Support WhoWhatWhy
FRESH TAKES | news, content and perspective you might not find elsewhere

Oh Thank God—Finally, War With Syria

Syrian-President-Bashar-a-06Don’t you hate it when someone says, “I told you so?” We do. That’s why we’ll revise the common statement.

We told you so.

We first told you, 18 months ago and again  here and here and here and  here and here and here and here and  here and here and here and here and here and here, that you couldn’t trust the Obama Administration when it began making noises about pushing out Syria’s President Bashar Assad for strictly “humanitarian reasons.” In fact, before that, we told you again and again and again (ok—we’ll stop) not to trust the Obama Administration when it urged intervention in Libya for the very same reasons.

Now, the Obama administration is preparing for war, in an astonishing echo of the George W. Bush administration’s misleading justifications for invading Iraq.

We saw the first little dribble to prepare us in a CNN Breaking News email Thursday, sent out at 5:14pm EST as most Americans were heading home.

Congress has been notified that the United States will acknowledge that Syria has used chemical weapons on a small scale multiple times and a “red line” has been crossed, according to congressional sources.

Friday, when it was clear that this trial balloon had met largely with silence — and certainly with no hail of outrage or skepticism—came the next salvo. Here, again, CNN Breaking News via email (this time, 4:53pm as most folks’s attention was fixed on the weekend):

United States military support for Syrian rebels will include small arms, ammunition and possibly anti-tank weapons, according to two officials familiar with the matter. The weapons will be provided by the CIA, the officials said.

Oh, and Obama is “considering” a no-fly zone. Where have we heard that before?

Expect the announcement that your son or daughter in uniform will not be home for Christmas to be sent out at 3am Sunday.

No one is likely to demand good hard evidence for the use of chemical weapons. After all, the Bush administration and its lies for war was so…very long ago.

War—What a Gas

None of these military adventures were ever about anything remotely honorable. So, whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, you just have to get over it. You may feel better believing the system of which you are part has noble intentions, or that the party you prefer is somehow more principled.

The truth is actually pretty simple: no matter which party is running things,  globally dominant governments do not make decisions based on humane do-goodism.  In the halls of power, decisions are based on a consensus of hard-headed “realists,” whose concerns do not extend to human rights, the safety of women and children and other civilians, or the “self-determination” of non-Americans. “Spreading democracy around world”? Um, no.

In Top Secret National Security Council sessions, no one is foolish enough to raise noble and humanistic objectives. He (or occasionally she) would be laughed right out of the place. No, the talk is all about “national security.”  And national security equates with national interest. So when we look for the motives behind the Obama administration’s announcement that it has determined Syria used chemical weapons and therefore crossed an imaginary “red line” which will trigger active involvement in a war against the Assad regime, we must focus on self interest.

Probable factors, almost none of which have been reported by the major media, include

1)     the desire to create new bases in the Middle East to watch over the Iraqi oilfields without taking flak for maintaining a permanent presence in Iraq;

2)     eliminating one of the last non-Western-dependent pan-Arabists left;

3)     getting rid of a regime that works closely with China and Russia; and especially

4)      weakening one of Iran’s few and most important allies.

Also, not long before the “spontaneous uprising” in his country, Assad was reaching out to pariah states like Venezuela and Cuba to foster cooperation, including a joint investment with Venezuela in an oil refinery in Syria.

Plus, like Saddam and Qaddafi, Assad had moved away from dependency on the US dollar.

But increasingly, it seems that the primary reason for wanting Assad out is not oil, but gas. In 2011, while Arab Spring was going down, Iran, Iraq and Syria signed a gas pipeline deal. Iranian gas would end up at Lebanese ports before making its way to EU markets. This would substantially relieve Iran of the economic pressure designed to topple its regime.

But it all gets really interesting when you consider the South Pars gas field—the largest in the world —which lies underneath the Persian Gulf and is divided between Iran and a country facing it across the water, Qatar. The latter, a highly reliable western beachhead in a hostile region and a major US military hub, is run by Sunnis, who are of course at the throats of the Shiites who run Iran. If Iran gets a pipeline, it trumps Qatar and the West. On the other hand, if Qatar alone can benefit from the field, it becomes a significant player in regional and even global power.

Qatar has been a great favorite of NATO, contributing its troops in places like Libya to mask what are essentially Western invasions of Arab soil. And of course Qatar runs Al Jazeera, which has not exactly been at the forefront of independent investigative journalism in any of these situations. Israel, with its own agenda on Iran, its own formidable gas discovery—turning it from an energy importer to an exporter—and an alliance with NATO and Qatar, also stands to benefit from blocking the Iranian pipeline.

Human Rights Indeed

Last summer, on the porch of a country store on Martha’s Vineyard, a favorite of Obama and his fans, a “liberal” became enraged when I tried to explain a few nuances about Syria. “You are apologizing for a butcher,” he yelled at me, moving away to emphasize his revulsion.

If Assad is a butcher, he’s long been our butcher. Just as Muammar Qaddafi did the US a favor and tortured people after 9/11, so did Assad. Just as, for a long time, Saddam Hussein was only too glad to do the CIA’s bidding.

This is all forgotten (if it was ever known) by Americans guilty of unspeakable indifference, of having learned nothing at all from a century of nearly constant war.

Poor Obama

The war for the hearts and mind of impressionable members of the public goes on. Note the latest dribble (posted late Friday by the New York Times): Obama didn’t want to push the button on Syria, but he succumbed to tremendous pressure:

For two years, President Obama has resisted being drawn deeper into the civil war in Syria. It was a miserable problem, he told aides, and not one he thought he could solve. At most, it could be managed. And besides, he wanted to be remembered for getting out of Middle East wars, not embarking on new ones.

So when Mr. Obama agreed this week for the first time to send small arms and ammunition to Syrian rebel forces, he had to be almost dragged into the decision at a time when critics, some advisers and even Bill Clinton were pressing for more action. Coming so late into the conflict, Mr. Obama expressed no confidence it would change the outcome, but privately expressed hope it might buy time to bring about a negotiated settlement.

His ambivalence about the decision seemed evident even in the way it was announced. Mr. Obama left it to a deputy national security adviser, Benjamin J. Rhodes, to declare Thursday evening that the president’s “red line” on chemical weapons had been crossed and that support to the opposition would be increased. At the time, Mr. Obama was addressing a gay pride event in the East Room. On Friday, as Mr. Rhodes was again dispatched to defend the move at a briefing, the president was hosting a Father’s Day luncheon in the State Dining Room.

This raises lots of questions about Obama, and whether this is a sign of his own weakness, a deliberate leaked sop to his peace-oriented donors and supporters or, in line with something we wrote recently, that the decisions facing the modern American presidency are just too consequential for the establishment to leave them to an ephemeral figure like Obama.

Further raising doubts about the extent to which Obama is “in charge” and operating on behalf of the electorate is the Rhodes factor. As we previously pointed out, the rapid rise of the young, obscure and seemingly unqualified Rhodes from a coffee shop novelist to virtually managing foreign policy for the United States is a strange and disturbing event on its own. The particulars deserve much more scrutiny.

***

Although admittedly it all is hair-raising, few people here in the USA seem too terribly bothered. Almost all of the media, from rightist outfits like Fox through the great commercial middle to the liberal left opinion media, have been loudly silent on Obama’s decisions on Libya, and now on Syria.

You can bet they’ll be silent on Iran when its time comes. Which it will. Even if—once again— the reasons are fake.

Yeah. We told you so.

 

 

WhoWhatWhy plans to continue doing this kind of groundbreaking original reporting. You can count on it. But can we count on you? We cannot do our work without your support.

Please click here to donate; it’s tax deductible. And it packs a punch.

GRAPHIC: http://thenationonlineng.net/new/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Syrian-President-Bashar-a-006.jpg


Comment Policy:
Keep it civil. Keep it relevant. Keep it clear. Keep it short. Identify your assertions as fact or speculation. No typing in ALL-CAPS. Read the article in its entirety before commenting.

Note: As a news site dedicated to serious inquiry, not a bulletin board, we reserve the right to remove any comment at any time, especially when it appears to be part of an effort to push a deceptive, unscientific, false or narrow ideological line. Posts that scapegoat by ethnicity, gender, religion or nationality will also be removed.
  • mijj

    > when I tried to explain a few nuances about Syria. “You are apologizing for a butcher,” he yelled at me

    it amazes me that amercans think they can make pronouncements about “butchers” when their regime is the nastiest butcher of them all. If these americans were actually concerned about butchers, they’d haul in and take apart the monsters that are running their own regime

    • amy

      ooh, nicely put! yes, the hypocrisy of americans is awful, isn’t it? we’re so busy lecturing the rest of the world on all the things they’re doing wrong that we can’t see the fascist nature of our own brooks-brother gangster regime.

  • Vivek Jain

    “We have about 50 per cent of the world’s wealth, but only 6.3 per cent of its population. … Our real task in the coming period is to maintain this position of disparity. … To do so we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming. … We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford the luxury of altruism. … We should cease to talk about vague, unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we will have to deal in straight power concepts.”
    - George Kennan, head of the State Department’s PPS in a 1948 memorandum

    The “we” Kennan is referring to is the ruling class.

    • Jeff Grotke

      the one percenters have moved beyond that position, and are no longer US patriots. The world is their oyster and whether they live in the US, or abroad, they will take as much of the wealth as they possibly can, from everybody, including Americans.

  • flashdance

    I see so sit back, let Assad and his Hezbollah boot boys hurl chemical weapons at Israel and watch Armageddon unfurl from inside your white picket fences? Oops sorry – there is a little treaty called the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance to consider. A maniac on the loose with the largest stockpile of chemical weapons in the world is not a’walk away option’. This is not an illegal invasion of Iraq. The Syrian people have never asked for US troops on the ground they, want the hardware to defend themselves from indiscriminate bombing aided and abetted by 11bn worth from the billionaire arms dealers and carpetbaggers infesting the Kremlin. 2.5m Syrians on the run from bombing devestation – one fifth of them children. The number of soldiers in the FSA is now four times those left in the regime, despite an estimated 18,000 Hezbollah and Iranian National Guard inflating its ranks. 150,000 FSA are now encircling Allepo to defend it – but largely depending on small arms. The point you miss is that the age of tyrants and dictators creating family dynasties on the backs of their people is well and truly over. The movement for democratic freedoms and equality of justice before the law is a world movement and is unstoppable. America of all the nations should realise that. The American War of Independence was no more or no less than the same as that the the Syrian people aspire to today, and it is shameful that those who have benefited from it the most, now cast aspersions on those fighting for no more and no less.

    • Dan Miller

      Great news! No more Bushes, Clintons, Gores, Dodds, Pauls, Cuomos, Kennedys or Romneys

    • Eric

      flashdance writes:

      “150,000 FSA are now encircling Allepo to defend it…”

      Where do you get your numbers? Nobody else is reporting any FSA soldiers encircling Alleppo. Quite the contrary: Assad’s troops are encircling it, while the rebels are hunkering down in Alleppo.

    • sean drake

      Nice try dude. This crisis is entirely of an external making. Them freedom fighters are a mixed bag connected to the likes of the Benghazi bastards and uncle Sam’s favorite bogeyman, Al Qaeda :-)
      Why Assad must have gotten those chemical weapons from the same store as the yellow cake.

      • http://www.facebook.com/robert.c.miller.92 Robert Carl Miller

        I wonder if Rumsfeld was there to shake Assad’s hand and smile for the camera when the sarin was delivered.

        You see, that’s the problem with ever being an ally of the US. We know your dirt, we may have even delivered the dirt to you.

        Then we have those hypocritical moments like invading Panama because Noriega was a drug dealer. I bet GHW Bush must have been laughing about that.

  • CB

    Grrreat. I can hardly wait for the “support our troops” propaganda to ramp up again as throngs of mindless Americans cheer on their brave soldiers to kill countless innocents as so much collateral damage in yet another Middle Eastern country.

  • a Fan

    Internet search “the Yinon plan” Could that also be a reason for ongoing “middle East” military operations?

  • Rob

    You did call it. One of the best ways to gauge whether someone really does know what they are talking about is the predictive value of they say. Think of mainstream news. When is the last time these people got anything right? Yet people still hang on their every word.

    What’s going to happen if this turns into an all out proxy war between the US and Russia? How many trillions will this little humanitarian overthrow end up costing? I don’t know what the general consensus on this is out there but it’s hard not to think that the war party is really starting to push their luck here.

    If this turns into a quagmire then Obama can forget about distracting the public. His image could quickly change from “well meaning and trying to do his best in tough circumstances” to “no backbone and caves to special interests every time”. After all, Assad isn’t exactly a household name which means that most people will probably have a hard time caring about this unless something goes wrong. Not exactly a good risk/reward move.

  • Pingback: The Geopolitics of Gas and the Syrian Crisis: Syrian “Opposition” Armed to Thwart Construction of Iran-Iraq-Syria Gas Pipeline |

  • AbsolutelyBarmy

    Lest we forget. In the early seventies Makarious was negotiating with the Russians to give them use of Famagusta harbour for their Mediterranean fleet. This was unacceptable to the USA, UK and NATO. So Greece stages a coup in Cyprus, Turkey invades, island divides, UK keeps sovereign bases and GCHQ facilities (housing NSA) and problem goes away. Now Russia might lose naval base in Syria so starts talks with Cyprus about Famagusta again. Result, EU (NATO, IMF) destroys Cyprus economy, using self inflicted banking crisis as an excuse, Russian deposits confiscated. Russians seen off. Next phase is to deny Russia use of the Syrian harbour. Job done. Brilliant. Mediterranean safe for democracy.

    It is no coincidence that UK help to Syrian rebels is in the form of “communications equipment.” GCHQ in Cyprus is listening to every, and I mean every, communication there is in the Middle East. When one Syrian tank commander says to another “Fancy a cup of tea Abdul” They hear it.

  • Chizzlin’ Sam

    Astoundingly, just one year after WWII, in 1946 President Truman wrote “I think we ought to protest with all vigor… against the Russian program in Iran…Unless Russia is faced with an iron fist and strong language another war is in the making. Only one language do they understand…I do not think we should play compromise any longer…I am tired of babying the Soviets.”

    Truman had helped to create the peaceful United Nations which opened in Jan 1946…Three out of the first five Resolutions of the Security Council involved Russian aggression in Iran (Resolutions 2, 4 and 5)…In March, 1946 Truman announced a $400 million military/humanitarian aid package for Greece and Turkey (where there was also Russian aggression)…

    Truman pointed out the U.S. had spent $341 Billion to win WWII and that the aid package was less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the cost of WWII. This also set a pattern of aid which often goes for American military weapons in addition to humanitarian aid…67 years later the U.S., Russia and Iran are still playing covert dirty tricks and funding militias…I guess the more things change, the more they stay the same.

  • AbsolutelyBarmy

    “The Great Game” as it was called in the days of the British Empire was all about denying Russia access to warm water ports. Their only home ports are frozen in winter. This is a real handicap to the expansion of military power. Twice Britain occupied Kabul and was forced to leave. In the end they took the Swat Valley. After two miserable winters there they negotiated a withdrawal. The broad terms were. The Tribal Area acknowleged Victoria as Queen. The British left them alone in semi-independance and they promised in perpetuity never to allow the Russians to pass and get access to the Indian Ocean.

  • Lorenzo Rankins
  • Lorenzo Rankins

    the html was cleared so i mean please use target=”_blank” in your anchor tags

  • http://charlesfrith.blogspot.com/ Charles Frith

    Venezuela is not a pariah state you fool. The US is the regime that murders all round the world. Look in the mirror before applying propaganda terms to Venezuela.

  • http://erichs-blog.blogspot.com/ erichwwk

    And others called it in November, 2001.

    “I just got this memo from the Secretary of Defense’s office, it says we are going to attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years. We are going to start with Iraq and then we are going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.” Seven countries in five years.”

    http://bit.ly/14DkW2y transcript for above

  • Man on the street

    I watched a video this morning where a Muslim Jihadi killed a man, then proceeded to cut his head off as the blood gushed on his hands and shoes. Hundreds of other Muslims are chanting allah akbar!

    The barbarian had a difficult time taking the man’s head off because his little knife was not too sharp, so, the process took long as he kept trying to sever the head completely. Finally, he managed as the rest of the Islamic barbarians chanted Allah is great; the savage throws the head out in the air as a ball.

    After this event took place on video, McCain went to visit these same gangs, and was pictured with them. Our news covered his call of arming these Muslim barbarians. Then Obama gave up to these neocon pressure, and agreed to feed these savages with more weapons.

    The availability of these atrocities and inhuman videos are all over, and I am sure that Obama, and McCain have seen them. So, I ask myself: What kind of a human being approves of such inhuman cannibal behaviors?

    Having a civilized country like America support such atrocities in the name of Islam makes me question Islam, and the Muslim nations that cover up these inhuman teaching of Islam. Then, you see Egypt, where the best Muslim scholars are made support that butchery and cannibal acts, which proves to me that the religion itself has been hijacked by savages.

    • mijj

      ummm .. that stalwart Christian nation, the United States .. fully endorses and encourages these actions. As well as mass murder chaos and misery creation on an industrial scale over decades. So, the people of the United States are as barbaric as any of the Muslims you’re shocked by.

      The barbarity of US selected and encouraged “Muslims” is far outdone in scale and savagery by barbarous Christians.

  • Man on the street

    It is very clear that the CIA, AND THE MOSAD are working together to employ foaming at the mouth Islamists to terrorize the Middle East, destroy any organized civilized resistance. As ethnic, and sectarian war is fed with weapons to create permanent state of war and destruction. This is difficult for outside observer to imagine. Using crazy Muslims to destroy Muslim nations. What a strategy. Anyone who dared to expose such plot will be discredited if not destroyed.

    • Dannup

      Omg, someone mentioned the Mossad. Thank you! Can you imagine this stuff happening next door to the most focused intelligence agency in the world, and NOT having them manipulating things to some extent? For all I know, they’re the ones who exploded the chemical weapons. I don’t trust anything being reported out of Syria. It’s a hall of mirrors and I would have nothing to do with it.

      • sean drake

        Who do you think sets off many of them bombs in Iraq?

        • Bbethany7

          Who wired the WTC buildings?

        • Jeff Grotke

          trick question, obviously, the bombs were wireless and remote controlled…

        • Bbethany7

          Remote controlled of course. The explosives would have had to be installed in the steel framework in hundreds of places. Wireless? I don’t know. Ask the Mossad.

      • Man on the street

        Mossad, and CIA are a potent combo. The systematic desyruction of secular Syria benefots israel, and the fanatic towel head islamists

  • krinks

    RT my favorite broadcast network put it best. It showed Christians in Syria who are firm supporters of Assad. They know that the alternative is death to them. There have been many cases of mass murder of Christians by Obama’s Islamic “rebels” and only Assad to come to their defense. Yet on this the American churches are silent. How can this be? I suspect the lot of them are two faced hypocrites.

    • mijj

      > Yet on this the American churches are silent. How can this be? I suspect the lot of them are two faced hypocrites.

      exactly. Eg. the current beloved Pope collaborated with the Argentinian fascist regime in the 70s when people were “disappeared” for disagreeing with the government.

      It’s not just the curch – it’s any organization. The pinnacles of hierarchies, no matter how worthy, will empathize and collaborate with each other using the people as pawns. The people at the bottom are regarded as no more than numbers – of no consequence and disposable.

    • sean drake

      Too many socalled American Christians are morons, for they serve 2 Masters.

      • krinks

        I would love to argue the point but I can’t. Serving as the Treasurer of an independent church, I have attended enough meetings to know most of the church going folks are imposters.

        • marxmarv

          I imagine many Americans see it as “face time”, insofar as they actually believe, and otherwise as a government-subsidized social club and status marker.

      • marxmarv

        Yes, Mammon with the heart and soul, Yahweh only with the lips.

  • HumanWrites

    Question: Why did Russia invade Georgia in August of 2008 while GW slept it all off? Answer: To gain control of valuable Black Sea ports in Abkhazia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abkhazia

    Russian wants control in Syria for similar control of its Mediterranean ports: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=syria&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x1518e6dc413cc6a7:0x877546f4882af620,Syria&gl=us&ei=mpq_Ub6cFIPD0gGToYCgDQ&ved=0CJIBELYD

    Simply to ignore Russia’s geopolitical expansionist motivations, again, will have ramifications throughout the EU and beyond. Thus, Obama’s continued hands-off in Syria seems ill-advised.

    • mijj

      lol .. you’ve been getting info from Fox News, haven’t you.

      Georgia attacked and invaded South Ossetia (which was attempting to make itself independent of Georgia). Of course, as is the habit of NATO friends, it was massacring people. South Ossetia was under the protection of Russia – and Russia did its duty.

      Of course, the whole thing was a deliberate provocation by the nut case, Saakashvili, to prove his credentials to NATO and get NATO involved. Fortunately, Russia didn’t just sit back and let Ossetia be overrun.

      The history of Ossetia/Georgia: Ossetia was forced into an artificial union with Georgia by Stalin. It’s interesting how the West and Stalin share the same mindset.

      • http://www.facebook.com/robert.c.miller.92 Robert Carl Miller

        Saakashvili, who was a Wall Streeter and got trained in politics through a State Department program.

      • HumanWrites

        LOL? …You must been getting your intel. directly from Vladimir, the great new savior of Syria. LOL!

    • marxmarv

      Ill-advised for whom, and how do the other interests in the matter fare?

  • Chizzlin’ Sam

    Meanwhile…the U.S. just finalized a $590 Million deal to buy RUSSIAN Mi-17 choppers for Afghanistan…Think Obama gave Putin a check and offered a bonus for quick delivery???

  • Ugmo

    Whatever…I hope to see Syria off the radar soon.

    • Margaret Swaid

      Why? What did they do to “you”? what nonsense.

      • Ugmo

        They take…and never give.

    • Man on the street

      Whoever you are? If you are a thinking American, and you wish total destruction yo a country that wish us harm, the top of the list should be Saudi Arabia! But, if you are an arm-chair war monger like most of the evangelicals, and neocons; then I have no opportunity in talking sense to you.

      • Ugmo

        I don’t wish harm on anyone, except for the aggressor…

        • Man on the street

          That is great, but inconsistant with wishing Syria off the map?

        • Ugmo

          I wish Syria was off America’s map…politically, culturally and militarily. Thank you and good by!

  • Pingback: Oh Thank God (cough) — Finally, War With Syria | IndyInAsia-Pacific

  • Annie

    While we are all lead to believe this is in national interest or Christians against Muslims, my belief is that the evidence points otherwhere. Historically bankers have financed both sides of wars to endebt the victor to them. Obama as with all of the other front men leaders act as if they are simply pawns. Even amongst Dems and Pubs there is no argument about the important things. They get quietly passed without even a whisper of controversy.
    Tell me why is it that we are only attacking countries lacking BIS tied central banks? Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and Iran were the main remaining holdouts… and we are going down the list. The AlQaeda rebels started a central bank in Benghazi long before the country ws taken..
    IMO, evidence indicates that this has nothing to do with the interest of the US or the west, but instead is about consolidating power under a global monopolistic/communistic/elitist controlled banking empire. Everything else is just distraction. You might ask who is behind this multigenerational conquest of the world … ask who is behind the central banks….
    The hand that gives is above the hand that receives.

    • sean drake

      Ding ding we have a winner. You broke the code regarding Bis.

  • kim

    I would ease up on the “told you so’s”. Broken clocks are correct twice a day. Not saying this is necessarily a broken clock situation, but if things in Syria simmer down for another year, then you’re left with credibility shot. Best just to lay out the case.

    Can’t wait to learn more about this Benjamin Rhodes character. There’s too much there not to do a follow-up.

    • http://www.facebook.com/robert.c.miller.92 Robert Carl Miller

      The Zbigniews of the world get old and die. You need new people coming off the bench.

  • Pingback: Oh Thank God (cough) — Finally, War With Syria | Conspiracy This Week | What Team Are You On?

  • d b

    Obama has been resisting military involvement in Syria and has been pushing a negotiated peace. Will he succeed? Probably not, it’s a difficult task, but he’s attempting at least. Since Ron Paul didn’t win the last election, Obama is our second-best chance of avoiding war escalation.

  • Pingback: Oh Thank God–Finally, War With Syria | saveourcola

  • Pingback: The Snowden affair examined | Piece Of Mind

  • SO

    Yeah, I don’t think that the people we elect make these decisions. The decision they make is to keep their jobs and their lives. That is, at least, when their names are not “Bush.”

  • sunmusing

    The Corporations are once again trying to secure their dominance of the world using OUR military and OUR tax money…they don’t pay taxes…we should just invoice these corporations like they do to the rest of us…or better yet, kick these corporation out of power…

  • Pingback: The response of AMRIS to calls for military action against Syria «

  • Snead Hearn

    Gen. Wesley Clark revealed this program, and he told the truth. http://www.salon.com/2011/11/26/wes_clark_and_the_neocon_dream/

  • http://www.facebook.com/robert.c.miller.92 Robert Carl Miller

    You of all people should not make this so personal.

    No President since the Coup of 1963 in the Oil Capitol of the World, Dallas, has really been in charge of our foreign policy. Some Presidents have agreed with the Military-Industrial Complex’s foreign policy (most Republicans) and many of the Democrats have gone along with heavy hearts or got pushed out of office. But the policy’s all written out, and it’s mostly about oil. If there’s also drugs in the area to exploit and make a profit on the side, all the better.

    No one’s talked about the Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline that will compete with Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Not a surprise that Qatar and the Saudis are the primary backers of the Syrian rebels. It’s also in competition with pipelines running through Georgia and Turkey.

    And perusing the New York Times and the Washington Post, I don’t recall much discussion about how al-Nusri have been diddling around with kilos of sarin last Spring.

    Just saying.

    • Comment Cal

      “no one’s talking about” the gas pipelines? It’s right in the article above. Always best to read before commenting.

  • Suze O

    Count me as one of the people who think there is something really fishy going on with the latest report of a massive attack of chemical weapons in Syria. The other incidents were piddling examples – rebel forces were probably behind those – but this latest one is probably going to pull Obama into some sort of action in Syria. My question is: Why would Assad do something so obvious? I would think the last thing he would want is foreign intervention (not that we aren’t intervening already) but a big chemical weapons attack would be sure to make his life harder. And why did it happen after an international group on investigators had arrived? Obama has been getting pushed, largely by Republicans to get more involved in the Syrian situation, and they have been critical that the previous “evidence”, or more like “trace” evidence, did not move him enough. This latest event is oh so convenient for them.
    Tonight Rachel Maddow went into some history about the Iran-Iraq War, saying that Saddam used mustard gas and nerve gas on the Iranians, and although the CIA, Reagan and others knew it, we played dumb and did not denounce the practice. Of course, we wanted Iraq to win that war, and I always thought Hussein got those weapons from us in the first place. So how do we know that the CIA didn’t enable this attack? One expert on Democracy Now stated that this attack is worrisome but we must remember that propaganda around this issue is enormous. He sounded doubtful for the same reasons I have stated.
    I don’t know what you could dig up, Russ, but I’d like to know if you smell a rat like I do.

  • AndrewGross

    Government cover stories continue to bamboozle US citizens. eg: Oswald didn’t shoot anyone 11/22/63 per a negative DPD paraffin test.

  • Pingback: The response of AMRIS to calls for military action against Syria | Mediawerkgroep Syrië

  • Jeff Grotke

    i’d like to take a poll of all those commenting and find out how many people believe Obama has the power to stop this military action, and believe that his presidency would survive if he did?

  • Peter White

    Only a voters revolution and wide-spread civil disobedience can change the course of history. We the People must unite from left and right to move democracy forward! Are we ready??

  • maryann26

    Who doesn’t know that the wars in Middle East are about oil and gas? How many Americans think we will have alternative and clean energy any time soon? Not in the lifetime of anyone on the planet.

  • Greg

    I watched your latest medal of honor winner on Letterman the other night, here in New Zealand. He had to re-enlist because there was no jobs for him, he couldnt get health insurance or even support his family. Yet we hear about how great the American economy is. Winning the medal will mean he doesnt need to re-enlist a third time I’d expect. When are American voters going to wake up and realize their manifest destiny. Its your poor fighting these wars, the rich kids wont be serving. Has Detroit been declared bankrupt yet, who will rebuild America, not the bankers in Wall street.

  • Ed Housman

    We seem to be strutting, uncertainly, into a “little war” where we will “take some sites out” just to show them we mean business – “stop it with the gas and get out of town, you blaggards.”

    No one has mentioned the fact that the those blaggards have weapons (including a few Russian missiles, perhaps) and might use them in retaliation, or preemptively, against our ships, our intel centers, our supply lines, “our” pipelines, or take hostages … remember those hostages?

    We’ll hit them, but not too hard, and they will lie down and be good? Right?

    But what if they sink one of our ships killing hundreds of US military, or mow down a group of contract warriors, or hang a few innocent US citizens, or CIA agents, or a dignitary on travel. Would we take that blow and limp away? Or …

    And how much would that war cost?

    Obama won’t let that happen. He will break a little knowing smile when Congress “stops him.” And he will be the first US president to have the guts to holster the gun and think of a better way.

  • https://sites.google.com/site/themattprather Matt Prather

    Pepe Escobar gives a rapid-fire run-down of all the pipeline politics and business interests at play around Syria, late August 2013:
    http://www.corbettreport.com/interview-733-pepe-escobar-on-bandar-bushs-role-in-syria

  • Pingback: Introduction | Step Back

  • Pingback: Top reasons why many companies buy Instagram Likes | Top reasons why many companies buy Instagram Likes