Saturday, 31 August 2013
No to symbolic and good conscience strikes. Yes to useful strikes in Syria
'If the West had earlier decided to send a strong warning to President Bashar Al Assad and his entourage - "Your silence is killing us" slogan on Friday 29 July 2011 - and had not lent a deaf ear to the cries for help that had launched their revolutionary in vain for months successively claiming "international protection" (Friday, September 9, 2011), the "no-fly" (28 October 2011), "an area protected "(Friday, December 2, 2011) and" support for the Free "Syrian Army (13 January 2012), we would not be here today . The plan might have looked for another solution to the escalating crisis and the jihadists have not made their appearance, with the initial support of the Mukhabarat Syria to become a convenient scarecrow and a useful excuse for inaction by Western democracies." '
A Father Finds the Son He Thought He Had Lost
'Video posted online on Monday shows a man overcome with emotion as he is reunited with his young son, who he thought had been killed in a chemical weapons attack last week on the town of Zamalka. Friends and neighbors celebrate around them, hugging and kissing one another, as the two embrace. "Thank you, God," the man weeps. Later, his son sits on his lap, hair neatly combed, and cries. The man strokes and kisses his cheeks, cooing, "Don't be upset. I am beside you, my darling. I am beside you." '
Elizabeth O'Bagy: On the Front Lines of Syria's Civil War
These people aren't going to gas their own side, or tolerate anyone who does.
'Moderate opposition forces—a collection of groups known as the Free Syrian Army—continue to lead the fight against the Syrian regime. While traveling with some of these Free Syrian Army battalions, I've watched them defend Alawi and Christian villages from government forces and extremist groups. They've demonstrated a willingness to submit to civilian authority, working closely with local administrative councils. And they have struggled to ensure that their fight against Assad will pave the way for a flourishing civil society. One local council I visited in a part of Aleppo controlled by the Free Syrian Army was holding weekly forums in which citizens were able to speak freely, and have their concerns addressed directly by local authorities.'
Syria Mocks Obama For Changing His Mind On Military Strikes
'Syrians hold up a sign encouraging President Obama to "just do it" on Aug. 30, 2013.'
Damascus residents 'hold their breath' as strike looms
'Two-and-a-half years since the start of the uprising, and with more than 100,000 Syrians killed, many people in Syria want to see an end to the violence.'
I'm not sure anybody is going to admit to wanting it to continue. The question is, what will stop it?
I won't hold you in suspense. The answer is (a) arm the rebels. Anyone who answered (b) preventing American airstrikes, needs to stay after class.
I was thinking earlier about what the "hands off Syria" people claim is going to happen. How many people do they think are going to be killed, and how many of those civilians. Will they be using depleted uranium and white phosphorous? If the answers to these question are not very many or none, but you're saying that is a slippery slope, can you tell me exactly how they are going to get from the airstrikes to full-scale war? If it is the principle of the thing, can you you explain to Syrians why your principles are more important than their lives?
Friday, 30 August 2013
The case for ‘Hands off Syria’
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjM3_FKAE-w4MJKavOdO33sJGlyzS2yEa7PBPqL_d8HV7ijeYQXdgjudG9oy1dfuLzOHrUAdj6E9JQV3WbQHQmHM2uALibPIFzit2hUzJVzci00mhMr77l9PzDgtoS3Sm0gP53ss5toy4Y/w497-h373/hos2.png)
'All of the fears that you hold against a military intervention in Syria have materialized long ago. Entire cities have been flattened, men, women, and children have been brutally mutilated, tortured, raped, and slaughtered. What have we the Syrians got to lose at this point? A few more flattened buildings? A few more lives lost? Or is it the West, which you hate so much the sticking point in your feeble mind?'
If You Tolerate This
Dr.Rola*: "We have watched people be slaughtered by the régime for 2½ years, and the world has done nothing. Now is the time to act."
Then Gavin Esler mentioned a slogan from the Spanish Civil War.
*“We feel like some sort of, not even a second class citizen, like we just don't matter. Like all of these children, and all of these people who are being killed and massacred, we don't matter.
The whole world has failed our nation and it is innocent civilians who are paying the price.”
[Note 17/2/24, original Panorama video removed from Youtube]
Syria’s largest city just dropped off the Internet
![(Renesys)](https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/files/2013/08/syria-connections-1024x1024.jpg)
'Internet outages in Syria have a curious history of happening at times convenient for the Assad regime. In November 2012, some 92 percent of national Syrian Internet traffic went offline as the regime was rumoured to be mixing chemical weapon components, while 78 percent of traffic went offline in January when Assad gave a rare public address. Some past localized Internet outages have also coincided with government offensives in those areas.'
Here's what Syrians have to say about intervention
'Abdullah Omar, a Syrian who lives in the rebel-held town of Atmeh, near Turkey, said the majority of people where he lives support US airstrikes.
“They think it will give the rebels an advantage over the regime,” he said. "But in my opinion, it won’t. The Syrian people will keep suffering either from the regime or the extremists.”
“The world’s reaction has come too late,” Omar said. “Even now some are trying to delay the strikes. It’s like sending a message to Bashar that he still has four days to do what he wants."
Muhamad Raslan, a Free Syrian Army fighter, said US missile strikes may be too little and almost too late, but he and his fellow fighters still welcome them.
“Although it is so late for the USA to intervene, it may help us a lot,” Raslan said from the province of Idlib. “But frankly in Syria we do not need anyone to fight for us. We need weapons and ammunition only.” '
Palestinian refugee family's escape from Syria via tropical island to new life in Sweden
Victory for the revolution would end much of the suffering.
' "I thought the revolution would end and we would get victory. But there was no change, the killings increased and everything became expensive. There was no life for my children, they were living in fear," he said of the civil conflict that has driven nearly 2 million people out of the country – 1 million of them children.'
Lecturer from Syria says Britain should intervene in his country
'He said he has been “living in fear” for his people since the 2011 revolution, and says “although no one would favour a foreign attack against their country, it may be the only option”.'
If nothing is done soon, the place will start looking like Luton.
Fears Growing as Syrians Wait for U.S. Attack
'Though some called early on for NATO intervention, others said they wanted support and arms from Washington — not an attack by the American military.
“We know what is best for our country,” said Fahad Darwish, 33, a supermarket worker in Damascus. “We don’t need the Americans to do it for us, and we will win this war by the Free Syrian Army,” he added, referring to the loose-knit rebel coalition.'
Despite words of warning, Israel wants to stay out of Syria conflict
Israel not part of anti-Assad plot, also Assad force try to spread terrorism:
"Lebanon charged five people Friday, including one Syrian intelligence officer and two sheikhs, over the twin Tripoli bombings that killed 47 people last week."
[http://www.dailystar.com.lb/…/229328-2-lebanese-sheikhs-2-s…]
Peace campaigners hail Commons verdict on Syria strikes
'Anti-war campaigners and bishop of London say decision reflects public opinion, but British-Syrian novelist voices disgust.
Robin Yassin-Kassab, a British-Syrian novelist, said he was disgusted at the politicians' decision. "In a decade we have gone from a situation where they rushed at the gleam of their leader's mad eye into a criminal war [in Iraq] to not even being able to join a symbolic strike to deter a genocide," he said. "It has been going on for two and a half years and they still do nothing. The left have it all wrong. This was not an imperial war." '
Blanket Thinkers
One of the catchphrases the SWP used to have is "earn the right to criticise". That's one thing the far left has signally failed to do in putting opposing Western intervention on the top of its Syria wishlist. They, and those like them should make sure they have made it clear, not in their own minds, but to the Syrian revolutionaries, that they're first priority is how to support the revolution before uttering word one about intervention. That's the ABC of Leninism.
I reproduce part of a discussion below with some Syrians, not stooges of the CIA, but people who want a revolution in their country. These are the people whose struggle you need to relate to, not the scabs of the Stop The War Coalition. And if you start by saying what a terrible thing the West is, they will chase you off. But there is hope. Robin in the post below points out,
'My talk of "infantile leftists" does not include the entire left of course. Simon Assaf of the Socialist Workers, for instance, understands what’s happening. So does Max Blumenthal. And many others.'
Syrian1: Robin , they have always been pro-assad, they used to come down to the protest outside the Syrian Embassy in London, at least on 2 occasions the police were alerted ..
There were only 1 or 2 of them, and Syrian2 on the 2nd occasion alerted the police,as they are scum bags who support this evil tyrant
Dick Gregory: I suspect that the SWP are being confused with the Stop The War Coalition. If it was the SWP they must have been more than usually inane in the way they expressed themselves, their leadership has been better (Assaf) and worse (Orr) on Syria, but have all said they were anti-Assad. Maybe Syrian2 rushed to judgement. Maybe they were carrying Stop The War literature and didn't realise how inappropriate it is.
Syrian1: Anybody who opposes Intervention in My opinion is pro-Assad , this is quite a broad definition, as non-intervention only serves Assad, I remember they were carrying literature against intervention ( this was a year ago i think)
Robin Yassin-Kassab: But yesterday, Dick, the SWP were waving 'stop imperial war' banners. even if they don't want intervention, why do they call it imperial war when it obviously isn't? is it the same failure of analysis that has cursed most of the left, or is it just a trendy lie to pose with?
Dick Gregory: They think they can combine both, but that stopping the supposed threat of British action was the priority. Hence the front page of their paper reading "Don't Bomb Syria."They are wrong, but they might be capable of listening to reason, which is the difference with the real pro-Assad crowd.
I've just seen that the International Socialist Network/ Socialist Resistance statement reads in part, "Alongside the Stop the War Coalition, we will continue to campaign against intervention in Syria" so I've left this comment where I saw it:
'Could just be replaced with the three words: Arm The Rebels
Should read "alongside the scabs of the Stop the War Coalition".'
Next move for U.S. divides local Syrians
I didn't post this before, as I'd got tired of having to point out that I wasn't so keen on Western intervention, but quite wanted to as I have a friend who is from Toledo.
'Sylvania lawyer Ammar Alo, whose family emigrated from Syria in the 1970s, has become a local leader in the effort to create awareness of the atrocities carried out by Assad. “We’d like to see policies and/or actions that will stop the Syrian regime from killing innocent civilians and innocent Syrians and, stop their military campaign in total,” Mr. Alo, 30, said.
Asked about a possible U.S. attack on Syrian military installations, Mr. Alo said, “That would definitely help.” '
Wait, wait for political solution
The Syrian Community's March
Sunday, 1 September 2013 at 13:00 American Embassy
'Appeal to all free of the sons of the Syrian community Distinguished to participate in the march in solidarity with our people inside public and affected by the chemical attacks in Gota special condemnation for its gangs stamens of crimes against our people vulnerable and in response to Takmal the international community towards the issue of our people and the revolution glorious
the starting point : U.S. embassy (24 Grosvenor Square, London W1A 2LQ) per hour at noon.
endpoint: Downing Street. please all Liberals attendance and generalize this the Post as widely as possible.'
With A Little Help From My Friends
The vote last night in the House of Commons isn't a glorious success for an insurgent anti-war movement, that has stopped Britain's imperial pretensions 4evah. Miliband was on the TV this morning, saying that this will force the government to go down the diplomatic route. What does that mean? Going to the Russians to agree an imperial imposition on the Syrian people, if not retaining Assad at the top, retaining his state of torturers. To impose such a settlement, more force will be needed, a hundred thousand dead will turn into hundreds of thousands dead, and what is left of Syria will be a battleground for al-Qaida.
But we have to stop Cameron's drive to war, we're told. What drive to war? Cameron says he will respect the will of the House of Commons, and there will be no British involvement in military action against Syria. That doesn't sound like a juggernaut driver to me. That sounds like someone who really wants to be seen to be doing something effective, perhaps to impress his wife. But it is nowhere on Cameron's list of priorities, and so it is dropped. When there are further massacres, Cameron may rhetorically attack Miliband for not letting him attack now, but that's all it will be rhetoric.
There aren't a lot of people in this country who want to help to go to Syrians (they may be a larger number who would like to help, but have been bamboozled by all the talk of "we don't know who we'd be helping" into believing that nothing can help). Nick Griffin of the BNP went to Damascus and praised the government for fighting Islamists. Nigel Farage doesn't want to know. Across the political spectrum there is virtual unanimity in the West that military strikes are a bad thing. I think they are a much worse idea than arming the rebels. I've explained before that there aren't many people in favour of them except Bashar al-Assad, who would hope they would give his government some badly-needed credibility. I know that there are many in Damascus who really would mind Assad being given a taste of his own medicine. They probably know where Iraq is, and what a mess the Americans made of it, as they live in the adjoining country. Good luck with explaining to them that you have stopped the airstrikes that might have killed them with imperialist bombs, and that the Russian missiles fired by their own government shouldn't hurt so much.
One advantage Marxism considers it has over other systems of thought is that it views events as a changing process, not as series of isolated snapshots. Viewed in isolation, there was a chemical attack, there was a vote on a Western response, and the vote went for peace. But I think there is a broader context. People are dying in Syria every day, because a government that fired on peaceful protesters is still maintained by the force of Russian arms against the insurgency that arose to defend those protesters. There have been UN monitoring missions, Arab League missions, UN peace plans, and all they have served to do is give the régime time to do more killing, to try to spread the war, to invite sectarian killing, and it is the lack of support for the mainstream Free Syrian Army that has enabled al-Qaida types any influence whatsoever, though once the war is over, they are not going to impose anything on millions of Syrians. What this vote in the House of Commons last night was was a distraction, a placing of the debate about what Britain should do on behalf of Syrians, what the Americans should do on behalf of Syrians. No it would not have helped if they had voted the other way. But those playing up the significance of the vote as a great success insult Syrians. There was never going to be carpet-bombing of Syria, there was never going to be the mass killing of civilians by the USAF (there are reports the Syrian air force has been dropping napalm, which might be a sick tribute to the US war on Vietnam). If you are fooled by a reasonable belief that US intervention is always wrong into believing that anything they do is the worst thing that could happen, more fool you. If you want Syrians to hate you, because you promote the fantasy that the Americans are a more serious threat to them than Assad's forces, that's the way to go about it.
I might get back to this subject later, with reference to other events in Iraq. The drive to war in 2003 stemmed from the position that leaving Saddam in power in 1991 had left unfinished business, by talking up the prospect of US intervention while offering no hope to Syrians, those who think of themselves as anti-war may be a similar construction of justification for ruling class belligerence in the future. It might also be noted that it was the sanctions that really killed in Iraq, which nobody protested so much about.
Somebody put up a link to the West's failure to send gas masks to Syria (there was obviously a worry they would fall around the heads of salafis). Given that what is going on in Syria is an armed rebellion against a capitalist government with support from its imperial patron Russia, the position of international socialists should be to demand that the people of Syria be given the arms they need to topple the government, notably anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons. And demanding the withdrawal of the foreign forces from Iran and Lebanon probably won't make a blind bit of difference, but is probably the right thing to do too. Any concentration on the airstrikes Obama might authorise is at best a distraction, a talk of hypotheticals in an imperial Great Game while Syria burns, at worst an endorsement of Bashar al-Assad's right to kill hundreds of kids with sarin gas.
An open letter on Syria to Western narcissists
'But please, don’t let the conflict in Syria be about opposing America. Let it be about Syria, and what might actually help Syrians – you know, the actually existing people who are dying by the tens of thousands in this brutal war. But if you can’t do that, then do me a favour, and please shut up.'
Thursday, 29 August 2013
Incendiary bomb victims 'like the walking dead'
Original headline, 'The World Has Failed Our Nation'.
'Eyewitnesses describe a fighter jet dropping the device, a low explosion, followed by columns of fire and smoke.
Ian Pannell and cameraman Darren Conway's report contains images viewers may find extremely distressing.'
Obama's Dilemma and Assad's Opportunity
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiomVzdmW_etLev52o0k_aylbpSZZRYT9K9T0cZMdjho4eT3twfujEG5uT36d4L3PN0EyozMN65OuAwOPF7IjE-eBA9Y9-15EM9G8inmeHImeZ723A3rScJuBid-VcJyVfdAfzsXI7Wf3U/w537-h378/Obama-stolls-Assad.jpg)
'Why did Obama say "a whole bunch of chemical weapons?" What exactly is a whole bunch of chemical weapons? Such fuzzy language has no place in laws, let alone ultimatums. Can one imagine schools that prohibit "a whole bunch" of drugs or weapons on campus? How could you enforce such a rule?
And yet this is exactly the road map that Assad has used to introduce chemical weapons into the arsenal of weapons he is using to suppress his own people. In a whole series of chemical attacks since December, he has stayed safely to this side of "a whole bunch of chemical weapons" until this most recent attack on 21 August 2013.
The first use was on 22 Dec 2012 in the rebel-held al-Bayyada neighborhood of hotly contested Homs. While this use by the regime was documented by video tapes, witness and doctor testimony and confirmed by a general who defected from the chemical weapons division days later, only seven people died so it could hardly be considered that "a whole bunch of chemical weapons" were used.
Then there were two attacks on 19 March 2013. In one of them, Khan al-Assal, 31 people were killed. Both Britain and France conducted investigations and found the Assad regime responsible but the Assad regime blamed the opposition, which denied responsibility and nothing was done. Apparently, "a whole bunch" involved more than three dozen deaths.
There was no question of who was responsible for the gas attack on 13 April 2013 in Sheik Maqsoud, Aleppo because the gas canisters were dropped from helicopters and only the regime flies those. Using that delivery method was very much "in your face" but since only two women and two children were killed and another 16 made sick, there was no question of it passing the "whole bunch of" test.
Then there were two attacks on 19 March 2013. In one of them, Khan al-Assal, 31 people were killed. Both Britain and France conducted investigations and found the Assad regime responsible but the Assad regime blamed the opposition, which denied responsibility and nothing was done. Apparently, "a whole bunch" involved more than three dozen deaths.
There was no question of who was responsible for the gas attack on 13 April 2013 in Sheik Maqsoud, Aleppo because the gas canisters were dropped from helicopters and only the regime flies those. Using that delivery method was very much "in your face" but since only two women and two children were killed and another 16 made sick, there was no question of it passing the "whole bunch of" test.
And this has been the pattern of chemical attacks up until now. Almost certainly, the Assad regime has been behind all of them. Jihadists have not used sarin gas missile attacks anywhere in the world and there has been nothing indicating that anyone in the opposition has this type of capability. The videos of so-called rebel labs making chemical weapons with lye have all been debunked. These chemical weapons attacks have all been small scale attacks, very tentative in nature, in the beginning. This has been Assad's pattern with the introduction of every new weapons system into the conflict. There has been the suspicious on the part of some observers that the poisons were being deliberately watered down or mixed with non-lethal agents to throw investigators off the scent. All of these gas bombs fell through the "whole bunch of" loophole Obama included in his chemical weapons prohibition and all of them have been given a pass by Obama.'
Shell Shocked and Rouged: Syria Is Not a Disposable Bride
'Syria is not a disposable bride; it is not a prop to be married to larger ideological struggle. It is not a political mistress with whom one can vacation to these miserable battlefields for liberation and make selective observations.
There are over 100,000 people dead. Perhaps an aerial bombing campaign will only make things worse. But what is certain is that those who continue to fixate on how Syria fits into their preexisting worldview, and not on Syria itself, are deluding themselves if they think they are protesting to save Syria. "Hands off Syria" is the mantra. But one has to wonder where these voices where when the imprints of Russian or Iranian or Hezbollah intervention scarred the Syrian landscape, and sheltered the Assad dynasty from diplomatic or military threat.
If the concern is Syrian innocent life, where were these voices, and their easy slogans, when he essentially threw over a million Syrian children into exile, robbed them of family and childhood and dignity.'
One of the voices with their easy slogans that have never cared for the Syrian people's struggle is Kevin Ovenden's:
[http://stopwar.org.uk/news/kevin-ovenden-act-now-to-stop-war]
[http://stopwar.org.uk/news/kevin-ovenden-act-now-to-stop-war]
Sole Survivor
In case it disappears below the fold, the punchline is going to be, "I dare you, I double dare you motherfucker, ask a survivor of the chemical weapons attacks if they think the Assad forces might not have done it."
Objectively is a nasty word, always good for describing others. But I tend to think that if you walk down the street in Britain with a placard that reads Hands Off Syria, it isn't referring to the Russians and Iranians whose guns and men have had their hands on Syria for two years. No, it refers to the threat of a limited airstrike, a token response meant to show that the West has done something to deter chemical weapons use. If that is what you choose to protest about right now, then you are objectively in favour of chemical weapons use.
And if you want, raise doubts about who used the chemical weapons.
Debating Intervention
'Ahmed said, 'People are smiling, people there [Damascus] are relieved," they're waiting for their nightmare to end, and looking forward to a military intervention." '
I haven't got to Robin Yassin-Kassab's contribution yet, only as far as someone who tells us that the opposition in Syria is all al-Qaida, because Robert Fisk said so in yesterday's Independent.
"Sadly, I don't think there's going to be a dramatic change in the balance on the ground after this coming intervention. If it's even coming - it's now looking a bit more doubtful than it did yesterday. If it does come I think it's going to be very limited and symbolic. The reason why America mainly thinks now that it has to act, is the mass attacks come a year to the day after Obama said that chemical weapons would be an absolute red line, and then he would actually do something."
"The régime has already used chemical weapons, several times, on a much smaller scale; testing the line, and seeing that it didn't really exist. And the reason why Bashar al-Assad did this big attack now was to show the Syrian people, the opposition, the vast majority of the Syrian people, that nobody's coming to help you. I've got Russia and Iran on my side, I've got Hezbollah, I've got sectarian Shia militias from Iraq directing my fightback; and you've got some inefficient, not very well sustained help from Saudi Arabia, not from anywhere else*, a little bit from Qatar."
*I.e. The West, which has provided diddly-squat to the Syrian rebels.
[Continuing as Bashar] "The equation isn't going to change, and if I want to gas you en masse, I can; nobody's going to do anything.
"So the West now thinks it has to show that Obama's words, that America's words, still mean something, and it has to show the world in general that you can't get away with use of weapons of mass destruction."
Mahmoud: "Of course my home is empty, my town is empty. Yesterday the régime shelled my town, about twenty people were sent to the field hospital, so my town is empty. Most of the people are next to the border, scared from death. So this is why I said we want to stop killing inside Syria. So I think the régime, when they receive the strike, they would not answer America, they would answer Israel. The same thing happens in Syria, when the FSA or the rebels attack the régime, they shelled the civilians. So they don't answer their enemy, they answer the civilians, the others."
Robin: "If this were an Israeli/American plot, they've had 2½ years in which they could have done a proper intervention and régime change, if they wanted. They could have armed the Free Army, but they didn't do any of this. Israel's quite happy with Bashar al-Assad, who locks up teenage girls for reading poems about Palestine, who has kept the border with the occupied Golan Heights silent since 1973. Whar started all this was the régime responding to peaceful demonstrations by gunning people down, raping people, and torturing them. That's what caused people eventually to take up arms. Al-Qaida in Syria was created by the régime's war, and the trauma it caused, and the fact that the West failed to support the moderate defectors of the Free Army a year ago, when it would have really made a difference."
"These conspiracy theories, any intelligent listener will know that they are wasting our time. Stories about thehe RAND corporation, I don't know what's next, the Illuminati, David Icke, lizards. It's too simplistic to say that al-Qaida is an American creation. America is a complex hypocritical state, like all states are hypocritical, like any state it has different wings, different interests, going on at once. It probably has aligned itself at times with al-Qaida type people, for example when they were fighting the Russians in Afghanistan. At the moment, no. Al-Qaida got into Syria because of the trauma caused by Assad's war on what was at first an unarmed, peaceful, reform movement. If you can't admit that, any theory which cuts that out, treats the Syrian people as if they are innocent pawns in the hands of devilishly clever foreigners."
"These conspiracy theories, any intelligent listener will know that they are wasting our time. Stories about thehe RAND corporation, I don't know what's next, the Illuminati, David Icke, lizards. It's too simplistic to say that al-Qaida is an American creation. America is a complex hypocritical state, like all states are hypocritical, like any state it has different wings, different interests, going on at once. It probably has aligned itself at times with al-Qaida type people, for example when they were fighting the Russians in Afghanistan. At the moment, no. Al-Qaida got into Syria because of the trauma caused by Assad's war on what was at first an unarmed, peaceful, reform movement. If you can't admit that, any theory which cuts that out, treats the Syrian people as if they are innocent pawns in the hands of devilishly clever foreigners."
Intervention?
'Simplistic "anti-imperialists" (the sort who haven’t noticed Russia’s blatant imperialism in Syria) should reflect on the complexity of the situation. Should a tyrant be left unchecked to gas his people? If Israel were doing it to the Palestinians, would outside intervention (of course there would be none) to deter Israel be absolutely wrong? Was it right to leave the Bosnian Muslims to be slaughtered? (Many statist leftists would of course unhesitatingly answer yes to this question). Even with our hypocritical and frequently criminal ‘international community’, is there no validity in attempting to preserve the semi-taboo on the mass use of WMD?
I cannot say what will happen, or if it will happen, or what the ramifications will be. I expect, however, that any American-led attack will not dramatically change the balance on the ground. Obama wants to be seen to be acting, and to deter. He will be scared that Assad, Hizbullah or Iran will respond in such a way that he is pressured to expand the operation to end the regime. And he doesn’t want to do this. General Martin Dempsey has recently explained why* – America can’t find any branch of the opposition ready to assume power and serve American interests.'
*[http://eaworldview.com/…/syria-analysis-us-military-rules-…/]
So there is no military strike anymore?
Karam Nachar:
'Oh so there is no military strike anymore?! but come on! the metropolitan self-righteous anti-imperialists have just reorganized and sent out their "cri de guerre"! and the realists have just assumed the platforms to debate "western national interests" ad nauseum ... and indeed even the neo-cons have just started to reemerge from their long forgotten corners to gloat and say .."we told you so" ... never mind that Syrians have been dying for three years and shall continue to die in droves ... or that the famed 'strike' was never about stopping Assad from butchering his people but merely punishing him for using one specific type of weapons in the process.
Meanwhile the Iranians and the Russians continue their "dance macabre" on our bodies ... and Al-Qaeda continues its attempts in the north to replace secular with Islamic fascism ... I apologize for the bitter tone and the obscene language everyone ... but really all I want to say this morning is ... fuck you world, fuck your norms, and laws, and ideologies ... It all means nothing next to the silent bodies of Ghouta children.'
Stop the War must support the Syrian revolution
If socialist and left-wingers don’t support those who are oppressed and crying out for freedom then something is very wrong. The movement has the right to ask their government not to intervene in wars abroad but at the very least they should hold placards that tell Syrians who have lost their homes, families and dignity that “we the people of Britain are with you.” Holding placards that say “No intervention and hands off Syria” appears to Syrians that you are on Russia’s side and Russia is and has been intervening since the beginning (with its war vessels in Tartous since the 5th month of the revolt and most of the weapons that have killed Syrians were a gift to Assad from Putin).'
FSA Kittens
'Young Syrian children feed a Free Syrian Tortoise.
Even though Syrians are hungry, they look out for each another. Assad is unable to kill Syrians’ resilient spirit of compassion, justice, and honour.'
FSA Kittens
'Assad killed 1600 civilians with nerve gas in Damascus today.
Our message to him is this:
"We are not afraid. We are not giving up. Our cause transcends our bodies and you cannot kill it. We are coming for you." '
Tumbleweed
This afternoon British MPs meet to discuss principle of voting for action calibrated not to affect anything too much.
Meanwhile Assad's airstrikes against Syria continue.
Federation false flag operation against the Xindi
Earth not the Federation, must google a slightly different version of the conspiracy theory. Humans are trying to destroy the Xindi, but they won't allow it. They might have a high proportion of Alawites in the security apparatus, but their balance of five ethnic groups brings the same stability Lebanon enjoys today, or Yugoslavia did in the 1990s, while Earth thinks that putting a token Vulcan on a starship proves their commitment to racial harmony. And this idea that the Xindi are building a superweapon - my God, have we learned nothing from Iraq?
There's none so blind
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5-mJzZufdAShXH1xOmpoMOcK2lnHAXnyZ-r8IZX9O2ltNmNT5JTgF7qodjZKK4YyGmVsiec14Mc1krLMjxDXuP9J5TBJbUwbpSs1C94IQrJUE8BOMqmCksXfG4LY1YEX4hAVQR1xt2lttCAWdJl_3_cVGz8OXotTd9x4We4tifc9sya0hFRO74xofL7EM/w511-h408/Screenshot%20(2173).png)
The BBC is now claiming that the use of chemical weapons in Syria may have been an accident. Kirsty Wark went for it on Newsnight last night, and now they are doing it on Breakfast. Apart from an interview Clive Myrie did with the Syrian foreign minister, the BBC have done nothing to deconstruct the lies the Syrian government has spread to hide its culpability.
The Revolting Syrian has pictures of kids killed in non-chemical airstrikes, kids killed in airstrikes in the areas hit by chemical weapons that were missed last time round, many pictures of the kids killed in the chemical weapon attacks last week. Go look if you still need to see, but there's none so blind as those that would say that the Syrian people rather than the régime might have done this.
Wednesday, 28 August 2013
Syrian army may use kamikaze pilots against west, Assad officer claims
Hysteric of the Day. Just edges out Putin Orders Massive Strike Against Saudi Arabia If West Attacks Syria.*
Colonel Asscart** might want to consider whether painting the Syrian Air Force as single-minded jihadis might contradict everything his superiors have been saying about the Assad monarchy being a bastion of secularism.
OSU Student with Ties to Syria Braces for Possible U.S. Military Action
'Alwattar claims his cousin was killed in Syria in July, 2012 after protesting the government of President Bashar Assad. "The end goal, and the beginning goal of this revolution, was democracy," Alwattar said. "People started protesting for democracy, and they were attacked by the troops." '
For Syrians, Life Goes On Despite Likelihood Of U.S. Action
'Like millions of Syrians, he has been driven from his home. He and his wife, Rana, have been living with her parents in downtown Damascus for months.
"Well, let's be realistic," added Rana. "I'm not going to say I want a strike against my own country. But I do say I hope such a strike will help us out a little. We've seen so much already. Enough."
Samir, who served his mandatory military service in the late 1990s, said an attack could harm the Assad regime but it won't drive it from power.
"The strike won't necessarily change the equation on the ground. It's not meant to get rid of the regime," he said, adding that he always supported the uprising against Assad.'
Concentrate our protests
I don't think Syrians need to have bombs rained on Assad's forces from the air. I think they would generally rather we concentrate our protests on the Russian bombs the Syrian government drops on them, the Scud missiles it fires at them, the sarin gas it smothers them with. And protesting that our government, any government should give them the means to prevent such attacks, the anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons that would turn the tide of the revolution in the Syrian people's favour.
Syrian family in Kansas City talks worry for loved ones in Middle East
' "The people want democracy. They want better living standards. They want to be able to live with dignity," he said. He says while global forces decide how to help, he knows he doesn't want to see anyone else die.
"No boots on the ground are needed. We do not need any American casualties. The Syrian people just want a no fly zone and a targeted missile attack," Banyalmarjeh said.'
On Interventions and the Syrian Revolution
Darth Nader articulates very well.
'No one armed the Syrian resistance, so they were killed by the regime, or forced to put up with jihadi infiltration. So Assad used chemical weapons against the Syrians, and the West wants to respond to teach Assad a lesson, a response that still guarantees that Syrians have no say in the matter of their future. And the regime will probably live through any “punitive” Western intervention, and the killing will probably not stop.'
The regime and the West are both threats to Syrian Revolution
'These jihadist groups are reactionary and sectarian—and the Syrian revolution wants to break down sectarian and ethnic division—but they cannot be compared to the Syrian regime.'
I would agree with Joseph Daher here, though I would disagree with the headline (and the internet sub-heading - "Western powers are using the horrific gas attack on Damascus suburb of East Ghouta as an excuse for military intervention in Syria" - in a more indirect way) - the régime and the prospect of American airstrikes are not comparable threats to the Syrian people, the former is the immediate threat. Maybe the good people at Socialist Worker are responsible for the headline, who is editing it now?
Also, "Don't Bomb Syria" suggests that American bombing is the problem of the moment, not for Syrians: "Two civilians have been killed and a number of others injured including a child as a result of regime warplane bombardment on the district."[http://yallasouriya.wordpress.com/…/snn-syria-breaking-new…/]
Thin veneer of normalcy in Syria's wartime capital
'For much of the conflict, it has been cut off from its hinterland, the densely populated towns and villages that surround it in the area known as “Rif Dimashq,” or “the Damascus Countryside.” Rebels have controlled most of the Rif since last year, and regime forces have launched repeated assaults trying to dislodge them, devastating the area.'
One thing the people saying that we need to stop British troops going to Syria might like to have explained to them in words of one syllable is that nobody wants British troops sent to Syria. Nobody. Well, maybe one person. Bashar al-Assad might want something to takes people's mind off the destruction he has wrought on Syria.
One thing the people saying that we need to stop British troops going to Syria might like to have explained to them in words of one syllable is that nobody wants British troops sent to Syria. Nobody. Well, maybe one person. Bashar al-Assad might want something to takes people's mind off the destruction he has wrought on Syria.
Container Packing for Syria
While this is going on, those unconcerned by Russian, Iranian and Lebanese attacks in Syria will be demonstrating in Downing Street.[http://stopwar.org.uk/events/emergency-protest-syria]. I will not be in central London, and I urge nobody to attend the demonstration.
Out Of The Blue
After 9/11 there was a lot of confusion. But after a while it became obvious that a mostly Saudi group called al-Qaida had done so, however difficult it was to pin down al-Qaida as a unified organisation.
There are people who denied all this, who said it was a plot by the US government to propel us into war with Iraq. There are times when I can be sympathetic to how people got to such a position, and even examine the arguments they put forward for their theory of events. But the denial of the Syrian government's responsibility for its murder of a similar number of people has been of a similarly conspiracist turn, which reminds me that one thing said about 9/11 Truthers is that they mock the victims by denying the culpability of the actual perpetrators.
Of course 9/11 came out of a clear sky, whereas the massacre in Eastern Ghouta has been done by a government that has been waging a war against its own people for two years, which should make it easier to spot the obvious, and avoid slandering the Syrian people as capable of doing this to themselves.
Does Obama know he’s fighting on al-Qa’ida’s side?
What a wanker Fisk has become. Particularly this piece of genocide non-denial denial.
'This doesn’t mean that the terrible images of the gassed and dying Syrian civilians are false. It does mean that any evidence to the contrary is going to have to be suppressed. For example, no-one is going to be interested in persistent reports in Beirut that three Hezbollah members – fighting alongside government troops in Damascus – were apparently struck down by the same gas on the same day, supposedly in tunnels. They are now said to be undergoing treatment in a Beirut hospital. So if Syrian government forces used gas, how come Hezbollah men might have been stricken too? Blowback?'
Two and a Half Years Later: Inside 'Liberated' Syria
'Living in the U.S., I had long stopped using the term "Revolution" to describe the situation in Syria. Yet in my time in Syria, not a single person I met used any other term to describe it. It didn't matter whether I was talking to a mother or an FSA fighter or an activist.
It also didn't matter if I was talking to someone who supported the Revolution or was critical of it. They all spoke of the "thawra" (Revolution). Indeed they spoke of little else. Similarly, not a single person I met used the term "civil war" to describe the situation in Syria. I was told time and again that a civil war requires two sides. In Syria, there was only one side -- the government -- that unilaterally waged war against its people.'
Tuesday, 27 August 2013
It's time to cast off the 'Iraq war' mindset
Brian Whitaker:
'George Bush and the neocons have a lot to answer for. Their scheming over Iraq a decade ago has cost us dear and its long shadow still looms over foreign policy decisions – nowhere more so than on Syria where the Great Deception of 2002-2003 is making rational debate increasingly difficult.
Yesterday brought a deluge of war hysteria, some of it in the mainstream media, much in the social media (mainly anti-war hysteria, and much of it ill-informed – talk of an invasion, troops going in, a lack of exit strategies and of course the "false flag" theories that have become so popular).
This is not surprising, given the enormity of what Bush did. It's good that people are sceptical now and are asking questions about policy in Syria – it's a pity more people didn't do that over Iraq. The problem, though, is that the dreadful example of Iraq obscures the real picture regarding Syria. Syria is viewed as Iraq 2.0, and so the issue of chemical weapons in Syria is inevitably seen as a pretext for war and little else.
It is only by casting off this "Iraq mindset" that we can begin to grasp the realities of Syria and what to do about it.'
The Revolution Armed Itself
Robin Yassin-Kassab:
'Lynch is right that direct foreign military intervention is inadvisable. It would fulfill the expectations of those in and beyond the Middle East who believe the Syrian revolution is all about Iran and that the revolutionaries are pawns in the hands of dastardly foreign powers. There’s too much bad history, particularly as far as the United States is concerned. Moreover, Syria would be an infinitely more difficult conflict than Libya: Western forces would find themselves fighting several wars at once — against Iran, Hezbollah, al Qaeda, perhaps even against Kurdish insurgents. Their presence might well exacerbate the sectarian element of the conflict.But direct military intervention has always been highly unlikely. It’s a red herring (the most persistent red herring of the conflict) — and one that misjudges the West’s mood, its economy, and its current capabilities in the Middle East. The only useful intervention that can be hoped for is not a land or air invasion but a coordinated effort between the West, the Arabs, and Turkey to fund and arm the Syrian National Coalition, which is now recognized by over 130 countries as the “sole” or “legitimate” representative of the Syrian people.'
Mostly though, those who oppose intervention without any proposals for what should be done by Syrians instead, those telling us the enemy is at home and not Assad, that Syria is another Iraq, are doing nothing to help the Syrian people and will be hated by them. These non-interventionists are the ones rehabilitating Tony Blair's cult of liberal intervention, as their alternative is the continuing massacre of the Syrian people. There is a better way, of pressuring governments to allow the arming of the FSA so that Syrian can achieve their freedom, and unrepresentative jihadi groups can be left to make their unrepresentative little plans while the world moves on, but there is no point whining about the rain if you don't bring an umbrella.
If the Americans drop some cruise missiles on Assad's forces, I'm not going to lose any sleep. They have a bad record of killing civilians by accident, and imperial bombing is often a good propaganda weapon for whoever is fighting them. But to say "we are against intervention" without proposals of how the fight against Assad can be taken to victory, is to invite the murder of Syrians by their government.
If the Americans drop some cruise missiles on Assad's forces, I'm not going to lose any sleep. They have a bad record of killing civilians by accident, and imperial bombing is often a good propaganda weapon for whoever is fighting them. But to say "we are against intervention" without proposals of how the fight against Assad can be taken to victory, is to invite the murder of Syrians by their government.
Many of those simplistic anti-interventionists repeat the word Iraq like a magic formula. The magic doesn't really work on those who opposed the war for oil from the start, but can spot the difference when a revolution takes place. The liberal interventionists used to ask at the time, "What would you do about Saddam?" and I think the answer was quite clear, when there is a full-scale imperialist war going on against Iraq you cannot fight both at once, but at any other time it's a great idea. And when Saddam really does use chemical weapons, as he did at Halabja in 1988, you don't pretend that it is a fiction dreamt up by the neo-cons. And there is no prospect of a full-scale imperialist war in Syria, a few bombs or a No Fly Zone do not change the fact that the struggle is between the régime and the rebels, and if you haven't expressed any sympathy for the rebels but have written them off as God-Know-What or liver-eating maniacs, just calling any action against Assad a disaster is to miss the point.
Monday, 26 August 2013
UN inspectors' convoy hit by sniper fire
'Syrian state media blamed opposition "terrorists" for the attack, though the claim could not be verified.'
Because it's a lie. Because soldiers fighting for the régime shot at the convoy. Because they don't want their chemical attack investigated. Doubt is good, but seeing what's in front of your eyes is good too.
Chomsky on Syria: Very good
I think he's wrong about this:
"We all want to force Assad to the negotiating table and from there, to resign, but the question is how to achieve this? The first way to do this is to supply the opposition with arms. This step would most likely produce an escalation of the military conflict and open the door to further military upgrading and expansion on the part of the regime, leading to increased destruction and the regime staying in place for longer. The second approach is to go to Geneva with the cooperation of the major powers, including Russia, and force the regime to accept a truce. These are the options we have."
There isn't any further escalation that Russian armaments would help with. Rather than the Russians becoming more stubborn the more active the West is, the reverse seems to be the case over Syria, as can be seen by their agreement to the deployment of UN inspectors now that military action is threatened. It is more that there has been a dance, each threat of action by the Russians has been an excuse for the West to back off. Negotiations with Assad inevitably mean leaving his régime in power, and probably him, there really isn't a need for a Geneva conference for him to go. Does get a lot of things spot on, though.
"Let us not forget that the regime might be using chemical weapons. There is still a lot of uncertainty over this right now, but it’s a possibility that will inevitably come true in the future."
False Consciousness in Sunnydale: Karl Marx,
Adam Smith, and Buffy the Vampire Slayer
When the Hellmouth opens, it's very probable that the vampires are responsible,
though who knows what these 'ordinary Sunnydale residents' will do to provoke intervention?
Sunday, 25 August 2013
Time stops in Syria
ALL clocks and timepieces stopped across Syria on July 15 at 18:07 local time, it has emerged.Last year.
"Hilary Clinton and William Hague have been stating on a daily basis that ‘time is running out’ for the Assad regime – and with minutes counting down and Mondays turning into Tuesdays it was clear that this was no empty rhetoric.
But it has since emerged that the war-ravaged country has fallen into the grip of a temporal standstill and is now permanently stuck at teatime."
"Hilary Clinton and William Hague have been stating on a daily basis that ‘time is running out’ for the Assad regime – and with minutes counting down and Mondays turning into Tuesdays it was clear that this was no empty rhetoric.
But it has since emerged that the war-ravaged country has fallen into the grip of a temporal standstill and is now permanently stuck at teatime."
Sam's Speech From The Two Towers
"There's some good in this world, Mr. Frodo, and it's worth fighting for."
Mr. Crowley
It is very unlikely that Jews gassed themselves at Auschwitz in order to provoke American and British bombing of the railway lines there. #justsayin
Was Crowley that bad? Debate here:
[http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=1190]
Seven Minutes and Nineteen
Seconds in Aleppo
"Syrians attempt to analyze the attack on social media. Most agree that it is the regime’s retaliation for a deadly car bombing in southern Beirut the day before, widely thought to have been carried out by rebels. But after many months of the same attacks on Syrian towns and cities, does Assad’s scorched earth policy have a rational explanation?
Over 30 dead have been counted on this day in Aleppo. The rest are still buried in the concrete rubble.
By nightfall, civilian rescuers were still digging with their bare hands. In any other country, these men would have been treated like heroes. But here, they aren’t even noticed. No one watches these videos from Syria anymore. They have become the norm.
Heartbreaking pleas for machinery, ropes, floodlights and first aid kits saturated online platforms after the attack shown in the video. They didn’t ask for weapons or food; they begged for ropes to pull out their dead. Activists shared plans to train civilians on rescue missions to prepare for the aftermath of the next attack. They know there will be a next time.
One week later, rebels claim that over 1300 are dead from a chemical weapon attack on the eastern Ghouta area outside Damascus. The media is moved once more to share the images of our dead children. And the men in Bustan al-Qasr still dig in the rubble, unnoticed. Twelve more bodies are excavated, only to be buried again. There are still more to be retrieved. The men continue to dig.
Remember three years ago, when we watched the fate of the 33 Chilean miners trapped underground? Remember how the world united in that moment? We rooted for survival, for humanity, for an ending that somehow proves our collective resilience. For an ending that somehow defies all odds. In Syria, such an ending was written off long ago.
There is nothing left to prove in Syria any more. Nothing to offer but cowardly ambivalence and cold political calculations. World leaders know that the words “never again” are mere words, empty promises reserved for the sanitized spaces of memorial dedications or an exhibition on genocide years after it comes to an end."
"Syrians attempt to analyze the attack on social media. Most agree that it is the regime’s retaliation for a deadly car bombing in southern Beirut the day before, widely thought to have been carried out by rebels. But after many months of the same attacks on Syrian towns and cities, does Assad’s scorched earth policy have a rational explanation?
Heartbreaking pleas for machinery, ropes, floodlights and first aid kits saturated online platforms after the attack shown in the video. They didn’t ask for weapons or food; they begged for ropes to pull out their dead. Activists shared plans to train civilians on rescue missions to prepare for the aftermath of the next attack. They know there will be a next time.
One week later, rebels claim that over 1300 are dead from a chemical weapon attack on the eastern Ghouta area outside Damascus. The media is moved once more to share the images of our dead children. And the men in Bustan al-Qasr still dig in the rubble, unnoticed. Twelve more bodies are excavated, only to be buried again. There are still more to be retrieved. The men continue to dig.
Remember three years ago, when we watched the fate of the 33 Chilean miners trapped underground? Remember how the world united in that moment? We rooted for survival, for humanity, for an ending that somehow proves our collective resilience. For an ending that somehow defies all odds. In Syria, such an ending was written off long ago.
There is nothing left to prove in Syria any more. Nothing to offer but cowardly ambivalence and cold political calculations. World leaders know that the words “never again” are mere words, empty promises reserved for the sanitized spaces of memorial dedications or an exhibition on genocide years after it comes to an end."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)