cut short his holiday and returned to London to deal with the Syrian crisis.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote

The administration has deliberately left itself almost no room for manoeuvre - its credibility would now be zero if it failed to take some form of military action”

image of Mark Mardell Mark Mardell North America editor

Read more from Mark
How Syria conflict affects neighbours

Russian foreign ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich has called on the international community to show "prudence" over the crisis and observe international law.

"Attempts to bypass the Security Council, once again to create artificial groundless excuses for a military intervention in the region are fraught with new suffering in Syria and catastrophic consequences for other countries of the Middle East and North Africa," he said in a statement.

Late on Monday, the US said it was postponing a meeting on Syria with Russian diplomats, citing "ongoing consultations" about alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria.

Hours later, Russia expressed regret about the decision. The two sides had been due to meet in The Hague on Wednesday to discuss setting up an international conference on finding a political solution to the crisis.

The Russian deputy defence minister, Gennady Gatilov said working out the political parameters for a resolution on Syria would be especially useful, with the threat of force hanging over the country.
Continue reading the main story
Residents gather around a convoy of UN vehicles carrying a team of UN chemical weapons experts at one of the sites of an alleged poison gas attack in the Damascus suburb of Muadhamiya on 26 August 2013 UN chemical weapons inspectors spent nearly three hours in the suburb of Muadhamiya in western Damascus on Monday.
Continue reading the main story

On Monday, Mr Cameron spoke to Russian President Vladimir Putin who said there was no evidence yet that Syria had used chemical weapons against rebels, Mr Cameron's office said.

The official Chinese news agency, Xinhua, said Western powers were rushing to conclusions about who may have used chemical weapons in Syria before UN inspectors had completed their investigation.
UN visit

Both the Syrian government and rebels have blamed each other for last Wednesday's attacks.

Medical charity Medecins Sans Frontieres said three hospitals it supported in the Damascus area had treated about 3,600 patients with "neurotoxic symptoms", of whom 355 had died.
Continue reading the main story
Models for possible intervention

Iraq 1991: US-led global military coalition, anchored in international law; explicit mandate from UN Security Council to evict Iraqi forces from Kuwait
Balkans 1990s: US arms supplied to anti-Serb resistance in Croatia and Bosnia in defiance of UN-mandated embargo; later US-led air campaign against Serb paramilitaries. In 1999, US jets provided bulk of 38,000 Nato sorties against Serbia to prevent massacres in Kosovo - legally controversial with UN Security Council resolutions linked to "enforcement measures"
Somalia 1992-93: UN Security Council authorised creation of international force with aim of facilitating humanitarian supplies as Somali state failed. Gradual US military involvement without clear objective culminated in Black Hawk Down disaster in 1993. US troops pulled out
Libya 2011: France and UK sought UN Security Council authorisation for humanitarian operation in Benghazi in 2011. Russia and China abstained but did not veto resolution. Air offensive continued until fall of Gaddafi

Models for possible intervention

US officials said there was "little doubt" that President Bashar al-Assad's government was to blame.

UN inspectors spent nearly three hours in the western district of Muadhamiya on Monday where they visited two hospitals and interviewed survivors, eyewitnesses and doctors.

A UN spokesman said they had collected some samples.

Earlier in the day, the UN convoy came under fire from unidentified snipers and was forced to turn back before resuming its journey.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon condemned the shooting and asked the UN team in Syria to register a complaint.

'Accountability'

In the most forceful US reaction yet, US Secretary of State John Kerry on Monday described the recent attacks in the Damascus area as a "moral obscenity".

He said the delay in allowing UN inspectors to the sites was a sign the Syrian government had something to hide.

He said Washington had additional information about the attacks that it would make public in the days ahead.

"What we saw in Syria last week should shock the conscience of the world. It defies any code of morality," Mr Kerry said at a news conference on Monday.

"Make no mistake, President Obama believes there must be accountability for those who would use the world's most heinous weapons against the world's most vulnerable people."

John Kerry: "There is a clear reason that the world has banned entirely the use of chemical weapons"

Washington has recently bolstered its naval presence in the eastern Mediterranean and military leaders from the US, UK and their allies have convened a meeting in Jordan.

Analysts believe the most likely US action would be sea-launched cruise missiles targeting Syrian military installations.

But Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told reporters on Monday the West had not produced any proof that President Assad's forces had used chemical weapons.

He was responding to suggestions from some Western countries that military action against the Syrian government could be taken without a UN mandate.

Mr Lavrov said the use of force without Security Council backing would be "a crude violation of international law".

Earlier, UK Foreign Secretary William Hague told the BBC an international military response to the suspected use of chemical weapons would be possible without the backing of the UN.

The UN Security Council is divided, with Russia and China opposing military intervention and the UK and France warning that the UN could be bypassed if there was "great humanitarian need".

In a column in The Times newspaper, former UK PM Tony Blair has written that if the West does not intervene to support freedom and democracy in Egypt and Syria, the Middle East will face catastrophe

The UN says more than 100,000 people have been killed since the uprising against President Assad began more than two years ago. The conflict has produced more than 1.7 million registered refugees.

[Julian the Apostate]

fuck it, we might as well have elected mccain.

All holds are removed. Time to politically destroy this president.

He clearly wants to do Iraq all over again. No Clue appears present.

Either he's totally controlled, or totally useless.

Either way, it's over.

high time to start talking Impeachment if even one bomb is launched at Syria.

Call your congresscreatures

Introduce legislation specifically banning any attack.

Assuming the chemical attack was faked by the US to build a consensus for intervention, is it possible that Obama doesn’t even know that, that someone who wants this war made it happen? If so, it would not be the first time that happened (see JFK & the Cuban Missile Crisis).

I have no idea if that is the case, but I do not see Obama willingly wanting this war. He is being pushed into it either due to a real WMD attack by Assad on civilians (the benefit of the doubt viewpoint) or by a false flag attack designed to get us into the war (possibly the more realistic view).

[seemslikeadream]

AUGUST 27, 2013

Prince Bandar and Zionist Lobby
Forcing Obama into a Prolonged Syrian War
by FRANKLIN LAMB
Tehran

The Bandar-Zionist lobby collaboration, currently the cocktail party talk of many in Washington, is not a case of strange bedfellows given three decades of mutual cooperation which started during Prince Bandar’s long tenure as Saudi ambassador in Washington. Based in Washington, but with a palace out west and up north, Bandar developed almost familial relationships with five presidents and their key advisers. His voice was one of the shrillest urging the United States to invade Iraq in 2003. In the 1980s, Prince Bandar was deeply involved in the Iran-Contra scandal in Nicaragua and it his intelligence agency that first alerted Western allies to the alleged use of sarin gas by the Syrian regime in February. Bandar has reportedly for months been focused exclusively on garnering international support, including arms and training, for Syrian rebel factions in pursuit of the eventual toppling of President Bashar al-Assad.

Reportedly, the Saudi-Zionist discretely coordinated effort, confirmed by Congressional staffers working on the US House Foreign Affairs Committee as well and the US Senate Foreign Relations committee, is being led by Bandar protégé, Adel A. al-Jubeir, the current Saudi ambassador and facilitated by Bahrain ambassador Houda Ezra Ebrahimis Nonoo, who is the first Jewish person, and third woman to be appointed ambassador of Bahrain.Long known, for having myriad contacts at AIPAC HQ, and as an ardent Zionist, Houda Nonoo has attended lobby functions while advising associates that the “Arabs must forget about the so-called Liberation of Palestine. It will never happen.”

The project has set its sights on achieving American involvement in its third and hopefully its forth (the Islamic Republic) war in this region in just over one decade.

Labeled the ‘surgical strike project”, according to one Congressional staffer, the organizers, as of 8/26/13 are blitzing US Congressional offices with “ fact sheets” making the following arguments in favor of an immediate sustained air assault. They are being supported by the increasingly anguished cries from neo-cons in Congress such as John McCain, Lindsey Graham and their ilk.

The lobby’s missive details calculations why the project will succeed and turn out to be a political plus for Obama who is increasingly being accused, by this same team, of dithering. Bandar is arguing that Syrian threats to retaliate against Israel is only political posturing because Syria has never and will never launch a war against Israel, has no military capacity to do so and for the reason that Israel could level Damascus and the Baathist regime knows this well.

In addition, the Prince and his partners insist that Iran will do nothing but complain because it has too much to lose. Iran will not response other than verbally and has no history of attacking the US or Israel and would not risk the unpredictable consequences of a military response by the Republic Guards or even some of its backed militia in Iraq or Syria. Sources in Tehran have reported otherwise to this observer.

Hezbollah, it is claimed, will not act without orders from Tehran which has instructed it to maintain its heavy weapons in moth balls until the coming ‘big war’ with Israel.. It is widely agreed that if Israel attacks Iran, the region will ignite with Hezbollah playing an important role in targeting occupied Palestine.

McClain, a former pilot in Vietnam, is even pushing “weapons to be employed” list, which includes advising the White House and Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on how to do their jobs. Congressional sources report that there is tension between McCain and the Pentagon because the Senator is implying that the Pentagon doesn’t know its job or what assets it has available and how to use them.

The Saudi official acknowledges that a military strike is a game changer, especially for Russia and that it will kill any diplomatic initiative (including Geneva II), meaning that Russia will lose a serious advantage in Syria. This also means that Russia will lose its bargaining chips which could have bought them the consensus they need, political or economic. But this does not mean that Russia will stand up to the U.S. militarily, as the losses in this case would be more severe. All this is reportedly acceptable to the Prince and the lobby.

The timing of such an attack according to knowledgeable sources in Damascus and Washington would probably last no more than two days and involve sea-launched cruise missiles and long-range bombers.

Reportedly, striking military targets not directly related to Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal, hinges on three factors: completion of an intelligence report assessing Syrian government culpability for the chemical attack; continuing consultation with allies and Congress; and the Department of States International Law Bureau preparing the justification under international law.

One of the most common phases being uttered by AIPAC to congressional offices this week are the words, “Assad’s massive use of chemical weapons”.

Bandar has reportedly agreed that Israel can call the shots but that the air assault will be led by the US and involve roughly two dozen US allies including Turkey, the UK and France. The German weekly ‘Focus” reported on 8/26/13 that the IDF’s 8200 intelligence unlit bugged the Syrian leadership during the chemical weapons attack last week and that Israel ‘sold” the incriminating information to the White House.

A group from Israel arrived in Washington on 8/26/13. It included the Director of the Political-Security Staff in the Defense Ministry, Jaj. Gen. (res) Amos Gilad, Director of Planning Branch Maj. Gen. Nimrod Shefer and IDF intelligence Research Department Director Brigadier General Ital Brun. After some intense discussions, the shared some of their tapes with US officials.

The Bandar/AIPAC arguments being, pushed by this delegation and being spread around capitol hill as part of “Israel sharing its sterling intelligence” can be summarized as follows:

The US must avoid half measures to pursue a limited punitive response to the CW use. What is needed is a sustained Bosnia style bombing campaign until Bashar al-Assad is removed from office. Giving in to that temptation would be a mistake.

The use of the CW affords President Obama an, underserved opportunity to correct his errant Middle East policies. As Isreal’s agent, Robert Satloff of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy ( WINEP) is telling anyone who is willing to listen, “Obama’s deep reluctance to engage in Syria is clear to all. This hesitancy is part of his policy to wind down U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan and his championing of the idea of “nation building at home.” It is not understandable and to the millions of Americans who see Syria as a heaven-sent contest between radical Shiites and radical Sunnis, it is unwise and inappropriate. “

According to the Saudi’s,” the Obama administration now faces Bashar al-Assad’s regime and its Iranian sponsors who believe they can put a stake through the heart of U.S. power and prestige in the region by testing the president’s “red line” on the use of chemical weapons (CW). “ WINEP is arguing in a memo just issued, “ For Assad, large-scale use of CW serves multiple ends — it demoralizes the rebels, underscores the impotence of their external financiers and suppliers, and confirms to Assad’s own patrons that he is committed to fight to the bitter end. For the Iranians, Assad’s CW use makes Syria — not Iran’s nuclear facilities — the battlefield to test American resolve.”

For Bander and his Zionist collaborators, the key issue is not whether Obama authorizes the use of American force as a response to Syria’s use of CW. Rather, the key imperative is that the U.S. use whatever force in necessary to achieve regime change and choose the next regime assuring that it will be friendly to Israel.

WINEP and AIPAC are arguing that If the US military action is designed to only punish Assad for violating the international norm on CW,” it will merely have the effect of defining for Assad the acceptable tools for mass killing — perhaps only the acceptable quantities of CW to use at any given time — and will have little impact on the outcome of the Syrian conflict; in fact, it might just embolden Assad and his allies.”

Bandar has told Congressional friends who he has known for decades, that if American military action must be designed to alter the balance of power between the various rebel groups and the Syrian/Iranian/Hezbollah alliance? This will require a wholesale change in U.S. on-the-ground strategy to supply and train well-vetted opposition militias.

For Israel and its agents, the worst of all is victory by the Assad/Iranian/Hezbollah axis, which a brief but fiery barrage of cruise missiles is liable to bring about. A global power thousands of miles away cannot calibrate stalemate to ensure that neither party wins; we have to prioritize the most negative outcomes and use our assets to prevent them.

The Bandar-Zionist project is still not irreversible. The Pentagon and especially Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, are very concerned and have threatened to resign in protest. For they realize that there is a grave risk that the Syrian response will lead to a clash with one of its neighbors, a US ally. Any scenario is possible from the moment that the first missile leaves American ships in the eastern Mediterranean.

Sources in Iran and Syria has advised this observers that they expect the US bombing to commence within 72 hours.

AUGUST 27, 2013

Obama's Syria Moment
Another Western War Crime In The Making
by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
Washington and its British and French puppet governments are poised to yet again reveal their criminality. The image of the West as War Criminal is not a propaganda image created by the West’s enemies, but the portrait that the West has painted of itself.

The UK Independent reports that over this past week-end Obama, Cameron, and Hollande agreed to launch cruise missile attacks against the Syrian government within two weeks despite the lack of any authorization from the UN and despite the absence of any evidence in behalf of Washington’s claim that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons against the Washington-backed “rebels”, largely US supported external forces, seeking to overthrow the Syrian government.

Indeed, one reason for the rush to war is to prevent the UN inspection that Washington knows would disprove its claim and possibly implicate Washington in the false flag attack by the “rebels,” who assembled a large number of children into one area to be chemically murdered with the blame pinned by Washington on the Syrian government.

Another reason for the rush to war is that Cameron, the UK prime minister, wants to get the war going before the British parliament can block him for providing cover for Obama’s war crimes the way that Tony Blair provided cover for George W. Bush, for which Blair was duly rewarded. What does Cameron care about Syrian lives when he can leave office into the waiting arms of a $50 million fortune.

The Syrian government, knowing that it is not responsible for the chemical weapons incident, has agreed for the UN to send in chemical inspectors to determine the substance used and the method of delivery. However, Washington has declared that it is “too late” for UN inspectors and that Washington accepts the self-serving claim of the al Qaeda affiliated “rebels” that the Syrian government attacked civilians with chemical weapons.

In an attempt to prevent the UN chemical inspectors who arrived on the scene from doing their work, the inspectors were fired upon by snipers in “rebel” held territory and forced off site, although a later report from RT says the inspectors have returned to the site to conduct their inspection.

The corrupt British government has declared that Syria can be attacked without UN authorization, just as Serbia and Libya were militarily attacked without UN authorization.

In other words, the Western democracies have already established precedents for violating international law. “International law? We don’t need no stinking international law!” The West knows only one rule: Might is Right. As long as the West has the Might, the West has the Right.

In a response to the news report that the US, UK, and France are preparing to attack Syria, the Russian Foreign Minister, Lavrov, said that such unilateral action is a “severe violation of international law,” and that the violation was not only a legal one but also an ethical and moral violation. Lavrov referred to the lies and deception used by the West to justify its grave violations of international law in military attacks on Serbia, Iraq, and Libya and how the US government used preemptive moves to undermine every hope for peaceful settlements in Iraq, Libya, and Syria.

Once again Washington has preempted any hope of peaceful settlement. By announcing the forthcoming attack, the US destroyed any incentive for the “rebels” to participate in the peace talks with the Syrian government. On the verge of these talks taking place, the “rebels” now have no incentive to participate as the West’s military is coming to their aid.

In his press conference Lavrov spoke of how the ruling parties in the US, UK, and France stir up emotions among poorly informed people that, once aroused, have to be satisfied by war. This, of course, is the way the US manipulated the public in order to attack Afghanistan and Iraq. But the American public is tired of the wars, the goal of which is never made clear, and has grown suspicious of the government’s justifications for more wars.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll finds that “Americans strongly oppose U.S. intervention in Syria’s civil war and believe Washington should stay out of the conflict even if reports that Syria’s government used deadly chemicals to attack civilians are confirmed.” However, Obama could not care less that only 9 percent of the public supports his warmongering. As former president Jimmy Carter recently stated, “America has no functioning democracy.” It has a police state in which the executive branch has placed itself above all law and the Constitution.

This police state is now going to commit yet another Nazi-style war crime of unprovoked aggression. At Nuremberg the Nazis were sentenced to death for precisely the identical actions being committed by Obama, Cameron, and Hollande. The West is banking on might, not right, to keep it out of the criminal dock.

The US, UK, and French governments have not explained why it matters whether people in the wars initiated by the West are killed by explosives made of depleted uranium or with chemical agents or any other weapon. It was obvious from the beginning that Obama was setting up the Syrian government for attack. Obama demonized chemical weapons–but not nuclear “bunker busters” that the US might use on Iran. Then Obama drew a red line, saying that the use of chemical weapons by the Syrians was such a great crime that the West would be obliged to attack Syria. Washington’s UK puppets, William Hague and Cameron, have just repeated this nonsensical claim. The final step in the frame-up was to orchestrate a chemical incident and blame the Syrian government.

What is the West’s real agenda? This is the unasked and unanswered question. Clearly, the US, UK, and French governments, which have displayed continuously their support for dictatorial regimes that serve their purposes, are not the least disturbed by dictatorships. They brand Assad a dictator as a means of demonizing him for the ill-informed Western masses. But Washington, UK, and France support any number of dictatorial regimes, such as the ones in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and now the military dictatorship in Egypt that is ruthlessly killing Egyptians without any Western government speaking of invading Egypt for “killing its own people.”

Clearly also, the forthcoming Western attack on Syria has nothing whatsoever to do with bringing “freedom and democracy” to Syria any more than freedom and democracy were reasons for the attacks on Iraq and Libya, neither of which gained any “freedom and democracy.”

The Western attack on Syria is unrelated to human rights, justice or any of the high sounding causes with which the West cloaks its criminality.

The Western media, and least of all the American presstitutes, never ask Obama, Cameron, or Hollande what the real agenda is. It is difficult to believe than any reporter is sufficiently stupid or gullible to believe that the agenda is bringing “freedom and democracy” to Syria or punishing Assad for allegedly using chemical weapons against murderous thugs trying to overthrow the Syrian government.

Of course, the question wouldn’t be answered if asked. But the act of asking it would help make the public aware that more is afoot than meets the eye. Originally, the excuse for Washington’s wars was to keep Americans safe from terrorists. Now Washington is endeavoring to turn Syria over to jihad terrorists by helping them to overthrow the secular, non-terrorist Assad government. What is the agenda behind Washington’s support of terrorism?

Perhaps the purpose of the wars is to radicalize Muslims and, thereby, destabilize Russia and even China. Russia has large populations of Muslims and is bordered by Muslim countries. Even China has some Muslim population. As radicalization spreads strife into the only two countries capable of being an obstacle to Washington’s world hegemony, Western media propaganda and the large number of US financed NGOs, posing as “human rights” organizations, can be counted on by Washington to demonize the Russian and Chinese governments for harsh measures against “rebels.”

Another advantage of the radicalization of Muslims is that it leaves former Muslim countries in long-term turmoil or civil wars, as is currently the case in Iraq and Libya, thus removing any organized state power from obstructing Israeli purposes.

Secretary of State John Kerry is working the phones using bribes and threats to build acceptance, if not support, for Washington’s war crime-in-the-making against Syria.

Washington is driving the world closer to nuclear war than it ever was even in the most dangerous periods of the Cold War. When Washington finishes with Syria, the next target is Iran. Russia and China will no longer be able to fool themselves that there is any system of international law or restraint on Western criminality. Western aggression is already forcing both countries to develop their strategic nuclear forces and to curtail the Western-financed NGOs that pose as “human rights organizations,” but in reality comprise a fifth column that Washington can use to destroy the legitimacy of the Russian and Chinese governments.

Russia and China have been extremely careless in their dealings with the United States. Essentially, the Russian political opposition is financed by Washington. Even the Chinese government is being undermined. When a US corporation opens a company in China, it creates a Chinese board on which are put relatives of the local political authorities. These boards create a conduit for payments that influence the decisions and loyalties of local and regional party members. The US has penetrated Chinese universities and intellectual attitudes. The Rockefeller University is active in China as is Rockefeller philanthropy. Dissenting voices are being created that are arrayed against the Chinese government. Demands for “liberalization” can resurrect regional and ethnic differences and undermine the cohesiveness of the national government.

Once Russia and China realize that they are riven with American fifth columns, isolated diplomatically, and outgunned militarily, nuclear weapons become the only guarantor of their sovereignty. This suggests that nuclear war is likely to terminate humanity well before humanity succumbs to global warming or rising national debts.

Update:

The war criminals in Washington and other Western capitals are determined to maintain their lie that the Syrian government used chemical weapons. Having failed in efforts to intimidate the UN chemical inspectors in Syria, Washington has demanded that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon withdraw the chemical weapons inspectors before they can assess the evidence and make their report. The UN Secretary General stood up to the Washington war criminals and rejected their demand.

The US and UK governments have revealed none of the “conclusive evidence” they claim to have that the Syrian government used chemical weapons. Listening to their voices, observing their body language, and looking into their eyes, it is completely obvious that John Kerry and his British and German puppets are lying through their teeth. This is a far more shameful situation than the massive lies that former Secretary of State Colin Powell told the UN about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. Colin Powell claims that he was deceived by the White House and did not know that he was lying. Kerry and the British, French, and German puppets know full well that they are lying.

The face that the West presents to the world is the brazen face of a liar.

[MayDay]

So the West is planning to attack Syria within days, just as soon as the UN inspectors leave the country- on Sunday, Sept 1st- the same day Germany attacked Poland in 1939, setting off WW2.

[MayDay]

Julian Wrote:
Assuming the chemical attack was faked by the US to build a consensus for intervention, is it possible that Obama doesn’t even know that, that someone who wants this war made it happen? If so, it would not be the first time that happened (see JFK & the Cuban Missile Crisis).

I have no idea if that is the case, but I do not see Obama willingly wanting this war. He is being pushed into it either due to a real WMD attack by Assad on civilians (the benefit of the doubt viewpoint) or by a false flag attack designed to get us into the war (possibly the more realistic view).

You give Obama too much credit. It does appear, to the casual observer, that he is being pushed into this, although I highly doubt that is the case. It's just political posturing, a game at which Obama has proven himself adept.

[chump]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbfcceEkn_M

S&B's Kerry is obviously incredible. Propaganda has overwhelmed the US. (Hannah Montana??) The World sees through this blatant false flag. Dumb it down into a language the TV brats (like me) can understand.

Might makes right? I really hope the US doesn't bomb Syria (again)... Those bombs are boomerangs... Best not awake the sleeping giant, imo.

[Julian the Apostate]

Julian Wrote:
Assuming the chemical attack was faked by the US to build a consensus for intervention, is it possible that Obama doesn’t even know that, that someone who wants this war made it happen? If so, it would not be the first time that happened (see JFK & the Cuban Missile Crisis).

I have no idea if that is the case, but I do not see Obama willingly wanting this war. He is being pushed into it either due to a real WMD attack by Assad on civilians (the benefit of the doubt viewpoint) or by a false flag attack designed to get us into the war (possibly the more realistic view).

You give Obama too much credit. It does appear, to the casual observer, that he is being pushed into this, although I highly doubt that is the case. It's just political posturing, a game at which Obama has proven himself adept.

Assuming Obama cares about his Presidency and his record, how does war with Syria now do anything to help that, when the vast majority of Americans don’t seem to want it? And if he is so for it, why did he wait until now? Why would he willingly throw away whatever goodwill and political capital he still has left on a war in Syria, and risk being compared to Bush? I just don’t see any benefit for him whatsoever.

I think he has been stalling, delaying this as long as he can.

[slimmouse]

Julian Wrote:
Assuming the chemical attack was faked by the US to build a consensus for intervention, is it possible that Obama doesn’t even know that, that someone who wants this war made it happen? If so, it would not be the first time that happened (see JFK & the Cuban Missile Crisis).

I have no idea if that is the case, but I do not see Obama willingly wanting this war. He is being pushed into it either due to a real WMD attack by Assad on civilians (the benefit of the doubt viewpoint) or by a false flag attack designed to get us into the war (possibly the more realistic view).

You give Obama too much credit. It does appear, to the casual observer, that he is being pushed into this, although I highly doubt that is the case. It's just political posturing, a game at which Obama has proven himself adept.

Assuming Obama cares about his Presidency and his record, how does war with Syria now do anything to help that, when the vast majority of Americans don’t seem to want it? And if he is so for it, why did he wait until now? Why would he willingly throw away whatever goodwill and political capital he still has left on a war in Syria, and risk being compared to Bush? I just don’t see any benefit for him whatsoever.

I think he has been stalling, delaying this as long as he can.

Im currently pondering on the more authentic, between Obama ( or any other Western leader), and the Protocols.

On initial reflections I gotta tell you its pretty close.

[justdrew]

fuck it, we might as well have elected mccain.

All holds are removed. Time to politically destroy this president.

He clearly wants to do Iraq all over again. No Clue appears present.

Either he's totally controlled, or totally useless.

Either way, it's over.

high time to start talking Impeachment if even one bomb is launched at Syria.

Call your congresscreatures

Introduce legislation specifically banning any attack.

Assuming the chemical attack was faked by the US to build a consensus for intervention, is it possible that Obama doesn’t even know that, that someone who wants this war made it happen? If so, it would not be the first time that happened (see JFK & the Cuban Missile Crisis).

I have no idea if that is the case, but I do not see Obama willingly wanting this war. He is being pushed into it either due to a real WMD attack by Assad on civilians (the benefit of the doubt viewpoint) or by a false flag attack designed to get us into the war (possibly the more realistic view).

that's quite likely, but it's too bad he couldn't get in front of that, and do something about those shadowy forces, which operate without ANY legal basis. Such operatives can be and should have been liquidated in the first term. It's a problem that he (we) have apparently zero force projection capability. There should have been a low level war going on these last 5 years, isolating and destroying the shadow government. Instead we got nothing. Pure pacifism is the domain of victims. and now, due to "our" "principles" gawd only knows how many people are going to _continue_ to die 'in our names'

[8bitagent]

From "Shock and Awe" to "Shock the Conscience". Didn't the 2003 Iraq invasion begin with cruise missile strikes? Yes of course I feel terrible for all the suffering, all the displayed families and children, and
the many who have died. But the situation is so murky, it's hard to make heads or tails regarding Western/gulf supported militants and other factors.

Again as I've stated, the media and government does not have to make much of a case...most the public is already glued to their own self panopticon reality show(facebook, smart phones, twitter) to even pay attention

[8bitagent]

Surely Russia will not lay down on this, Putin must know that if Syria falls, Iran is next, and sooner or later Russia itself will be living on borrowed time. For that reason, it is not unreasonable to imagine that Putin will take a stand against this beast sooner rather than later. China too knows that who wins this game will determine who wears the crown of planet earth's one world government. I don't expect that the beast will be given a free ride to wear this crown, so the period ahead is fraught with high risk of serious world war.

Yeah as much as I say "fuck Russia" re: their policies, they may be the only thing preventing a total globalist takeover of the world. (though the corporations already beat them to it)

Afghanistan - Iraq - Libya , all conquered toppled and proxy militants injected. Somalia, Pakistan and Yemen have been droned and bombed ad nauseum....now comes Syria. The West already has
proxy militants wreaking havoc. All that is left is Iran. Iran is sandwiched between Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan so it's curious they're saving the best for last. And I hate to be that one, but since Israel has to deal with Hezbollah fall out, what is Israel's role or comment on this current situation? They've already been striking Syria in recent months. An element of Iran could get involved, and we got ourselves a clusterfuck.

It's funny...we get sick to our stomach over the views of social conservatives, particularly southern social cons. But its the "liberal" hawks like Mccain and Lieberman that are often the MOST dangerous.

[justdrew]

From "Shock and Awe" to "Shock the Conscience". Didn't the 2003 Iraq invasion begin with cruise missile strikes? Yes of course I feel terrible for all the suffering, all the displayed families and children, and
the many who have died. But the situation is so murky, it's hard to make heads or tails regarding Western/gulf supported militants and other factors.

Again as I've stated, the media and government does not have to make much of a case...most the public is already glued to their own self panopticon reality show(facebook, smart phones, twitter) to even pay attention

that's the thing about Iraq. the justification that it was allowed under existing UN resolutions MAY have basis. BUT - that doesn't EXCUSE the nature of the attack. Shock and awe, the targeting of civilian infrastructure, etc, was unquestionably a war crime. As was the insanity of de-bathification. Use of force to remove Sadam MAY have been justified, maybe. Some indications are he would have abdicated etc given a little re-assurance. At which time the Iraq Constitution could have been reimplemented, redacting some of Saddam's addendums and restructured the government fairly easily.