[Peace-discuss] Obama's goal in Syria & Greater Middle East

[Brussel, Morton K]

Did you overlook this, Carl?  Here's a quote from that article:

"The latest episode is merely one more horrific event in a conflict that has increasingly taken on genocidal<http://www.genocidewatch.org/images/Syria_13_04_26_Alert_Update_Revised.pdf> characteristics. The case for action at first glance is indisputable. The UN now confirms a death toll over 100,000 people, the vast majority of whom have been killed by Assad’s troops. An estimated 4.5 million people have been displaced from their homes. International observers have overwhelmingly confirmed<http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/15/syria-crisis-un-rights-idUSL6E8JFA3220120815> Assad’s complicity in the preponderance of war crimes and crimes against humanity against the Syrian people. The illegitimacy of his regime, and the legitimacy of the uprising, is clear."

--mkb

On Aug 31, 2013, at 8:30 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:

I don't think the article "takes for granted Obama's assertions with respect to responsibility for the gas attack," viz.

"Experts are unanimous that the shocking footage of civilians, including children, suffering the effects of some sort of chemical attack, is real – but remain divided on whether it involved military-grade chemical weapons associated with Assad’s arsenal, or were a more amateur concoction potentially linked to the rebels."

The point of the article is the nature and goal of US policy in the region. It's not a matter of "keeping America safe from terrorism."

The clearer that goal is, the better the chance of convincing Americans to oppose U.S. intervention in Syria.  --CGE


On Aug 31, 2013, at 7:07 PM, "Brussel, Morton K" <brussel at illinois.edu<mailto:brussel at illinois.edu>> wrote:

It is unclear to me whether this article is for or against incipient U.S. intervention in Syria. Moreover, it contains several unverified assertions and takes for granted Obama's assertions with respect to responsibility for the gas attack, if that is what it was. Which should render one suspicious.

--mkb

On Aug 31, 2013, at 12:27 PM, Karen Aram wrote:

I just read the same article on Alternet, excellent. It clearly spells out what the potential bombing of Syria is really about and for how long they have planned it.

> From: carl at newsfromneptune.com<mailto:carl at newsfromneptune.com>
> Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 11:49:06 -0500
> To: Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net<mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> Subject: [Peace-discuss] Obama's goal in Syria & Greater Middle East
>
> http://www.popularresistance.org/syria-intervention-plan-fueled-by-oil-not-chemical-weapons-concerns/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net<mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net<mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20130901/5901ea74/attachment.html>