War on Syria: so called ‘use of chemical weapons’ as a pretext


‘Britain joins chorus of concerns over Syria’s chemical weapons’

December 8th, 2012

British Foreign Secretary William Hague cited evidence that the Syrian regime could use its stockpile of chemical weapons against rebels battling government forces.

“We are extremely concerned,” Hague told reporters on the sidelines of a regional security conference Saturday.

Hague said that there was no simple “red line” which could trigger international military action, but that Britain and its allies had “contingency plans concerning chemical weapons” which he declined to disclose.

He noted several “dangerous scenarios” for the use of chemical weapons. One would be terror groups obtaining such munitions.

Recent U.S. intelligence suggests the Syrian government has started mixing chemical weapons compounds and loading them into bombs, though the bombs are not being moved to any delivery devices, CNN’s Barbara Starr reported.

The U.S. military continues to revise its plans for a potential strike against Syria over chemical weapons.

President Barack Obama said this summer that any effort to move or use chemical weapons was a red line.

“A red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of weapons moving around or being utilized,” Obama said. He prefaced that remark by saying the concern was the weapons falling into the hands of others.

With the new intelligence, administration warnings have focused not on moving, but on using the weapons.

As diplomats continue to seek a more peaceful resolution, international powers are weighing their military options.

The Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee on Friday warned the Obama administration it must act more urgently to prevent Syria’s government from using chemical weapons.

Rep. Mike Rogers told attendees at the IISS Manama Dialogue conference in Bahrain that the United States has a moral obligation to use military intervention if there is concrete proof chemical weapons are loaded and being readied for launch.

“I don’t see any other way of making sure those weapons aren’t used,” he said. “As a coalition, we will have the moral obligation (to intervene) if we can say with even a moderate degree of certainty that these weapons have been prepared and are put in an arsenal for use.”

On Friday, UN chief Ban Ki-moon said any use of chemical weapons by President Bashar al-Assad’s regime against the rebels would be an “outrageous crime.”

Although Hague said the option of international military intervention had not been ruled out, Britain was working along with the United States and others to support a peaceful transition.

Hague acknowledged that rebel fighters were “receiving arms and making progress on the ground,” but said Britain’s policy was not to send arms to the Middle East.

“We will continue to give them strong practical assistance; communication equipment and humanitarian assistance,” he said, adding that he hoped the international community would increase its support to the new Syrian opposition coalition during the Friends of Syria meeting in Marrakesh next week.


Photo: (L to R) NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, British Foreign Secretary William Hague and British Prime Minister David Cameron talk the opening meeting of the Libya Conference. A meeting of international allies to discuss the next steps for Libya on March 29, 2011 in London, England. A summit consisting of 40 governments and international bodies is being held in London to improve ties with the Libyan National Council, the umbrella group representing rebel Libyan forces, and in preparation for the intended aim of ending of the reign of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

In June 2012, Reuters suggested that the prospect of British special forces entering Syria on the ground is growing, following unconfirmed reports from an Israeli website that SAS Commandos were conducting covert operations within Syrian territory, operating from Turkey on 26 June 2012.


About kruitvat

I am working for the Belgian human rights association 'Werkgroep Morkhoven' which revealed the Zandvoort childporn case (88.539 victims). The case was covered up by the authorities. During the past years I have been really shocked by the way the rich countries of the western empire want to rule the world. One of my blogs: «Latest News Syria» (WordPress)/ Je travaille pour le 'Werkgroep Morkhoven', un groupe d'action qui a révélé le réseau pornographique d'enfants 'Zandvoort' (88.539 victims). Cette affaire a été couverte par les autorités. Au cours des dernières années, j'ai été vraiment choqué par la façon dont l'Occident et les pays riches veulent gouverner le monde. Un de mes blogs: «Latest News Syria» (WordPress)/ Ik werk voor de Werkgroep Morkhoven die destijds de kinderpornozaak Zandvoort onthulde (88.539 slachtoffers). Deze zaak werd door de overheid op een misdadige manier toegedekt. Gedurende de voorbije jaren was ik werkelijke geschokt door de manier waarop het rijke westen de wereld wil overheersen. Bezoek onze blog «Latest News Syria» (WordPress) ------- Photo: victims of the NATO-bombings on the Chinese embassy in Yougoslavia
This entry was posted in Geen categorie and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to War on Syria: so called ‘use of chemical weapons’ as a pretext

  1. kruitvat says:

    Pretext for a new war: Obama lies about Syrian chemical weapons
    By Peter Symonds

    14 June 2013
    In a statement issued Thursday, the Obama administration has declared that the Syrian regime of President Bashar al-Assad has violated “international norms” by using chemical weapons on multiple occasions over the past year. The claim is a transparent lie that will be used by the US and its European allies, Britain and France, as the pretext for arming their right-wing Islamist proxies and for military intervention.

    The WSWS needs your support!
    Your donations go directly to financing, improving, and expanding the web site.
    The allegations are no more credible than the lies about weapons of mass destruction that were used to justify the criminal US-led invasion of Iraq. The statement by Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes claimed that US intelligence agencies had “high confidence” in their assessment, but acknowledged that physiological evidence of sarin gas exposure did “not tell us how or where the individuals were exposed or who was responsible.”
    The US claims simply ignored evidence that anti-Assad militias had chemical weapons and may have used them. Late last month, the Turkish press reported that the Al Qaeda-linked Al Nusra Front, which forms the military backbone of the anti-Assad forces, had obtained chemical weapons and was planning to use them (see: “Syrian opposition fighters arrested with chemical weapons”). The Syrian “rebels”, which have been pressing for Western military assistance, have far more to gain than the Assad regime by staging small-scale chemical weapons attacks.
    Rhodes alluded to the real purpose of the chemical weapons allegations, saying that Obama had declared they were “a red line” that “would change his calculus and it has.” He acknowledged that Obama had “authorised the expansion of our assistance to the [opposition] Supreme Military Council” and would be “consulting with Congress… in the coming weeks.” He warned that “these efforts will increase going forward.”
    The timing of the announcement is no accident. It comes as the Obama administration has been immersed in emergency discussions this week on how to stem the recent defeats inflicted on the anti-Assad militias. The Syrian army, reinforced by fighters from Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shiite militia movement, took back the strategic town of Qusayr on June 5, cutting a crucial supply line from Lebanon for the so-called rebels.
    Syrian government forces are reportedly now massing in the north for a drive to seize Syria’s largest city of Aleppo. The Wall Street Journal reported that General Salim Idris, the titular commander of the “Free Syrian Army,” has issued desperate appeals to the US, France and Britain for “anti-tank missiles, anti-aircraft weapons and hundreds of thousands of ammunition rounds.” According to a US official involved in talks with Idris, he warned that “he cannot hold on to Aleppo without these weapons.”
    The disintegration of anti-Assad forces is not primarily due to the lack of weapons. Rather, working people are increasingly hostile to sectarian atrocities carried out by the right-wing Islamists that dominate the Syrian opposition forces. Even the British-based Economist acknowledged: “Many Syrians originally sympathetic to the rebels have been horrified by events such as the reported execution on June 9 of a 14-year-old boy by jihadists in Aleppo, allegedly for insulting the Prophet Muhammad.”
    The US is already engaged in talks with France and Britain over the direct supply of arms to Syrian opposition forces and plans to press for further assistance at next week’s G8 meeting. Washington has already been colluding with Middle Eastern allies—Qatar and Saudi Arabia—to supply large quantities of arms and ammunition to the Syrian “rebels.”
    French officials plan to meet with General Idris this weekend to assess his military needs. The European Union lifted its embargo on supplying military hardware to anti-Assad militias on the condition that shipments not start until August 1. Speaking to the Wall Street Journal, French officials dismissed the timetable as a “gentlemen’s agreement” that was not legally binding.
    The Journal also revealed advanced US plans to impose a no-fly zone inside areas of Syria adjacent to Jordan. The Pentagon has already moved Patriot anti-missile systems, F-16 fighters and V-22 tilt rotor Osprey aircraft, used to rescue downed pilots, to Jordan under the guise of participating in joint war games. The US has also stationed a big-deck amphibious warship with a Marine Expeditionary Unit in the Jordanian port of Aqaba.
    According to the Journal, the Pentagon plan involves “creating an area to train and equip rebel forces” inside Syria and “a no-fly zone stretching up to 25 miles into Syria which would be enforced using aircraft flown from Jordanian bases.” The Jordanian regime has already agreed to the use of its military bases and “it would take about a month” to implement.
    As was the case in the US-NATO war to topple Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, the imposition of a no-fly zone would simply be the pretext for an escalation into a full-scale air war in support of anti-Assad militias on the ground. Given the far more substantial character of the Syrian military, it could also be a prelude to the intervention of US-led ground forces.
    Influential Republican Senator John McCain has already been pressing for a far more aggressive American intervention into Syria, including supplying weapons and airstrikes. In a clear signal that the Democrats and the Obama administration are rapidly moving to do so, former President Bill Clinton was reported in the New York Times yesterday as saying in meeting with McCain that it had been a “big mistake” not to directly intervene, and, gesturing towards the senator, added: “I agree with you about this.” The Obama administration’s bogus claims about chemical weapons use have now provided the pretext.
    Once again the Obama administration is dragging the American people into a reactionary, neo-colonial war on the basis of lies. Washington’s determination to oust President Assad is no more about bringing “democracy” to Syria than the US invasion of Iraq was to end the supposed WMD threat posed by Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
    US imperialism is seeking to establish its untrammelled domination in the oil-rich Middle East at the expense of its rivals and regards both Syria and its ally Iran as obstacles to its interests. A reckless escalation of the Syrian conflict by the US and its European allies raises the very real danger of drawing in other major powers such as Russia into a broader regional and international war.


  2. kruitvat says:

    West seeks to use chemical weapons excuse to intervene in Syria: Makki

    Jun 6, 2013

    Press TV has conducted an interview with Danny Makki, a political commentator from London, to share his views on the victory of the Syrian Arab Army in retaking the strategic city of al-Qusayr from armed terrorists.

    What follows is a rough transcription of the interview.

    Press TV: Finally, the battle for al-Qusayr is won. It is a big win for the Syrian Army and also the government.

    Tell us the significance of this win for both sides, not only for the army but also for President Assad and his government.

    Makki: First of all, I am the co-founder of the Syrian Youth in Britain and not a member of the Syrian Social Club.

    As to the concept of al-Qusayr and the huge military victory, which is gained today, it has, essentially, shown the Western-backed armed groups inside of Syria and some of the regional Arab countries who are supporting them, that the real forces inside of Syria who are calling the shots on a day to day basis are the Syrian Arab Army.

    The fact that al-Qusayr, which was essentially a hub of the armed opposition in Homs and one of the most restive areas militarily, in terms of an opposition sense, inside of Syria, this area has been, essentially, the hub of funneling militants from Lebanon into Syria and essentially caused the third city of Syria, Homs, third largest city of Homs to become, essentially, a hub for the armed opposition and an area where the armed opposition could flourish and conduct terrorist activities.

    The fact that al-Qusayr, which is of an enormously strategic significance, has been taken over by the Syrian army after approximately a year of being under the control of the armed groups, essentially, does show that there is a changing situation on the ground, militarily, after the Syrian Arab army changed its tactic from using more unconventional methods of warfare, using experts being trained from Iran and Hezbollah and engaging in asymmetric warfare. This has, essentially, allowed and paved the way for the Syrian Army to conduct a more neater, tidier and quicker military operations on the ground without having the excess of a heavily weighted military with full armaments.

    The fact that al-Qusayr has been the capital of the insurgency in Homs and in central Syria and the fact that al-Qusayr has fallen to the Syrian Arab Army suggests a new tactic and a new phase in the Syria crisis where the Syrian Army will probably embark now on more intensive military operations to regain large areas of territories taken over by the rebels.

    Militants in al-Qusayr were numbered to be up to 15,000 or even more, and the fact that they have been defeated in this way, in such a ruthless manner, by the Syrian Army suggests that the Syrian Army has reached a level of stability and has gained all of its significant momentum, which now acts as a platform for it, to conduct numerous military operations in other areas where there are foreign-backed jihadists and militants.

    Press TV: Danny Makki I saw you shaking your head on a couple of occasions sir, go ahead.

    Makki: First of all, the concept that 50 percent of the Syrian territory is owned by the Free Syrian Army is completely ludicrous.

    Even the biggest Western propaganda stations have stated that the Free Syrian Army do not control the majority and essentially within the opposition rank there are big differences between the extremists and the so-called Free Syrian Army, who are essentially non-moderate extremists but are using the façade of the name of the Free Syrian Army.

    The Syrian army has not just been victorious in al-Qusayr, this has essentially been a chain of events which has been linked to the change of strategy which has been enforced inside of the Syrian Army. This has allowed the Syrian government and the government forces to embark on a new strategic plan, which is to regain large areas of territory controlled by the rebel forces.

    It is not just al-Qusayr, it is Daraa, Sheikh Maqsoud in Aleppo, other areas. We discuss Homs, 80 percent of Homs which was deemed as the capital of the insurgency, Homs, 80 percent of Homs is now under the Syrian government’s control.

    How can we state that this Free Syrian Army controls all of these lands when they are losing ground and men on a day to day basis? We also have to remember that the backbone of the Syrian opposition…

    Press TV: Danny Makki go ahead.

    First of all this is very incorrect that Bashar al-Assad is entering villages. It is not an issue of self-defense. The rebel forces are not innocent civilians holding olive branches. The rebel forces are, essentially, internationally blacklisted Jihadist groups who have a significant funding and significant sophisticated weapons, who have been able to embark on a brutal Islamic insurgency backed by the regional Arab countries.

    These are not civilians who are unarmed. These are extremist radicalized movements, who have a military basis.

    Essentially, the narrative which I am discussing in terms of the Syrian army and their advances is not justified by me, it is essentially a narrative which is being driven by the Western media outlets, when the New York Times and the Washington Post state that the civil war…, they call it the civil war though it is a proxy war and not a civil war; that the proxy war inside of Syria is taking a turn towards the government side because there is a significant change in tactics, that the strategy of the Syrian government and the Syrian army has been changing according to time.

    A guerrilla warfare is very, very different from a conventional military war. A conventional war consists of countries waging war against countries; a guerilla war, which is essentially funded and armed and aided by regional Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey by funneling of arms and weapons to extremist militias, is not the same as a conventional war.

    You are fighting a non-asymmetric warfare where the Syrian army, essentially, cannot use conventional means and methods.

    The legitimate tactics of the military are no longer useful. You need to use unconventional methods. The Syrian army has taken time to adapt to these unconventional methods and the new form of guerrilla warfare which is why it is using groups that have special forces as opposed to military.

    When The Guardian states that the Syrian army is embarking on different offensives all over Syria and that the rebels are losing territory, it is not me stating that, it is the Western media stating this.

    (In response to Alon Ben-Meir): Conventional warfare not conventional weapons; there is a significant difference between the both. Against a conventional Army not a militia funded by America and Britain and France and the regional Arab countries.

    Read more on: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/06/06/307478/west-after-excuse-to-intervene-in-syria/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s