Monday, April 1, 2013

The Road to Syria:
"It all depends on what America says"

www.facebook.com/choiceandtruth

There are a couple of characters missing from this cartoon (and I don't mean Bing Crosby and Bob Hope), but, essentially, it is spot on.

The recent New York Times article, Arms Airlift to Syrian Rebels Expands, With C.I.A. Aid, has made it all embarrassingly clear. It also, I take no pleasure in pointing out, confirms my previous analyses (especially here, but also here, here, and here).


The article describes a “a cataract of weaponry” pouring into Syria, in shipments whose "size ... and ... degree of distributions are voluminous," and are “suggestive of a well-planned and coordinated clandestine military logistics operation.” As a "former American official" is quoted: “People hear the amounts flowing in, and it is huge.”  



And it iswell-planned and coordinated operation, run by the United States. It's clear that the US is managing the flow of weapons and equipment from all the countries involved.  As one rebel leader says: "It all depends on what America says.” The article makes clear "the C.I.A. role in facilitating the shipments."  It was C.I.A. Director David Petraeus who was "instrumental in helping to get this aviation network moving and [who] prodded various countries to work together on it."  In fact, it's coordinated from even higher up the food chain, with "senior White House officials ... regularly briefed on the shipments." Of course, out of humanitarian concern, or in a cynical ploy to avoid a public debate about plunging the country into another war -- you decide how gullible you want to be about that -- the rapid acceleration of arms shipments in "voluminous" and "cataract" quantities was delayed until "after the presidential election in the United States."


Everybody knows, too, that, in this well-planned and coordinated operation, a lot of these weapons go to “fake Free Syrian Army brigades claiming to be revolutionaries, and when they get the weapons they sell them in trade” -- but, what the hell, that's part of the plan, since it's all for the same cause: democracy the destruction of the Syrian state.  Again, you decide what you think the point of all this is.


It's really quite depressing to watch the utter destruction of another Arab state unfold, framed once again as some kind of project for humanitarianism and/or democracy. It's depressing to know that it will engender chaos and violence throughout the region, that it is only the prelude to an even more epic criminal adventure in Iran, and that there is probably nothing that is going to stop it.


The following are excerpts from five other articles that follow up on the revelations in the NYT story, with my introductory remarks in italics:


1. The al-Nusra (al-Qaeda franchise) jihadis are getting their weapons from this well-planned and coordinated operation run by the C.I.A. and the White House, because, duh, there is no other source:



Confirmed: US Shipping Weapons to Syria - Al Nusra's "Mystery" Sponsors Revealed
The confirmed admission implicates NATO directly in militarily intervening in Syria's ongoing conflict and reveals the source of arms and cash that have ended up primarily in the hands of Al Qaeda's Syrian franchiseUS designated terror front, Jabhat al-Nusra. (see here for other examples of US arming listed terror organizations)
The CIA, Western media, and Western politicians insist that they have taken every precaution to ensure the now admitted torrent of cash and weapons that have been flowing into Syria to compound and perpetuate the bloodbath, did not end up in the hands of terrorists. However, no plausible explanation has been given as to where al-Nusra is getting its cash and weapons from, or how it has managed to eclipse the extensively Western-backed 'moderates,' to become the premier front in the fight against the Syrian people...... 
While the Western media has attempted in the past to feign ignorance as to where Al Qaeda's al-Nusra was getting their weapons from, it is now abundantly clear - al-Nusra's power has expanded across Syria in tandem with the CIA's ever-expanding operations along the nation's borders. If the US is working directly with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey, to arm militants, who else could possibly be working to arm and fund al-Nusra on a greater scale if not this axis itself? 



2. This article also points out that not only is the United States once again blithely ignoring international law to topple a disfavored government, it is also applying a unique double-bind logic by which it will blame the Syrian government for any use of chemical weapons, even by the rebels:

So while Obama has repeatedly lied about “non-lethal” military aid, he has been personally involved in overseeing a multi-country flood of weapons into Syria, many of which are given to terrorist organizations. The only effective fighting force for the Syrian rebels has been the terrorist grouping the Al Nusra Front, and now we know exactly where they got their guns....
If a toppling of a nation’s government is Obama’s precondition for peace, then Obama is by definition choosing war....
But even Syria’s rebels have admitted that the chemical weapons attack took place in a government controlled territory, and that 16 Syrian government solders died in the attack along with 10 civilians plus a hundred more injured. ...
No matter who is responsible, the Obama administration plans to hold the Syrian Government responsible for crossing the “red line” of a chemical weapons attack ...
Obama’s envoy for the United Nations, Susan Rice, issued a statement about the chemical weapons attack that, according to The New York Times , "… repeated previous American warnings that there would be “consequences” if the Assad government used or failed to secure chemical weapons."
So, if the Syrian rebels get hold of chemical weapons and use them on the Syrian government — as seems to be the case — the Syrian government should be held responsible, according to the Obama Administration, "for not securing chemical weapons."
There is zero room for truth with logic like this

3. And don't forget the American-picked actual American Prime Minister of the new Syria:

Ghassan Hitto, as Syria’s new interim Prime Minister"Bottom line, he’s an American, nearly thirty years here makes Ghassan one of us. And who cares if he came here as young man to dodge military service in Syria. Many of us dodged our draft during Vietnam and what’s important is that we can count on him!" 


4. A reminder of Israel's interest, which the United States will be certain to secure:



For Israel too, the comprehensive destruction of Syria as a major military power in the Middle East means that all three major Arab powers which could offer defiance to Israel in the past and have been the repositories of "Arabism" at one time or another – Iraq, Egypt and Syria – have been dispatched to the Stone Age.

5. Finally, Israeli news describes Israel's direct participation. Setting up field hospitals for wounded Syrian rebels! Because Israel is eager to help in the well-planned and coordinated comprehensive destruction of the Syrian state, or because the IDF has an ongoing humanitarian interest in patching up wounded jihadis and sending them back into battle? You decide:

The IDF has built a military field hospital in the Golan Heights, according to international media reports.
At least 11 Syrian fighters have been treated in Israel over the past month for wounds sustained in battle from the savage civil war taking place between opposition forces and troops loyal to President Bashar al-Assad.
Of those, eight were sent back to Syria, but three have remained in Israel for further treatment due to the complexity of their injuries, AFP reported Thursday.....According to the IDF Spokesperson, the injured men were met at the border by soldiers from the Golani Brigade, who maintained heavy security around the Syrians in order to maintain their anonymity and thus ensure their safe return. [to combat, of course]


See related posts on Syria here

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments will be lightly moderated, with disfavor for personal attacks and stunning irrelevancies, and deference to the trenchant and amusing.