Another Scandal in Syria, Gee Surprise

Recently, I noted that there might be a Korean War II that has the potential to usher in World War III, and an invasion of Iran may also be a possibility. However, increased military action in Syria may ultimately end up being the initial cause for the next global war. The claim that Syrian President Assad killed his own people may or may not be true, but if a majority of the world’s nations are involved in a large-scale, nuclear war, a lot more people are going to die. Who cares though, right? As long as evil dictators are out of the picture. “It is said that old men declare war over their arrogance, while the young men [and civilians] must suffer the consequences and wage in battle” (from The Global Bully).

The logic of American intervention in Syria is astounding. First of all, the Obama administration began arming al-Qaeda-allied soldiers and “moderate” rebels of Assad’s regime, which inevitably contributed towards his loss of territory. Once the Syrian government was weakened, surprise: ISIS rose to fill the vacuum. Then, airstrikes were initiated against ISIS to try to bring the wonderful, democracy-loving, united, and patriotic rebels into power. Americans were told that the primary focus was to take out ISIS, but once Assad supposedly used chemical weapons the first time and Russia came into the picture, a proxy war developed (with Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah).

Now we come to the alleged second chemical attack by Assad. Is it really logical that he would attack in this manner knowing that if he did, he would bring the United States further into the conflict and possibly contribute towards the termination his own reign?

A general rule of politics is that rulers (whether in a democracy or oligarchy) desire to stay in power and gain more of it. How does attacking rebels and bringing in further involvement by the United States and its allies accomplish this? Otherwise, one must assume that Assad is an irrational actor in global politics, which is hardly ever the case with world leaders.

In addition, the term “false flag operation” was used to describe the chemical attack by former Congressman Ron Paul on his “Liberty Report.” Since President Trump was open to the possibility of allowing the people to decide the leadership in Syria (even if the choice was Assad), the military-industrial complex, Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham and their gang of war hawks, the intelligence community, and other members of the political establishment decided to steer the United States back on the warpath.

Regardless, how come the fact that President Trump has killed hundreds of civilians in other parts of the Middle East (plus, of course Presidents Obama and Bush had their own bloodbaths) is seldom mentioned in the mainstream media? The emotional argument is usually only used when government officials desire war. Peace is not possible because of profit-driven and power-hungry individuals who are in charge of the United States (regardless of who is president).

In conclusion, let us recall the lies that were fed to the American people before President Bush’s invasion of Iraq. There were no chemical weapons in that country, and the whole war was likely waged to feed powerful government-allied corporations (fake or crony capitalism at its finest). If there is proof of Assad’s culpability, show us. If not, we are doomed to repeat the mistakes in Iraq (or worse, be faced with World War III).

If you are interested in the Syrian Civil War or other similar topics, please check out my book, The Global Bully
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share twitter circle
Published on April 06, 2017 13:07 Tags: syria
No comments have been added yet.