Don’t be fooled by the controlled “opposition” of dissident diplomats who claim we must intervene in Syria’s so-called “civil war.”
I cannot believe how eagerly CBS serves up propaganda claiming that these alleged dissident diplomats are “politically neutral.”
The New York Times was chosen to “break” the story, naturally:
More than 50 State Department diplomats have signed an internal memo sharply critical of the Obama administration’s policy in Syria, urging the United States to carry out military strikes against the government of President Bashar al-Assad to stop its persistent violations of a cease-fire in the country’s five-year-old civil war.
The memo, a draft of which was provided to The New York Times by a State Department official, says American policy has been “overwhelmed” by the unrelenting violence in Syria. It calls for “a judicious use of stand-off and air weapons, which would undergird and drive a more focused and hard-nosed U.S.-led diplomatic process.”
Such a step would represent a radical shift in the administration’s approach to the civil war in Syria, and there is little evidence that President Obama has plans to change course. Mr. Obama has emphasized the military campaign against the Islamic State over efforts to dislodge Mr. Assad.
This is all garbage. Barack Obama tried to use the chemical weapon attack pretext to launch air strikes. We should all remember what happened next, as AntiWar.com’s Justin Raimondo recounts:
This provoked a huge backlash from flyover country, with congressional switchboards tied up and protests coming in fast and furious. Clearly, the American people didn’t want another war in the Middle East, and, one by one, members of Congress who had planned on voting yes began to back down. The President backtracked – happily, I imagine. Hillary, who had already left the administration, was handed her final rebuke. Yet the seeds planted by her Syria policy would soon sprout into flowers of evil.
Notice that CBS completely throws the popular resistance to Barack Obama’s announced bombing campaign down the memory hole. They use the propaganda of the President as Nobel Peace Prize winner to portray him as reluctant to go to war. I’m sure he is reluctant to do anything that will hurt him politically. But it was opposition to needless war in the heartland that stopped him from attacking.
Both New York Times and CBS admit that John Kerry is on the side of the diplomats, yet they don’t let this raise any doubts that they are, indeed, dissident diplomats horrified at the “civil war”—a term that is also a lie because the “rebel groups” are mostly foreign jihadists. Do you really think that Kerry or someone on his side didn’t have a hand in orchestrating this letter and then leaking it the New York Times?
Don’t be naïve!
Opposition to risking World War III with Russia over Syria has been central to Donald Trump’s campaign. No wonder world leaders are “rattled” by Trump. He is our one shot at liberating the nation from insane international policy.