HILLARY CLINTON'S 2012 WAR AGAINST SYRIA
DID 300,000 PEOPLE HAVE TO DIE?
THE WAR HAS NOW SPREAD INTO IRAQ AND LEBANON
AND IS TURNING INTO A TOTAL DISASTER
In 2012 U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton decided that she knew best what was good for the people of Syria. She decided that President Assad "had to go".
In coordination with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar she launched a war to invade Syria and overthrow the government. Huge military bases were set up in Jordan and Turkey for puppet armies.
So far it has turned into an utter disaster. Over 300,000 people have been killed by Clinton's policies. Assad remains in power. Hilary's ridiculous "Syrian Free Army" is in chaos. Meanwhile, Islamic extremists backed by Hilary's allies have invaded Iraq.
Here is a good summary of what has happened.
History of America's Role in Syrian Violence: Before the U.S. got involved, this was a war with casualties in the 1,000's. Yet now around 150,000 people have died and cultural and archaeological treasures have been destroyed. The U.S. has inflamed a conflict that may have been ended quickly by the Syrian government, had we not chosen to get involved. The other fact is that a majority of Syrians (55%) support Assad. Is it right for the U.S. to oppose the will of the Syrian people? Jeffrey Sachs discusses this more in an article below:
Calling off America's Bombs (Common Dreams: Jeffrey Sachs, 9-5-13)
Here are some more facts:
INSURGENTS FROM SYRIA FLOOD INTO IRAQ
Insurgents in Northern Iraq Seize Mosul, Iraq's Second Largest City (Washington Post, 6-11-14)
Is the "Islamic State of Iraq and Syria" a Real Country Now? (Slate, 6-10-14)
ISIL: Rising Power in Iraq and Syria (Aljazeera, 6-11-14)
LATEST NEWS ON THE SITUATION IN SYRIA
Rebels Cut Off Water to 3 Million People in Aleppo, Syria (YouTube, 5-13-14)
Syrian Rebels Cut Off Water Supply to Both Halves of Aleppo (The National, 5-14-14)
Syria: Another Crusade (New Eastern Outlook, 5-18-14)
Kuwait, a U.S. Ally on Syria, is Also the Leading Funder of Extremist Rebels (Washington Post, 4-25-14)
"Bomb Syria... for Ukraine's Sake!": The True Colors of the "Humanitarian Interventionist" and "Responsibility to Protect" Crowd (Global Research, 4-24-14)
Bad Idea of the Day: Bomb Syria to Save Ukraine (National Interest, 4-24-14)
'If Stones Could Weep': Syria, Blair's Plans and an Archbishop's Son (Global Research, 4-10-14)
Obama Plans to Escalate the War in Syria (The Nation, 2-18-14)
Israeli Military Support to Syria Al Qaeda Terrorists, Operating Out of the Golan Heights (Global Research, 2-19-14)
Al-Qaeda Slaughters on Syria's Killing Fields (Al Jazeera, 1-21-14)
Terrorism As An Instrument of Imperial Conquest. From Afghanistan to Syria, America Supports Al-Qaeda (Global Research, 1-10-14)
WHO ARE THE REBELS CLINTON AND OBAMA ARE BACKING?
A CHAOTIC MESS WITH CLOSE LINKS TO TERRORISTS
The Rebels backed by the United States are associated with terrorist activity: There is a growing body of evidence that the opposition groups are a criminal environment populated by gangs, kidnappers and killers. Other elements of the opposition are even openly allied with Al Qaeda according to the New York Times. This has raised the prospect that a U.S. intervention in Syria could inadvertently strengthen Islamic extremists and criminal activity. Read more about it in the article below:
Obama Plans to Escalate the War in Syria (The Nation, 2-18-14)
Israeli Military Support to Syria Al Qaeda Terrorists, Operating Out of the Golan Heights (Global Research, 2-19-14)
Al-Qaeda Slaughters on Syria's Killing Fields (Al Jazeera, 1-21-14)
Terrorism As An Instrument of Imperial Conquest. From Afghanistan to Syria, America Supports Al-Qaeda (Global Research, 1-10-14)
Free Syrian Army breaking apart (Foreign Policy, 9-3-13)
Brutality of Syrian Rebels Posing Dilemma in West (New York Times, 9-5-13)
Terrorist-linked Rebels attack civilian populations (CBC, 9-5-13)
Administration
assertions regarding Rebels at odds with intelligence reports
(Reuters, 9-5-13)
History of America's Role in Syrian Violence: Even
though we have not gotten directly involved with military action yet,
there is plenty of evidence that our decision to support the rebels by
supplying fighters and weapons has contributed to massive violence and
prolonged bloodshed in the Syrian civil war. Before the U.S. got
involved, this was a war with casualties in the 1,000's. Yet now around 150,000 people have died and much of the world's cultural and
archaeological treasures have been destroyed. The U.S. has inflamed a
conflict that may have been ended quickly by the Syrian government, had
we not chosen to get involved. The other fact is that a majority of
Syrians (55%) support Assad. Is it right for the U.S. to oppose the will
of the Syrian people? Jeffrey Sachs discusses this more in an article
below:
Calling off America's Bombs (Common Dreams: Jeffrey Sachs, 9-5-13)
Saudi Arabia's Role in Syrian Violence: Saudi Arabia has had a role in sending weapons to the rebel forces. The Saudi king Abdullah was the first Arab leader to condemn the Assad regime in 2011. While both countries share an Arab Nationalist and Islamic identity, the Syrian government of Assad supports a secular regime and lifestyle while Saudi Arabia supports a conservative and religious world view. The rebels supported by the Saudi Arabian government are religious extremists. In this fight, America is supporting the side of religious extremism against a secular state.
A Veteran Saudi Power Player Works to Build Support to Topple Assad (The Wall Street Journal, 8-25-13)
Saudi Arabia Offers Russia Deal For Backing Off Assad Support (Huffington Post, 8-7-13)
Destroy All Churches in the Arabian Peninsula - Saudi Grand Mufti (RT, 3-16-12)
Violence throughout the Middle East: It is likely that the results of this war will spill out into other Middle Eastern countries in the region. We're talking about violence in Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq and Israel. The article below gives further details for how this violence could spread.
Syria Warns U.S. Not to Intervene Militarily (ABC News, 8-24-13)
Military Action in Syria Has Very Low Approval Ratings: It is fortunate that America did not intervene directly in Syria. Such an action would have had very low approval ratings. As well as lacking interest in the international community, there was very little support for this war at home here in America - apparently only 9% of Americans approved of striking Syria (according to a Reuters/Ipsos Poll)! America is tired of war. Obama was elected as the president that would get America out of Iraq - not into another "Iraq" with a bloodier cost.
Only 9% of Americans Approve of Military Intervention in Syria: According to Reuters/Ipsos Poll (Washington Post, 8-26-13)
Obama Approval Rating Plummets To Its Lowest Point Ever, Syria is to Blame (Business Insider, 8-30-13)
GOP Congressman: Military Members Keep Telling Me to Vote No on Syria (Business Insider, 8-31-13)
A violation of international law: The United Nations charter mandates that “all members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” There are two exceptions to this rule: (1) self-defense, and (2) force authorized by the UN Security Council. Neither of these exceptions apply to the United States' intentions in Syria. Any proposed bombing would have lacked legal justification.
The U.N. Security Council Needs to have the Final Say: If the United States plans to invade any other countries in the future, The U.N. Security Council needs to have the final say. The United States should not and cannot afford to rush into action without approval from the United Nations. Such an action would be a direct violation of International Law.
U.S. Russia Stalemate: Steinmeier Demands That Merkel Must Take Initiative on Syria (Spiegel Online, 9-5-13)
U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon Warns U.S. Strike in Syria Could Unleash More Turmoil (Huffington Post, 9-3-13)
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ALLEGATIONS OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS USE IN 2013
Back when the White House was making chemical weapons allegations against the Syrian Regime, there was serious evidence that both the Syrian government and the rebels may have used chemical weapons.
The Collapsing Syria-Sarin Case (Common Dreams, 4-8-14)
Media Blackout Over Syria (Global Research, 4-6-14)
Russian findings on rebel use of chemical weapons (RT, 9-5-13)
Syria chemical weapons attack blamed on Assad, but where's the evidence? (CBSNews, 8-29-13)
U.N. has testimony that Syrian rebels used sarin gas (Reuters, 5-5-13)
Inconsistent Statements from Kerry and Obama Team: The Obama Administration's case for attacking Syria was riddled with inconsistencies. The case Secretary of State John Kerry laid out on August 30th contained statements that were disputed by the United Nations, conflicted with details of British and French intelligence and lacked transparency. The Obama team dismissed the value of a U.N. inspection team's work by saying that the inspectors arrived too late for the findings to be credible. Yet U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq countered this statement by saying that such chemicals can be detected months after use. There are also drastically different numbers on the death toll being thrown around. The United States has claimed over a thousand deaths while France has stated that there were only 281 fatalities.
To Some, U.S. Case for Syrian Gas Attack, Strike has too Many Holes (McClatchy, 9-2-13)
Potential for extended military action (Reuters, 5-3-13)
Obama's Proposed Syria Strikes are Largely Divorced From Interests of the Syrian People (Washington Post, 9-2-13)
In Trying to help Syria, an Intervention Would Destroy It (Washington Post, 8-30-13)