Intervention in Syria: Just Waiting for an Excuse

I believe that the conditions are now set to "justify" US/NATO intervention in Syria should Bashar al-Assad cross a "red line."

1. The United States has formally recognized the Syrian opposition coalition as the "legitimate representative of the Syrian people."  France, Britain, Turkey and the Gulf Cooperation Council (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, et al) have also formally recognized the rebel coalition.  (VOA)  That makes the Assad regime illegitimate.  Does that somehow make us justified to protect this "legitimate" Syrian government from attack by Assad's regime?
2. The United States has designated the Al Nusra Front, a Syrian rebel group, as a terrorist organization.  The Al Nusra Front is claimed to be an off-shoot of Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI).  (HotAir, The Investigative Project)  As described in my piece "Al Qaeda: Tip of the Brotherhood's Spear," the existence of this group in Syria obliges the United States to become involved in the conflict to prevent its arch-enemy, Al Qaeda, from taking over the government or obtaining WMDs.  This means US support for the non-al-Qaeda rebels.
3. There have been multiple reports that the forces of the Assad regime are preparing to employ chemical weapons (e.g. sarin nerve agent) against the rebels.  This has been identified as a "red line" that would trigger US/NATO intervention should it be crossed. (Reuters)
4. Syria has reportedly fired SCUD missiles against rebels within the borders of Syria (from Damascus to the north, close to Turkey). (CNN)  Should they stray into Turkey, or carry chemical weapons, that will "justify" intervention.  Patriot missile systems have been deployed to Turkey that have the capability to shoot down many types of surface-to-surface missiles like the SCUD.  (Foreign Policy)

Again I ask: why is no American leader opposing our march to war in Syria?

--Against All Enemies

Connect to AAE
   Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
   Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies ("Follow")
   YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/AAEnemies ("Subscribe")
Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Syria: Why is no one opposing our march to war?

"It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world" --George Washington's Farewell Address 

"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations--entangling alliances with none." --Thomas Jefferson

Why is no one in America standing up and saying "no" to US involvement in the Syrian war?  It now seems to be a foregone conclusion that our military will be involved...not question of "if," but "when."

Is Syria's use of chemical weapons against its own citizens a proper justification for our military to become involved?  What threat are they to the security of our nation and our people?  Have the Syrians attacked us?

Do we not understand that the Syrian port of Tartus is the only one that the Russian military has use of in the Mediterranean Sea?  Do we not understand that the ouster of the Shia Bashar al-Assad in Syria will be a significant blow to Shia Iran's security?  Perhaps it is because of these very reasons that we believe it advantageous to encourage civil war in Syria, and then get directly involved when a conveniently placed "red line" is crossed.

Are we to think that the Russians and Iranians will not avenge the loss of Syria?  And what about the jihadis in Syria who we are aiding?  Just like the mujahideen in Afghanistan and Libya, they will turn right around and attack us.  You're delusional if you believe this will not happen.

Yes, our military still has the power to undertake wars in other nations (it is debatable for how much longer), but just because we can does not mean we should.  Being on the verge of economic collapse, we need to husband our military resources instead of squandering them on questionable adventures in the Middle East.  Yet here we are moving Patriot anti-missile batteries to Turkey and determining that it will take 75,000 US soldiers to secure Syria's chemical weapons.

What benefits will are nation really get from involvement in Syria?  Or will it instead benefit King Abdullah in Saudi Arabia, who seeks to lessen the power of his arch-rival Shia Iran?  Or Erdogan in Turkey who is reasserting Turkish dominance in the region?   Or the Muslim Brotherhood and Sunni Caliphate in general?

Why is no American leader standing up and saying "no" to this steady march to war?

America and its allies are playing with fire in Syria, and we are all about to get burned.  We need to back off and have nothing to do with that mess--chemical weapons or not.  We are not justified to start killing Syrians and our involvement is not worth one single American life, bomb, or dollar.

--Against All Enemies

AAE Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com

AAE on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
AAE on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies

Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Hagmann: The hidden real truth about Benghazi

The Mosaic of lies, deceits and state-sponsored terrorism:

Link to article: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/print-friendly/50586

By Doug Hagmann  Friday, October 26, 2012 Most people know that we’ve been lied to about the attacks in Benghazi, but few realize the extent of those lies or the hidden secrets they cover. After all, the lie is different at every level. Thanks to a well placed source with extensive knowledge about the attack, the disturbing truth is slowly beginning to emerge and is lining up with information contained in my previous articles published here weeks ago . The truth reveals the most serious situation in the world today as it involves the interests and destinies of us all.

A mosaic of lies

According to the U.S. government, Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed during a spontaneous protest at the consulate office in Benghazi by a frenzied crowd of Muslims outraged over an obscure internet video. Recently released “sensitive but not classified e-mails” from Stevens to the U.S. Department of State painted a picture of poor security for U.S. personnel and the embassy, which was obviously true but had little to do with the events of September 11, 2012. The failure to dispatch an extraction team or otherwise rescue the men during a firefight that lasted upwards of nine grueling and tortuous hours was not the result of any intelligence failure, but caused by our unwillingness to widen the conflict and expose the nature and scale of our true mission in Benghazi.

Based on information provided by my source and corroborated elsewhere, the official account by administration officials is a mosaic of lies that were necessary to cover the unpalatable truth of covert actions taking place in Libya, Syria, Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon. The primary objective of our covert actions was to secretly arm anti-Assad “rebels” in Syria by funneling arms from Libya to Syria via Turkey, with other destinations that included Jordan and Lebanon.  Regarding the threat to Stevens and the other murdered Americans, the truth will reformat the persistent question posed to government officials, from UN Ambassador Susan Rice to White House Spokesman Jay Carney and others from “how could you not have known” to “how could you have done these things?”

First, it is important to understand that Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Dougherty and Tyrone Woods were not killed at a consulate office in Benghazi—as there is not such office there. They died at one of the largest CIA operations centers in the Middle East, which was located in Benghazi and served as the logistics headquarters for arms and weapons being shipped out of the post-Qaddafi Libya.

Although the U.S. government insisted that Stevens was involved in securing and destroying the numerous caches of arms and weapons once under the control of Qaddafi, the operation was more complex than that. The visual accounts of weapons being destroyed were indeed real, but those weapons were not operational. The working weapons were actually separated and transported to holding facilities for their eventual use in Syria. Russia was fully aware of this operation and warned the U.S. not to engage in the destabilization of Syria, as doing so would endanger their national security interests. Deposing Assad, as despotic as he might be, and replacing him with a Muslim Brotherhood-led regime would likely lead to unrestrained Islamic chaos across the region.

The Turkish warning

According to my source, Ambassador Stevens was in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 to meet with his Turkish counterpart, who reportedly warned Stevens that the operation was compromised. They met in person so that Stevens could be shown overhead satellite images, taken by the Russians, of nefarious activities taking place in Turkey. But just what were these nefarious activities?

It is reasonable to suspect that these activities were more dire than just your average “gun running” operation. Since the overthrow of Qaddafi, it is estimated that upwards of 40 million tons of weapons and arms were shipped out of Libya to Syria. But it was also known inside intelligence circles that Qaddafi possessed chemical weapons in addition to numerous surface-to-air missiles. Could it be that Russia obtained unmistakable surveillance footage of the anti-Assad “rebels” being shown how to load chemical payloads onto missiles inside Turkey near the border of Syria? Weapons, of course, that were shipped from Libya by the CIA in conjunction with various Muslim Brotherhood rebel groups.  If so, such weapons could be used as a “false flag” type of operation—one that would be implemented to “set-up” Assad by making it appear that he was using these weapons on forces dedicated to his overthrow.

The blowback by the international community would be swift and punishing, and the entirety of the civilized world would be demanding his overthrow. NATO would then be used to expedite his ouster, and Russia’s moral position within the international community would be weakened. Was the meeting held to show Stevens that the operation was compromised and that they had to stop?

A Nation/State sponsored attack?

While the administration asserts that the attack in Benghazi was conducted by a group of rebels acting alone, the facts seem to indicate otherwise. The level of coordination was such that we did not deploy military assets, located just an hour or two away by air, to rescue Stevens and the others at the CIA operations center in their time of need. If, as the administration contends, that the attack was perpetuated by a group of frenzied rebels, our military could have easily handled them in short order. So why was there no rescue operation?

Keep reading (article continues)...

Turkey Authorizes Military Strikes Into Syria

After a mortar attack that killed five Turkish civilians, the Turkish government has authorized the use of force against Syria (which is not necessarily the same as declaring war).  Turkey's membership in NATO creates a potential challenge for the United States as hostilities between the two nations may drag us into the conflict, which we should avoid.

Syria is positioned as yet another nation to fall to the Muslim Brotherhood.  Now that the Brotherhood controls most of North Africa, they are shifting their focus eastward.  Back in the early 1980s, Bashar al-Assad's father, Hafez, crushed a revolt by the Muslim Brotherhood, the most notable of which was the siege of the town of Hama in 1982.  Now the Brotherhood wants to kick out the ruling Shia Alawite clan and replace it with a Muslim Brotherhood-controlled government.

Supporting this theory is the appearance of al Qaeda fighting against the al-Assad regime.  I find it curious that everywhere the Muslim Brotherhood takes over, al Qaeda shows up first.  This is why I believe that al Qaeda is really the tip of the spear for the Muslim Brotherhood, and thus why we see al Qaeda in Syria now.

If we support the overthrow of the al-Assad regime, we are doing the Brotherhood's dirty work for them.  Yes, al-Assad is bad.  Yes, he is associated with Iran.  But I believe that facilitating the expansion of Muslim Brotherhood power in the Middle East is ultimately far worse.  The Brotherhood seeks the destruction of the West (which coincides with the objectives al Qaeda), so the US and its Allies facilitating the Brotherhood's control of another nation-state is by its very nature suicidal.  We've already done this in Libya and Egypt--it must stop.

Regarding our current state as a nation, we are not standing on solid ground.  We are being crushed by an enormous national debt that is increasing exponentially.  Inflation is increasing, with no end in sight due to the Federal Reserve implementing "Quantitative Easing 3."  Our military is about to take a huge cut in their budget that will be devastating in its consequences.  The domestic conflict between constitutionalism and socialism create the conditions for internal strife and will be exacerbated by deteriorating economic conditions.  Any war we undertake at this moment in time must be waged only if the security of our nation is truly threatened.  Intervention in Syria certainly does not meet that criteria--we should not sacrifice the lives of our citizens or our wealth (do we have any left?) to advance the goals of our declared enemy, the Muslim Brotherhood.

Iran is a different case, but linked to Syria for obvious reasons.  I fear that our forward deployment of two, and reportedly soon to be three, Carrier Strike Groups to the Persian Gulf region places us in a very vulnerable position.  Similarly, the deployment of two carrier battle groups to Japan may also put us at risk (five carriers is about half our fleet of eleven).  Should our carriers in the Middle East and Pacific be attacked with some success and our economy further destabilized, America will be hard pressed to recover.  America and its interests will become vulnerable.

But vulnerable to whom, you ask?  Well, Russia and China.  As we face a precipitous reduction of our military spending, they are increasing theirs.  China is becoming more and more aggressive in the Pacific.  These two nations have everything to gain from America's demise.  Should they be able to neuter our ability to project power amidst an economic collapse, China and Russia have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fill the vacuum that is created.  We must be on guard.

(AAE Note: We have seen conflicting reports as to whether the USS Stennis battle group is in the Middle East or Pacific.  Could be deliberate misinformation or deception.)

AAE Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
AAE on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies
AAE on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies

Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Arab Spring Update, 25 June 2012

Turkey said Monday it would push NATO to consider Syria's downing of a Turkish jet as an attack on the whole military alliance....Turkey will push NATO to consider the jet's downing under Article 5 in a key alliance treaty. Article 5 states that an attack against one NATO member shall be considered an attack against all members.  (Stars and Stripes)

Syria:  Turkey's cabinet was supposed to have met on Monday, 25 June, to discuss the downing of a Turkish aircraft by Syrian government forces and determine a proper response.  Turkey has also called for a NATO meeting under Article 4 (Consultations) on Tuesday, 26 June, to discuss the same issue.  Secretary of State Clinton called the incident a "brazen and unacceptable act in the strongest possible terms." Reports indicate that 33 Syrian soldiers defected to Turkey, which apparently included two colonels and a general.  (Comment: As I have said many times, America must not get involved in Syria.  It is a lose-lose situation for us.  How many more wars are we going to fight on behalf of those who are not our allies, but are instead our enemies?) (Sources: MSNBC, CNN, Stars and Stripes)

Egypt:  The Muslim Brotherhood's candidate for President of Egypt, Mohammed Morsi, has been declared the winner.  He has declared that he will review Egypt's peace treaty with Israel, which will most likely be thrown out.  The Coptic Christians in Egypt may soon be under threat of death, conversion to Islam, or paying the jizya tax.  (Sources: Jerusalem Post, Washington Post)

Kuwait:  The Kuwaiti cabinet resigned on Monday, 25 June.  I don't get this one, so you can read it for yourself: Reuters article.

Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Turkey Threatens Syria

Please notice the words that the Prime Minister of Turkey uses in reference to his nation's crisis with Syria:

Erdogan said Syria shot down the unarmed plane in international airspace in a `deliberate' and `hostile' act and without warning. He said border violations in the region were not uncommon. He said Syrian helicopters violated Turkish airspace five times recently, without Turkish response. 

AP

"No one should be deceived by our cold blooded stance," Erdogan said. "Our acting with common sense should not be perceived as a weakness." 

The downing of the jet has aggravated tense ties between the two neighbors. Turkey has repeatedly called on Syrian President Bashar Assad to step down as 33,000 Syrians have sought refuge in Turkey, fleeing a government crackdown on a popular uprising.  

Erdogan said as much as Turkey's friendship is valuable, Turkey's "wrath is as much violent and crushing."  

He said: "we will continue to be a burning torment for circles who have adopted a hostile attitude toward Turkey."  (from Fox News article)

Turkey is understandably upset about the downing of its aircraft, but it appears to have flown into Syrian sovereign airspace.  Last time I checked, Syria has the right to defend itself from perceived threats that enter into the airspace of its nation.

After these bellicose and inflammatory words from Erdogan, plus Turkey's behavior over the past few months, I must recommend that Turkey be removed from NATO and never be considered for entrance into the European Union.  We should do no fighting on Turkey's behalf.  It is clearly a regime hell bent on expanding its power in both the Middle East and Europe, and the actions it takes and wishes to take are not in the best interests of the United States of America.

Please see my previous posts on Turkey for more validation of my stance based on their behavior:

21 May 12: Austrian MP Blasts Turkish Ambassador  (link to video here)

22 Jan 12: Turkey's Foreign and Domestic Policies

19 Nov 11: General World Trending, 19 Nov 11

16 Sep 11: Turkish Vessels Instructed to Engage Israeli Vessels

06 Sep 11: Turkey Tightens the Screws on Israel

18 Aug 11: The World Says Assad Must Go

17 Aug 11: Coup Plot in Turkey

Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Arab Spring Update, 18 June 2012

Syria.  Russia is currently loading two amphibious ships in Sebastopol to send Marines to reinforce its naval base in Tartus, Syria.  (Source article.)  "The United Nations' human rights chief has accused the Syrian government of committing crimes against humanity by attacking towns with heavy weapons."  (Source article.)  On 25 May, over 100 civilians including women and children were murdered in Houla.  (Source article.)  Some blame the government for the massacre, others claim it was a "false flag" operation to bring more world pressure on the Syrian government.  The United Nations has suspended their peacekeeping mission to monitor a 12 June ceasefire.  (Source article.)  In summary, I am seeing a steadily increasing desire by the West, Turkey and the United Nations to intervene in Syria and oust Assad.  This would place the Sunnis and most likely the Muslim Brotherhood in charge.  Russia and Iran appear to oppose any intervention in Syria by outside forces.  As I have stated before, we need to avoid this conflict altogether.  Nothing good can come out of intervention in Syria.

Libya.  On June 11th, a bomb exploded outside the US Mission in Benghazi.  The British Ambassador's convoy was attacked by RPGs on June 12th in the same city.   (Source article.)

Jordan.  Thousands of Jordanians protested the rise in electricity prices (around 2 June), and rumors have it that the rising prices of public services will trigger an Arab Spring-like uprising.  (Source article.)  This comes after the Jordanian government outlawed political parties that are organized on the basis of religion, potentially putting the current government add odds with the Muslim Brotherhood.  The protests could be the first sign of the Muslim Brotherhood beginning to put pressure on the Jordanian government.  This also comes on the heels of the multi-national "Eager Lion 2012" exercise held in Jordan.  (Arab Spring Updates: 15 May and 17 April)

Egypt.  Last week the ruling military government dissolved the Islamist-dominated parliament.  This week the Muslim Brotherhood claimed victory in the Presidential Election (their candidate is Mohammed Morsy).  Their opponent, former prime minister Ahmed Shafik, claims that he is ahead in the votes.  The military continues to hold onto power.  Frankly, I am surprised that the Muslim Brotherhood has not yet attempted to instigate a full revolution to oust the military government.  They could be working within the political system until such a time when they have determined that they cannot obtain power through legitimate means and must resort to force instead.  (Source article.)

Javier Soriano/Agence France-Presse -- Getty Images

Saudi Arabia.  The successor to King Abdullah's throne, Crown Prince Nayef bin Albdulaziz al-Saud, died on 16 June and Defense Minister Prince Salman bin Abdul-Aziz has been selected as the new heir.  (Source article.)  Related to the ruling Saud family, remember that some in Iran believe that King Abdullah must die before the Mahdi will return.  ("Iran Warns of Coming Great Event")

Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Turkey-vs-Israel. ANOTHER War in the Middle East?

Turkey-vs-Israel. ANOTHER War in the Middle East?
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

**************

THIS is what happens when America has a weak President.

There can be no doubt that America has the weakest President in office, since the Jimmy Carter fiasco. The rogue nations of the world can sense a spineless President and as soon as one is ensconced in the Oval office they begin to take advantage of the limp-wristed “see on evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” polices of these feckless regimes.

Carter had his Iranian hostage problem. Clinton had his Kosovo and Serbian problem, and now Obama has his Turkey-vs-Israel problem.

Obama wanted some “daylight” between Israel and America. Well, he accomplished that -- and THIS is the result.

There is the likelihood that war will breakout between Turkey and Israel at any hour. If Turkey sends Turkish military vessels and fighter aircraft to escort those so-called “peace activists” in another attempt to run the Gaza blockade, I have no doubt the IDF will sink Turkey’s ships and shoot down most, if not all, of the Turkish fighter aircraft. Of course there will be Israeli causalities, but Turkey needs to recognize they will going up against one of the premier militaries on the planet. Remember, too, If Israel goes to war today, they will be going to war under Netanyahu, a former IDF Special Forces officer. Netanyahu can be as bellicose as the situation requires.

Certain parts of the US President’s nether region have been caught in a crack -- largely by his own ineptitude. Those who sniff out weakness in an American leader are applying pressure. North Korea, Iran, Turkey, Russia, and yes, China are the usual culprits – save for Turkey, which, however, seems to be making a maximum effort to break its bonds with NATO and join that list of delinquents as a permanent member.

If Turkey goes through with committing its military in a skirmish with the Israeli Defense Forces, it will suffer withering loses as well as a tremendous loss of face.

Look, Netanyahu is not to be messed with! Frankly, I wish the man were qualified to be a candidate for the US Presidency. He is what America needs – a former officer in Israel’s elite special forces, he HAS the military experience required for a strong president. Unfortunately, America’s leadership comes in a far distant second to Netanyahu. Israel’s leader is perceived to be strong while America’s leader is perceived to be, well, pitiful!

President Obama’s obvious disdain for Israel and his nauseating rash of sucking up to Islamic countries leads one to question whether he favors Islam over Israel.

There are roughly 6 million Jews in Israel. There are roughly 6 million Jews in America. We would respectfully suggest that those American Jews, who support President Obama’s Regime, might wish to re-evaluate that support in light of Obama’s obvious dislike of the nation of Israel, which is, like it or not, recognized by the nations of the world as the Jewish state.

The Obama Regime not only has Americans at each other’s throats, it also has America’s allies at each other’s throats!

There is something terribly wrong with America’s current government led by the Obama Regime. America made a horrible mistake in 2006 and 2008 with the election of a socialist government to lead the country. Most sentient Americans have awakened to this fact and are determined to correct this error this November and again in November of 2012.

If the correction isn’t made in the next two elections, I think it is, indeed, plausible to see some of the American states again asserting their sovereignty by breaking away and re-establishing themselves as independent states.

Look, most Americans have come to understand that we, as a country, cannot continue in the direction the country is currently headed. They are as sincere as it is possible to be when the say they want their country back. They stand ready to rescue and restore America and elect a leader Americans and the rest of the world can respect.

America did not choose the role of policeman of the world. We were drafted into the job. Even if we threw up our hands and walked away, we would still have the job BY DEFAULT!

It seems America has its very own Hamlet in the Oval Office. His wrestling with decisions is reinforcing the appearance of weakness -- and weakness in an American President can bring the world to the brink of war. In fact, we may be tiptoeing along that brink even as I scribble these few words.

May God Bless America… and hurry up!

J. D. Longstreet