Syria

Syria intervention prelude to war on Iran?

Syria intervention prelude to war on Iran?
Jonathan Cook The Electronic Intifada 29 June 2012

It is foolhardy in the extreme for those on the left to play along with West’s current agenda in Syria. (Muammar Awad / APA images)
In a traditional cowboy movie, we know what to do: we look for the guy wearing the white hat to be sure who to cheer, and for the one wearing the black hat to know who deserves to die, preferably gruesomely, before the credits roll. If Hollywood learned early to play on these most tribal of emotions, do we doubt that Washington’s political script-writers are any less sophisticated?

Since 11 September 2001, the United States and its allies in Europe have persuaded us that they are waging a series of “white hat” wars against “black hat” regimes in the Middle East. Each has been sold to us misleadingly as a “humanitarian intervention.” The cycle of such wars is still far from complete.

But over the course of the past decade, the presentation of these wars has necessarily changed. As Hollywood well understands, audiences quickly tire of the same contrived plot. Invention, creativity and ever greater complexity are needed to sustain our emotional engagement.

Declarations by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu aside, there are only so many times we can be convinced that there is a new Hitler in the Middle East, and that the moment is rapidly approaching when this evil mastermind will succeed in developing a doomsday weapon designed to wipe out Israel, the US, or maybe the planet.

In 1950s Hollywood, the solution for audience ennui was simple: High Noon put the noble sheriff, Gary Cooper, in a black hat, and the evil gunslinger in a white one. It offered a veneer of complexity, but in reality the same good guy-bad guy formula played out along familiar lines.

Syria: Only diplomacy can stop the war

Syria: Only diplomacy can stop the war
 
Phyllis Bennis – June 20, 2012
 

Syria: Violating a country's airspace by trying to avoid its defensive capabilities shows hostile intent.

Syria: Gulf of Tonkin Redux?

By Stephen Lendman June 24, 2012 "Information Clearing House"

Lyndon Johnson wanted war on Vietnam and got it. The August 1964 false flag Gulf of Tonkin incident initiated full-scale conflict after Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. War was authorized without declaring it.

It's an American tradition. Big lies launch wars. Manufactured pretexts initiate them. Mass killing and destruction follow. 

One nation after another is ravaged. Syria's next, then Iran, followed by other states on Washington's hit list.

U.S. Marching To War In Syria- Rep. Ron Paul

HR 5993 The Syria Non-Intervention Act of 2012

Mr. Speaker: The Administration is marching toward another war in the Middle East, this time against Syria. As with the president's war against Libya, Congress has been frozen out of the process. The Constitution, which grants Congress and only Congress the authority to declare war, is once again being completely ignored.

The push for a US attack on Syria makes no sense, is not in our interest, and will likely make matters worse. Yet the Administration, after transferring equipment to the Syrian rebels and facilitating the shipment of weapons from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, has indicated that its plans for an actual invasion are complete.

This week there are even press reports that the Central Intelligence Agency is distributing assault rifles, anti-tank rocket launchers, and other ammunition to the Syrian opposition. These are acts of war by the United States government. But where is the authority for the president to commit acts of war against Syria? There is no authority. The president is acting on his own.

Today we are introducing legislation to prevent the administration from accelerating its plan to overthrow the Syrian government by assisting rebel forces that even the administration admits include violent Islamic extremists. The bill is simple.

SYRIA -The Vision of the Local Coordination Committees on International Protection

The Vision of the Local Coordination Committees on International Protection

More than eight months have passed on the Syrian Revolution. Entire towns and villages have moved against a state of despair and absence of hope, due to the rampant mishandling of public affairs by the Syrian regime on all levels, and in particular on the political level. Thousands of citizens demonstrate each day, as part of grassroots social movements, using all forms of peaceful demonstration. They claim rupture from the existing authoritarian and family-based system of government, and they aspire to lay the foundations for the values of freedom and dignity to all citizens in Syria. The Syrian regime has confronted this revolution of values with an insistence on unaccountability, an attempt to stir up strife among the various components of society, and the use of the most repulsive forms of repression.

Why the horrific events in Syria must not carry us into support for Western intervention

John Rees - Stop The War Coalition (UK)

The bloody attack at Houla by the Syrian regime, or militias supporting it, is the latest in a long line of such atrocities.
The deaths at Houla have become the latest opportunity for those who care little for the rights of the Syrian people, British foreign secretary William Hague and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to demand regime change in Damascus.

The Syrian uprising is now more than a year old and blood is still being shed on a daily basis. Over 10,000 have now lost their lives. The government of Bashar al Assad has been unable to crush the movement, but the movement has been unable to overthrow Assad.

But however horrific the events in Syria are we should not allow our sympathy for the victims to carry us into support for Western intervention. Here is why.

We have been here before. The millions of lives lost in the Iraq war were justified as ‘humanitarian intervention’. In fact this is the major imperial ideology of the last 20 years used successively in the Balkans, the First Gulf War, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.

Many years after the massacre of the Kurds at Halabja had actually taken place it was being used as a justification for the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Before that, the first Gulf War in 1991 was justified in part by a news report that asserted that Saddam Hussein’s forces were tearing babies out of hospital incubators in Kuwait. Understandable outrage at this act was channelled into support for war by the mainstream media and the government. But, as it turned out, the story was entirely invented.

We know that in Iraq the cost to Iraqis of Western intervention was out of all proportion greater even than the brutality of Saddam’s regime.

Syndicate content