Syrian Rebels call for No-Fly Zone

The "No Fly Zone" over Syria, short for a massive bombing campaign to provide cover for advancing insurgents, mercenaries and special forces, appears to be getting greater play in the mainstream media.

Reuters is reporting that Syrian rebels are calling for a no-fly zone, i.e., U.S./NATO attack on Syria. .

"Abdelbasset Sida, head of the Syrian National Council, said the United States had realized that the absence of a no-fly zone to counter Assad's air superiority hindered rebel movements.

"He was speaking a day after U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said her country and Turkey would study a range of possible measures to help Assad's foes, including a no-fly zone, although she indicated no decisions were necessarily imminent."

What a coincidence, the day after!

The Reuters article was telling in how this travesty in Syria has evolved.

"Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey are the leading regional supporters of the Syrian opposition. Assad's main backers are Iran and Lebanon's Shi'ite Hezbollah movement."

A regional sectarian war as opposed to a civil war hasn't been admitted in the mainstream media until now. My guess is the MSM will never admit who is really behind this sectarian war, the imperial masterminds of the west.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/12/us-syria-crisis-idUSBRE8610SH2...

Topic: 

Tags: 

Rating: 

0
No votes yet

Comments

Still can't see them getting this by Russia and China

Big Al's picture

thru a U.N resolution. They appear to have drawn a line in the sand against U.S./NATO imperialism, as well as a large number of other countries. Iran hosted a 30 nation meeting about Syria a few days ago, not mentioned in the MSM of course, where alternative actions were considered.

http://www.sfgate.com/world/article/Iran-hosts-30-nation-meeting-on-Syri...

0
No votes yet

Power

geomoo's picture

At least according to one especially cogent economist one of our resident financial reporters linked to. It was pointed out that the first thing the U.S. did in Libya was to cancel payment of debts to Russia. Naturally Russia isn't eager for a repeat of that. I don't know that there is anyone left in the world who can stand up to the U.S. [arm of multi-national corporations]. The theory given was that a cornerstone of U.S. strategy is to keep oil and money away from any actors with a chance of challenging U.S. military hegemony, especially Russia and China.

The reason it's all about terrorism, imho, is that there are no state actors left who can mount a direct challenge. In the insane minds of far too many powerful people, the only resistance to world domination will come from clandestine groups. Over the last decade, we have seen a tremendous strengthening of the ability to handle popular resistance--militarizing police forces, drastically increasing clandestine forces and private forces to further buffer troops from democratic control, inuring troops to killing and torture of civilians, to carrying out operations in residential areas, drones, constant propaganda creating caricatures of imagined enemies, and so much more.

Sorry to drift so far afield. These days to me, drone attacks in Pakistan, bombing in Syria, and imprisoning Katrina survivors without due process--it's all part of the same dynamic. And all done right out in the open in front of an enthralled citizenry. Tough times.

0
No votes yet

Excellent interview from RT

traveler's picture

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhWiFSUY8gY

The interview is with an former opposition leader to the Syrian Government. Watch it all of the way though.

Behind the scenes I believe that if they could control the news from Syria - it's proving to be difficult for them, the US and Israel would be okay with destroying Syrian society, destroying Syria as a country, if they are not able to install a US friendly leader by means of a regime change.

Internal fighting among the various factions would mean that Syria would be seriously weakened and therefore be no threat to Israel or to US interests in the region.

Destruction of Syria would further weaken Iran. I believe the neocon planners, the usual gang of chickenhawks, believe that once Iran is taken down they could then come back and clean up Syria - and Lebanon.

I believe they will be proven wrong again as they were on the invasion of Iraq.

Following is a quote from the policy paper "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" which was written in 1996 (Wiki link follows here): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Clean_Break:_A_New_Strategy_for_Securing_...

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions."

From A Pretext for War. by James Bamford, page 261 of the paperback version:

"Then Bush addressed the sole items on the agenda for his first high level national security meeting. The topics were not terrorism--a subject he barely mentioned during the campaign --or nervousness over China or Russia, but Israel and Iraq. From the very first moment, the Bush foreign policy would focus on three key objectives: get rid of Saddam, end American involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, and rearrange the dominoes in the Middle East. A key to the policy shift would be the concept of pre-emption.

The blueprint for the new Bush policy had actually been drawn up five years earlier by three of his top national security advisors. Soon to be appointed to senior administration positions, they were Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser. Ironically the plan was orginally intended not for Bush but for another world leader, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Was this the policy coup General Clark spoke of? Apparently nothing has changed since a new administration took office in 2009.

0
No votes yet

If humans survive long enough

geomoo's picture

Someone will write a heart-breaking history of how savages and vandals from the West destroyed the ancient culture from the cradle of human civilization. The nearly complete destruction of the culture of Iraq is one of the great crimes of modern history, rivaling the Shoah in its enormity. I am not exaggerating. It is painful to imagine the alternative world we would be living in now had the European powers partnered with the ME following WWII at a time when there was a great hunger for modernization and democracy. I believe Western perfidy and degeneracy in dealing with the ME is on a par with the treatment of native Americans. The rise of aggressive fundamentalism can be traced directly to exploitation and insults by the West leading to desperate attempts to protect what was thought of as culture. Of course, in such pressured circumstances, the result is usually perverted culture. Of course, the West has had their fingers in fanning radical Islam since WWII, continuing to naively believe that they can cynically control the genii once he's out of the bottle despite decades of proof to the contrary.

Andrew Bacevich is perhaps the most authoritative commenter consistently pointing out that these neo-con fantasies spring from ignorance of the reality of war. Once you start a war, he says, no one can predict where it will go. War is messy. The success of the Madison Avenue ad machine and the subsequent 24/7 propaganda machine has them thinking they can, in perhaps the most chilling words of the last decade, "Create their own reality." They will learn to all our suffering that there is more to reality than hypnotizing people into believing what is not true.

We are ruled by psychopaths. I'll watch that interview now.

0
No votes yet

Russia and China have already vetoed 3 different resolutions

sartoris's picture

Russia is the primary arms supplier to Syria and has a long relationship with Assad. China has so many different things going on in the region that it does not want to see an expanded regional war (a proxy war) disrupt its regional economic and political plans. I think that Russia and China will continue to veto any such proposal. As usual, the US is so not interested in actually helping the citizens of another country. Our leaders (and most Americans in general) could care less about the life of the average Syrian. Our government sees this as a great way to bloody the nose of Iran without actually putting our own troops on the battlefield. If Syria falls Iran will lose a huge ally. We are working with that shining beacon of hope, liberty and the petrol dollar way, Saudi Arabia, to fight Iran and limit their influence in the region. This is not terribly complicated but it is complicated enough that most Americans are simply buying the idea that it's about good guys and bad guys. I'm not sure how the figure was determined but most reports I have read put the number of dead at over 20 thousand. That's a lot of blood shed in the name of the Great Game of international politics.

0
No votes yet

Ray McGovern former CIA analyst

traveler's picture

has authored an article for Common Dreams - "Israel’s ‘Bomb Iran’ Timetable" Link: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/08/13-2 .

McGovern says that Washington insiders are coming to the conclusion that Israel’s leaders are planning to attack Iran prior to the upcoming election hoping to draw in the US to support Israel but of course a "slam dunk" intelligence coup or some variety of a Gulf of Tonkin incident will be needed as a pretext.

McGovern writes that

Netanyahu gives every evidence of believing that — for the next 12 weeks — he is in the catbird seat and that, if he provokes hostilities with Iran, Obama will feel compelled to jump in with both feet, i. e., selecting from the vast array of forces already assembled in the area.

Apparently he agrees.

Sadly, I believe Netanyahu is probably correct in that calculation. Batten down the hatches.

I would guess that the unresolved situation in Syria will delay an attack on Iran until after the election and that Obama will not be an unwilling to participant once he has securely been returned to a second term, and that he will have numerous cheerleaders.

We will know soon.

Blowback? Who can say for sure what form it might take.

0
No votes yet

Pat Lang at Sic Semper Tyrannis

traveler's picture

expresses concerns similar to those of McGovern. Col. Lang writes: "it looks like this might really be the time if not yet the hour."

After all the years of waiting for Israel to make up its mind about its intentions in regard to Iran, I am as weary as the rest of you concerning the possibility.

He might have meant to write "wary" rather than "weary" but "weary" is also fitting.

Link is here: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2012/08/-dont-rely-on...

0
No votes yet