War

Apparently the head of the UN is not on board with a new war in Syria. Or maybe he's just going through the motions.

The US tried to abort the UN investigation of the supposed chemical weapons attack, lending credence to the theory the attack was already planned, and the chemical weapons claims was a false flag to justify it. Maybe this is why Ban is pushing for a diplomatic solution.

"Kerry asserted Monday that he had warned Syrian Foreign Minister Moallem last Thursday that Syria had to give the UN team immediate access to the site and stop the shelling there, which he said was “systematically destroying evidence”. He called the Syria-U.N. deal to allow investigators unrestricted access “too late to be credible”.
After the deal was announced on Sunday, however, Kerry pushed Ban in a phone call to call off the investigation completely."

The US expected to attack before a deal was could be completed.

"The Wall Street Journal reported the pressure on Ban without mentioning Kerry by name. It said unnamed “US officials” had told the secretary-general that it was “no longer safe for the inspectors to remain in Syria and that their mission was pointless.”
But Ban, who has generally been regarded as a pliable instrument of US policy, refused to withdraw the UN team and instead “stood firm on principle”, the Journal reported. He was said to have ordered the UN inspectors to “continue their work”."

That's interesting.

"“[W]e don’t at this point have confidence that the UN can conduct a credible inquiry into what happened,” said Harf, “We are concerned that the Syrian regime will use this as a delay tactic to continue shelling and destroying evidence in the area.”
Harf did not explain, however, how the Syrian agreement to a ceasefire and unimpeded access to the area of the alleged chemical weapons attack could represent a continuation in “shelling and destroying evidence”."

That's funny. What isn't funny is the US is using naked lies as cover to kill many Syrians.

"Haq sharply disagreed with the argument made by Kerry and the State Department that it was too late to obtain evidence of the nature of the Aug. 21 incident.
“Sarin can be detected for up to months after its use,” he said."

More US lies. This also explains why the failure of people treating people and handling dead bodies to wear protection is a sign that no chemical weapons were used. Hagel joins Kerry in spouting the party line, though in less absolute terms. Obama joins the choir.

Repercussions of war with Syria.

It turns out the rebels are delaying the US team.

"The UN inspection team in Syria has been "delayed" due to a dispute among the rebels, who could not or would not guarantee the team’s safety. While the Assad government has granted them access, the suburb of Damascus where the alleged chemical attacks occurred is in rebel-controlled territory."

Another lie exposed.

"the US has "signals intelligence" supposedly proving the Syrian air force high command launched unspecified chemical weapons against rebel forces.
See, now aren’t you glad we have a National Security Agency with the ability to spy on anyone in the world?
Well, then, can we see the evidence? Clemons cited "signals intelligence." This is supposedly the source of the administration’s certainty that this time confirmed liars are telling the truth. Declassify the intercepted emails showing Assad telling his commander to gas ‘em all. Let’s hear the phone conversations played out in public:"

Like that will ever happen.

"It’s hard not to laugh when our Secretary of State cites a YouTube video as a clear and sufficient reason to take this nation into war:
"I went back and I watched the videos, the videos that anybody can watch in the social media, and I watched them one more gut-wrenching time."
Forget the UN inspectors, forget the scientists and the forensic experts poring over the evidence, forget a vote in Congress and never mind that only nine percent of the American people support this reckless policy – because he’s seen the videos. In the social media!"

I thought Democrats know how to use the internet to their advantage. Apparently they can only reach 9 percent of the public. Those people probably all work for the federal government.

Congress cannot veto another Obama war.

"Firing a few shells of gas at Syrian civilians was not going to advance Assad’s cause but, rather, was certain to bring universal condemnation on his regime and deal cards to the War Party which wants a U.S. war on Syria as the back door to war on Iran."

"The basic question that needs to be asked about this horrific attack on civilians, which appears to be gas related, is: Cui bono?
To whose benefit would the use of nerve gas on Syrian women and children redound? Certainly not Assad’s, as we can see from the furor and threats against him that the use of gas has produced.
The sole beneficiary of this apparent use of poison gas against civilians in rebel-held territory appears to be the rebels, who have long sought to have us come in and fight their war."

Everybody knows this supposed attack is a lie, but our rulers don't care.

British PM caved to demands on a Parliament vote before attacking Syria. The vote won't happen until next week. US Congressmen demand Obama obtain congressional approval before an attack. That'll never happen. Congress is on vacation, so all this might have been timed to coincide with that. Britain to wait on UN report. A little bit of sanity seems to be rising up.

Self-interested Israeli sources supposedly captured signals ordering the chemical attack.

"The Israelis are selling Obama a bill of goods that they have intercepted Syrian government telephone conversations admitting chemical weapons use."

But NSA didn't? Claim US intelligence intercepted the communication, but this article greatly exaggerates the number of casualties.

Even if the Syrian government used chemical weapons, the US should not start a war because of it.

Cruise missiles are unlikely to be successful at destroying Syria's chemical weapons stockpiles, if any exist.

Russia blocks UN resolution.

Without Congress declaring war or a UN, or NATO edict, how will Obama legally justify starting a war with Syria? They're considering using Kosovo as a precedent, but that war was illegal too.

"If understood correctly, the Kosovo war was indeed a precedent that should act as a warning signal.
How many times can the United States use a false alarm to start an aggressive war?  Non-existent “genocide” in Kosovo and Libya, non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and now what looks to much of the world like a “false flag” chemical weapons attack in Syria.
The United States habitually announces the presence of a desired casus belli, dismissing demands for concrete evidence."

They'll get away with it again.

Israeli run on gas masks. I think that happened before the US attacked Iraq too.

Motives for the US destabilizing country after country.

Criticism of US policy on Syria and Egypt. There's plenty of that to go around.

Lest we forget the consequences of starting wars, 99 killed and 266 wounded in Iraq.
US sends traumatized troops back into war.

"The Washington Post reported last week that soldiers with six and seven tours behind them are still being deployed to Afghanistan, even after being diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The military knows this, and redeploys them anyway, as Post reporter Kevin Sieff so reasonably explained it."

That's evil compounded on top of evil.

Fort Hood shooter sentenced to death.