Bombing Syria, Toppling Tyrants

I have little enough to say on the proposal to bomb Syria, apart from this.  Did we learn nothing from the invasion of Iraq?  Have we forgotten everything about the fabricated evidence, the childish Powerpoint cartoon presentation to the UN by Colin Powell, the insane demonising of the entire Iraqi administration?

What on earth are the military powers of the west thinking?  What on earth are their political masters thinking?

The world is full of murderous despots.  Africa is overrun with them.   North Korea has a murderous despot threatening to fire missiles at South Korea, a US ally.

In Saudi Arabia, the murderous despots are the royal family, strong supporters of the US, hypocrites who preside over an extreme Islamic tyranny while happily pursuing their private lives of drunkenness and whoring.

saudi execution

I didn’t see anyone clamouring to invade these tyrants.  Did you?

What exactly could be so special about Bashar al-Assad then?  Could it be that his particular brand of despotism happens to be politically inconvenient to America, Britain and Israel?  Is that  why everyone is suddenly so angry?  I don’t know, but they haven’t been so quick to unseat murderous dictators anywhere else in the world.

There’s no sign of American cruise missiles pounding the Saudis into submission, despite their support for al Qaeda and the involvement of their citizens in the 9-11 attacks.  No sign of the West invading North Korea.

A full week after the event, nobody has yet explained why Bashar al-Assad might benefit politically from an attack on Syrian civilians.  And yet, as a result of the attack, Americk and British politicians are now talking about an attack on Syria.

What a wonderful thing moral flexibility is.

37 thoughts on “Bombing Syria, Toppling Tyrants

  1. it’s the same old stuff. US versus Russia. Meet in the Middle-East. Try out their latest weapons. Reduce the population. Take control of any remaining assets.

  2. As I was wondering in the post “Chemical Weapons Attack in Syria. Who Benefits?” I still don’t know what’s going on.

    I’ve read that William Hague first accused Assad to be the culprit of the chemical attack. But weren’t they the poodles of the Americans who first jumped on the bandwagon of “weapons of mass destruction”, invaded Iraq and destroyed people and cultures?

    By now, however, I do believe that Assad is the culprit of the chemical attacks. But why is he so cocky and does it in full view of the political public? Of the powers who think they can rule the world?

    Your questions about the Saudis are, I hope, hypothetical. Of course the West (USA and their allies in Europe and elsewhere) aren’t interested to upset the oil wells of the world or a dictatorship which keeps mostly a certain part of the Arab world in line.

    Or North Korea. Who cares. There is nothing to gain here, move on …

    Or maybe Obama’s current official reluctance to intervene is just a strategic thing – not another war where the US have nothing to gain … where is the PR-advantage here, please? (Obama waiting for advisors coming back from prolonged power lunches).

    And for the Brits: Aren’t they still eager to be in the know and being a power and having notions about an empire? And wouldn’t they lie and twist any news for their advantage?

    I do wish that all this killing in Syria and in the whole world ends. But knowing Americay they never rescue people, they just make things worse by intervening under the false ideal of westernized so-called democratic culture – and be it by introducing McDonald’s and Starbucks into “pacified” countries – which kills them anyway eventually.

    The worst thing is that the whole Syria-situation is part of the actual election campaign in Germany, and in GB, and probably in the USA. It’s a political survival and profile strategy in every western country, not a concern about the survival of a people.

    There lies probably the cui bono.

    But what’s new?

  3. Bock,

    read your blog, and am struggling to get your point.

    Are you saying that the West should NOT intervene in these despotic regimes?

    Are you saying that the West SHOULD intervene in these despotic regimes?

    Are you saying that you don’t agree with the criteria that the West applies to each of these situations?

    Just trying to bottom line this?

  4. I”m sure if you look closely enough at this you will find the EDL behind this whole thing…………… usually do !

  5. Toff, there’s more than one point. I’ve done my best to explain what I think in the post, and it’s unfortunate if I haven’t succeeded. However, I’m a bit pushed for time and I’m not in a position to write it all over again. Sorry about that.

  6. guys, you are all forgetting one *very* important thing, you all seem to think that any action taken in Syria is to warn the bad man to not do bad things with chemical weapons. a load of rubbish

    The US are going in, no matter what, thats the whole plan and the whole point from day one. Syria is the prize, any thing that they say regarding “reasons” and “justifications” is crap, they are just throwing it all out there via the media and seeing what sticks, whatever makes the public comfortable (or not) is what they’ll keep singing until everyone knows the words.

    Syria…then Iran…Just watch

  7. That’s a pity Bock, because there isn’t a point that I could fathom – just the usual myopic rant about the so called double standards of the West – which is a human condition common to all races – people with glass houses etc etc

    Pity, I thought there was something more to the blog :(

  8. The hegemon and it’s manifest destiny. The Godfather will not tolerate disobedience. That is just the way things work. You will get smashed up. Bombed into the stone age. Nicaragua, got smashed up. It disobeyed the Godfather.

    It had the audacity to overthrow a vicious, murderous regime called the Somozas. Clients of the US. Nicaragua, a small country was smashed to pieces for it’s trouble. Democracy had to be restored. Same all over Central America and S America. Other countries too numerous to mention.

    Same with Syria. Independent of the US. Definitely going to get smashed up. Nothing to do with chemical weapons realy. Just a ruse. US saturated S Vietnam with chemicals. Children still being born deformed today

    . Epidemic of cancer in Iraq where depleted uranium and phosphorus bombs were used. US had no problem with Saddam using chemical weapons against the Iranians or gassing the Kurds.

    Who’s next on the list? Possibly Iran? Russia? China? Dr Strangelove indeed. Dangerous Orwellian times we live in Bock.

  9. There is no morality in this equation.

    What I have learnt is that most politicians are wingnuts. The world is dominated and ruled and always has been, by narcissistic and dysfunctional beings. Most politicians don’t really give a fuck about their fellow human being because they’re on big fucking ego-trips and massive salaries.

  10. Afraid not, Toff. It’s all pretty shallow, but there are plenty of sites with more substance to them.

    Anyway, you knew that already. Best wishes.

  11. UK Parliament has just told Cameron where to shove it, and better again he says he’s not going to take matters into his own hands, he’s accepting it and staying home. Looks like the yanks are on their own this time.

    Has the US used all of its political Currency? Personally, I’m waiting to see if we are going to keep kissing ass.

  12. Jesus Bock, very hard to keep people happy around here. Between deflaming people and shallowness, nobody’s happy.

  13. Bock; How can the evenings be shorter or are you referring to hours of daylight?
    The Yanks are worried that the ragtag rebel forces in Syria are getting their asses whipped by Assad’s forces–America is not interested in Regime change– they want the war to continue as long as possible for it consumes lots of Islamist volunteers from the Gulf, it consumes Saudi money and materiel, it consumes Iranian personnel and resources– it weakens everyone in the theatre and foments fear and fresh demand for Western weaponry. The Great Game.

  14. Let’s not reduce the discussion to that level. Getting their asses whipped equates to 100,000 deaths in a country with a population of 22.5 million. There are currently 6 million Syrian refugees. It’s all simply appalling.

    However, because of American, French and British interference in the region, any incursion now will lead to even worse consequences.

    The shocking analysis is this. What’s happening in Syria is dreadful, but what ensues from Western involvement would be even worse.

  15. My poorly communicated point was that whatever spin comes out of Washington or London; Western military involvement has nothing to do with humanitarian intervention and everything to do with geopolitical concerns. It’s cynical and all sides are guilty. Western military involvemnent in the Middle East has been a disaster for the people of the region (and the West)

  16. Gombeenmen may well be on the money Bock.

    Think a little, al-Assad’s forces have been making major gains within the last few months and the rebels are effectively surrounded in neighbourhoods in urban areas. Their supply lines are severed and they only control some rural area of the far north.

    As you say, there are 100,000 dead which shows the ferocity and viciousness of this civil-war.

    The looser looses everything, it’s winner takes all here, so surrender or armistice is out of the question.

    By late 2011, it had become clear that this uprising had taken a rather nasty sectarian turn. The phrase

    “…Christians to Beruit – Alawites to the grave…”

    began to be expressed as graffiti and in chants. Then we have the al-Nusra et al fighting everybody and anybody which compounds everything.

    This has become a vicious fight to the death that al-Addad is beginning to win.

    Such such a victory come soon, unless the right excuse comes along to prevent the rebels from collapsing and keep the pressure on al-Assad, on Iran, and on Russia and China.

    Low and behold – A chemical weapons attack.

    Or as the US, France and the UK would have it – A CHEMICAL WEAPONS ATTACK!!!! (OMG)

    100,000 people are dead. Dead by gunfire, dead by high-explosive shells from artillery and tanks, by missiles fired by aircraft and helicopter, by white phosphorus that eats into the muscle to the bone, by the blade, by being crushed or disemboweled, every which way!

    Now the west has its casus belli when some hundreds of people are killed in, what appears to be indeed a bona fide use of chemical weapons. But your question – who benefits? – still rings in my head.

    I believe Cameron, Kerry and company that any attack will not be about regime change. Any intervention will not be like Libya, The Russians and Chinese would successfully block such an adventure but perhaps the US and Europe just wish to hobble al-Assad, not replace him.

    Another year or to of this and the country will be back in the stone age.

    Bock, I fully subscribe to your sentiment that once the west gets involved, God only knows what will happen!

  17. Sorry for the typos and plain mistakes people (I say prayers at night for the old editing facility to be restored).

  18. The Israelis don’t like having such a powerful islamist nation in such close proximity to their northern border.
    You’d think they’d have gotten used to it by now.

  19. I prefer that the U.S. do nothing. What goes on in the middle east should be sorted by Middle Easterners. Israel can look after itself and I pity the poor fool that tries to take them on as they will take no prisoners.


    The U.S.’s angle is to preserve what little influence it has left in the region. With a large, very vocal and connected Jewish community in the U.S., Israel is a US ally by default, even though they make being such impossible to bear.

    It’s Oil, plain and simple. The threat of having it influenced by Russia or China is too great of motivator for the US not to get involved. If the US does nothing, the less influence they will have in the future. Negative influence is better than no influence.

    The Saudi’s aren’t a problem while they tolerate Israel and brown nose America for legitimacy. Egypt the same, I mean what happened there with the overthrow of a democratically elected government, goes against everything the US is supposed to stand for. But the military will play ball with Israel, the Muslim Brotherhood wouldn’t.

    N. Korea? Won’t be attacked as long as there is China propping up the Government, no matter what they do, including starving half the population.

  20. ” It’s a snap of an execution in Saudi Arabia, the faithful US ally ”

    Sincerely doubt it. It might be a protest against executions in Saudi Arabia, but it sure as hell isn’t like any of the executions that used to to take place in Chop Square.

    White phosphorus isn’t a chemical weapon. It’s an incendiary and smoke munition, used by everyone and not just Israelis. Depleted uranium isn’t a chemical weapon either; it a dense head for shells, usually 30mm – 50 mm which allows a machine gunner to take on a tank.

    Europe and America have sat on the sidelines wring their hnds for two hers now, and allowed a protest movement – an unarmed protest movement – to be bombed and shelled and executed and now they’re wringing their hands. Spineless appeasers the lot of them.

    ” I have in my hand a piece of paper “

  21. ” I have in my hand a piece of paper “


    So pray tell us given that the west kept out of the civil war thus far (rightly or wrongly), what do you expect to be achieved by military intervention at this point in time?

    If your answer is to topple al-Assad and fulfill the wishes of the Syrian people and create a democracy – you are deluded.

    If the Syrian regime were to collapse, there will arise the degree of revenge-taking committed will be on a massive scale, it would leave Iraq after Hussain’s demise looking like a tea-party.

    This combined with up to 100,000 jihadists still in a country flooded with weapons (chemical ones included) will add to the chaos.

    Make no mistake, if you happened to be a Shia or Christian or indeed Druze you’d pay a horrific price and it is arguable that a greater regional war involving both Iran and Israel may well ensue.

  22. @ Niall

    My money is on Israel. They’ve been itching for a fight for many years, but have acquiesced to US demands to lay low,because the U.S.insists on being in control of all the blood letting and don’t want to be shown up.

    You know what… Fuck Russia, Fuck China, Double Fuck Iran, Syria is a minnow not worthy of an honorable mention, Fuck the Palestinians, Fuck Hamas and Fuck Al Qaeda, The Arabs are soooo done with the status quo and would welcome Israel sorting out everything just so they can be left in peace.

    To many Jews in Russia for them to get their knickers in a twist and the Chinks won’t be able to do shit….I think Israel should take the lead now that Egypt is indisposed and finish what it started in 1967. Starting with Iran!!!!!

  23. “Russia gave UN 100-page report in July blaming Syrian rebels for Aleppo sarin attack”

    “The report itself was not released. But the statement drew a pointed comparison between what it said was the scientific detail of the report and the far shorter intelligence summaries that the United States, Britain and France have released to justify their assertion that the Syrian government launched chemical weapons against Damascus suburbs on Aug. 21. The longest of those summaries, by the French, ran nine pages. Each relies primarily on circumstantial evidence to make its case, and they disagree with one another on some details, including the number of people who died in the attack.”

  24. @ Niall:-

    “If the Syrian regime were to collapse, there will arise the degree of revenge-taking committed will be on a massive scale, it would leave Iraq after Hussain’s demise looking like a tea-party.”

    And the revenge bloodletting by Assad and his family if they succeed in overcoming the uprising ? What will that lok like ?

  25. LM, that is precisely the reason that the west needs to stay out of this and join neither side in what is after all, a civil war.

    You stated earlier that. “Europe and America have sat on the sidelines wring their hnds for two hers (sic) now, and allowed a protest movement – an unarmed protest movement – to be bombed and shelled and executed and now they’re wringing their hands. Spineless appeasers the lot of them.

    That, to my mind is simplistic in the extreme.

    Just to be clear here, I am no supporter of Bashar al-Assad who, like his father is nothing but a ruthless tyrant.

    The initially peaceful protests (starting on the 15th of March 2011), very quickly became anarchic in nature. As early as the 20th March, a mob burned down the Ba’ath Party headquarters and other public buildings in the city of Daraa killing officials inside. By June 2011, many parts of the country were in a state of complete anarchy – a full-scale civil war had begun.

    Instead of adding fuel to the fire and risk a greater regional war, the US and the west should be uniting with Russia and China to pressurise both parties to the peace table.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.