U.S. prepares to fire missiles at Syria

[Flying Purple People Eater]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/26/politics/obama-syria-options


Missile strikes on Syria likely response to chemical attack
By Chris Lawrence. Elise Labott and Tom Cohen, CNN
August 27, 2013 -- Updated 0157 GMT (0957 HKT)
Watch this video
Kerry: Chemical use a 'moral obscenity'
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
NEW: U.S. evidence includes satellite imagery, official says
Obama is considering how to respond to Syrian chemical attack
Official: Obama could be presented with options within days
A U.S. strike "can't just be one and done," a Middle East analyst says
Washington (CNN) -- Few question that there was a major chemical attack in Syria last week, and the United States has made clear that it blames the government of President Bashar al-Assad.
Now, the question is how President Barack Obama will respond.
For almost two years, Obama has avoided direct military involvement in Syria's civil war, only escalating aid to rebel fighters in June after suspected smaller-scale chemical weapons attacks by Syrian government forces.
However, last week's attack on a Damascus suburb that reportedly killed and wounded more than 3,000 people obliterated the "red line" Obama set just over a year ago against the use of Syria's chemical weapons stocks.
At the White House, spokesman Jay Carney told reporters Monday that Obama was evaluating "a response to the clear use on a mass scale with repugnant results of chemical weapons," adding that "there is very little doubt that the Syrian regime ... used those weapons."
Meanwhile, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry called the attack "inexcusable" and "undeniable," and said there was "a clear reason that the world has banned entirely chemical weapons."
He said that evidence "strongly indicates" chemical weapons were used in Syria and that "we know the Syrian regime maintains custody" of such weapons and has the rockets to use them.
Read Kerry's remarks
Obama "will be making an informed decision about how to respond to this indiscriminate use" of chemical weapons, Kerry added, saying the president "believes there must be accountability" for those who use them.
Options available to Obama range from ordering limited missile strikes to continued diplomatic efforts labeled by critics as a "do-nothing" approach.
Obama will be presented with final options regarding actions against Syria in the next few days, a senior administration official said Monday. Assuming the president decides to go ahead with a military response, any action could come as early as mid-week, though it could be later, the official cautioned.
Factors weighing into the timing of any action include a desire to get it done before the president leaves for Russia next week and before the administration has to make a decision on whether to suspend aid to Egypt because of the ongoing political turmoil there, the official explained. The administration also wants it to be a quick response to the use of chemical weapons, the senior administration official said.
American officials are consulting with allies to ensure they are supportive of any U.S. action, which the senior administration official said would be very limited in scope and a direct reaction to the use of chemical weapons. And three representatives of allied governments involved in those top-level consultations said the goal is to reach a consensus as soon as possible.
"No one is talking about a long process," one European diplomat told CNN.
Marie Harf, a State Department spokeswoman, said any U.S. response would be "a determination on how to respond to a blatant use of chemical weapons, and it's not necessarily to change the entire situation on the ground in Syria."
That might be a mistake, said Michael Doran, an analyst at the Brookings Institution's Saban Center for Middle East Policy. A U.S. strike "can't just be one and done," but should be part of a plan to remove al-Assad, he told CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360."
"The president has been very reulctant to get involved. Public opinion has been against it. There's not a lot of support on the Hill," Doran said. "And yet, here we are again. Time and time again, we get dragged further and further in." The result could be "a Vietnam-type problem, where we kind of back our way into this, if we don't come up with a plan about how to win."
Kerry spoke with his British, Jordanian, Qatari and Saudi counterparts Monday and with the secretary-general of the Arab League, Harf said.
"Obviously, the intelligence assessment is ongoing," she said. "But he reiterated that the president is studying the facts and will be making an informed decision about how to respond going forward."
The Obama administration is expected to declassify the intelligence assessment backing up its assertion that the Syrian regime was responsible for last week's chemical weapons attack, another senior administration official said. The declassification would happen before any U.S. military action would take place.
A senior administration official familiar with the intelligence told CNN that the evidence "includes but is not limited to" satellite images of activity at Syrian military installations identified as including chemical weapons depots.
Earlier Monday, a White House official ruled out sending ground troops to Syria or implementing a no-fly zone to blunt al-Assad's aerial superiority over rebels fighting to oust his regime. The official insisted that all other options were under consideration by Obama but put no time frame on a decision.
Meanwhile, a senior Defense Department official told CNN's Chris Lawrence Monday that four U.S. Navy destroyers "maintain readiness and, if required, could execute a mission within hours" of being ordered to do so.
But the official added that the U.S. military remained "in a holding pattern" as Obama considers both military and nonmilitary options.
Opinion: How Al-Assad used chemical weapons to poison debate on Syria
Also, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said while visiting Indonesia that any U.S. action "will be in concert with the international community and within the framework of legal justification."
While U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Monday that the use of chemical weapons was a crime against humanity and must be punished, certain opposition by Syrian ally Russia and possibly China undermined the possibility that the Security Council would support a military mission.
Instead, a limited coalition of NATO partners such as Germany, France and Britain -- all of which have called for action against Syria -- and some Arab League members appeared more likely to provide the political backing needed by Obama to order U.S. missile strikes.
A senior administration official told CNN on Monday that the goals of any coalition military action would be to punish al-Assad and show him that there was a cost for using chemical weapons while preventing him from doing so again.
In addition, a military strike would seek to degrade the Syrian regime's capabilities enough to weaken it without causing it to fall to an opposition considered unprepared to assume power, the official said.
Possible coalition partners include NATO allies Britain, France, Germany and Canada, as well as regional powers Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
Last month, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey provided Congress with a list of declassified U.S. military options for Syria that emphasized the high costs and risks of what he said would amount to "an act of war" at a time of deep budget cuts.
U.S. official: Almost no doubt al-Assad regime used chemical weapons
Dempsey's letter, dated July 19, listed U.S. assets in the region including Patriot missile defense batteries in Turkey and Jordan, as well as F-16 jet fighters positioned to defend Jordan from possible cross-border trouble. In addition, the Pentagon has sent four warships armed with cruise missiles to the region.
According to U.S. officials, updated options offered the president in recent days included:
• Cruise missiles fired from one of four Navy destroyers deployed in the Mediterranean Sea. The missiles would be used to strike "command and control" facilities such as command bunkers, or the Syrian regime's means of delivering chemical weapons: artillery batteries and launchers. There is no indication that the missiles would strike at actual chemical weapons stockpiles.
• Military jets firings weapons from outside Syrian airspace. This option carries additional risks and is considered less likely.
"They have to be careful to do this in concert with our allies," Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, told CNN on Sunday, adding that "I don't think the White House is going to want to risk American lives by sending pilots over Syria, so that really limits our options to cruise strikes and think that's probably where the White House is going to go."
U.N. chemical weapons inspectors reach alleged attack site
Cruise missile strikes could be "very punishing" on al-Assad's missile supplies and aircraft without going after the chemical weapons stockpiles to risk dispersing them, Schiff said.
To Aaron David Miller, a vice president at the Woodrow Wilson International Center, the situation is forcing Obama to shift from being an "avoider-in-chief" regarding military involvement in Syria.
"It's almost inevitable that the president will authorize some form of military action," Miller told National Public Radio in an interview broadcast Monday.
He said he expected a significant response that amounts to "a warning that lays down this time a red line that the president intends to enforce, not one that turns pink."
"It cannot simply be a couple of cruise missiles into a storage shed somewhere," Miller said, adding that the goal was to deter al-Assad rather than topple him or radically shift the balance in Syria at this time. "The president's not on the verge of becoming the cavalry to rescue the country."
Schiff agreed that Obama has little choice but to respond strongly.
"In terms of the credibility of the White House," he said, "the cost of not acting now, I think, exceeds the cost of acting."
CNN's John King, Frederik Pleitgen, Hamdi Alkhshali and Ben Brumfield contributed to this report.

Map of possible missile firing positions.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/08/26/syria-obama-pentagon-cruise-missiles/2701263/

Allied action against Syria in response to its government's alleged use of poisonous gas on its citizens would most likely involve firing cruise missiles from ships in the Mediterranean Sea into Syria. Analysts say cruise missiles can be fired from outside Syrian airspace, and they would provide the safest option for allied forces.



And so it happens once again.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

US and Britain to launch missile strikes on Syria in days


http://www.news.com.au/world-news/middle-east/us-and-britain-to-launch-missile-strikes-against-syria-8216in-days8217/story-fnh81ifq-1226704387686

US and Britain to launch missile strikes against Syria 'in days'
by: JASON GROVES
From: Daily Mail August 26, 2013 3:08PM



inShare
1
submit to reddit
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Print
Email
A Syrian army soldier wears a medical mask in the Jobar neighbourhood of Damascus, Syria. Photo: AP
A Syrian army soldier wears a medical mask in the Jobar neighbourhood of Damascus, Syria. Photo: AP
BRITAIN and the US are set to launch missile strikes against the Syrian regime in retaliation for its barbaric chemical attack on civilians.
David Cameron and Barack Obama discussed the plan in a 40-minute phone call at the weekend and will finalise the details within 48 hours. The two leaders want to send a clear warning to dictator Bashar Al-Assad over the deaths of as many as 1,300 people, many of them children.

William Hague said 'all the evidence' suggested Assad's henchmen carried out last week's horrific nerve gas atrocity. 'We cannot, in the 21st century, allow the idea that chemical weapons can be used with impunity - that people can be killed in this way and that there are no consequences,' insisted the Foreign Secretary.

'It is very important there is a very strong response so that dictators know that using chemical weapons is to cross a line, and that the world will respond.'

US President Barack Obama with British Prime Minister David Cameron. Photo: AFP
US President Barack Obama with British Prime Minister David Cameron. Photo: AFP
Royal Navy commanders in the region are preparing to take part in the assault, which is likely to be unleashed within ten days.

Government sources indicate the cruise missile blitz will be short and will not signal any wider involvement in Syria's bloody civil war.

But it will inevitably lead to fears that Britain could get sucked into another Iraq-style nightmare. MPs last night demanded the recall of Parliament for the Commons to have a say before any action goes ahead. Planners in strikes rather than an airborne bombing campaign, in order to avoid the dangers posed by the sophisticated air defences supplied to Syria by Russia.

A British source said 'naval assets in the region' were likely to be involved, suggesting the possible use of submarine-borne Tomahawk cruise missiles.

citizen journalism image
A Syrian man mourns over a dead body after an alleged poisonous gas attack fired by regime forces, according to activists. Photo: AP
In an ominous development Damascus last night warned US president Obama that any intervention would not be a 'walk in the park', adding: 'It will bring chaos and the region will burn.' Iran warned the West it would face 'severe consequences' if it intervened in Syria.

And Russia, which has blocked UN action against Syria, said unilateral action by the West would undermine efforts for peace and have a 'devastating impact' on the security situation in the Middle East.

The Syrian regime last night attempted to head off a military intervention by the West by announcing it would finally allow United Nations experts to visit the gas atrocity site in Damascus. Inspectors are expected to begin their work today.

But Washington and London dismissed the move, saying it was 'too late to be credible', and followed almost a week of shelling of the area during which much of the evidence may have been destroyed.

Britain, the United States and France have all blamed the Assad regime for the attack because the rebel fighters are not thought to have the capability to carry out an atrocity on that scale.

President Francois Hollande, who spoke to Mr Cameron yesterday, is also pushing for swift military retaliation and could authorise the use of French forces in the attack.

Black columns of smoke rise from heavy shelling in the Jobar neighbourhood, east of Damascus, Syria. Photo: AP
Black columns of smoke rise from heavy shelling in the Jobar neighbourhood, east of Damascus, Syria. Photo: AP
In a statement following the talks, Downing Street said the two men 'agreed that a chemical weapons attack against the Syrian people on the scale that was emerging demanded a firm response from the international community. This crime must not be swept under the carpet.' Mr Hollande's office said: 'France is determined that this act does not go unpunished.' A Government source said the Prime Minister had not abandoned hope of achieving tougher UN action against Syria in the future. But with Russia frustrating progress, the source said Mr Cameron believed any short-term military response would have to be taken outside the UN process.

'This looks like one of the worst chemical weapons attacks of modern times,' another Government source said.

'If you are responding to an attack on this scale you have to do it quickly. If you let it go for two, three, four weeks there is a danger you send a message that it doesn't matter.' Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has discussed the crisis several times with Mr Cameron in recent days and a senior Lib Dem source said there would be an agreed Coalition response. 'The Government is working as one on this,' the source said.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
A government source said it was 'possible' that Parliament could be recalled early from its summer recess this week to discuss the crisis. But the source stressed that Mr Cameron had always reserved the 'flexibility' to order a military strike in response to fast-moving events without recourse to Parliament.

Former Lib Dem leader Paddy Ashdown yesterday warned against rushing to military action on Syria. But Lord Ashdown, who remains close to Mr Clegg, acknowledged that the UN would be 'greatly diminished' if the world failed to respond to Assad's 'terrible breach' of international law.

Bob Corker, the ranking Republican on the US Senate foreign affairs committee, said he had spoken to the Obama administration about its plans for Syria and believed the president would seek authorisation from Congress.

'I think we will respond in a surgical way and I hope the president as soon as we get back to Washington will ask for authorisation from Congress to do something in a very surgical and proportional way,' he told Fox News.

A Downing Street spokesman said: 'No decisions have been taken on military action and the timetable for a serious response from the international community is not yet clear.

'We are very conscious of when MPs are due to return and haven't ruled out recalling them earlier.'

- Daily Mail



Read more: http://www.news.com.au/world-news/middle-east/us-and-britain-to-launch-missile-strikes-against-syria-8216in-days8217/story-fnh81ifq-1226704387686#ixzz2d9u1zsPM

Mind the Daily Mail's rightwing US arsekissing.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

What is the possibility of joint labour action against this newest war of imperialist predation? Knowing the situation in the US and otherwise, probably not very good...

[Os Cangaceiros]

^about the same likelihood as me shit turnin' purple & smelling like rainbow sherbet

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

first as tragedy, then as farce

[Zealot]

I'm pretty much prepared to give up on mankind and concede that socialism won't happen for another millennium or so, assuming of course that capitalism hasn't destroyed the planet after convincing everyone that said destruction was in our interests. Poverty and authoritarianism was sufficient for the USSR to collapse but the financial crisis and the "revelations" in recent years about the US global domination project is apparently unconvincing to most people. Besides, most of them are busy fawning over a royal baby, checking facebook updates, or keeping up with the lives of Kim Kardashian and Miley Cyrus. How fucking sad.

I'm not sure how long Russia, Iran and co. can withstand the continued plundering of their allies and sense another world war in the works. But on the bright side, maybe we'll return to primitive communism and get our way after all :rolleyes:

[Rss]

I'm pretty much prepared to give up on mankind and concede that socialism won't happen for another millennium or so, assuming of course that capitalism hasn't destroyed the planet after convincing everyone that said destruction was in our interests. Poverty and authoritarianism was sufficient for the USSR to collapse but the financial crisis and the "revelations" in recent years about the US global domination project is apparently unconvincing to most people. Besides, most of them are busy fawning over a royal baby, checking facebook updates, or keeping up with the lives of Kim Kardashian and Miley Cyrus. How fucking sad.

I'm not sure how long Russia, Iran and co. can withstand the continued plundering of their allies and sense another world war in the works. But on the bright side, maybe we'll return to primitive communism and get our way after all :rolleyes:

I am sure that many people had similar thoughts before Russian and Chinese Revolutions. Don't give up, comrade.

Admittedly, some people need to be in the receiving end of capitalism until they "wake up". I know several of these cases.

EDIT: I have a nasty feeling that liberal crowd will be all over these news, cheering. Eh, even mainstream media has noted that motives and perpetrators of these chemical attacks are still unknown.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

EDIT: I have a nasty feeling that liberal crowd will be all over these news, cheering.

Not only that, many of those liberals consider themselves socialists of some sort.

[The Douche]

What is the possibility of joint labour action against this newest war of imperialist predation? Knowing the situation in the US and otherwise, probably not very good...

What was the response to the Libyan no-fly-zone?

Obama is a democrat, he doesn't get involved in imperialist wars, he offers humanitarian aid and helps defend children from dictators.

We can even go back to Clinton and his bombing of the Balkans...

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

What was the response to the Libyan no-fly-zone?

I realise that - which is why I said that the prospects for such action are probably not really good. And yeah, it's atrocious how most "socialist" parties in the US are little more than vaguely leftish cheering squads for the Obaminator.

[hatzel]

Besides, most of them are busy fawning over a royal baby, checking facebook updates, or keeping up with the lives of Kim Kardashian and Miley Cyrus. How fucking sad.

Yeah, okay, we all get the drill already, leftoid dude telling everybody how much better he is than the Great Unwashed, but seriously what else is new?

[Consistent.Surprise]

Reports are showing as soon as Thursday for missile strikes.

God Bless America *headdesk*

[Rss]

Reports are showing as soon as Thursday for missile strikes.

God Bless America *headdesk*

According to some sources I googled, syrian air defense capabilities have been upgraded in the last years. Pantsir-S1, S-300 and Buk-M2 should be able to engage cruise missiles, I believe. Let's just hope that they can shoot down cruise missiles to lessen unavoidable civilian casualties.

[Sasha]

I think inocent civilians are not even on Assads relevant to protect list, lets not keep any ilusion about the fucker.

[Arlekino]

I could not manage to follow full story on Syria just a question what Russian positions if USA will strike Syria, do Russia ready to strike back or not?

[Delenda Carthago]

As KKE warned the greek people months ago, Greece is going to take part in this war with the NATO bases of Souda and Kalamata. Souda is the NATO base that this happened some months ago.

f7L07wSZhXc

On the 29th of the month, there is a demo as a first answer against the imperialist intervention at Syntagma.

[KurtFF8]

I could not manage to follow full story on Syria just a question what Russian positions if USA will strike Syria, do Russia ready to strike back or not?

I seriously doubt it, Russia didn't even deliver those anti air missile systems that they had promised (which Syria is probably really upset about right now)

[ANTIFA GATE-9]

The scale's pretty huge. My friends house is right next to the British bases(cyprus) I was there today and every 5 minutes a British or American fighter jet would land. Cyprus is close to Syria so I guess they will be using the island as a base but I don't think the goverment is going to let them

[Rss]

I think inocent civilians are not even on Assads relevant to protect list, lets not keep any ilusion about the fucker.

I'm not. But did stand-off long range bombardment with cruise missiles and guided munitions do anything worthwhile in Bosnian War or Kosovo War, aside from some superficial damage to military forces, atrocious damage to civilian infrastructure and unneeded civilian casualties?

[tachosomoza]

What is the possibility of joint labour action against this newest war of imperialist predation? Knowing the situation in the US and otherwise, probably not very good...

Joint labor action? All that matters in a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie masquerading as a liberal democracy/meritocracy is what the people that pay the politicians want, they want to attack Syria, they're going to attack Syria. Anything else is just noise to them.

[ckaihatsu]

What is the possibility of joint labour action against this newest war of imperialist predation? Knowing the situation in the US and otherwise, probably not very good...


This is serious! Tell Obama: JUST SAY NO!


If this message does not format correctly, read it on the web HERE (http://org.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=HL5g%2FHNAyXBhXHPadKz3rtJCrdoKS8Fn)
Not subscribed to this newsletter? Subscribe now! (http://org.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=yLudj0Ezg%2BXlc1kHHsGbptJCrdoKS8Fn) Unsubscribe information at bottom.

Please share this with others.


Please read and take action to prevent
U.S. involvement in another war.
Mr. President:
Just Say No!
CALL or WRITE
the President today.

Tell him to reject military intervention in Syria, which will only escalate the crisis and bog the U.S. down in another mideast quagmire - one that could engulf the entire region.

CALL -THE WHITE HOUSE- WRITE

Leave this message: "I oppose U.S. military intervention in the Syrian civil war. I do support energetic diplomacy and continued humanitarian aid."

Then:

SIGN THE PETITION (http://org.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=HjKTt5h3j78ciSOD2D4119JCrdoKS8Fn)

As this is being written, President Obama is weighing whether to launch a military attack on Syria. Hawks in the Congress and Pentagon, spurred on by significant corporate media, are waging a full court press for an immediate attack - even without Congressional authorization that is required by the Constitution, or UN sanction required by international law.

What is less well known (because the media does not report it) is that there are significant doubts about these claims about whether chemical weapons were used, and if so by whom, and there are counter-claims by the Syrian government, Russia and others.

No one who advocates a military attack has explained how launching such an attack will bring the Syrian civil war any closer to a resolution, or even how it will spare civilians from continuing to suffer the brunt of armed conflict. Indeed, a missile attack proposed by many of the hawks is likely to inflict even wider casualties and damage to civilian communities.

Greater heed should be paid to an important statement issued by Ban Ki Moon, UN Secretary-General when these charges first surfaced, and to an appeal by Nobel Peace Laueate Mairead Maguire, both of whom make the point made by USLAW's Steering Committee in early July:

There is no military solution to the crisis in Syria. It will require determined patient negotiations by all parties to the conflict and those negotiations will not proceed if the U.S. escalates the military conflict and becomes a party to it.

There is an understandable impulse to want to "do something" in the face of such horrific suffering as the Syrian people now experience. But the choice is not between reaching for our missiles or doing nothing. And as we said in July, "pouring gasoline on a fire to put it out" is not a strategy for resolving this crisis or relieving the suffering.

Syria: UN chief ‘shocked’ by new allegations of chemical weapons use

Speaking for Ban Ki Moon, Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson said:

“This should also be seen in the larger and broader perspective, namely the great need for cessation of hostilities,” he said of the dramatic situation, underscoring that: “What this incident has shown is that we must contain this conflict,” especially given its regional implications, and now, the possibility of the use of chemical weapons, which is to be investigated.

.... Mr. Ban and the Security Council reiterated that the use of chemical weapons by any side under any circumstances would violate international law, and reaffirmed the need for a “thorough investigation” of the alleged incidents, according to the spokesperson, as well as a need to cease hostilities.

....“Such horrific acts should be a reminder to all the parties and all who have influence on them that this terrible conflict has gone on far too long and children have suffered more than enough,” the UN agency said in a statement.

(full article)

An Appeal Against Attacking Syria

by Mairead Maguire, Nobel Peace Laureate

....Arming rebels and authorizing military action by USA/NATO forces will not solve the problem facing Syria, but indeed could lead to the death of thousands of Syrians, the breaking-up of Syria, and it falling under the control of violent fundamentalist jihadist forces. It will mean the further fleeing of Syrians into surrounding countries which will themselves become destabilised. The entire Middle East will become unstable and violence will spiral out of control.

Contrary to some foreign governments current policies of arming the rebels and pushing for military intervention, the people of Syria are calling out for peace and reconciliation and a political solution to the crisis, which continues to be enflamed by outside forces with thousands of foreign fighters funded and supported by outside countries for their own political ends....

....We all remember the fear, panic and lies spun by the British and American governments, and others that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and it was not true. Let us learn the lesson of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya where so many millions have been killed in invasions and war, and many continue to die in violence. Violence is not the answer, let’s end this ‘war on terror’ and give nonviolence and peace a chance.

(full appeal and statement)

Less popular than Nixon during Watergate: Our potential Syria intervention!


salon.com 2013-08-26
Americans would rather get a proctology exam than have their government intervene in the Syrian civil war, we’re led to believe by a new Reuters/Ipsos poll out today, which finds that just 9 percent of Americans support military action.

"LESS POPULAR THAN..." DEVELOPMENTS OF EVENTS Follow-up report to me Any reported complete Just news photo Just video That makes the intervention less popular than communism, BP during the Gulf oil spill, less popular than Richard Nixon during Watergate, less popular than Paris — and even less popular than Congress, that most hated of American institutions. (Comparing polls like this is not really “scientific,” but you get the general idea.)

(more)

As Syria war escalates, Americans cool to U.S. intervention: Reuters/Ipsos poll

WASHINGTON | Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:32pm EDT (Reuters) - Americans strongly oppose U.S. intervention in Syria's civil war and believe Washington should stay out of the conflict even if reports that Syria's government used deadly chemicals to attack civilians are confirmed, a Reuters/Ipsos poll says.

About 60 percent of Americans surveyed said the United States should not intervene in Syria's civil war, while just 9 percent thought President Barack Obama should act.

More Americans would back intervention if it is established that chemical weapons have been used, but even that support has dipped in recent days - just as Syria's civil war has escalated and the images of hundreds of civilians allegedly killed by chemicals appeared on television screens and the Internet.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll, taken August 19-23, found that 25 percent of Americans would support U.S. intervention if Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces used chemicals to attack civilians, while 46 percent would oppose it. That represented a decline in backing for U.S. action since August 13, when Reuters/Ipsos tracking polls found that 30.2 percent of Americans supported intervention in Syria if chemicals had been used, while 41.6 percent did not.

Taken together, the polls suggest that so far, the growing crisis in Syria, and the emotionally wrenching pictures from an alleged chemical attack in a Damascus suburb this week, may actually be hardening many Americans' resolve not to get involved in another conflict in the Middle East.

more
Your donations make it possible for USLAW to keep you informed, issue action alerts like this, organize solidarity support for Iraqi unions, conduct campaigns like Jobs-Not-Wars, build the New Priorities Network, and bring the issue of economic conversion and just transition to the rest of the labor movement.



US readies possible missile strike against Syria

Published time: August 24, 2013 00:08
Edited time: August 25, 2013 10:13
Download Video
Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey is expected to present options for such a strike at a White House meeting on Saturday, CBS News reported on Friday. Despite President Obama cautioning against intervention in Syria, the Pentagon is making “initial preparations” for a cruise missile attack on Syrian government forces, according to a new report.

.... Meanwhile, a defense official, cited by Reuters, said on Friday the US Navy was expanding its Mediterranean presence with a fourth cruise-missile ship, the USS Mahan. Though the source stressed to Reuters the Navy did not have orders to prepare for military operations against Syria.
.... President Barack Obama is under renewed pressure to take action following the emergence of footage of what appears to be the aftermath of a toxic agent attack in a Damascus suburb on Wednesday. The forces of President Bashar Assad were assaulting a rebel stronghold in the district at the time, but deny responsibility. Moscow, which has maintained close ties with the regime, called the incident a rebel “provocation” possibly designed to derail upcoming Geneva peace talks.

Though the Pentagon will present plans for potential action on Saturday, as CBS reported, President Obama has final say on any further developments.

Questioned on the continuing upheaval in Syria and Egypt during a CNN interview Friday, Obama

said the United States should be wary of “being drawn into very expensive, difficult, costly interventions that actually breed more resentment in the region.”

Obama went on to express reservations for becoming involved in the 30-month Syrian conflict due to a lack of international consensus.

"If the US goes in and attacks another country without a UN mandate and without clear evidence that can be presented, then there are questions in terms of whether international law supports it, [and] do we have the coalition to make it work?” said Obama.

Despite his cautious tone, Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice said via Twitter, “What is Bashar al Assad hiding? The world is demanding an independent investigation of Wednesday’s apparent CW attack. Immediately.”

Adding to the rhetoric in Washington, Sen. John McCain said that if the administration was to “let this go on,” it was “writing a blank check to other brutal dictators around the world if they want to use chemical weapons."

The top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee also spoke out in support of a strike in Syria, writing to Obama of the need to respond to the latest alleged outrage.

"If we, in concert with our allies, do not respond to Assad's murderous uses of weapons of mass destruction, malevolent countries and bad actors around the world will see a green light where one was never intended," Rep. Eliot Engel wrote on Friday.

Engel has been a proponent of a more aggressive approach to Assad’s government.

"And, we can do this with no boots on the ground, from stand-off distances," he added in the letter. "I know that your Administration is wrestling with these very complex issues, but I believe that we, as Americans, have a moral obligation to step in without delay and stop the slaughter."

Obama insisted to CNN that while the United States remains “the one indispensable nation” in international diplomacy, he suggested that perhaps this was one conflict where the world should not look to Washington for a definitive answer.

"The notion that the US can somehow solve what is a sectarian complex problem inside of Syria sometimes is overstated," said the president.

The White House later released a statement confirming Obama’s words, and emphasizing that the US has no plans to put “boots on the ground.”

Want to know more?

The USLAW website has a wealth of information about this and other hotspots, like Egypt, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and, of course, Iraq.

Chuck Hagel: Syria Intervention Only Possible With International Support
President Obama: Don't Strike Syria Without Congressional Approval
Firing missiles at enemies usually doesn’t produce a declaration of war
Competing claims on chemical weapons use in Syria
Evidence Indicates that Syrian Government Did Not Launch a Chemical Weapon Attack Against Its People
'Ball of fire in Middle East': Tehran, Damascus warn US against Syria strike
US moves warships closer to Syria after chemical attack
Important Doubts About the Syrian Chemical Attack
New Allegations of Chemical Weapons Use in Syria Based on US Political Motives, not Facts
Non-violent Syrian Opposition Group Denies Claim of Assad Chemical Weapon Use
Christians, other minorities in Syria fear 'ethnic cleansing'




This is a low-volume email list operated by
US Labor Against the War
1718 M St, NW #153
Washington DC 20036
202-521-5265

Unsubscribe (never receive ANY emails from USLAW)

Manage profile (change preferences, unsubscribe from other USLAW lists, update email address, etc...)

Contact USLAW

Have you visited the USLAW website recently? www.uslaboragainstwar.org Check it out for news, information and resources for labor's antiwar movement. See the latest news about Iraq's labor movement, the U.S. military occupation and the movement that seeks to end it. Learn more about USLAW and what you can do to bring all U.S. troops and contractors rapidly home.

[Zealot]

Petitions and "labour actions" are absolutely futile. In case you haven't heard, the American dictatorship gives not one fuck about what its citizens or the world at large think. Political power grows from the barrel of a gun.

[Bostana]

What if the U.S. launched the chemical attack and framed the Syrian government to justify an attacker?

This is how conspiracy theories start

[TheCat'sHat]

I'm not. But did stand-off long range bombardment with cruise missiles and guided munitions do anything worthwhile in Bosnian War or Kosovo War, aside from some superficial damage to military forces, atrocious damage to civilian infrastructure and unneeded civilian casualties?

The US actually flew missions in Bosnia. And, yes, they did some (belated) good. Although it would have been much better if the international community had intervened much earlier. Unfortunately, a number of members of the diplomatic corps, particularly in UK diplomatic circles, bought into racist explanations of the war which claimed that the conflict was the result of ancient blood hatreds and that no peace was possible until the ethnic cleansing 'sorted itself out.'


I share the traditional leftist skepticism of wars launched for supposedly humanitarian purposes. Generally such claims are pure bull shit. But I haven't seen much evidence that the US bombing of the Bosnian Serbs had any serious ulterior motives other than the political pressure to intervene. Most Bosnian Muslims I know are grateful for the intervention. And most of the leftist accounts for why Bosnia was *really* an act of imperialism seem like exercises in scholasticism.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Petitions and "labour actions" are absolutely futile. In case you haven't heard, the American dictatorship gives not one fuck about what its citizens or the world at large think. Political power grows from the barrel of a gun.

I wasn't talking about petitions, though, or the inevitable popular-front liberal-led marches - I was talking about direct proletarian action to disrupt the war. Refusing to handle military cargo, driving recruiters off streets, sabotaging military equipment so it explodes in the handler's face, things like that.

[Zealot]

I wasn't talking about petitions, though, or the inevitable popular-front liberal-led marches - I was talking about direct proletarian action to disrupt the war. Refusing to handle military cargo, driving recruiters off streets, sabotaging military equipment so it explodes in the handler's face, things like that.

My bad, thought you meant some sort of liberal protest. In any case, this type of consciousness seems to be a long way off, in the US at least.

[Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant']

Impending miltary action in the Middle East, cue media spewers getting their sexy graphics out.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/69503000/jpg/_69503406_syria_strike_624.jpg

Cor, look at that jet yeah? Phwoar Destroyers! Yay a missile going off! It's like sexy chess, look at the pieces, oooh.

[tachosomoza]

Impending miltary action in the Middle East, cue media spewers getting their sexy graphics out.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/69503000/jpg/_69503406_syria_strike_624.jpg

Cor, look at that jet yeah? Phwoar Destroyers! Yay a missile going off! It's like sexy chess, look at the pieces, oooh.

That's what makes American conservatives hard. In 2003 it was:

"Holy shit, takalookat that dead haji!"

"FUCK YEAH, BAGHDAD IS OURS!"

They see it as a sort of real life RTS game.

[Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant']

...to protect civilians? I've smelt this shit before and it doesn't get sweeter.

The UK is to put a resolution to the UN Security Council later on Wednesday "authorising necessary measures to protect civilians" in Syria.
The resolution will be put forward at a meeting of the five permanent members of the council, UK Prime Minister David Cameron said on Twitter.
Earlier a team of UN weapons inspectors resumed work probing an suspected chemical weapons attack on 21 August.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called on the council to act together.
"The body interested with maintaining international peace and security cannot be 'missing in action'," Mr Ban said.
"The council must at last find the unity to act. It must use its authority for peace," he went on.
"We've always said we want the UN Security Council to live up to its responsibilities on Syria," Mr Cameron said in another message.
"Today they have an opportunity to do that," he said. The draft resolution would condemn the "chemical weapons attack by Assad", he added.
In a briefing to journalists, joint UN-Arab League envoy to Syria Lakhdar Brahimi said: "It does seem clear that some kind of substance was used... that killed a lot of people" on 21 August.
But he emphasised that any military action needed Security Council authorisation.

(BBC News)

[Rusty Shackleford]

I seriously doubt it, Russia didn't even deliver those anti air missile systems that they had promised (which Syria is probably really upset about right now)

According to this (http://www.timesofisrael.com/russia-sends-at-least-12-warships-to-syria/), Lavrov is still into delivering them. Probably after the fact.

I read somewhere else that russian defense personnel have been removed from Syria in the last few months, which would contradict russia sending 12 ships from the black sea.

[Nakidana]

I wasn't talking about petitions, though, or the inevitable popular-front liberal-led marches

Are you guys saying that we shouldn't participate in anti-war demonstrations?


They see it as a sort of real life RTS game.

Yeah, the kind where you start out with billions in the bank and a huge base containing factories, barracks, starp...airfields and docks. Everything is researched and you have all upgrades. 95% of all players on the map are your allies and will provide extra military support, and btw you have the enemy player surrounded and can choose to end the game at any time by pressing the "nuke" button.

The enemy player, apart from being surrounded, is in the stone age, broke, has no construction facilities, no defense structures and no friends.

Good luck out there commander!

[Comrade Jacob]

Did we really think it wouldn't come to this? The Syrian people (even some rebels) will unite with Assad to defeat imperialism! It's one of those bloody contradictions.
Solidarity to Syria.

[ckaihatsu]

WHY LABOR SHOULD OPPOSE A U.S. ATTACK ON SYRIA!

At a time when 27 million U.S. workers are unemployed or underemployed and severe cuts in social programs are being implemented under the sequestration, the Obama administration is focused instead on finalizing plans to unleash a bombing attack on Syria.

We strongly believe that labor and our community partners should vehemently oppose such an attack.

After all, the government destroyed Iraq at a cost of 4,488 U.S. lives, tens of thousands casualties and billions of dollars, and at a cost of a million Iraqi lives and casualties, all based on a lie that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. And this came after the U.S. supported Iraq's use of chemical weapons against Iran in the 1980s. Washington's outrage is indeed selective.

The U.S. government attacked Afghanistan and 12 years later the war against that country is still going on with a further loss of human life and at a cost of $10 billion a month. But what benefit has that war brought to the working class majority of either country?

Now a new U.S. war is apparently about to commence, this time against Syria. Will Iran be next? And which country will be the enemy after Iran?

A lot of terrible things are taking place not just in Syria but also in other parts of the world. But the U.S. has no right to intervene and dictate the course of events in other lands. We are not the world's cop and have no right to go from one hot spot to the next, demanding that countries comply with what the U.S. government directs them to do.

The cornerstone of international law is that each country must decide its own destiny, free from outside intervention and dictation. Unfortunately, the U.S. has a long history of waging aggressive wars -- even when it faces no immediate threat as is the case with Syria -- because it does not approve of the regimes and policies of other countries. Vietnam is a classic example of where such a war was waged with enormous loss of blood and treasure, while the warmakers suffered a staggering defeat.

Labor must be unconditionally against any military aggression by the U.S. government -- the only government in the world that used atomic weapons and that later used Agent Orange in Vietnam and Depleted Uranium in Iraq.

The American people are sick and tired of endless wars and occupations. All polls show an overwhelming majority of the public opposes a U.S. strike against Syria.

We urge our union brothers and sisters -- and all of labor's allies -- to speak out now and demand of the U.S. government: "Money for Jobs and Education, Not for Wars and Occupations! Hands Off Syria!"



Issued by the Labor Fightback Network. For more information, please call 973-944-8975 or email [email protected] or write Labor Fightback Network, P.O. Box 187, Flanders, NJ 07836 or visit our website at laborfightback.org.

Donations to help fund the Labor Fightback Network based on its program of solidarity and labor-community unity will be much appreciated. Please make checks payable to Labor Fightback Network and mail to the above P.O. Box or you can make a contribution online. Thanks!

[Skyhilist]

Saw this on facebook:

"My fellow Americans,

It's been two years since our humanitarian bombs dropped over Libya, and over a decade since our troops stormed the sands of Iraq only to be greeted with open arms as liberators. Today, we face a new challenge.

Backed by the trusted military-industrial complex, this Nobel Peace Prize-winning four-term President knows the time for intervention in Syria is drawing near. For too long, we've done nothing! We've sat on the sidelines and acted as mere bystanders, having no role whatsoever in what is going on in Syria.

Sure, we funded and armed the freedom-loving, al-Qaeda-linked, mostly non-Syrian "rebels". Sure, we've stationed U.S. troops in Jordan and Turkey to keep Syria's borders surrounded. Sure, we've backed Israel as they've launched airstrikes inside Syrian territory. But none of that matters! What matters is my finely-polished rhetoric, and that rhetoric says we've played no role. Based on that, you should believe me.

Why? Because this four-term President has a long track record of telling the truth! I told you the truth about Iraq. I told you the truth about Libya. And today, I'm telling you the truth about what's going on in Syria.

With that said, it's almost time to move FORWAR! Please ready your handy American flag and prepare to patriotically wrap it around your head so your eyes are securely blinded.

Thank you, and may God bless Goldman Sachs, Raytheon, Boeing, General Electric, and Lockheed Martin."

-George W. Obama

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Are you guys saying that we shouldn't participate in anti-war demonstrations?

Not necessarily. But direct action against the war is both more effective, and more conductive to developing a proletarian consciousness in the course of concrete struggle. And if the proletariat participates in marches, it should do so alone, or with the participation of oppressed plebeian strata, not tailing the "Democratic doves" and other liberal aberrations.

[brigadista]

Listening to the debate right now trying to say its about gas and "saving civilians" talking about children now ...breathtaking cynicism

I notice US and Uk never mentioned weird gas being shot at protesters in turkey and Egypt
- they are determined to go in and it's going to get very scary - world players lining up like a game of risk - Syrian people at the bottom of the list of priorities

False flags and lies and attempts to manufacture consent :cursing:

[Nakidana]

Not necessarily. But direct action against the war is both more effective, and more conductive to developing a proletarian consciousness in the course of concrete struggle.

And how exactly do you propose we should go about initiating the "direct actions" you list above? I've yet to hear of a single case of workers sabotaging military equipment in the last decade of US wars in the ME, but hey if you've got a magic formula that will make 'em do it then let's hear it.


And if the proletariat participates in marches, it should do so alone, or with the participation of oppressed plebeian strata, not tailing the "Democratic doves" and other liberal aberrations.

What does this even mean? Most of us are workers, how exactly do we gauge who isn't a worker and how do we extirpate ourselves from them during marches? Should we hold our own parallel marches where we go around asking the attendants if they own any means of productions?

If the liberals want to join us then let them, they're only digging their own graves.

[Quorina]

The US actually flew missions in Bosnia. And, yes, they did some (belated) good. Although it would have been much better if the international community had intervened much earlier. Unfortunately, a number of members of the diplomatic corps, particularly in UK diplomatic circles, bought into racist explanations of the war which claimed that the conflict was the result of ancient blood hatreds and that no peace was possible until the ethnic cleansing 'sorted itself out.'


I share the traditional leftist skepticism of wars launched for supposedly humanitarian purposes. Generally such claims are pure bull shit. But I haven't seen much evidence that the US bombing of the Bosnian Serbs had any serious ulterior motives other than the political pressure to intervene. Most Bosnian Muslims I know are grateful for the intervention. And most of the leftist accounts for why Bosnia was *really* an act of imperialism seem like exercises in scholasticism.

Milosevic wasn't a puppet for the West. They had their own bank, and he didn't bow to Western neocolonialist pressure to do certain things. Therefore, he had to be punished. We see this going on every where around the world. The only pressure they were feeling was the pressure of multinational corporations within the military industrial complex to conquer yet another sovereign nation for THEIR own interests. You have clearly bought into their "humanitarian" excuse. Good for you!

You can also talk about how "good" the shelling and depleted uranium was for Bosniaks, but that doesn't make it so. Whether being conquered or not was popular with those being conquered is completely irrelevant (capitalism is popular in the West, does that excuse it?)

On topic, I find it funny that the warmongers in power are saying a red line has been crossed because chemical weapons have been used, allegedly by Assad. But I guess it's okay for them to have used chemical weapons in Vietnam, Serbia and Iraq. Do we not see through the thick bull sheet being paraded by our governments and the corporate media? Why is it okay for OUR governments to use these weapons, but not okay for others? I get it, it's not okay for them since they are our "enemy", which really means enemy of the multinational. Heh.

[brigadista]

uk gov defeated in war debate[for now] by 13 votes

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2013/aug/29/mps-debate-syria-live-blog

[bricolage]

crazy vote. three line whip foreign policy decision and the tory backbenchers went the other way. this government can't even control itself let alone anything else.

[Rusty Shackleford]

this is monumental. i actually see the chance of intervention dropping dramatically. Obama cannot stand with this loss of moral support from one of the most hitherto reliable military allies since WWII.

[tachosomoza]

this is monumental. i actually see the chance of intervention dropping dramatically. Obama cannot stand with this loss of moral support from one of the most hitherto reliable military allies since WWII.

Not really. Britain had no major troop commitments to Vietnam, and they pulled out of Iraq years before the USA did.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Not really. Britain had no major troop commitments to Vietnam, and they pulled out of Iraq years before the USA did.

moral support. militarily britain is not much in the way of actually assisting in us combat operations. Its on France now i believe. Maybe Turkey.

If the US can find another ally that is ready to go then things will change, maybe.

Jordan also stated that it will not allow any operations against syria from its territory. but, the US has air bases in Turkey it can use.

[Comrade Samuel]

moral support. militarily britain is not much in the way of actually assisting in us combat operations. Its on France now i believe. Maybe Turkey.

If the US can find another ally that is ready to go then things will change, maybe.

Jordan also stated that it will not allow any operations against syria from its territory. but, the US has air bases in Turkey it can use.

I think things are getting a bit too far along now for the U.S to just quit to be honest.

If our government wants to get us involved in another war, one that approximately 9% of us would even support mind you, then I say go for it you suicidal fucks.

[Delenda Carthago]

As KKE warned the greek people months ago, Greece is going to take part in this war with the NATO bases of Souda and Kalamata. Souda is the NATO base that this happened some months ago.

f7L07wSZhXc

On the 29th of the month, there is a demo as a first answer against the imperialist intervention at Syntagma.
As promised.

http://902.gr/eidisi/politiki/25216/sygkentrosi-tis-ko-attikis-toy-kke-kai-tis-kne-enantia-stin-epemvasi-sti-syria#/0

[Rusty Shackleford]

I'm just getting the feeling the US might be trying to set up avenues to back out through. Obama is being very hard headed about this.

I may be suffering from a rush of optimism after the parliament's vote and the US just stated it will 'go on its own' (http://rt.com/usa/white-house-military-syria-own-186/) if it has to.

I'm waiting to see what France says after Saturday if the US does not attack by then.

Also, the US will be releasing 'declassified' information that 'proves' the SAA used chemical weapons.

Still though, I believe there is a chance that the US will back down and settle for some sabre rattling. Especially if the UN investigators provide insubstantial data or even prove the opposite, that the rebels engaged in chemical warfare.

[Red_Banner]

Impending miltary action in the Middle East, cue media spewers getting their sexy graphics out.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/69503000/jpg/_69503406_syria_strike_624.jpg

Cor, look at that jet yeah? Phwoar Destroyers! Yay a missile going off! It's like sexy chess, look at the pieces, oooh.


But where's the sexy MiG-21 interceptors?

[Delenda Carthago]

KKE & KNE participated in an anti-war demonstration in London, with basic slogan "Their profits demand imperialist wars, Socialism our future, monopolies must fall".

photos here.
http://www.902.gr/eidisi/diethni/25569/londino-dynamiki-paroysia-toy-mplok-toy-kke-sti-diadilosi-kata-tis-epemvasis#/0

[Questionable]

I'm disappointed that certain 'progressive' media outlets are supporting imperialism in this instance. ThinkProgress has done nothing but try to justify Obama's actions since this began, even though they'd be crying for blood if a Republican president did the same thing.

The response of certain reformists is also disappointing - you've got people talking about how it is America's "moral responsibility" to intervene, the same shit we've heard since World War I. How can they fall for the same tricks? It just goes to show how contradictory your world paradigm will become without Marxism as a tether.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

The response of certain reformists is also disappointing - you've got people talking about how it is America's "moral responsibility" to intervene, the same shit we've heard since World War I. How can they fall for the same tricks? It just goes to show how contradictory your world paradigm will become without Marxism as a tether.

It really is terrifying how supposed lefties begin to rally like dogs under the American war cry in the name of nonsense like 'moral responsibility' once it has been sounded.

[Delenda Carthago]

I'm disappointed that certain 'progressive' media outlets are supporting imperialism in this instance. ThinkProgress has done nothing but try to justify Obama's actions since this began, even though they'd be crying for blood if a Republican president did the same thing.

The response of certain reformists is also disappointing - you've got people talking about how it is America's "moral responsibility" to intervene, the same shit we've heard since World War I. How can they fall for the same tricks? It just goes to show how contradictory your world paradigm will become without Marxism as a tether.
History of the 20th century has proven, oh so many times, that many of the so-called leftist/progressive/democratic etc figures of any kind(organisations, media, theoriticals, artists) were involved with the secret agencies to blur the class movements thinking.


Just now I was reading about Koestler's involvment with IDR and CIA. Be cautius with all of these things.

[ckaihatsu]

KKE & KNE participated in an anti-war demonstration in London, with basic slogan "Their profits demand imperialist wars, Socialism our future, monopolies must fall".

photos here.
http://www.902.gr/eidisi/diethni/25569/londino-dynamiki-paroysia-toy-mplok-toy-kke-sti-diadilosi-kata-tis-epemvasis#/0


The Google Translate version of the article shouldn't be missed:





With banners "Under imperialism no allegiance, the only superpower is folks" [...]


Gonna try this one out at the next demo...(!) (grin)

[Questionable]

History of the 20th century has proven, oh so many times, that many of the so-called leftist/progressive/democratic etc figures of any kind(organisations, media, theoriticals, artists) were involved with the secret agencies to blur the class movements thinking.


Just now I was reading about Koestler's involvment with IDR and CIA. Be cautius with all of these things.

It's pretty clear that ThinkProgress is intimately involved with the Democratic Party, and I wouldn't even be surprised if the Obama Administration itself uses it as a "net" for catching liberals with more radical views. I'm more disappointed in the comments I read from people demanding we "save the innocents" in Syria.

[ckaihatsu]

I'm disappointed that certain 'progressive' media outlets are supporting imperialism in this instance. ThinkProgress has done nothing but try to justify Obama's actions since this began, even though they'd be crying for blood if a Republican president did the same thing.

The response of certain reformists is also disappointing - you've got people talking about how it is America's "moral responsibility" to intervene,




the same shit we've heard since World War I. How can they fall for the same tricks? It just goes to show how contradictory your world paradigm will become without Marxism as a tether.


I recently heard the argument that people today can't recall the lesson from a mere *10* years ago, with the "Weapons of Mass Destruction" claim from then.... Fyi:


Military Missteps - Bomb-first diplomacy becomes habitual to US

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLGQHcPa1fU


Here's the 'counter-evidence' for today's situation, that the U.S. / West has a twitchy trigger finger:


Bush admits that Iraq Had Nothing To Do With 9_11

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM


Bush Jokes about WMD

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKX6luiMINQ

[Delenda Carthago]

It's pretty clear that ThinkProgress is intimately involved with the Democratic Party, and I wouldn't even be surprised if the Obama Administration itself uses it as a "net" for catching liberals with more radical views. I'm more disappointed in the comments I read from people demanding we "save the innocents" in Syria.
Dont
Dont
Dont believe the hype...
(http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks)