How about this? Stop supporting the rebels. There will always be some nitpicks within a country opposing the country’s policy. Majority of Syrian support for Assad. These nitpicks pick to fight to overthrow the majority govt.
The mainstream media whom are controlled by certain shadow govt in the west does not tell us where the rebels get their weapons. We know Syria bought theirs from Russia and China. Just like Canada bought our weapons from US and Britain.
USA (under a shadow govt) and the west had more than once duped us into wars. Iraq’s WMD was revealed to be false. We just marched in with no questions and pure utter ignorance. Now we were at it again. Are we to be fooled again.
Assad was winning the war. US had previously warned the red line is chemical use. UN team were to arrive on the weekend prior to the chemical incident which took place where the rebels were holding out. UN inspectors were following up on alleged previous incidents. Many recent wars were born out of false flags. Do you not have any ounce of wit to at least question who benefits. Just in case, the rebels have the most to benefit with USA and the west claiming they would attack Assad if chemical is used. Rebels are not winning. Rebels (majority) are not Syrians. Why would they care if Syrians are killed whichever way if they can get the upper hand. Look at how the drum beats were drumming. It is thanks to enough public doubt that held back these so call govt back.
Don’t blame this all on Obama or even Bush or even congress. They are just puppets. Before they are voted into office, they swear allegiance to this ____. They are acting on behalf of ____, not to their country or Americans, though some had duel citizenships.
This is what is particularly bad in my mind, the lack of clear objectives or linking these proposed limited cruise missile strikes to these objectives.
If our objective is regime change, it’ll take a much more serious effort than these strikes. Even if our objective is to deny Assad use of his chemical weapons, a few cruise missiles simply doesn’t do that. I don’t really see many/any scenarios where I’d support basically stepping into a ready-made quagmire. However, at least if we were proposing concrete objectives (remove Assad from power, deny him use of his chemical weapons) and planning things that could actually achieve those goals, it’d at least be more worthy of discussion.
What we’re talking about here is launching explosives at a Middle Eastern country basically for symbolic purposes. I don’t think cruise missiles are there to be used for symbolism purposes.
The mainstream media reports substantially on who is arming the rebels. A lot of it is coming from Saudi Arabia (which hates Assad) and Qatar. Saudi Arabia and Qatar are both cash rich states with interests in Syrian outcomes, and they actually conflict a bit in which rebel groups they have chosen to support. There is also support coming from al-Qaeda in Iraq and other affiliated groups, as well as some material support from Europe and the United States.
Our objectives are to persuade Assad that it’s in his best interest not to use chemical weapons. As stated in the OP.
I found a story on the false flag hypothesis, written by the journalist Dale Gavlak, who has done reporting for AP, NPR and the BBC. It’s at an obscure website: EXCLUSIVE: Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack. The idea is that the Saudi intelligence chief has the means and motive to supply chemical weapons to the Syrian insurgence. Allegedly they did not provide proper training and some of the supplied weapons went off. (Link found via FAIR and the Washington Monthly.)
I trust there will be more picking apart of the intelligence over the next week or so.
John Mace: I was drawing a distinction between pure air wars and invasions. In Libya, air-only participation by the US succeeded in overthrowing Kadaffi without turning most of the populace against us. Historical analogies are of limited use, but the point I was making was reasonably narrow.
Martin Hyde: If our objective is regime change, it seems to me that air strikes at the levels proposed are pointless. If they work it would be predicated on the contention that lobbing an additional chemical weapon won’t provide Assad with substantially greater military advantage. It might be preferable to him to rely on his clear superiority in the air and artillery and forgo chem weapons so as to keep the US out of the conflict. No historical analogies, just an appeal to Assad’s self interest.
If we are to believe the linked article above, the Saudis are running a more ambitious playbook.
You claimed “success” in Libya, but our objective was not to overthrow Khadafi there. And what happened afterwards? Local militias took over, and they raided Libyan weapons stockpiles, sending much of that horde into Mali and into the hands of Islamists there. Fortunately, Libya did not have CWs.
If exactly what happened in Libya happens in Syria, that will be a gigantic failure, not a success. And I don’t consider what happened in Libya to be a success, either.
Well I am under that impression. The Baath Party is suppose to be a secular one. I understand that Assad’s Alawite base is divided between those sympathetic to further democratization, unsympathetic, and positively loony tyrannical. Presumably the first group has been thoroughly marginalized by now. Or a few of them may have switched sides.
ETA: John: And I’m not advocating air strikes at the level we did in Libya. I was merely responding to highly generalized contentions regarding the impotence of air-only actions.
The Jews have for too long been getting the goyim to do their bidding.
They fooled us into ripping apart poor Germany after Germany fought back against them and invented something they chose to call the Holocaust and then with their puppets, the Elks, the Masons and the Shriners flooded our countries with drugs, made us take over much of the Middle East and now are trying to get us to make war on the beloved homeland of the Aryan people, also known as Iran.
Worst of all, they have made us for decades mutilate the penises of our male offspring.
Thankfully, there are a courageous few who do stand up to them.
You mean the same government who’s Constitution declares “all laws herein are inspired by the Holy Quran” requires the President be “a believing Muslim”, requires religious instruction in schools, has separate schools for Muslims and Christians, requires all Syrians have their religion listed on their national ID, has laws against blasphemy and “insulting Islam”, sponsors religious broadcasts on both the radio and TV, and as late as 2005(I don’t know if it’s still true) had laws making honor killings effectively legal?
And that’s not even bringing up their relations with Hezbollah(Party of God) and the Islamic Revolutionary Government of Iran.
Assad’s government is lots of things, but it’s not “secular”.
It’s pretty clear. He thinks the only “good Jews” are those who claim the Holocaust is a hoax and/or rail against the “Holocaust industry” while supporting Hezbollah.
problem is there are millions who are so uninformed. I think the reporters and journalists do want to speak out but are afraid of being ostracized
my profound thanks to individuals mentioned here:
Remember the young man referred in the above youtube had a 10K??/month job in Hawaii. Tell me who would give that up. Our society is heading towards Orwellian state. That young man and many others as you have mentioned whom society owes a great deal to if we could be saved.
GG and DM latter being detained. Talk about free world free speech, democratic…
