AuthorTopic: The Syria Desk  (Read 58993 times)

Online Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 18517
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: The Syria Desk
« Reply #15 on: August 27, 2013, 03:46:32 AM »
From the Do-What-We-Say-Not-What-We-Do Department:
Secretary of State John Kerry Announces Chemical Weapons Unacceptable on SAME DAY that It’s Revealed America Helped Saddam Use Chemical Weapons-
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/08/secstate-john-kerry-announces-chemical-weapons-unacceptable-on-same-day-that-its-revealed-america-helped-saddam-use-chemical-weapons.html

On the same day that Secretary of State John Kerry announces that we have to bomb Syria because the use of chemical weapons violate international rules, it was revealed that CIA files prove that the U.S. supported Saddam Hussein’s use of chemical weapons against Iran.

The irony is stunning …

The U.S. literally defines terrorism as other people doing what we ourselves do.


"Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world's grief. Do justly now, love mercy now, walk humbly now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it."

Online Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 18517
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: The Syria Desk
« Reply #16 on: August 27, 2013, 04:04:26 AM »
U.N. Official And Syrian Kurdish Leader: Assad Did Not Use Chemical Weapons-
http://disquietreservations.blogspot.com/2013/08/un-official-and-syrian-kurdish-leader.html


Who is more deaf to global public opinion - Obama or Assad? Answer: Obama. Sources of photos: AP and Reuters.

First, the U.N. official. Her name is Carla del Ponte, the "former Chief Prosecutor of two United Nations international criminal law tribunals" (Wikipedia). She's an attorney general from Switzerland, so you know she's neutral.

Read the excerpt below from the article, "Syrian rebels used Sarin nerve gas, not Assad’s regime: U.N. official" by Shaun Waterman, published in The Washington Times on Monday, May 6, 2013:
Testimony from victims strongly suggests it was the rebels, not the Syrian government, that used Sarin nerve gas during a recent incident in the revolution-wracked nation, a senior U.N. diplomat said Monday.

Carla del Ponte, a member of the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, told Swiss TV there were “strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof,” that rebels seeking to oust Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad had used the nerve agent.

But she said her panel had not yet seen any evidence of Syrian government forces using chemical weapons, according to the BBC, but she added that more investigation was needed.

Damascus has recently facing growing Western accusations that its forces used such weapons, which President Obama has described as crossing a red line. But Ms. del Ponte’s remarks may serve to shift the focus of international concern.
The same false allegations against Assad that were flying around back in May were bound to resurface late in the summer. So the date of the article in no way diminishes its value as far as enlightening the world about who actually is willing and has the means to carry out a chemical weapons attack against Syrian civilians.

The Saudi-Turkish-Qatari-French-British-USraeli backed Al-Qaeda terrorists have everything to gain by framing Assad because they are currently losing the war and would see their fortunes reversed at least somewhat if the U.S. attacks Syria.

Saleh Muslim, Syria's main Kurdish leader, says that Assad would be stupid to use chemical weapons against his own people in front of the eyes of the world, and that he has no motive to take this drastic step.

The Al-Qaeda terrorists are the most likely culprits, if in fact there is proof that chemical weapons have been used in Syria.

Read the excerpt below from the article, "Syrian Kurdish leader says Assad not to blame for attack" by Alexandra Hudson, published by Reuters on Monday, August 26, 2013:
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad would not be "so stupid" as to use chemical weapons close to Damascus, the leader of the country's largest Kurdish group said.

Saleh Muslim, head of the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD), said he doubted the Syrian president would resort to using such weapons when he felt he had the upper hand in the country's civil war.

He suggested last Wednesday's attack, which the opposition says was carried out by government forces and killed hundreds of people, was aimed at framing Assad and provoking an international reaction. Assad has denied his forces used chemical weapons.

"The regime in Syria ... has chemical weapons, but they wouldn't use them around Damascus, 5 km from the (U.N.) committee which is investigating chemical weapons. Of course they are not so stupid as to do so," Muslim told Reuters.

At the time of the incident, U.N. experts were already in Syria to investigate three previous alleged chemical attacks dating from months ago.

POSTED BY SAMAN MOHAMMADI
"Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world's grief. Do justly now, love mercy now, walk humbly now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it."

Offline g

  • Golden Oxen
  • Contrarian
  • Master Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 12280
    • View Profile
Re: It Takes a Thief to Spot a Heist
« Reply #17 on: August 27, 2013, 04:58:52 AM »
What Diners typically hate is lying and BS.

Not to mention Tap Dancing around every direct question ever put to Socrates on the Diner.  He doesn't answer any question directly, he doesn't provide links to material he SAYS he has published, and he pitches out Ad Hom Napalm on a regular basis besides.  So there is simply nothing of substance in all the posts he has ever made here on the Diner, it is all just blatant Trolling.  I know, I am capable of out-Trolling him anytime.  LOL.  Takes one to know one, as they say.  :icon_mrgreen:  Don't fuck with the KING of Trolls, who is ALSO ADMIN.  POWER OF GOD ON A FORUM:icon_mrgreen:

It takes a THIEF to spot a HEIST.

RE

Having been a vocal supporter of MKing;s right to express his opinions, and still feel that way, it was rather disturbing and dismaying to see his initial posting after being let out of the can.

His ridicule of the seriousness of the current middle east situation is also very difficult to understand, and seems to be designed solely to inflame other members.

Whatever the case, doing what we can to protect free speech is the Diner's strongest and most valuable trait, and makes us the valid ONLY go to place for Doom discussion. We are smart enough and tolerant enough to deal with someone who abuses our desire to seek valid, heartfelt opinions and solutions to the impending problems we feel are on the horizon.

Praises again to RE for reconsidering and letting this poster out of the dungeon. His current postings do nothing to detract from your laudable decision to listen and reconsider.


Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41302
    • View Profile
Re: It Takes a Thief to Spot a Heist
« Reply #18 on: August 27, 2013, 05:11:54 AM »
Having been a vocal supporter of MKing;s right to express his opinions, and still feel that way, it was rather disturbing and dismaying to see his initial posting after being let out of the can.

His ridicule of the seriousness of the current middle east situation is also very difficult to understand, and seems to be designed solely to inflame other members.

Whatever the case, doing what we can to protect free speech is the Diner's strongest and most valuable trait, and makes us the valid ONLY go to place for Doom discussion. We are smart enough and tolerant enough to deal with someone who abuses our desire to seek valid, heartfelt opinions and solutions to the impending problems we feel are on the horizon.

Praises again to RE for reconsidering and letting this poster out of the dungeon. His current postings do nothing to detract from your laudable decision to listen and reconsider.

Basically since being Paroled, Socrates' posting only serves to reinforce why I pitched him into the Dungeon in the first place.

However, he has not Violated the terms of the Parole here as of yet, so we are back to the battle of Troll vs. Troll.

You wanna lay an over-under on who wins this one on the Diner?  LOL.  Don't Fuck with Admin.  Power of GOD on a Forum.  :icon_mrgreen:

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline WHD

  • Administrator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3177
    • View Profile
Re: The Syria Desk - Alastair Crooke, HuffPost Blog
« Reply #19 on: August 27, 2013, 08:10:54 AM »
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/lobbing-rocks-into-the-sy_b_3822614.html


Alastair Crooke

Fmr. MI-6 agent; Author, 'Resistance: The Essence of Islamic Revolution'

Lobbing Rocks Into the Syrian Fog
Posted: 08/27/2013 9:37 am

HuffPost Blog

BEIRUT -- A scrum has erupted in the press these last few days: heads down, padded shoulders locked, like some football "rush" intent on pushing and jostling a president cradling the ball of military intervention physically across the "red line" on Syria. The speed and thrust of this dash for the line, however, seems to convey the momentum of unchallengeable "truth." Awkwardly, reality is rather different: There has been absolutely no evidence published to support the allegation that President Bashar Assad's forces were responsible for this, or any other gas attack.

Unwelcome as it may be to certain European and regional governments, who have been cheerleading the case for American intervention, neither the Russians nor the Chinese, both of whom are well represented on the ground in Syria, have believed either the earlier U.S. finding of the use of chemical weapons by Syrian security forces or indeed this latest allegation. On the contrary, Russia previously has given evidence to the U.N. Security Council to show it has been opposition forces that have used sarin gas against civilians (echoing the conclusion of Carla del Ponte, the former international prosecutor and current U.N. commissioner on Syria). And Russian officials state that the latest use of gas was delivered by a homemade missile, fired from a position known to be under opposition control.

Although the European constituency (Britain and France) are chaffing with impatience to begin retaliation even before evidence has been amassed, the U.S. administration has been more cautious. This is wise. Wars are always treacherous in their facts, and for the U.S. to launch a military strike without Security Council sanction (which it will not get) would constitute an illegal "act of war" against a sovereign state -- and a crime. (The Kosovo precedent cannot change an illegal act into a legal one).

But more substantially, what might be the outcome of, let us say, a cruise missile fired at a military target in Syria: a rhetorical strike, as it were, rather than a major military intervention?

So far, Syria has always turned a blind eye. The government knows well that Western special forces have supported the insurgents, but it has chosen to overlook this covert aspect. Assad has always insisted, however, that his "red line" is Syrian sovereignty. An explicit and public U.S. attack on his country plainly crosses this "line." It is by no means assured that the Syrian government would remain passive: that it would not respond. Neither is it likely that Russia or China easily would tolerate the West again (after Libya) bypassing the U.N. and the international order to concoct some spurious "Friends of Syria" legitimacy for its illegal military action.

Still less clear would be the consequences inside Syria of such an intervention. Does anyone seriously imagine that a cruise missile attack on their homeland would make ordinary Syrians long for the inchoate, warring and violent opposition factions to take over their country? It will of course do the reverse. It will strengthen President Assad. But it will concomitantly reinforce the conviction of extremists and their varied intelligence-service patrons that only by a "massacre" which can be blamed on Assad will the West be driven to overthrow Assad -- a result the opposition is unable to achieve by its own efforts alone.

And then, there are the "known unknowns": The Middle East is both angry and frightened, too; it is bitterly divided and increasingly violent. To toss a few cruise missiles into this volatile, unstable brew simply is to invite the unforeseeable and the unwanted to make its explosive appearance.

© 2013GLOBAL VIEWPOINT NETWORK/TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

Offline WHD

  • Administrator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3177
    • View Profile
Re: The Syria Desk - CIA Phoenix Program _ Brandon Smith
« Reply #20 on: August 27, 2013, 08:18:43 AM »
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/1677-has-the-cias-phoenix-program-been-resurrected-in-syria

Has The CIA's Phoenix Program Been Resurrected In Syria?
Monday, 26 August 2013 03:17 Brandon Smith


In 1964, the U.S. had for years been involved in covert operations in Vietnam designed to destabilize the North Vietnamese leadership and goad them into attacking American and South Vietnamese targets. On August 4th, U.S. naval authorities reported one of two recent “torpedo attacks” in the Gulf of Tonkin, torpedo attacks which were later admitted to be entirely faked in order to provide pretext for an open American invasion.

While Lyndon Johnson was declaring a “police action” in the region (essentially a war declared without the authority of Congress) CIA Station Chief Peer DeSilva was organizing Vietnam operations around a new strategy called “counter-terrorism”. This strategy held that terrorism, used in the hands of “the good-guys”, was not only acceptable, but necessary in order to undermine the support structures of the enemy. CIA counter-terror units were formed using mostly South Vietnamese nationals as well as men from surrounding countries. These hit teams, called Provincial Reconnaissance Units (PRU's) were coordinated and led by U.S. special operations officers and CIA liaisons under the umbrella of ICEX - the Intelligence Coordination and Exploitation Program, meant to create perfect information sharing and centralization between various teams.  The entire horrifying edifice would eventually be called "The Phoenix Program":

http://videos.howstuffworks.com/discovery/31295-cia-americas-secret-warriors-the-phoenix-program-video.htm

The Phoenix Program is defended to this day by the CIA as nothing more than a practical counter-insurgency methodology meant to win the war faster, and with fewer casualties:

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol51no2/a-retrospective-on-counterinsurgency-operations.html

In fact, some in the mainstream still argue that Phoenix tactics should be used in Afghanistan and Iraq:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/04/opinion/04moyar.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=mark moyar&st=cse

But Phoenix went far beyond aspirations of “winning” in Vietnam. The program utilized a “by any means necessary” strategy to warfare that included the use of random assassination and the FABRICATION of enemy atrocities in order to rally the civilian population around U.S. forces. PRU operators routinely targeted the backwater villages of Vietnam, killing at least 20,000 civilians as later admitted by CIA Director William Colby, and 40,000 civilians as estimated by the South Vietnamese Government. The slaughter of villages was frequently blamed on the Vietcong, while PRU's ran rampant in the jungles, physically mutilating victims in order to draw greater emotional reactions from Southern citizens as well as oblivious Americans back home.

All of this took place under the close supervision of the CIA. Torture was often applied in CIA substations with high tech security. CIA officers carefully selected PRU troops, specifically seeking out ARVN deserters, VC traitors, and South Vietnamese criminals looking for a reduction in their prison sentences. The CIA planned and mapped operations, including death squad operations. They created teams of monsters and unleashed them upon Vietnam, not just to win against the North, but to create the illusion that the U.S. military presence was justified.

Skip ahead about 20 years...

The same exact theater was used in the 1980's by the CIA in El Salvador. Militants and fascist political leaders, including El Salvadorian dictator-by-election-fraud Roberto D'Aubuission, trained at the Fort Benning, Georgia's “School of the Americas” (also known as the School of the Assassins) where they learned the same “counter-terror” methods used during the Phoenix Program. This resulted in the formation of the Mano Blanco (the White Hand), a network of ruthless death squads utilized against Salvadorian citizens, killing tens of thousands in a bloodbath that was covertly endorsed by the U.S. government.

Skip ahead another 30 years...

The techniques and technology have become more sophisticated, but the general strategy remains identical.

The Syria crisis is swiftly escalating with the advent of yet another unverified chemical weapons attack on the civilian population that is being used as a broad permit for the Obama Administration to enter into open operations against the Assad government. A previous chemical attack at the beginning of this summer was left unverified, though the establishment went to great lengths to convince the American public that the Assad government was responsible. It certainly didn't help that the UN was relying purely on “samples” from a French evening newspaper called Le Monde rather than an officially sanctioned source, and that the UN was forced to acknowledge that the Syrian insurgents may have been involved.

Today, the mainstream media and the U.S. government references “strong indications that Syria’s government used chemical weapons in attacks that opposition groups claimed killed more than 1,100 people” as if their version of events is already considered concrete reality:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324165204579026123332790830.html

But where are these “strong indications”? Where is this unassailable evidence of Assad's involvement? The American public hasn't been given a scrap of verifiable data concerning the attack and its origin. Once again, we are being asked to accept on simple “faith” that our government is telling us the truth and that military intervention must be supported.

Here is what we DO know for a fact...

The Syrian insurgency is made up primarily of Al Qaeda operatives (terrorists and criminals).

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/04/11/syria-al-qaeda-connection/2075323/

The CIA trained and supported these operatives using Bengahzi as a base for at least a year before the Bengahzi attacks.

http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01/exclusive-dozens-of-cia-operatives-on-the-ground-during-benghazi-attack/

http://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-cia-syria-20130621,0,6346686.story

Syrian insurgents have been caught on numerous occasions committing startling crimes, including the torture and murder of civilians, and the mutilation of prisoners and even their corpses. Captured Syrian soldiers are commonly executed.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/Rpee0dOcoqg?feature=player_embedded" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/Rpee0dOcoqg?feature=player_embedded</a>

The U.S. government continues to support the insurgents despite their death squad mentality, supplying heavy weapons including anti-aircraft missiles.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/world/middleeast/arms-airlift-to-syrian-rebels-expands-with-cia-aid.html?_r=0

Syrian insurgents impose their own fanatical system of theological governance in regions where they have total control. Anyone remotely suspected of being an Assad supporter is tortured, and the civilian population is carefully vetted.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-03-19/world/37840878_1_al-nusra-deir-aleppo

Clearly, Phoenix Program methods are being used by the CIA in Syria. The only difference in Syria is that the establishment has chosen to use the faction in rebellion as a tool for destabilization and war rather than a prevailing puppet government. Reports are now beginning to surface in the mainstream exposing direct U.S. and Israeli involvement on the ground in the Syrian theatre:

“According to our information, the regime's opponents, supervised by Jordanian, Israeli and American commandos moving towards Damascus since mid-August. This attack could explain the possible use of the Syrian president to chemical weapons.

According to information obtained by Le Figaro , the first trained in guerrilla warfare by the Americans in Jordan Syrian troops reportedly entered into action since mid-August in southern Syria, in the region of Deraa. A first group of 300 men, probably supported by Israeli and Jordanian commandos, as well as men of the CIA, had crossed the border on August 17. A second would have joined the 19. According to military sources, the Americans, who do not want to put troops on the Syrian soil or arming rebels in part controlled by radical Islamists form quietly for several months in a training camp set up at the border Jordanian- Syrian fighters ASL, the Free Syrian Army, handpicked.

According to this expert on the region, the idea proposed by Washington would be the possible establishment of a buffer zone from the south of Syria, or even a no-fly zone, which would cause opponents safely until the balance of power changes. This is the reason why the United States has deployed Patriot batteries and F16 in late June Jordan.”

http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2013/08/22/01003-20130822ARTFIG00438-syrie-l-operation-anti-assad-a-commence.php

This report from Le Figaro has not yet been confirmed by a secondary source, but it fits perfectly with the Phoenix paradigm. The so called “rebels” have been trained by CIA operatives and U.S. interests. The rebels are armed and funded by the U.S. government. The rebels are vicious and amoral in their tactics, frequently targeting innocent civilians in death squad fashion. And finally, the rebels, it appears, are being directed on the ground by U.S. assets. The natural next step in this process would be a false flag, and what better way than to use chemical weapons against non-combatants; a “red line” which Barack Obama previously stated “cannot be crossed”?

As I have pointed out in numerous articles dealing with engineered disaster events, if you aren't examining who benefits, you aren't seeing the big picture.

Who REALLY benefits from the latest chemical weapons attack in Syria? Assad, already nearing victory against the insurgents, gains absolutely nothing from killing hundreds if not thousands of his own people with Sarin gas on the same exact day that a UN inspections team arrives in the country. However, the insurgents gain immense military support from the West if Assad is successfully labeled a war criminal. The establishment gains a pretext for air strikes, no-fly zones, and eventually a physical invasion of the region, which is something they have obviously wanted for quite some time given the fact that they have manipulated the Syrian revolution from its very inception.

It's all happened before, with different players, different faces, and different ideologies, but always the same winner – the global elites. Call it the “Phoenix Program”, call it the “School Of The Americas”, call it the “Arab Spring”; it doesn't really matter. The endgame is predictable. Unilateral war without the approval of the American people or even Congress. Collapse of a nation or multiple nations resulting in the deaths of tens of thousand, hundreds of thousands, or perhaps millions. Severe economic and social implications reverberating throughout the rest of the world. And American culture takes several steps closer to a totalitarian hell on Earth

I have been predicting the use of Syria as a catalyst for wider war for years:

http://www.alt-market.com/articles/994-syria-and-iran-dominos-lead-to-world-war

And in recent months, I reiterated my concerns and predictions, many of which are coming true as you read this:

http://www.alt-market.com/articles/1535-the-terrible-future-of-the-syrian-war

I do believe that the Obama Administration is going to steamroll forward with overt U.S. action in Syria, Iran, and likely Egypt. I do believe that the consequences economically and politically in America will be catastrophic. I believe that if extended U.S. or Israeli strikes occur in Syria, they will be accompanied by subsequent attacks here at home (false flag or otherwise). I believe that a Syrian strike should be considered a Red Alert event for those in the Liberty Movement preparing for the worst. We may not be able to stop the landslide of devastation that will be triggered in coming months, but we can still decide the outcome. Make yourselves ready now, and do not waver.

 

Offline WHD

  • Administrator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3177
    • View Profile
Re: The Syria Desk
« Reply #21 on: August 27, 2013, 12:07:51 PM »
Quote
Can't say any of that is true. You wouldn't have happened to learn your reading comprehension skills from the same place that WHD did, did you?

I was prepared to flame you, but there are bigger fish to fry, and troll never tastes very good.

WHD

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41302
    • View Profile
Re: It Takes a Thief to Spot a Heist
« Reply #22 on: August 27, 2013, 12:43:15 PM »

You claimed to have pitched me into the Dungeon because I refused to give up my anonymity by providing you with references to my published works? <gasp>...you didn't LIE now did you!!

If that was your only Crime, I would likely not have bothered.  However, like getting Al Capone for Tax Evasion, you use what you got.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Ka

  • Global Moderator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 887
    • View Profile
Re: The Syria Desk
« Reply #23 on: August 27, 2013, 01:03:18 PM »
I'm hoping that someone with better realpolitik knowledge than I have can suggest a better answer than I have for why the US with Britain and France are going into Syria. As I see it, the US and its allies have three real red lines in MENA: keeping the oil flowing out of the Gulf, keeping the Suez Canal open, and keeping Israel in existence. I don't see how toppling Assad helps any of these, and do see how it could well hurt.

I suppose it could be that the stance taken early on in the civil war (when it was still taken as part of the "Arab Spring", and toppling evil dictators like Assad to be replaced by pro-Western democrats could still be fantasized) has set in motion something that can't be stopped. But that seems unlikely. I think at this point, the US would like nothing more than to turn back to status quo ante Arab Spring. That can't happen. But given the lack of popular support for Western intervention, why accuse Assad of the chemical attack? Why not proclaim a plague on both their houses, and step back?

That leaves, as far as I can see -- and I hope someone can see something less drastic -- that TPTB see that the time has come to implement Operation Partial Collapse. That is, it is known that time has run out on kicking the can to keep the financial system going as is, and so it is time to get a major war going as cover for resetting the financial system. Just intervening in Syria wouldn't be enough. Getting a Sunni-Shiite war across the whole area, in particular the Gulf, would.

I don't really know if the preceding is or isn't likely. I just hope someone can provide, as I say, a less drastic reason for the US intervening in Syria.

Online Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 18517
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: The Syria Desk
« Reply #24 on: August 27, 2013, 01:52:24 PM »
I'm hoping that someone with better realpolitik knowledge than I have can suggest a better answer than I have for why the US with Britain and France are going into Syria. As I see it, the US and its allies have three real red lines in MENA: keeping the oil flowing out of the Gulf, keeping the Suez Canal open, and keeping Israel in existence. I don't see how toppling Assad helps any of these, and do see how it could well hurt.

I suppose it could be that the stance taken early on in the civil war (when it was still taken as part of the "Arab Spring", and toppling evil dictators like Assad to be replaced by pro-Western democrats could still be fantasized) has set in motion something that can't be stopped. But that seems unlikely. I think at this point, the US would like nothing more than to turn back to status quo ante Arab Spring. That can't happen. But given the lack of popular support for Western intervention, why accuse Assad of the chemical attack? Why not proclaim a plague on both their houses, and step back?

That leaves, as far as I can see -- and I hope someone can see something less drastic -- that TPTB see that the time has come to implement Operation Partial Collapse. That is, it is known that time has run out on kicking the can to keep the financial system going as is, and so it is time to get a major war going as cover for resetting the financial system. Just intervening in Syria wouldn't be enough. Getting a Sunni-Shiite war across the whole area, in particular the Gulf, would.

I don't really know if the preceding is or isn't likely. I just hope someone can provide, as I say, a less drastic reason for the US intervening in Syria.

Ka,
I tend to pay serious attention to foreign events, and the logic for knocking over the Syrian domino is opaque outside of the meetings of the alumni of PNAC.

So IMO, and only IMO, your assessment thus:
Quote
TPTB see that the time has come to implement Operation Partial Collapse. That is, it is known that time has run out on kicking the can to keep the financial system going as is, and so it is time to get a major war going as cover for resetting the financial system. Just intervening in Syria wouldn't be enough. Getting a Sunni-Shiite war across the whole area, in particular the Gulf, would.
-seems to be the most logical.

The QE balloon appears to be fully inflated. There would appear to be no other way to keep the 1% whole than to have a huge system reset in which a large number of brown people lose their lives. But, of course, there are profits, as well as "business decisions," to be made.

Interestingly, Russia's actions could have a huge countervailing effect. It will be interesting to watch Putin in the next couple of days as NATO brandishes its weapons and makes loud noises, as Russia's military threats might be the only thing saving us from WW III.

I dearly hope that I am wrong.
"Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world's grief. Do justly now, love mercy now, walk humbly now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it."

Online Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 18517
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: The Syria Desk/Pierce
« Reply #25 on: August 27, 2013, 02:18:29 PM »
Making War In Syria
By Charles P. Pierce at 9:20AM
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/Making_War_In_Syria


Joseph Eid/AFP/GettyImages

It looks as though the skids are properly greased, and the United States will be making some sort of war in Syria pretty soon. I say "making war in Syria" because that's different than going to war in Syria. We aren't sending troops. We're going to be sending cruise missiles and dropping bombs because that is how you make war without going to war and, if you make war without going to war, then it's a lot easier to pretend back home that you're not at war. Again.

The bipartisan consensus to make war in Syria seems to be growing. John Kerry played the role of Colin Powell yesterday, albeit with slightly more actual evidence on his side. But the proposed response doesn't seem to match the gravity of the rhetoric he used.

Quote
    Administration officials said that although President Obama had not made a final decision on military action, he was likely to order a limited military operation - cruise missiles launched from American destroyers in the Mediterranean Sea at military targets in Syria, for example - and not a sustained air campaign intended to topple Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, or to fundamentally alter the nature of the conflict on the ground.

If Kerry is to be believed, the "situation on the ground" is that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons against its own people, a monstrous crime. If we aren't trying to "fundamentally alter the nature of the conflict on the ground," then why in the hell are we making war in in Syria in the first place? If we aren't trying to "topple" the Syrian president so he won't use chemical weapons on his own people again, why are we going to be firing high explosives into the country that are going to kill some of those people anyway? This is the difference between making war in a place and going to war in a place. If you're simply making war in a place, logic doesn't necessarily apply. Even a lot of the people proposing that we make war in Syria -- even a lot of the liberals proposing it -- admit freely that they don't know what will come next, or even on whose side we will be making war in Syria. This strikes me as an important thing to determine before you commit the nation to a course of action like the one proposed, but then, making war in a place enables you to do it from an antiseptic distance, to believe in the fairy-tale McNamara concept of "sending a message" by blowing stuff up, to believe that the most important thing for the World's Last Superpower to do is anything. The New York Times thinks making war in Syria will make the president a more believable president. And that, if the president decides to make war in Syria, the Iranians will wonder if they should still want a nuclear bomb.
Quote

    This time the use of chemicals was more brazen and the casualties were much greater, suggesting that Mr. Assad did not take Mr. Obama seriously. Presidents should not make a habit of drawing red lines in public, but if they do, they had best follow through. Many countries (including Iran, which Mr. Obama has often said won't be permitted to have a nuclear weapon) will be watching.   

The Times declines to tell us how many Syrians have to die to enhance the president's credibility with the Iranians. Because when you make war in a place, actual people die actual deaths. Fathers get killed. Children get killed. School buildings and hospitals fall down all around the people inside them. The message you are sending with your missiles gets just a trifle muddled. Make no mistake. If we strike, we will be making actual war in Syria. Ordinary Syrians will not see our missiles as "bomb-o-grams," telling them with every deadly explosion that we're really on their side. We will be another belligerent making their daily lives brutal and deadly, and there will be enough of them to hate us for that to guarantee that we will have to make more war in that place, or in some other place, very soon. That is what we do now. We make war in a place without going to war in a place, and nobody is fooled except ourselves.

Read more: Making War In Syria - Esquire
Follow us: @Esquiremag on Twitter | Esquire on Facebook
Visit us at Esquire.com
"Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world's grief. Do justly now, love mercy now, walk humbly now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it."

Offline JoeP

  • Sous Chef
  • ****
  • Posts: 2148
    • View Profile
Re: The Syria Desk
« Reply #26 on: August 27, 2013, 03:39:43 PM »
The US hits the debt ceiling in mid-October. Maybe the reason for the US going into Syria is all about debt creation? The US invades Syria creating more debt. R's get to pump up the war machine - keeping the illuminati satisfied.  The R's will support the increase in debt cuz the US will be "at war".

There will be a "common cause" for killing yet more brown people in the ME. D's are delighted to have more spending. R's get an erection rampin' up the war machine and sticking J6pack with more debt.
 
just my straight shooting honest opinion

Offline Karpatok

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 1427
    • View Profile
Re: The Syria Desk
« Reply #27 on: August 27, 2013, 03:51:12 PM »
The US hits the debt ceiling in mid-October. Maybe the reason for the US going into Syria is all about debt creation? The US invades Syria creating more debt. R's get to pump up the war machine - keeping the illuminati satisfied.  The R's will support the increase in debt cuz the US will be "at war".

There will be a "common cause" for killing yet more brown people in the ME. D's are delighted to have more spending. R's get an erection rampin' up the war machine and sticking J6pack with more debt.
// That certainly makes sense to me, Joe P. Nice going.

Offline Karpatok

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 1427
    • View Profile
Re: The Syria Desk
« Reply #28 on: August 27, 2013, 04:05:59 PM »
I have no expert knowledge in this field whatsoever, but would add that the numerous administrations of the USA have behaved the "Clinton" way because they could. Because they maintained the mightiest force and sacrificed all principles to the maintenance of that force. Always under the guise of promoting that old standby "in the name of democracy", they plundered, twisted, manipulated, and maimed the lives of people both at home and in foreign nations in order to advance whatever paranoid idea of national security was prominent at the moment. It certainly bespeaks to me of a "death wish" rising to the surface in the service of a very paranoid projection of ulterior motives all its own. Karpatok

Offline g

  • Golden Oxen
  • Contrarian
  • Master Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 12280
    • View Profile
Re: The Syria Desk
« Reply #29 on: August 27, 2013, 04:23:03 PM »
I'm hoping that someone with better realpolitik knowledge than I have can suggest a better answer than I have for why the US with Britain and France are going into Syria. As I see it, the US and its allies have three real red lines in MENA: keeping the oil flowing out of the Gulf, keeping the Suez Canal open, and keeping Israel in existence. I don't see how toppling Assad helps any of these, and do see how it could well hurt.

I suppose it could be that the stance taken early on in the civil war (when it was still taken as part of the "Arab Spring", and toppling evil dictators like Assad to be replaced by pro-Western democrats could still be fantasized) has set in motion something that can't be stopped. But that seems unlikely. I think at this point, the US would like nothing more than to turn back to status quo ante Arab Spring. That can't happen. But given the lack of popular support for Western intervention, why accuse Assad of the chemical attack? Why not proclaim a plague on both their houses, and step back?

That leaves, as far as I can see -- and I hope someone can see something less drastic -- that TPTB see that the time has come to implement Operation Partial Collapse. That is, it is known that time has run out on kicking the can to keep the financial system going as is, and so it is time to get a major war going as cover for resetting the financial system. Just intervening in Syria wouldn't be enough. Getting a Sunni-Shiite war across the whole area, in particular the Gulf, would.

I don't really know if the preceding is or isn't likely. I just hope someone can provide, as I say, a less drastic reason for the US intervening in Syria.

It is all about Money,Money, Money, and Distraction.

The oil will always flow to whoever has the Money, the oil excuse is nonsense.

Halliburton and Friends are in a quandary over what to do with two wars winding down.

The three nations mentioned are in Very sick financial shape and have run out of bull shit to tell the populace about the Great Recovery.

What better way to show the dim why we need Big Brother Government, NSA, Drones, CIA, Homeland security, the entire gamut of wonderful people to protect us from the bad people of the world.

Then there is our wondrous press of course, that will get the big distraction going with the puppet reporters all running around with their military gear and getting first hand scoops from the war zone for us. That serious false look of concern and make believe horror at the innocent dead is always amusing, as they vie for ratings and advertising dollars from the piggies.

Great for the upcoming elections as well, show your support for the boys, unite around your leaders, we are at WAR.

What a sick deplorable disgrace. "Let's make it a strong response Obama, you have been perceived as weak on this issue." Show everybody whose Boss!" Let's get some Shock and Awe out there for starters!!      :( :exp-angry: :exp-angry: :'(

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
1066 Views
Last post August 29, 2014, 02:05:12 AM
by Anthony Cartalucci
2 Replies
781 Views
Last post August 11, 2015, 09:54:48 PM
by Palloy
Syria - Russia - US

Started by Palloy « 1 2 ... 6 7 » Geopolitics

99 Replies
18589 Views
Last post November 06, 2015, 09:22:13 AM
by RE