Source
Posted by Daniel McAdams on February 24, 2012 09:20 AM
As Secretary of State Clinton prepares to convene her "Friends of Syria" conference in that capitol of the Arab Spring, Tunisia, where democratic nirvana has been achieved, she is joined by her willing accomplices from those well-known liberal democracies Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Under the guise of bringing peace to Syria, which although not in civil war as is often erroneously claimed but rather is being torn apart by a limited but well-armed uprising, Secretary Clinton and her boss will bring instead death and destruction, as they did in Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and as her husband did earlier in Yugoslavia. However on the eve of a grotesquely contrived Tunisia "Friends" meeting she is playing coy with already-determined US/GCC/NATO plans to overthrow another -- the last secular -- regime in the Middle East.
Clinton confidently predicts that this limited and disorganized uprising will coalesce into a full-scale civil war and that a fighting force will be established capable of overthrowing the significant military resources of the Syrian government. She must know something we don't, as she unequivocally states on the eve of the conference, "There will be increasingly capable opposition forces. They will from somewhere, somehow, find the means to defend themselves as well as begin offensive measures."
As RT reports, "The Friends of Syria are expected to put an ultimatum to Assad government – either broker a ceasefire to allow aid group to give help to civilians suffering in the conflict or face as-yet-unspecified additional punitive measures."
The problem with this approach, mirroring as it does the failed UN Security Council resolution just a few weeks ago, is that the "ceasefire" it demands only applies to one side -- the governmental forces seeking to put down the armed insurrection.
Imagine if the Occupy movement in the US had been an armed one, equipped with Chinese and Iranian weaponry, and Russia demanded that the Obama regime observe a one-sided cease-fire?
Oh, but there are different rules for the US than for the rest of the world! We are the ones charged -- burdened -- with fomenting, aiding, arming, and bombing to achieve the worldwide democratic revolution!
Funny it was not long ago that such a maniacal drive to impose a utopian ideological system on the entire world was resisted by the full force of the United States and the "free world," believing as it correctly did then that it was up to the peoples themselves to determine what is best for them. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it is the US that is rhetorically blistering those countries seeking to resist its imposition of an "end of history" view of a new international order.
Clinton, still reeling at the audacity of Russia and China to veto the UN regime change resolution on Syria, barked today, "The pressure will build on countries like Russia and China because world opinion is not going to stand idly by. Arab opinion is not going to be satisfied watching two nations, one for commercial reasons one for commercial and ideological reasons, bolstering a regime that is defying every rule of modern international norms."
The majority of Syrians who do not want Assad to go? They are resisting the vanguard and as such they do not count. In the brave new world of post-modern democracy, the majority opinion must sometimes be pushed aside so that progress can continue!
Under the guise of bringing peace to Syria, which although not in civil war as is often erroneously claimed but rather is being torn apart by a limited but well-armed uprising, Secretary Clinton and her boss will bring instead death and destruction, as they did in Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and as her husband did earlier in Yugoslavia. However on the eve of a grotesquely contrived Tunisia "Friends" meeting she is playing coy with already-determined US/GCC/NATO plans to overthrow another -- the last secular -- regime in the Middle East.
Clinton confidently predicts that this limited and disorganized uprising will coalesce into a full-scale civil war and that a fighting force will be established capable of overthrowing the significant military resources of the Syrian government. She must know something we don't, as she unequivocally states on the eve of the conference, "There will be increasingly capable opposition forces. They will from somewhere, somehow, find the means to defend themselves as well as begin offensive measures."
 |
| A Syrian rebel takes up position during a battle with Syrian Army |
The problem with this approach, mirroring as it does the failed UN Security Council resolution just a few weeks ago, is that the "ceasefire" it demands only applies to one side -- the governmental forces seeking to put down the armed insurrection.
Imagine if the Occupy movement in the US had been an armed one, equipped with Chinese and Iranian weaponry, and Russia demanded that the Obama regime observe a one-sided cease-fire?
Oh, but there are different rules for the US than for the rest of the world! We are the ones charged -- burdened -- with fomenting, aiding, arming, and bombing to achieve the worldwide democratic revolution!
Funny it was not long ago that such a maniacal drive to impose a utopian ideological system on the entire world was resisted by the full force of the United States and the "free world," believing as it correctly did then that it was up to the peoples themselves to determine what is best for them. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it is the US that is rhetorically blistering those countries seeking to resist its imposition of an "end of history" view of a new international order.
Clinton, still reeling at the audacity of Russia and China to veto the UN regime change resolution on Syria, barked today, "The pressure will build on countries like Russia and China because world opinion is not going to stand idly by. Arab opinion is not going to be satisfied watching two nations, one for commercial reasons one for commercial and ideological reasons, bolstering a regime that is defying every rule of modern international norms."
River to Sea
Uprooted Palestinian 
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!
No comments:
Post a Comment