In 2013, the US was on the verge of war with Syria. Obama prepared for war but backed down when allies would not support the idea. Trump tweeted against the idea.
Had Hillary won the election war was certain. Last week, Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson said that Mr. Assad’s fate “will be decided by the Syrian people.” That is exactly how it should be.
Unfortunately, Déjà Vu 2013 has arrived in yet another rush to judgment with absolutely no facts at hand.
The New York Times reports, Worst Chemical Attack in Years in Syria; U.S. Blames Assad.
One of the worst chemical bombings in Syria turned a northern rebel-held area into a toxic kill zone on Tuesday, inciting international outrage over the ever-increasing government impunity shown in the country’s six-year war.
Dozens of people, including children, died — some writhing, choking, gasping or foaming at the mouth — after breathing in poison that possibly contained a nerve agent or other banned chemicals, according to witnesses, doctors and rescue workers. They said the toxic substance spread after warplanes dropped bombs in the early morning hours. Some rescue workers grew ill and collapsed from proximity to the dead.
Western leaders including President Trump blamed the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad and called on its patrons, Russia and Iran, to prevent a recurrence of what many described as a war crime.
Russia offered another explanation. A spokesman for its Defense Ministry, Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov, said Syrian warplanes had struck an insurgent storehouse containing toxic substances to be used in chemical weapons.
Another Rush to Judgement
The Western response was perfectly predictable: Another Rush to judgment, with the New York Times leading the media parade.
The scale and brazenness of the assault threatened to further subvert a nominal and often violated cease-fire that had taken hold in parts of the country since Mr. Assad’s forces retook the northern city of Aleppo in December with Russian help, emboldening the Syrian leader to think he could win the war.
That’s pretty damn reckless given we do not know what happened.
The White House called the attack a “reprehensible” act against innocent people “that cannot be ignored by the civilized world.”
OK, but who is responsible?
Mr. Trump’s spokesman, Sean Spicer, denounced Mr. Obama for having failed to make good on his famous “red line” statement in 2012, suggesting he would intervene militarily in Syria if Mr. Assad used chemical weapons.
But in August 2013, Mr. Trump exhorted Mr. Obama not to intervene after a chemical weapons attack near Damascus that American intelligence attributed to the Syrian military killed more than 1,400 civilians, including hundreds of children, according to United States government estimates at the time.
President Obama, do not attack Syria. There is no upside and tremendous downside. Save your "powder" for another (and more important) day!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 7, 2013
Assad’s Days Numbered
The New York Post writes Trump Administration: Assad’s Days are Numbered.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said Thursday that “steps are under way” to get rid of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, CNN reported.
Speaking aboard Air Force One, President Trump blamed the attack on al-Assad, saying “something should happen.”
“I think what Assad did is terrible. I think what happened in Syria is one of the truly egregious crimes. It shouldn’t have happened. It shouldn’t be allowed to happen,” Trump told reporters, according to CNN. “I think what happened in Syria is a disgrace to humanity. He’s there, and I guess he’s running things, so something should happen.”
Defense Department officials are coming up with options for military action against Syria in retaliation for the country’s chemical attack that killed dozens of people, according to the New York Times.
Proof Please!
Not only is this Déjà Vu 2013, it’s Déjà Vu 2002 when Bush invaded Iraq on blatant lies Saddam Hussein had WOMDs.
But who gives a damn about proof?
Certainly not the New York Times nor Senator John McCain, nor Hillary Clinton, nor warmongers in the Trump administration, nor (and very unfortunately), the one person whose opinion matters most, president Trump.
False Flag?
Ron Paul says ‘Zero chance’ Assad is behind the ‘false flag’ chemical attack in Syria
“Before this episode of possible gas exposure and who did what, things were going along reasonably well for the conditions,” said Paul. “Trump said let the Syrians decide who should run their country, and peace talks were making out, and Al Qaeda and ISIS were on the run.”
“It looks like, maybe, somebody didn’t like that so there had to be an episode, and the blame now is we can’t let that happen because it looks like it might benefit Assad,” he said.
“It’s not so easy though is it? What happened four years ago in 2013, you know, this whole thing about crossing the red line?” Paul continued. “Ever since then, the neocons have been yelling and screaming, a part of the administration has been yelling and screaming about Assad using poison gas.”
Zero Sense vs Zero Chance
It makes zero sense for Assad to have used chemicals. He is back in control and he knew full well that use of chemicals would bring a strong international response.
Those in power do stupid things, but such actions are extremely unlikely, even if remotely possible. The odds are not zero, but they are extremely low.
Flashback 2013-2014
I wrote about the near war in Syria four times.
September 9, 2013: U.S. Going to Kill Syrians to Show Syria that Killing Syrians is Wrong
Yes, the US is literally funding Al Qaeda rebels to fight an insane war on trumped up evidence that Assad used chemical weapons on Syrians.
The evidence is in dispute and if chemicals were used, it is equally likely the rebels used them to goad the US into action: Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack
Still More Hypocrisy
To top off the hypocrisy, the US is the biggest user of chemical weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, in the entire world.
Please read about the use of White Phosphorus by the US military in violation of the convention on chemical weapons.
September 4, 2013: Warmongers Unite (As They Always Do); Boehner Caves In, Backs War; McCain Caught Playing iPhone Poker During Syria Hearing
Sarin Used? By Whom?
Let’s assume that sarin was used. Not once did Kerry say who was responsible. So who was responsible?
Please consider Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack
U.S Secretary of State John Kerry saying Monday that Assad’s guilt was “a judgment … already clear to the world.”
However, from numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families, a different picture emerges. Many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the dealing gas attack.
September 4, 2013: McCain Proposes Military Aid to Al Qaeda; Mideast Map of Who Supports Who
Who Gains From Using Chemical Weapons?
Assad had the most to lose by using chemical weapons. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar have the most to gain, especially if the chemical use was attributed to Syria (not the rebels).
As noted in Warmongers Unite (As They Always Do), Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack. Here are some additional links.
John Kerry says US tests prove sarin used in Syria attacks
Kerry never answered the question “By Whom?”
August 26, 2016: Reflections on “A Moral Obscenity”: How Long Ago Was a War Against Syria Decided?
Chemical Weapons Questions
Q: Were chemical weapons used in Syria?
A: Highly likely
Q: By Assad, the rebels, or both?
A: Good question (and no one knows the answer for sure)
Q: Does it matter?
A: Apparently not. The US is headed for war anyway.
We Know Where They Are
Reflect back on the inane war in Iraq. Recall Donald Rumsfeld’s statement regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction: “we know where they are“.
We didn’t know then. Do we know now?
Does it matter? Apparently not.
Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack
Let’s flashback to August 29, 2013: Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack
Ghouta, Syria — As the machinery for a U.S.-led military intervention in Syria gathers pace following last week’s chemical weapons attack, the U.S. and its allies may be targeting the wrong culprit.
Interviews with people in Damascus and Ghouta, a suburb of the Syrian capital, where the humanitarian agency Doctors Without Borders said at least 355 people had died last week from what it believed to be a neurotoxic agent, appear to indicate as much.
The U.S., Britain, and France as well as the Arab League have accused the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for carrying out the chemical weapons attack, which mainly targeted civilians. U.S. warships are stationed in the Mediterranean Sea to launch military strikes against Syria in punishment for carrying out a massive chemical weapons attack. The U.S. and others are not interested in examining any contrary evidence, with U.S Secretary of State John Kerry saying Monday that Assad’s guilt was “a judgment … already clear to the world.”
However, from numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families, a different picture emerges. Many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the dealing gas attack.
Ghouta townspeople said the rebels were using mosques and private houses to sleep while storing their weapons in tunnels.
“When Saudi Prince Bandar gives such weapons to people, he must give them to those who know how to handle and use them,” she warned. She, like other Syrians, do not want to use their full names for fear of retribution.
Saudi involvement
In a recent article for Business Insider, reporter Geoffrey Ingersoll highlighted Saudi Prince Bandar’s role in the two-and-a-half year Syrian civil war. Many observers believe Bandar, with his close ties to Washington, has been at the very heart of the push for war by the U.S. against Assad.
Ingersoll referred to an article in the U.K.’s Daily Telegraph about secret Russian-Saudi talks alleging that Bandar offered Russian President Vladimir Putin cheap oil in exchange for dumping Assad.
Likeliest Scenario
1. Rebels, ISIS, or Saudis
2. US False Flag
3. Assad accidentally hit a chemical dump
4. Assad on purpose
I believe #4 is the least likely scenario. Regardless how one orders those, attacking Syria makes zero sense.
Trump was correct in 2013. And Tillerson had the correct viewpoint last week when he said Mr. Assad’s fate “will be decided by the Syrian people.”
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
