Thursday, August 29, 2013

War with Syria is tricky business .

These images of victims of a chemical
attack warrant some investigations
Like Libya . America , the Obama Administration is up the legal creek. Only a few days before the 12th anniversary of 9/11, Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama might be fighting side by side with… al-Qaeda, as he was foolish enough to be trapped by his own rhetoric on Syria. The recent "use" of chemical weapons (nerve gas )  on what appears as "civilians" not military "rebels" can only for me bring to mind that the "photos" of those "killed" in a chemical attack are fake . Which I say they are not , if they are real, sure enough probably . It was a "terrorist" attack by al-Qaeda on Syrian citizens . I don't believe that the Dictator Assad is cold -blooded enough to kill his own people unlike Iraq's Saddam . Either case the United States is NOT RESPONSIBLE to police the "actions" of other "nations" and "governments" all in the name of Democracy . There is a due process with in the United Nations , which can bring about justice to the perpetrator as "crimes against humanity" . America can't just shoot missiles into Syria because it has to take up a just cause .You would not know that, however, from watching the news. With the prospect of a shiny new war, American media has gone all-in on war talk, pushing for the U.S. to intervene, and questioning why President Obama hasn’t done so already. The media’s consensus is that war in Syria is inevitablenothing can stop it now that Obama’s “red line” of chemical weapon use has been crossed and that we really need to just get on with it already. Even Britain’s The Guardian, which has all but accused Obama of being an imperialist tyrant bent on world domination, ran an article by Tom Rogan demanding that Obama lead the West into a military engagement with Syria. The White House promises a “revelation” from above this Thursday, “above” being the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Yet the heart of the matter is that the UN chemical inspectors have had no time to identify what sort of chemical weapon is involved in the Ghouta attack (sarin or something else); where it was manufactured; how it was delivered (possibly by DIY rockets); and last but not least, who did it. Woah! Hold your horses, Barack. Before we go to war with Syria can we be absolutely surely sure that we've got our pretext right? Only we've made a horrible mistake about WMDs before…The official UK/US narrative on the conflict in Syria is this. Last year, we drew a red line in the sand: if the regime uses chemical weapons then it makes itself a legitimate target for military action. Last week, it apparently did just that – murdering hundreds of people, including children, in a suburb of Damascus. John Kerry described this slaughter as defying "any code of morality", and he demanded "accountability" from the Assad regime.  why would the Assad regime do something so stupid? It must know that by using chemical weapons it would isolate itself from any international support and invite a Western military response. More importantly, Assad was already winning the war – so why bother to use WMDs during the last lap to victory? Indeed, the only people who have anything to gain by Assad using chemicals are the rebels, because that would internationalise the conflict in a way that they have long lobbied for. so now we are responsible for Syria and for the west's moral state of being - but only becuase we have an agenda, shared with the US, of course, for the whole mid east/gulf region. What, precisely is the evidence that this attack was committed by the regime and not by the rebels as they claim?

No comments:

Post a Comment