Thread: Americans Strongly Oppose U.S. Intervention In Syria’s Civil War and Believe Washingt

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

Posted on August 25, 2013 by WashingtonsBlog

The Gruesome Pictures Out of Syria May Actually Be Hardening Many Americans’ Resolve Not To Get Involved In Another Conflict In the Middle East

A new Reuters/Ipsos poll finds:

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….

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.

***
[Only] 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.

***
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.

The results – and Reuters/Ipsos polling on the use-of-chemicals question since early June – suggest that if Obama decides to undertake military action against Assad’s regime, he will do so in the face of steady opposition from an American public wary after more than a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

***
In this week’s Reuters/Ipsos survey of 1,448 people, just 27 percent said they supported his decision to send arms to some Syrian rebels; 47 percent were opposed.

***
The most popular option among Americans: not intervening in Syria at all. That option is backed by 37 percent of Americans, according to the poll.

In other words, Americans might finally be souring on the whole idea of “humanitarian war”.

Given the substantial doubt among experts regarding the claims that the Syrian government used chemical weapons on its own people, and the desire of the American people to stay out of another war even if Syria did use such weapons, the U.S. government’s saber rattling appears to be further alienating a population already skeptical due to the NSA spying scandal and Iraq war.


http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/...ck-civili.html

Inspectors In Syria Forbidden From Finding Out WHO Used Chemical Weapons, Only IF They Were Used

Posted on August 27, 2013 by WashingtonsBlog

The Fix Is In

The Wall Street Journal reports:

“The [weapons inspection] team must be able to conduct a full, thorough and unimpeded investigation,” said U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Sunday night. However, the team is only mandated to determine if chemical weapons were used, not who used them, Mr. Ban’s spokesman said.

In other words, even if it was the rebels who carried out the attack, it will still be used as an excuse to attack the government.

The fix is in … the U.S. will get the war it planned 20 years ago.

Hat tip: What Really Happened.


http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/...were-used.html

The Fix Is In

yep yep... the Fix Is In

Secretary of State John Kerry Announces Chemical Weapons Unacceptable on SAME DAY that It’s Revealed America Helped Saddam Use Chemical Weapons

Posted on August 26, 2013 by WashingtonsBlog

From the Do-What-We-Say-Not-What-We-Do Department

On the same day that Secretary of State John Kerry announces that we have to bomb Syria because the use of chemical weapons violate international rules, it was revealed that CIA files prove that the U.S. supported Saddam Hussein’s use of chemical weapons against Iran.
The irony is stunning …

The U.S. literally defines terrorism as other people doing what we ourselves do.


http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/...l-weapons.html

Because the Last “Humanitarian” War Turned Out SO WELL …

Posted on August 26, 2013 by WashingtonsBlog

Iraq, Libya … Syria

Everyone knows that U.S. claims about Iraq turned out to be false, and that Iraq is now a mess. And the Iraq war pretty much destroyed the U.S. economy.
America’s last “humanitarian” war – in Libya – didn’t turn out so well either.
The U.S. backed Al Qaeda in Libya, and the terrorists have now taken over the country.
RT notes today:

On this day two years ago, Libyan rebels were transferring their government to Tripoli. However, the anniversary is marred by an acute parliamentary crisis, a severe economic slump and the country becoming the main base for Al-Qaeda in the Maghreb.
***
The euphoria of the revolution has all but gone now, as Libya finds itself mired in deep political crisis as well as economic turmoil.
“We do not feel the taste of happiness, security and stability,” a resident of Tripoli is cited as saying by Libya Herald, “nor did we have any benefit from the government. People are now feeling insecure and live in fear because of killings that are being witnessed all over Libya.”
The government’s ruling Justice and Construction party, controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood movement, has been facing tough confrontation with the opposition. Fearing the Egypt-style scenario, the president of congress, Nuri Abu Sahmain, had militias allied to the Brotherhood summoned to the capital.
***
“I am not sure that it will be right to assume that there is a government in Libya. There is no army, no police, armed militias are in control. There is violent chaos,” Yehudit Ronen, professor of political science at Bar Ilan University, told RT.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) says a wave of assassinations has killed dozens of politicians, activists, judges and members of security agencies.
“At least 51 people have died in a broadening wave of apparent political assassinations in the cities of Benghazi and Derna in volatile eastern Libya. Authorities have not prosecuted anyone for these crimes,” an HRW report of August 8 states.
***
“All we hear is very troublesome, because we hear about clandestine detention centers, detention centers that are run by militias that are not accountable to anybody,” Juan Mendez, UN rapporteur on torture told RT.
Unable to cope with militias the government has reportedly turned to Gaddafi-era surveillance techniques, according to anonymous officials the Wall Street Journal.
***
Two years after Gaddafi regime fall the country’s constitution is yet to be adopted. There are fears that once finally in place, the constitution will fail to address the needs of all of the diverse communities within the country.
***
Meanwhile, work at Libya’s oilfields and ports have been regularly paralyzed because of sporadic strikes by security guards.
“Libya has lost $1.6 billion in oil sales since July 25 until today,” Oil Minister Abdelbari al-Arusi was cited by Reuters on August 16.
***
And as if economic turmoil and infighting weren’t enough, reports emerged of Al-Qaeda making Southern Libya its new base of operations, following its members being ousted from the nearby Mali, following the French intervention to fight the Islamist insurgency there.
***
“Libya has become AQIM’s [Al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb] headquarters,” the intelligence source was cited as saying.
Abayomi Azikiwe, editor of the Pan-Africa Newswire, predicts that the instability in the post-Gaddafi Libya will only get worse.
“This kind of revolution has been detrimental to the wellbeing of the Libyan people. What we’ve seen over the last few years is a total disruption of Libyan society. There’s no plan for the national restoration of Libya. Many of the key political players involved in an attempt to run Libya right now are divided over tribal, regional as well as political levels,” Azikiwe told RT.

Given that track record, a “humanitarian” war against Syria’s Assad regime may not turn out so well. Indeed, a prominent military strategist who has been consulted by the Pentagon and NATO wrote in The New York Times that the U.S. defeating the Syrian regime would harm our national interests.
In reality, this has nothing to do with what’s going on in Syria right now. Regime change in Iraq, Libya and Syria were planned 20 years ago … and the “humanitarian” wars being launched by Obama are nothing but a kinder, gentler face on Bush’s wars.


http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/...t-so-well.html

Americans Would Rather Get a Root Canal or a Colonoscopy than Launch War Against Syria

Posted on August 26, 2013 by WashingtonsBlog

Americans Are Sick of War

We noted last month than Congress is less popular than North Korea, cockroaches, lice, root canals, colonoscopies, traffic jams, used car salesmen, Genghis Khan, Communism, BP during the Gulf oil spill, Nixon during Watergate or King George during the American Revolution.
The Washington Post notes today that a Syria intervention is less popular than Congress. So that means that the American people would much rather get a root canal or a colonoscopy than bomb Syria.
Indeed, while John Kerry announced today that the Syrian government used chemical weapons, Reuters noted:

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.

The bottom line is that Americans are sick of war.


http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/...nst-syria.html

Media’s Reporting on Syria as Terrible as It Was on Iraq

Posted on August 26, 2013 by WashingtonsBlog

After Giving Mea Culpas for Horrible Iraq Coverage, Media Does the Exact Same Thing On Syria

Preface: We wrote this in May. Media coverage has gotten even worse since then.
Common Dreams notes:

Former New York Times’ executive editor Bill Keller is not the only un-’reluctant’ war hawk under fire for publicly pushing for US military intervention in Syria, but for those who remember the media debacle that ushered in the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, he has exemplified the troubling trend among the nation’s pro-war punditry class.
Since Keller’s column appeared in the ‘paper of record’ on Monday—following a weekend of disturbing news about Israeli airstrikes inside Syria and amidst shaky reports about “chemical weapons” and “red line” rhetoric—those seeking wiser guidance on the path forward in a deeply fragmented Middle East are hoping that people like Keller, so wrong when it came to Iraq, will be pilloried for their positions on Syria.
Pilloried—then disregarded.
In his op-ed, Keller describes that though his mistaken assessment of the Iraq war may have left him “gun-shy” about Syria at first, he is now of the opinion that the US should flex its military muscle in the war-torn country.
But, stating he was “frankly appalled” by both the “mindlessness” and prominence of Keller’s article in the Times, noted foreign policy analyst Jim Lobe argued the piece is “filled with the same kind of arrogance that [Keller] brought to Iraq as a “reluctant hawk” ten years ago.”
And AntiWar.com’s John Glaser characterized the piece as “absurd,” writing:

Keller lays out how terribly wrong he was for supporting the Bush administration’s war of choice in Iraq, and is now asking readers not to collapse in laughter as he speaks with an air of authority on why we should invade, or at least bomb, Syria.
Keller explains that “at the outset of the Iraq invasion, I found myself a reluctant hawk. That turned out to be a humbling error of judgment, and it left me gun-shy.” How harrowing the experience must have been for you, Bill – using your position as an opinion-shaper at the most widely read newspaper in the country to cheer-lead an illegal war that destroyed an entire country, killed hundreds of thousands of people, and cost trillions of dollars.

The Nation’s Greg Mitchell, who literally wrote the book on media malfeasance and the Iraq War, pulled no punches, writing of Keller:

He says he was gun-shy after his Iraq flub—but no more! Now he derides Obama for “looking for excuses to stand pat.” He also provides several reasons why Syria is “not Iraq,” and how now his hawkishness is based on reality: This time we really can hurt the terrorists gathered there, [never mind that we are actually supporting Al Qaeda and other terrorists in Syria] really can calm tensions in the region, and so on. Instead of a “mushroom cloud,” he warns of the next chemical “atrocity.” And he claims there’s a broader coalition of the willing this time.
He even revives the good old “domino theory,” endorsing the view that if we don’t do something in Syria it will embolden China, North Korea and Iran. And I love this one, straight from 2003: Doing nothing “includes the danger that if we stay away now, we will get drawn in later (and bigger), when, for example, a desperate Assad drops sarin on a Damascus suburb….” If a surge in aid for those Al Qaeda–lovin’ rebels fails against Assad, then we “send missiles against his military installations until he, or more likely those around him, calculate that they should sue for peace.” Yeah, how did that work out in Iraq in the long run? ***

What good would a US military campaign possibly achieve? Looking back on Iraq—even to ignore the justifications of war, say experts—shows that the US is ill-equipped to fulfill its promises to delivery democracy, stability, both, or either.
As Katrina vanden Heuvel writes in the Washington Post on Tuesday, “after war, years of occupation, many lives and hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq, we have not been able to create a stable regime, power sharing or an end to the political violence.”

***

Filmmaker Michael Moore’s tweet that concluded thus:

Bill Keller of the NYTimes was wrong about Iraq but now wants 2 bomb Syria. Will some adult pls take his laptop away?

Common Dreams also points out that the U.S. claim that the Syrian government used chemical weapons is highly dubious. Indeed, a U.N investigator said – and on-the-ground reports confirm – that the Syrian government likely did not use chemical weapons.
In reality, it’s not just Iraq and Syria … the corporate media is always pro-war.
In addition, wars today are fought on the Web as well as on the battlefield … and Syria is no different.
Agence France-Press reported yesterday:

The Twitter feed of satirical US news website The Onion appeared to have been hacked Monday by a Syrian group aiming to inject its own sardonic spin on the deadly conflict.
***
“UN retracts report of Syrian chemical weapon use: ‘Lab tests confirm it is Jihadi body odor,’” said one tweet, still available in a screenshot on news blogs after being deleted.
Another tweet said: “UN’s Ban Ki Moon condemns Syria for being struck by israel: ‘It was in the way of Jewish missiles.’”
***
“Either @TheOnion has been hacked by the Syrian Electronic Army, or this is its most convincing stunt ever,” one tweet said.
Another user tweeted: “The Onion’s Twitter feed has been hacked and yet it is still a more reliable news source than CNN.”
The Syrian Electronic Army, which appears to be aligned with the government of President Bashar al-Assad, has previously claimed credit for hacking Agence France-Presse, the Associated Press and other news organizations.

No wonder someone has knocked Syria off the web.


http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/...s-on-iraq.html

An Attack On Syria Would Be the Most Unpopular War Ever

​Three times more Americans supported US involvement in Vietnam at war’s lowest ebb

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
August 27, 2013

Image: Wikimedia Commons

Support for an attack on Syria amongst Americans is more than three times lower than support for US involvement in Vietnam at the very lowest ebb of the war, illustrating how universally unpopular such a move would be despite the media claiming Obama would “lose credibility” if he does not launch a military assault.

Chickenhawk politicians and the corporate press have repeatedly floated the talking point that Obama must follow through on his “red line” threat in order to save face and rescue credibility.

Credibility with whom? Certainly not the American people – only 9 per cent of which support intervention in Syria according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll.

If Obama got the United States embroiled in a conflict with Syria, it would be the least popular war in the history of the country.

Even at its most dire point in May 1971, 28 per cent of the American people still thought it was the right decision to send troops into Vietnam.

Despite the predictable hellhole it later turned into, Obama’s intervention in Libya was supported by a comparatively huge 47 per cent of Americans back in 2011, while 76 per cent initially supported the invasion of Iraq and 90 per cent backed the assault on Afghanistan.

As Washington’s Blog highlights, other things that Americans find more appealing than attacking Syria include “North Korea, cockroaches, lice, root canals, colonoscopies, traffic jams, used car salesmen, Genghis Khan, Communism, BP during the Gulf oil spill, Nixon during Watergate or King George during the American Revolution.”

Even Congress with its 15 per cent approval rating is almost twice as popular as the notion of attacking Syria.

With missile strikes set to be launched as early as Thursday, it seems the only “credibility” the Obama administration is concerned about retaining is their credibility with the military-industrial complex, which is about to lead America into yet another ludicrous, dangerous and unaffordable conflict which will empower Al-Qaeda led terrorists in seizing control of a major middle eastern country.

Forget claims about chemical weapons attacks, Syria has been targeted for annihilation for at least 12 years. As General Wesley Clark explains in the clip below, the Pentagon put the country on a list of seven nations destined for destruction in the weeks after 9/11.

This is why the White House couldn’t care less about the fact that the vast majority of Americans oppose intervention – the fix is already in.

Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71

FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

This article was posted: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 at 10:23 am

Tags: foreign affairs, war


http://www.infowars.com/an-attack-on...ular-war-ever/

Americans’ 91% Opposition to Syrian War Insignificant to Technocrats

Rogue government moves toward war despite American’s opposition

Julie Wilson
Infowars.com
August 27, 2013

What better way to lift the veil of distraction from the government’s recently exposed domestic spy program than a brand new war?
Photo: Turkish Naval Forces via Wikimedia Commons

America is most likely going to war with Syria this week in what would be history’s most unpopular war yet. According to Reuters, Americans adamantly oppose Syrian intervention with only 9 percent believing Obama should attack the nation.

The poll reveals Americans would be more inclined to support the war if provided actual facts indicating Syrian President Bashar al-Assad did in fact use chemical weapons against his people.

In a period of 7-10 days, American’s support for the war has fallen from 30.2 percent to 25 percent, and those opinions stand only if proof of a chemical weapons attack is provided. Despite the people’s opposition, the US is still aggressively positioning themselves for attack.


Hands OFF Syria @handsoffsyria
Venezuela: "We will not abandon the Syrian people" #NoWarWithSyria(via Tim Anderson) http://fb.me/1MyvBEvDL
8:36 AM - 27 Aug 2013



WebsterGTarpley @WebsterGTarpley
#NoWarWithSyria-Attack will mean impeachment for #Obama who will antagonize remains of his base, trigger process leading to regional war
1:08 AM - 27 Aug 2013



تحيا سوريـــــة @maridosa_
Spread the word. Please, please save my country and my people from more suffering.. Save #Syria from US invasion #NoWarWithSyria
3:25 PM - 26 Aug 2013



The claim Assad used chemical weapons against his people is asinine considering the country’s awareness that a Western assault would soon follow. Syria has consistently expressed reluctance to become entangled with the United States military.

Despite blatant war propaganda including photographs of dead women and children who allegedly succumbed to a chemical weapons attack in a Damascus suburb this week, Americans still aren’t convinced.
NBC News reports that the US could strike Syria with three days worth of missiles in an attempt to “send a message” rather than cripple Syria’s army. Warplanes and military transporters are assembling on Britain’s Akrotiri airbase on Cyprus, which is likely to serve as a hub for the air campaign.

Sources say unidentified snipers fired at a vehicle carrying UN inspection team members, further delaying the investigation. The team only needed to travel 15 minutes to get from their hotel to the Mouadamiya district of west Ghouta in Damascus, where the chemical weapons attack is said to have taken place, but they arrived on the scene 4 hours late in a vehicle riddled with bullet holes.

The Guardian’s report said doctors traveling with the UN team took blood and urine samples and recorded video statements from more than 20 victims. The team also collected samples of soil where the chemical rocket allegedly landed, but were unable to access the main six sites where the majority of the chemical rockets allegedly had fallen. The Syrian regime asked them to leave immediately and could not guarantee the team’s safety if they remained.

Dr. Abu Akram confirmed his clinic had 2,000 victims of the gas attack in which 500 were in critical condition. “Eighty people were pronounced dead at the hospital and I now have 20 victims in intensive care,” he said.

The victims told the UN inspection team that they had been sleeping in their homes when the attack occurred.

According to the Guardian, a US military strike on stockpiles of chemical weapons could widely disperse neurotoxins causing far more harm than the alleged previous attack.

As of today the positioning of Navy destroyers and submarines in the Mediterranean Sea will enable the US military to launch Tomahawk missile strikes at Syria with the precision of hitting not just buildings but specifically targeted windows.

Russia and China have both warned the US against attacking Syria before the UN inspection team’s investigation is complete. Both nations made it clear they would be “deeply displeased” if the US proceeds with an attack.

Russia’s deputy prime minister, Dmitry Rogozin described the West as “acting in the Islamic world like a ‘monkey with a hand grenade.’” Russia has subsequently sent aircraft into Syria in an attempt to evacuate their people.

A report by Paul Joseph Watson states that the West’s decision to attack Syria was made over a year ago. The US government’s decision to move forward with an attack on Syria in spite of Americans being heavily against it, further illustrates how out of control our criminal political system has become.

However, this time around Americans are waking up to the rogue government’s war propaganda, noticing it as Obama’s diversion to the tyranny that’s arrived on American soil under the domestic spy program carried out by paramilitary forces now acting domestically.

See below for Alex’s breakdown of the alleged Syrian chemical weapons attack.



This article was posted: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 at 12:34 pm

Tags: drones, foreign affairs, government corruption, terrorism, war

Related Articles

• Britain lays out plan for arming Syrian rebels amid fears of ‘likely’ chemical weapons attack
• Syrian rebels aim to use chemical weapons, blame Damascus – report
• REPORT: Russian forces take Syrian chemical, biological weapons under control
• Hundreds Dead In Syrian Chemical Attack As Even Impartial Experts Allege “False Flag”
• Russia Says Syrian Mercenaries Behind Chemical Attacks

http://www.infowars.com/americans-91...o-technocrats/

DISTURBING VIDEO – THE TERRORIST ROOTS OF EGYPT’S OBAMA-BACKED MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD

www.thelibertypaper.orgIt’s no secret that Barack Hussein Obama has vocally condemned the Egyptian military for using force to crack down on protesters – but once you find out why, the truth will shock you. The Egyptian ...