87 online
 
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 68 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing Summarizing
OpEdNews Op Eds    H2'ed 8/29/13

"War On Chemical Weapons": Obama Traps Himself Into Syrian Combat

By       (Page 1 of 3 pages)   14 comments

Pepe Escobar
Message Pepe Escobar
Become a Fan
  (190 fans)
Source: RT


Syrian activists inspect the bodies of people they say were killed by nerve gas in the Ghouta region, in the Duma neighbourhood of Damascus August 21, 2013. (Reuters) 

Only a few days before the 12th anniversary of 9/11, Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama might be fighting side by side with... al-Qaeda, as he was foolish enough to be trapped by his own rhetoric on Syria.

The dogs of war bark and the caravan... is Tomahawked. Amid out-of-control hysteria, the proverbial "unnamed US officials" spin like demented centrifuges. 

Obama's "kinetic operation" on Syria will fall out of the sky "in the next few days." It will be "limited,"  lasting only "three days," or "no more than two days." It will "send a message," a "short, sharp attack" against less than 50 sites on a list of targets. 

But then long-range bombers may "possibly" join the Tomahawk barrage, and all bets are off.   

A proverbial, anonymous "senior administration official" even stressed the "desire to get it done before the president leaves for Russia next week." 

That's it; we bomb a country like dialing a pizza delivery, and then we go to a G20 summit with the world's emerging powers hosted by no less than Russia's president, Vladimir Putin. Just because we need to prove that the president of the United States meant what he said: chemical weapons are a red line. And to hell who's responsible for deploying them.  

I'm not making this up. This is the core of White House spokesman Jay Carney's message, when he said, in faultless Newspeak: "The options that are being considered do not contain within them a regime change focus."  

So the administration of "constitutional lawyer" Barack Obama is mulling how to attack Syria, bypassing the UN Security Council -- which will veto, via Russia and China, the new resolution proposed by the UK;  bypassing always-docile NATO; and with 91 percent of Americans against it, just to send an (explosive) political message. And all because a US president was foolish enough to get trapped in his own rhetoric.  

U.N. chemical weapons experts visit people affected by an apparent gas attack, at a hospital in the southwestern Damascus suburb of Mouadamiya August 26, 2013. (Reuters)
U.N. chemical weapons experts visit people affected by an apparent gas attack, at a hospital in the southwestern Damascus suburb of Mouadamiya August 26, 2013. (Reuters)

Remember Iraq? 

Call it a 10th anniversary special: it's Iraq 2003 all over again. 

The attack dog presumably in charge of the Obama administration war brigade is Secretary of State John Kerry. Here, Gareth Porter thoroughly debunks Kerry's game -- and lies. No wonder Kerry's "Powell moment" has gone viral -- as in "deceived" Colin Powell in his infamous February 2003 UN presentation telling the world Saddam Hussein had tons of WMDs. Unlike Powell though, Kerry knows exactly what he's doing.  

The White House promises a "revelation" from above this Thursday, "above" being the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Yet the heart of the matter is that the UN chemical inspectors have had no time to identify what sort of chemical weapon is involved in the Ghouta attack (sarin or something else); where it was manufactured; how it was delivered (possibly by DIY rockets); and last but not least, who did it. 

It's imperative to remember that Russia presented an 80-page report last month to the UN Security Council detailing serious evidence about the "rebels" being behind the March 19 attack in Khan al-Assal. That's why the inspectors are in Syria now. So the Obama administration is lying when it insists that it's "too late" for the inspectors to investigate the latest attack.

This time though, Russia may not have collected enough evidence; it's too early. Otherwise Ambassador Vitaly Churkin would be talking to the press, like he did last month

These investigations take time. And the results cannot be fixed around the policy.

"Fixing" the facts 

Let's follow a track that is much more plausible than Washington's official narrative. 

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Must Read 4   Well Said 3   Supported 1  
Rate It | View Ratings

Pepe Escobar Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Pepe Escobar is an independent geopolitical analyst. He writes for RT, Sputnik and TomDispatch, and is a frequent contributor to websites and radio and TV shows ranging from the US to East Asia. He is the former roving correspondent for Asia (more...)
 

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

 
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

You Want War? Russia is Ready for War

Why Putin is driving Washington nuts

All aboard the New Silk Road(s)

Why Qatar wants to invade Syria

The IMF goes to war in Ukraine

It was Putin's missile?

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend