Democrats Lining Up Behind Obama Alongside Republican Hawks

One thing the so-called debate in the US Senate is doing is revealing to American people, the majority of whom are opposed to attacking Syria, that when it comes to wars, Democrats are no different from Republicans. In fact, there isn’t even a pretense of being for peace and respect for human rights and international laws and UN Charter by Democrats. Nor is there any pretense for wanting to spend money on people’s needs, such as jobs, education, healthcare, school lunches, etc. instead of another war. Furthermore, many of those Drmocrats who voted against the Iraq war, such as Nancy Pelosi, are now for war because now it’s Obama asking for it, not Bush. They keep telling us that unlike detached Republicans, they are where most Americans are politically and represent the will of the majority. Well, the majority of the American people – almost 60% – are against the proposed war. Their hypocrisy is shocking.

Meanwhile, US media continues to bash Russia, for vetoing the UN Security Council resolution that would have allowed NATO to do in Syria what it did in Libya. And that war wasn’t under Bush and it wasn’t 10 years ago. It was under Obama presidency and only about 18 months ago. And if the American people weren’t paying attention – or were being deceived and misinformed by US media – Russian and Chinese authorities, who in that case let the resolution go forward and decided to give US and NATO the benefit of the doubt and stood back and watched, were. That turned out to be a big lesson for them, as the resolution which was only to let NATO implement a “no-fly zone” to prevent the regime from conducting aerial bombing of the opposition, was tossed aside and ignored and the “no-fly zone” turned into a campaign of no-holds-barred, bomb-at-will non-stop bombing, including of population centers, hospitals, bridges, schools, etc., for weeks, killing thousands of people that the “no-fly zone” was supposed to protect, ending with bombing of Gaddafi’s own convoy which resulted in his grotesque and savage murder in the hands of pro-US mercenaries. Russian and Chinese authorities don’t suffer from the kind of amnesia that most Americans are known for.

Even if we were to accept that the US is a trustworthy and credible “policeman” of the world, which given its consistent violation of human rights and international laws, never can be, by any stretch of the imagination, the debate is on whether or not something should be done where that something is understood as nothing but bombing. No talk ever of peace talks or dialog between the two warring sides to try to end the war diplomatically and reach a peaceful resolution. That option is not even in the American vocabulary. The US is not and never has been interested in that option and has consistently opposed it, every step of the way.

Let’s be clear on one thing – which even US officials admit: what’s happening in Syria is not a people’s revolution against the regime, but a proxy war between those allied with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Israel, US and Turkey on the one hand, and Syria, Iran, Russia and Lebanon’s Hezbollah, on the other. The US ulterior motive has nothing to do with protecting Syrian people from future chemical attacks. They want a regime change there period. They’ve said as much on many occasions. And for what purpose? Well just listen for two words in their talks. Those two words which frequently pop up in their explanations as to why they want another war are: “US interests”. And what do you think they mean by that? Interests of the fast food workers, Walmart workers? Interests of those who lost their homes to banks? Or those who can’t find a job after looking for over two years? None of the above. What they mean is the interests of US corporations, oil companies, arms manufacturers, banks and others making up the US military industrial complex which wants another regime which is not towing US line in the region toppled.

We keep hearing that if the US doesn’t bomb Syria, it’ll be bad for its credibility. What does it say about an Empire when its credibility is supposed to be protected by its going to war, when the fear is that other nations, God forbid, may think of it as peaceful, rather than a warmonger they should fear.

After the overthrow of the Libyan government, President Putin rhetorically, or rather presciently, asked a US diplomat: “when are you going to start bombing Syria?” And, now, here we are, after only 18 months. So, once Syria is taken care of, I ask: how long before Iran is attacked?Image


Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: