Wednesday, February 12, 2014

"Use force to save starving Syrians" An opinion piece

Yesterday I commented on the fact that the drums of war were beating louder and more insistently
And what seemed like a renewed push for 'humanitarian' war. You know the meme? Kill to save.
Last night I came across this rather bizarre oped. But had no time to post it.
So here it is, today- Use force to save starving Syrians
Both men are affiliated with University of Denver- Middle East Studies
We should always consider how very co-opted people such as this are by the war machine.
How persons like Postel and Hashemi put forth views very compatible to imperialism. Globalism.
And many other schism creating 'isms.....
How persons such as this serve the global military agenda behind the mask of education or intelligentsia
Intelligentsia grows by means of "recruiting" from among the people of labor, but its produce, i.e., the produce of its intellectual labor is just a sort of goods ordered and paid by the exploiter class. Hence its independence is a mere ideological illusion, and in fact intelligentsia is by large a class of "lackeys"

A class of lackeys- Suitable
Let's read what the obvious lackeys have to say- I use the term obvious because once you read what these two propose their lackey status will become abundantly apparent. Lackeys of the exploiter class, indeed.

THE Syrian people are starving. According to the United Nations, about 800,000 civilians are currently under siege. In areas around the cities of Homs, Aleppo and Deir Ezzor and in parts of the capital, Damascus, no food, medical supplies or humanitarian aid can get in, and people can’t get out. Many have already died under these “starvation sieges” and hundreds of thousands teeter on the brink, subsisting on grass and weeds. In Damascus, a cleric has ruled that under these conditions, Muslims are permitted to eat normally forbidden animals like cats, dogs and donkeys.

   This is not a famine. Food is abundant just a few miles away from these besieged areas. Military forces — mainly the army of President Bashar al-Assad, but in some cases extremist anti-Assad militias — are preventing food and medicine from reaching trapped civilians. In addition to starving, many people in besieged areas have been stricken by diseases, including polio, but can’t get medical treatment because doctors can’t get through.

This moral obscenity demands action by the international community. Any armed group that prevents humanitarian access — whether the Syrian regime’s forces or rebel militias — should be subject to coercive measures.
It's odd that the intelligentsia never has issues when the US places sanctions on any nation?
France’s foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, has denounced the international community’s failure to prevent starvation as “absolutely scandalous” and is now calling for “much stronger action.”

The news that France may propose a strong Security Council resolution is welcome, (by who?) but Mr. Fabius hasn’t made clear whether such a measure would invoke Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, which allows the Security Council to enforce its directives through military action. If it doesn’t, the resolution will be inadequate.
So, it was not a coincidence that Hollande was in the US yesterday, visiting with Obama.
I mentioned this UN move in yesterday's post
The recent attacks on the convoys attempting to deliver humanitarian aid into the besieged city of Homs are a case in point: The lifting of the sieges can’t be left to the warring factions on the ground. An external, international force must be introduced to guarantee the safe passage of food and medicine to starving Syrian civilians.
Starving Syrian civilians? Or to the NATO backed mercenaries that have been terrorizing Syrians?
The Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, remains a major obstacle. His government has vetoed three Security Council resolutions on Syria since October 2011 and Russia has said it would support measures on humanitarian issues only if Syria agrees to them. But Mr. Putin’s geostrategic calculations and Mr. Assad’s coldblooded recalcitrance cannot be allowed to stand in the way of thousands of Syrian civilians eating.

If Russia blocks meaningful international action, and if the Assad regime or*** any rebel group refuses to allow humanitarian aid into the besieged areas,*** the sieges must be broken by any means necessary.
So, even if rebel groups refuse to allow humanitarian aid through that siege must be broken by any means necessary
We should invoke the Responsibility to Protect, the principle that if a state fails to protect its populations from mass atrocities — or is in fact the perpetrator of such crimes — the international community must step in to protect the victims, with the collective use of force authorized by the Security Council. And if a multinational force cannot be assembled, then at least some countries should step up and organize Syria’s democratically oriented rebel groups to provide the necessary force on the ground, with air cover from participating nations.
I see, so if we can't get Security Council approval then a coalition of the willing should get'er done.
"democratically oriented rebels groups" still pushing the good vs bad rebel meme
All the rebels are bad. And of course massive bombing raids in support of NATO terrorists on the ground

There are precedents to follow. The American-led and United Nations-approved multinational effort in Somalia between December 1992 and May 1993 was authorized to use “all necessary measures” to guarantee the delivery of humanitarian aid. In retrospect, this all-but-forgotten operation was largely successful in humanitarian terms. While public attention has focused on the “Black Hawk Down” battle of October 1993, a military failure, the strictly humanitarian goal of getting food to starving Somalis was in fact a success.

Before any such operation begins, however, Mr. Assad and the rebel groups should be put on notice that they have 48 hours to lift the sieges. There are reasons to believe that the mere threat of coercive action would produce results.

As we saw in September, the threat of force pushed the Assad regime to comply. Faced with President Obama’s threat of an imminent military strike last August, Mr. Assad, under Russian pressure, agreed to hand over his stockpile of chemical weapons (the same weapons he claimed he didn’t have). A similar threat of force could once again compel both Mr. Assad’s government and extremist rebels to make a choice: Allow humanitarian aid to flow or be subject to attack.

Invoking the responsibility to protect would also confront Russia with a choice: Convince Mr. Assad to lift the sieges or be left behind by an international community that is prepared to act.
WAIT RIGHT THERE! These two authors are playing fast and loose with the truth- They have already stated that even if the hired mercs (***) fail to allow 'humanitarian' aid through the coalition of the killing should start killing Syrian civilians. So, this is about confronting Russia on the international stage......

Humanitarian interventions typically occur when moral principles overlap with political interests. As we approach the third anniversary of the Syrian conflict, this alignment is taking shape. Growing global outrage over the humanitarian nightmare in Syria — replete with refugee flows, sarin gas, barrel bombs, and “industrial-scale” killings and torture, as revealed last month in a collection of 55,000 gut-wrenching photographs — has horrified the world.
The gut wrenching photo's were a load of propaganda created by one of the Arab states concocted with a bunch of lawyers and somebody, real or not going by the name of Caesar. I covered that psyop in this post
 Syrian torture claims- Without the torture- Unlike Abu Ghraib- Odd?

Using force to prevent starvation will not immediately resolve the crisis in Syria. It will, however, make a qualitative difference in the lives of hundreds of thousands of Syrian civilians. It will also send a clear message to the Syrian regime and the extremist militias: The international community, after three years of watching this moral and humanitarian catastrophe unfold from the sidelines, is finally prepared to act.

Using force will resolve the crisis in Syria for the West. It won't prevent starvation. It will increase it
It won't reduce disease or displacement. It will increase it. Force will not make a qualitative difference in the lives of Syrians. 
The West has the means to make a difference in Syria already. 
Stop arming the rebels.
Stop supporting the rebels. 
Stop training the rebels.  
The West cares not one whit for the Syrian people


  1. Yet another NYT oped from cloud cuckoo-land...backdoor war to do for the "demo-oriented rebels" non-existant...NATO bombs will kill the starving civvies; then the massacre begins in earnest.

    1. bfrakes; "NATO bombs will kill the starving civvies; then the massacre begins in earnest"

      and that my friend is a holocaust- not the trademarked one

    2. "not the trademarked one" Dr. Ahmadinejad - a professor of history like Fidel Castro or Pierre E. Trudeau - could relate. Looking at the YouTube videos of him being quizzed over his Holocaust beliefs is an exercise in scripting superimposing the suggestions of the 'interviewer' upon his prey. I became curious

    3. thanks opit
      I will check out the link

  2. Canada's Liberal and NDP parties are both well ahead of the NYT selling the humanitarian lie to support war on Syria. Harper is just selling the war part, as his true believers prefer revenge and destruction to silly humanitarian stuff.
    CBC is also well ahead of the NYT on the peace war sales pitch.

    Russia spent two years talking and putting on a big show about saving Libya. Same show in Syria now playing. Tragic.

    1. "Russia spent two years talking and putting on a big show about saving Libya. Same show in Syria now playing. Tragic."

      It is tragic, but, I am not sure... what do you really expect Russia to do?
      I am not looking forward to more war

    2. It's all part of the Great Game which requires cutting off Russia and incidentally any and all common currencies except the bankrupt dollar. The Mediterranean is being secured as per the Project for a New American Century. Libya: The Other Side of the Story

    3. What do I expect Russia to do?
      Helluva question. After really thinking about it, I HOPE they would help Syria with boots on the ground.........but I expect them to do nothing but provide theatrical support.
      Remember that Russia is 100% in on allowing its citizens to live under chemtrails every day, and denies it.
      Russia is all in with vaccines just like our countries.
      Putin just recently was chirping about the Boston bombings justifying his big security budget.
      Putin takes the odd verbal shot at the IMF, but he is also in the club.

      I expect Putin and Russia to do nothing of value for the Syrian people....other than to play the theatrical role of 'opposition'.

      Tragic indeed.

    4. Well Russia has already done more then provide theatrical support
      providing monetary assistance and military assistance
      If I understand your line of thought then when the NATO army comes knocking Russia will just allow their destruction?

  3. I think that BRICS and the rest of the free world know enough about Anglo-American led "humanitarian" bloodbath´s by now because just like colour revolutions, it follows the same guide lines, same M.O. Russia frankly couldn´t imagine that the west on decline would pull another one on Libya. Well, lesson learned and hence no direct UN stooge mandated bloodbath in Syria. I take it that the one of the authors is from the tribe and the other a token Arab?


    1. Mikhas

      " I take it that the one of the authors is from the tribe and the other a token Arab?"

      You would have that exactly right!

      The west on decline is IMO more dangerous
      because when you got nothing, you got nothing to lose
      it's irrational and deluded
      scary times