Syria’s election is taking place today. Assad will, of course,win. Not because the election is rigged. Nope. He will win because the Syrians will elect him of their own free will.
Since all NATO media is spinning against the Syrian nation and it's people I will link to an RT article
‘Syrian elections show real Western contempt to democracy’
"It really shows the contempt that the Western countries have for democracy. They have been calling for democracy in Syria for years, and when the elections take place they not only denounced them but actually banned Syrians from taking part in them. We can contrast turnout in places like Lebanon, and the enthusiasm and passion with which people are turning up to voting with lackluster support and low turnout in European elections all across Europe last week. For the West, democracy is not so much a principle - as a stick to beat third-world countries. And when actually democracy asserts itself and reveals itself as it is happening at the Syrian elections at the moment, the West is not interested - it tries to sabotage it. A lot has been revealed actually about the West’s attitude to what is taking place now in Syria"
And this snippet of the last paragraph is being included, though I was trying for brevity, it fits!
Don’t forget, Israeli forces are already involved in the Syrian war - they have been bombing Syria. (and more) And Syria is the main backer and the main conduit for the Iranian arms to Hezbollah, which is the main anti-Israeli hegemonic group force in the region. So why does not the opposition want to get involved? They should stand on elections, but the truth is that they will not get anywhere. They are still hoping and praying that the West will bomb them into power as happened to Libya. It is a fantasy because I do not think the West have a stomach for doing that in the face of such opposition from Russia and Iran.
While the Syrians make their choice, democratically, at the ballot box the global fascist dictator, Obama, plots against the tiny sovereign, daring to be independent, nation.
Gulf News-Obama’s sudden change of mind on Syria
President Barack Obama’s foreign policy speech at West Point last week was in large part a list of all the things he doesn’t want to do. He doesn’t want to withdraw from the world. At the same time, he doesn’t want to use military force to solve every problem. Above all, he doesn’t want to get stuck in another war in the Middle East, or anywhere else, for that matter.
But there’s an exception to the Obama Doctrine of restraint: terrorism. Obama is ready and willing to use US military power — indirectly if possible, directly if needed — against terrorists who pose a threat to the US.
That’s why, even as he has withdrawn troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, the president has sent military advisors to Africa. And that’s why, almost unnoticed, he has approved a gradual but significant escalation of US action on the most complicated and dangerous battlefield of all: Syria.
Obama has taken the steps he once refused. Aides say the president has agreed to “ramp up” the modest weapons supplies the US began last year. Perhaps more important, he wants to send US troops to Jordan or other countries near Syria to train rebel units, assuming Congress and the other countries agree.
What’s changed? Not the moderate rebels’ chances of victory in their fight against both Al Assad and Al Qaida. After a series of military setbacks, those rebels are in worse shape on the ground than they were two years ago. Instead, it’s the alarming growth and reach of extremist Islamist groups in Syria — some allied with Al Qaida — that is driving Obama’s decisions.Last week, a man from Florida became the first US citizen to die as a suicide bomber in the Syrian war. His death served as confirmation of the trend; as many as 70 Americans, a roughly equal number of Canadians and hundreds of Europeans may have joined jihadist groups in Syria, and, once trained and tested, some might return to attempt terrorism at home.
Tipping the balance
Have you noticed all the reports of foreign fighters from every nation 'finding' there way into Syria? No mention of how it is they would have got their? And just who armed and trained them? Nope, that's not mentioned. What is mentioned is how violent they are. All those other questions are unanswered. Completely avoided.“What has concentrated our minds is the threat from foreign fighters,” a senior US official told me. “That drives home that we’re talking about real national security interests now.”And it lands Syria — formerly a humanitarian tragedy and a refugee crisis but not a direct US threat — on Obama’s short list of “core interests” that justify the use of military force.
For the time being, the US focus is on tipping the balance, if possible, in the civil war; providing an alternative to Al Qaida for young Syrians who want to fight; and, importantly, providing helpers on the ground for US intelligence agencies as they hunt for potential terrorists. Not on the list of goals: a rebel military victory. That’s way out of reach, officials say.
What Obama is doing, of course, is trying to stay clear of the dreaded slippery slope toward full military intervention on the rebels’ behalf. Promise too much, officials fear, and sooner or later someone will ask the US to deliver.
The kind of limited commitment Obama is offering Syria’s moderates takes the US onto swampy moral ground. Once we train and arm “our” rebels, do we have an obligation to defend them against slaughter if they lose?Will the West bomb their rebels into power? (RT oped)
Haven't they already been trying?
Will they go full scale like Libya? Or Yugoslavia? Time will tell.
And finally from Gulf News-
It’s just possible, incongruous though it sounds, that Al Qaida — by drawing the US into the fight — might yet save Syria’s democratic opposition from utter defeat.
Al Qaida- might yet save Syria's "democratic opposition"?What contorted version of reality is this? There is an election going on. A democratic election.
Who is the democratic opposition being referred to here? Notice that Al Qaida is always there when NATO/US/Israel needs them- What a curious coincidence?
But then... I am not a coincidence theorist
Please check out- Lessons and Consequences of World War I: Back to the Future?