War

After weeks of propaganda, a majority of Americans support bombing ISIS. The beheading videos helped, which means ISIS believes it will gain by having the US attack it, much like al Qaeda has gained.

The US is lying about moderate Syrian rebels.

"The revelation by a spokesman for the family of Steven Sotloff, the second journalist beheaded by the Islamic State (ISIS), that Sotloff was "sold [to ISIS] for between $25–50,000," by the US-supported "moderate" Free Syrian Army underscores the irony and absurdity of this moment."

In a sane world, that would put an end to the lie. White House disputes as if they can be trusted.

"The "moderates" we have been funding, arming, and training for the past few years couldn’t have come up with a better plan to suck us into the Syrian quagmire. After crying "Wolf!" for so long – what with chemical attacks supposedly inflicted by the infinitely evil Bashar al-Assad, and other tall tales of dubious provenance – the rebels had lost all credibility. What to do? Desperate to increase the decibel level of calls for US military action in the region, they resorted to targeting the US media in hopes that the outrage generated would push the Americans into war."

And it seems to have worked. That's why the Foley beheading video was faked. Maybe Sotloff too. From the Raimondo article:

"As I’ve said in this space from the beginning, ISIS has "Made in USA" stamped all over it – and I don’t mean that just figuratively. Yes, our wrong-headed policies have so alienated the Sunnis that they’ve resorted to supporting the fanatics of ISIS, but it’s worse than that. It is literally true that we armed, trained, and deployed these monsters – what we might call the Islamist Frankenstein Brigade – and now they’ve turned on us with a vengeance."

I don't know if they've turned on us. ISIS is the US government's tool, not an enemy. The US has long been pursing dividing Iraq into three states and overthrowing Assad. ISIS is doing just that. It's just not capable of overthrowing Assad. Now Obama will overthrow Assad for them.

"To begin with, contrary to US government officials and their media echo chamber, ISIS represents little threat to the continental US. If we can’t corral the few dozen Americans who’ve gone over there to fight on behalf of our self-proclaimed allies, the darling rebels, then where have the billions spent on "homeland security" gone? "

Exactly.

"The fact of the matter is that there are no alternatives to Assad aside from ISIS. The kidnapping of Sotloff by the FSA and his quick transfer to the custody of ISIS proves they are operationally inseparable. After all, what is the so-called Free Syrian Army except for a vague collection of militias – Syria has over 1,500 of them! – of dubious loyalties loosely aligned with the radical Islamic Front – which, in turn, is close to Al Nusra, the official Al Qaeda affiliate in Syria. The fine distinctions drawn by deskbound analysts seem to evaporate into nothingness on the ground in Syria. Whatever differences exist between these factions and ISIS is down to turf, not ideology. The President himself told Tom Friedman that the idea of Syrian "moderates" among the rebel fighters is "a fantasy.""

So Obama admits it.

"No, we don’t have to ally with Assad – or the Iranians, for that matter – for them to deal effectively with our monstrous creations. We simply have to stand aside and watch as those states with a real stake in this fight are allowed to take aim and fire. In this case, inaction is the most effective act we can take: by stopping our support for the Syrian Islamists, we cut off a major source of support for ISIS – and leave Assad free to go after them hammer and tongs."

They don't this, proving destroying ISIS is not the goal. It's a tool, not an enemy.

"We are now being told this new war will take precisely three years to be prosecuted successfully – which seems like an extremely odd prognosis indeed. How do they know this – they who never saw ISIS coming? Of course it will take a lot longer than that if we pursue the strategy of fighting ISIS and Assad and doing our best to keep Iran out of it. For even if we do debilitate ISIS, another monster will arise from its ashes, perhaps even uglier and deadlier – and we return to our Sisyphean task."

The idea will be to reduce Syria to the stone age like Libya, leaving the militias to throw rocks at each other.

Amazingly enough, right when it best suits the warmongers, a report claims chlorine gas was used in Syria.

"The report, which was not immediately published in full, does not apportion blame for the chlorine attacks on three villages in northern Syria, OPCW spokesman Michael Luhan said. The OPCW put out only a short statement summarizing the findings."

At a very convenient time, right before Obama's speech tonight.

"Human Rights Watch said in May that it had strong evidence that in April this year Syrian army helicopters dropped bombs containing chlorine on the same rebel-held villages mentioned by the OPCW report."

There's the blame on Assad. As if Assad doesn't have enough regular bombs.

This coming war with ISIS is really a war on Assad to weaken Iran.

The Ukraine coupmeisters never provided evidence Russian troops were fighting in Ukraine, but now they say they've left. The Russians probably had special forces in Ukraine just like the US has special forces in Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Mali and everywhere else.

The ceasefire in Ukraine is only to give NATO time to increase aggression.

"Meanwhile, with European military spending on a downward trajectory over the last couple years, the vast majority of NATO members are not meeting their obligation of spending two percent of GDP on defense."

That's because it's a giant welfare program funded by US taxpayers.

Analysis shows Israel did not destroy so much critical Gaza infrastructure because of rocket launchers as claimed.

"A video released by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in a report on Hamas’s “illegal use of civilian infrastructure” last month shows an attack – obviously by an Israeli drone — on an underground rocket launcher only a few meters away from a mosque causing no damage whatever to the mosque.
These technological changes take away any justification for flattening civilian buildings even if a rocket launch site is nearby. In fact, however, the evidence now available indicates that Hamas launch sites are not that close to hospitals, schools and mosques."

That's not surprising.

"An IDF “declassified report” released Aug. 19, aimed at showing that civilian facilities were serving as military infrastructure for Hamas, includes no evidence of any rocket launches on the grounds of any civilian facility."

That story keeps unraveling too. More on the destruction and aftermath.

"In the wake of the 50-day Israeli assault on Gaza, parts of that tiny strip of land now look, according to photographs, like a moonscape of destruction. At least 10,000 homes were obliterated and thousands more damaged; at least 175 major factories were pummeled into the dust. Its only power plant was destroyed, damaging electricity, water, and sewage systems. Large apartment houses, as well as the ministry of education, schools, and other sites, were hit and sometimes reduced to so much rubble. It was all part of a massive Israeli assault on Hamas, several of whose senior leaders were assassinated, but also on the Palestinian population, involving what looked like collective punishment for its support of that organization or simply living in proximity to it."

And voting for it and supplying it. It seems the western goal in the Middle East really is to bomb every country other than Saudi Arabia, UAE, Dubai - the dollar allies - back to the stone age.

"And indeed, with almost no hope of rebuilding much of their world any time soon, you might think that Palestinians would hold the Hamas leadership at least somewhat responsible for the destruction that has rained down, as assumedly the Israelis wanted them to. But a recent poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR), begun in the last day before the ceasefire took hold, and carried out, in part, amid the rubble that is now Gaza, suggests otherwise. It finds that Palestinian opinion couldn’t be clearer. Support hasn’t been this high for Hamas since 2006, when it won a fair and square democratic election. If a presidential vote were held today, the pollsters of PSR discovered, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh would beat Fatah’s Mahmoud Abbas hands down. Here are just a few of the findings: “79% [of Palestinians] believe that Hamas has won the Gaza War; 3% believe Israel came out the winner; and 17% believe the two sides were losers… If new presidential elections are held today and only two [candidates] were nominated, Haniyeh, for the first time since we have started asking about his popularity about eight years ago, would receive a majority of 61% and Abbas would receive 32%. [The] vote for Haniyeh stands at 53% in the Gaza Strip and 66% in the West Bank."

The people in the West Bank who didn't get bombed support Hamas more than the Gazans who did.

"As historically has often been the case, massive bombings and other assaults do not destroy the support of populations for movements or governments, but tend to solidify it. In other words, Israeli policy is reducing civilized life for Palestinians in a major way and yet increasing the urge both to fight on and the desire for revenge." 

Yep.