This piece was reprinted by OpEd News with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.
It blames both countries for defending their sovereign rights. It turns victims into villains. It ignores lawless Western intervention. It brazenly justifies the unjustifiable. It backs the worst of imperial lawlessness. It cheerleads war, the more the better. It denigrates leaders supporting diplomatic solutions.
Its February 1 editorial headlined, "Russia's Bad Bet on Syria," saying:
"Since the largely peaceful revolt (erupted) last March, security forces have killed nearly 6,000 protesters and the toll is rising. Yet the (Security Council) is paralyzed, unable (to stop Assad from) killing or leave power.""....Russia, supported by China and India, (defends) Assad and block(s) constructive action."
"The Russians, Chinese and Indians - invoking Libya - insist that they will not abide foreign military intervention in Syria or let a resolution be exploited to permit the use of force. That complaint loses credibility...."
Fact check
Since March, Western backed insurgent killings wracked Syrian cities. Washington, key NATO partners, and regional despots support them. Assad's defending Syria's sovereignty. Russia and China oppose replicating Libya's model. They support diplomacy, not war.
Washington unsuccessfully tried pressuring their support for resolution power to intervene and force Assad to step down. The Times quoted notorious war goddess Hillary Clinton, saying:
"(T)here is no intention to seek any authority or to pursue any kind of military intervention." Like Obama, she's a serial liar. They backed Libyan responsibility to protect authority as Trojan Horse deception for war.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
