[Marxism] Fwd: bellingcat - Examining the Turkish Sarin “Recipe”
mkaradjis at gmail.com
Thu Oct 29 00:27:10 MDT 2015
From: Mark Richey via Marxism
> I don't know who launched the Ghouta attacks
Really? So the fact that around 8-10 different areas of outer Damascus
(working class suburbs, held by the rebels) were hit, some separated
from each other by areas not hit, all in a radius from a launching point
where there happens to be the regime, and with the need to have the high
capacity launching equipment, which is only in the hands of the regime,
and you have no idea who launched the attacks?
> But there is certainly doubt about the US version, with both Hersh and
> now two Turkish deputies making the same allegations independently.
What is the "US version"? Or do you mean the version that has been
established by the UN investigation?
> Why would the Assad regime have launched such attacks, militarily
> ineffective as they were, just weeks after Obama publicly stated, and
> trumpeted in the lackey media, that chemical weapons would be his
> 'red line' to destroy the Assad regime's military? Why would Assad
> play into Obama's hands in this way? ... Assad would have had to have
> been a FOOL, to put it mildly
Assad is no fool, it is all these western leftists who are FOOLish
enough to believe their own rhetoric, and then when reality blows up in
their faces, they still can't see it. I guess Assad just understood
class politics better than you. He was not fooled by some "red line"
like you were. Assad understood perfectly well the US did not want to
get rid of his regime, he played his cards perfectly. As a result, the
"line" became clearer: while there were to be no consequences for the
massive sarin attack on the Damascus working classes, there was enough
of a rah-rah to establish that *everything else* other than sarin was
considered OK, especially after the Obama-Putin-Netanyahu plan for
removing the chemical weapons was enacted. So the genocide with every
conceivable kind of conventional WMD was stepped up dramatically after
September 2013, and starvation sieges added.
> At the time, the Assad military was at least holding its own. His
> position was far from desperate, as we know, much better than now.
And people of course like to believe whatever fits their theory. This
statement has no meaning at all. Assad's position has continually ebbed
and flowed, and has only begun to get more desperate since around April
2015 when the rebels seized Idlib city and then went on to score a bunch
of victories north and south. None of that had anything to with the US
even then; but in any case what has it got to do with the sarin massacre
one and a half years earlier? Perhaps you imagine that the US did in
fact attack Assad after all in September 2013, thus weakening his
position? Shed some light on these unknown facts. Assad's military
position *greatly improved* in the period following September 2013: the
imperialist west began turning all its attention towards the Islamic
State, while Iran and its sectarian international began pouring
thousands of troops into Syria to bolster Assad at the very time that
the US opened the new round of nuclear negotiations with Iran, and began
literally *fighting together with pro-Iranian forces* in neighbouring
Iraq to bolster the Assad-allied government there. All very much in the
> And given The Tonkin Gulf, the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, the
> overthrow of Mossadegh, the lies about Khadafy's massacres, etc. etc.
> etc., doesn't the adage apply: 'fool me once, shame on you. Fool me
> twice, shame on me?'
Hang on, didn't something major happen after Tonkin Gulf, Iraqi WD etc
etc? Didn't nothing happen after Assad's sarin attack? So once again,
why do people like you keep trying to force reality to fit your theories
no matter how much it refuses to fit?
But then again, hardly surprising: a full year after the US began
bombing Anyone But Assad (ABA) in Syria, some still imagine the US is
"intervening against Assad in Syria" ...
More information about the Marxism