Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
March 24, 2013

More Disarray In The Syrian Opposition

Moaz Khatib, who was installed by Hillary Clinton to head the Syrian opposition, just resigned. In his resigning statement he explained:
[T]there is a bitter reality [to] tame the Syrian people and besiege their revolution and attempting to control it.
Those who are willing to obey [outside powers] will be supported, those who disobey will offered nothing but hunger and siege. We will not beg for help from anyone.

If there is a decision to execute us as Syrians, then let’s die as we want.
Our message to everyone is that Syrians decisions will be taken by Syrians, and Syrians only.

I had promised our people, and vowed to God on that, to resign if the situation reaches certain red lines. Today, I honour my promise and I resign from the National Coalition to be able to work with freedom not available through official institutions.

Khatib is clearly pissed that Qatar installed the U.S. citizen and Muslim Brotherhood favorite Ghassan Hitto as prime minister of a Syrian exile government.

While Khatib had offered talks with the Syrian government Hitto has rejected them.

There is more disarray. As predicted the so called Free Syrian Army has also rejected the premiership of Hitto saying that his nomination was not consensus based. Meanwhile Iraq, Algeria and Lebanon vetoed Qatar's attempt to give the Syrian seat in the Arab League to the exile government.

Qatar's plans to install the Muslim Brotherhood as the new authority in Syria are clearly not welcome.

Secretary of State Kerry is on a visit in Iraq where he rather comically "warned" Prime Minister Maliki to stop flights from Iran over Iraq to Syria. Maliki will of course not do so.

Kerry also said that U.S. lawmakers and the American people are watching what Iraq is doing and "wondering how it is a partner."
Maliki, and likely all Iraqis, will show Kerry the finger over such statements.

What is Kerry threatening to do? Invade Iraq again? Arrange for a coup by some Sunni strongman? Hold back weapon sales to Iraq so Moscow can make the big deals with an again rich Iraq?

Kerry clearly has no leverage over Iraq. Maliki will of cause help Syria wherever he can. It is necessary for his own survival. Is Kerry too stupid to see that?

Posted by b on March 24, 2013 at 14:01 UTC | Permalink


I will take the Khatib resignation, and Maliki's stance as good news. Could it be the forces of greed may have a setback? One can only hope so. As for John Kerry, screw'em. He's a sell out.

Posted by: ben | Mar 24 2013 14:57 utc | 1

The cats already out of the bag..No use wagging a dead horse back into existence..This Al Khatib guy is a dead man walking. Seems the Qataris wants his head and Assad also wants his head. He served his usefulness and got his 15-mins of fame..Now he's of no use.

This had to happen at some point. Turkey also couldn't hide their stupid posturing with Israel for much longer and had to "reconcile" with some fake apology from Bibi. Even Bibi himself admitted they had to apologize due to Syria. So now all these jihadis will realize all the noise Erdogan's been making was for nothing. They've been fighting . Seems after the jihadis haven't been able to deliver the good, the main elements behind the "revolution" are stepping in to try their luck.

So what do we get, Israel out to generate a pretext..They fire a missile on a Syrian army post, hoping for Syria to respond so they can call in the NATO big boys - yeah, "we have to protect the innocent Israelis from the murderous regime blah blah blah".

It won't wash..In the mean time, the US and their allies have empowered Al-Qaeda and radical groups all over the region that will eventually turn on the same US allies.

Posted by: Ali | Mar 24 2013 15:10 utc | 2

Kerry has an impressive bearing but has never displayed many signs of intelligence. It seems he is even dumber than one feared. He appears to believe he is the proconsul of the world's sole imperial power -- a position the US once occupied, which Bush Jr frittered away with his stupid wars.

Posted by: FB Ali | Mar 24 2013 15:44 utc | 3

Leon “Judas” Trotsky was the father of "regime change", his techniques of using deceptions to overthrow the Bolsheviks has been copied by muslim brotherhood

Posted by: clubofrome | Mar 24 2013 16:54 utc | 4

'Kerry also said that U.S. lawmakers and the American people are watching what Iraq is doing and "wondering how it is a partner."'

what role has the american people? none! this is an american big lie to make it seeem a party dictatorship is a democracy

Posted by: brian | Mar 24 2013 16:56 utc | 5

@5 Maliki knows the American people are watching TV and eating pizza. A few of them may be wondering why their tax dollars are being squandered in Iraq.

Posted by: dh | Mar 24 2013 17:02 utc | 6

Obama in the Middle East

Make sense? To someone in the White House it does – presumably. As for us mere mortals not privy to the Higher Wisdom who must rely on logic alone….well….

Posted by: somebody | Mar 24 2013 17:14 utc | 7

I was a fan of Erdogon and the rise of Turkey. For the last 18 months he's gotten mired in this Syrian debacle. Having ties to Algeria, I wondered what Turkey, the last empire to control the Mediterranean might mean for the region. I was actually hopeful. What has emerged may be more hopeful still. Turkey and Erdogon seem firmly entrenched in NATO now. Algeria seems to have parleyed their position into real independence.

Algeria being the number two supplier of natural gas is in a wonderful position. Russia is playing playing the hardball on NG, and Algeria seems to be picking their battles wisely. Algeria isn't a democratic paradise, but Boutiflika is popularly supported. (perhaps it's a product of fatigue from fighting in their recent past; those scars are literal and still can be seen about the country) It's an interesting dynamic and one that must be monitored. I don't offer unconditional support for anyone or anything; but thus far, Algeria has acquitted herself well.

Posted by: scottindallas | Mar 24 2013 17:25 utc | 8

'According to reporters at a picture-taking session at the start of Kerry's talks with Maliki, the U.S. diplomat appeared to joke that Hillary Clinton, his predecessor, had said Iraq would do whatever Washington asked.

"The Secretary told me that you're going to do everything that I say," Kerry said, according to the reporters.

"We won't do it," Maliki, also joking, replied, the reporters said.'

Yuk yuk. What an imbecile Kerry is.

Posted by: guest | Mar 24 2013 17:27 utc | 9

The last week has seen alot of movement, by various sides, linked to the Syria tragedy. The 3 big regional developments:

1) Lebanon's Prime Minister Najib Mikati's resigning.
2) Turkey making peace with both Israel and the Kurdish PKK.
3) Obama's trip to Israel and Jordan.

All seem to be gearing towards further destablising of the Resistance Axis.

- Najib Mikati was Lebanon's Prime Minister allied to the Hezbollah-led March 8 faction. According to Angry Arab he "was a lackey of Syrian intelligence for years and Syrian intelligeance introduced him into the Lebanese political scene". Angry Arab concludes that "Finally, the resignation of Miqati is a Saudi decision, and was delivered by Prince Bandar through Jumblat." My theory is that this move was made to prevent the Lebanese Army from cracking down to hard of FSA rebels in Lebanese territory and patrolling the border to agressively.

- Obviously Turkey making peace with both the PKK and Israel in one week means they want to focus on the Syrian battlefield without having to worry about Kurdish raids into Turkey or bringing discord into the Anti-Assad alliance (which has both Turkey and Israel). However the political cost is gonna be high for Erdogan. Doubt much Turkish people will like his move closer to Israel.

- On Obama's visit to Israel/Palestine and Jordan Al Akhbar had this to say:

The real results of US President Barack Obama’s visit to Palestine and Jordan. While urging the Palestinian president to keep praying, he was firm with the king of Jordan about the need to fall fully in line with the anti-Assad camp. More importantly, Obama obliged Israel’s leaders to keep quiet, refrain from action against either Iran, Syria, or Hezbollah.

Sounds like the King of Jordan is smart enough to be worried about blowback from sending thousands of Jordanians to fight Assad and might be getting cold feet.

Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Mar 24 2013 17:34 utc | 10

Israeli media give more proof on who used chemical warfare in Syria. Rebels. We will of course not hear this in the western media.

Posted by: Anonymous | Mar 24 2013 17:41 utc | 11

Nice work, again, b.
Khatib's resignation is a big defeat for the Yankees - "huge" as a Pretty Woman once retorted to some deluded daydreamers in a movie. Appointing that clueless jackass Kerry as Secretary of State was the prelude to an unbroken chain of diplomatic disasters and defeats for the US of A.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Mar 24 2013 17:44 utc | 12

Nice work, again, b.
Khatib's resignation is a big defeat for the Yankees - "huge" as a Pretty Woman once retorted to some deluded daydreamers in a movie. Appointing that clueless jackass Kerry as Secretary of State was the prelude to an unbroken chain of diplomatic disasters and defeats for the US of A.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Mar 24 2013 17:44 utc | 13

In addition to Kerry's thundering incompetence, you have those people who pop up on the Sunday talk shows. Tom Friedman must have spent all 30 seconds coming up with his following analysis. I'm guessing it must have been the amount of time between depositing his paycheck into the atm and having the receipt come out.

"The Syrian problem is the problem from hell," Friedman said. "You've got this Assad regime that has been ruling Syria since the late '60s, that family. And it does still have support. ...At the same time you have this rebellion against this regime.

"The rebellion has three different streams: There's one stream that wants to truly be citizens, people we would really identify with - a Syria where people have rights and responsibilities," he continued. "There is another group that wants Syria to be more sectarian; they want Sunni Muslims in charge. Let's remember, the biggest supporters of the Syrian rebellion are Saudi Arab and Qatar. These are two fundamentalist monarchies. Do you really think they're there for democracy? Then you have a third group that wants Syria to be more Islamist. So, as the congressman said, we do not have a unified opposition."

Posted by: guest | Mar 24 2013 17:58 utc | 14

I welcome Khatib's resignation, but only in the sense that it creates the impression of a chaotic opposition. I fear that it is bad news in terms of hoping for a peaceful resolution any time soon, if at all.

Khatib, to his credit, offered peace talks. Hitto's first action was to reject any notion of talks unless his demands were met.

But what about the jostling going on in the background..

Two articles were posted on an earlier post, which seemingly contradict each other.

One from b , and another from bevin

Is the US behind the appointment of Hitto, or will his appointment actually undermine their agreement with Russia

that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad would stay on during the transition process in return for the Russians accepting a transitional government with absolute powers [indicating] that the political option was now being favored over the military option

Perhaps both are true. Perhaps the US has now decided to renege on any agreement by supporting Hitto - a zionist friendly, right-wing Texan Islamist - and setting up their end game.

Interesting, too, the disagreement between Qatar and the Saudi's. I've noticed a couple of times where the Syrian Government has stopped short of blaming KSA for its troubles, but quick to play the blame game with Qatar. The most recent being the chemical attack near Aleppo.

Qatar isn't holding back. Maybe it's the gas

Either way, what a bloody mess.

Posted by: Pat Bateman | Mar 24 2013 18:41 utc | 15

Just wrote this about Syria:

Syrian Insurgent Provocations: Going For Endgame?.

Posted by: Daniel McAdams | Mar 24 2013 20:27 utc | 16

Welcome, Daniel McAdams, from a fellow Ron Paul supporter and Lew Rockwell reader.

My guess is that the US, along with it's junior partners and minions, (England and France, Qatar, KSA, Turkey) are in a position of 'hard to move forward but cannot turn back.' So long as Russia and China are Behind Syria, they don't want to launch an actual campaign. And yet they have invested so much credibility into "Assad must fall" that they can't just give up. Also, US/NATO support for Wahhabism and Al Qaida has been more exposed than ever before.

And so they will literally try everything except cutting their losses. As for an outright attack, it's possible but very risky for them. If the PKK is truly out of the way, they might convince Turkey to do some border incursions.

Posted by: Lysander | Mar 24 2013 21:13 utc | 17

It's a good article, Daniel but, as Lysander points out, a meaningful analysis of the Syria situation has to include the Russia/China factor.
If there's an End-game in the wind it is far more likely to be the beginning of the end of US-NATO bluster and bullying than the "end" of the Assad 'regime'.
Xi Jinping (hawkish by reputation) didn't waste any time getting together with Medvedev to discuss a joint strategy toward certain un-named global mischief-maker(s). The Yankees are spread very thin at present. It's a VERY bad time for them to make Russia and Chine any more angry and exasperated than they are already.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Mar 24 2013 21:55 utc | 18

Thanks for the welcome. I love MoA. I think you both are ignoring historical precedent when it comes to Russia and China. I remember hearing the same arguments in 1998-1999 -- oh just wait! The Russians are behind the Serbs! No way would NATO attack! Sorry, I am not buying that Russia will stand behind its "ally." I leave Russia and China out of it for now. They have given little reason to factor them in. I am ready to be proven wrong on this, but looking back Georgia was an anomaly for a variety of reasons.

Posted by: Daniel McAdams | Mar 24 2013 23:10 utc | 19

Pat Bateman #15

That last link of yours makes sense! I knew about Qatar's pushing on the whole Muslim Brotherhood thing and the Iran-Syria-Turkey pipeline but not the Qatari pipeline. Seems like a very good reason to keep pushing this forward.

Seems like the US and its allies can't get a valid excuse to start invading/imposing a no fly zone. Not with the so called "freedom fighters" kidnapping UN personnel (what were they thinking) and chemical warfare fals flag attack which was botched. Now they have the "credible" part of the opposition breaking apart which leaves the FSA with only al Qaeda-MB kind of scum. No more pretending that it is a unified resistance (which it was not) so the endgame might wel be they giving up doing it the intervention way and accepting a failed state.

A failed state also has the plus side that Syria can't complain about the theft of natural resources by Israel and that the US and it's allies can open up the valve of weapon delivery thus boosting sales.

What I can't figure out is why Jordan is helping this strife in Syria. They know that the Muslim Brotherhood will then shift it's sights upon them.

The John Kerry remark proves that they want to tighten up the noose around Syria and choke off all support. Luckily Maliki is not listening though I think as a result (as punishment) the sectarian strife in Iraq will reignite (of course al Qaeda's paymasters have nothing to do with us...)

Posted by: Gehenna | Mar 24 2013 23:20 utc | 20

#20 "What I can't figure out is why Jordan is helping this strife in Syria."

Jordan was trying to dance between rock and hard place (i.e. to avoid direct involvement with the same terrorists which could threaten his regime later, but at the same time trying to appease US and co). But he couldnt to stay away - Jordan is literally at gun point (king could be overthrown very easily by West/arabs, if he doesnt comply), and financial life-line in PGGC arabs hands too.

Posted by: Harry | Mar 24 2013 23:38 utc | 21

I believe that the "end-game" for the U.S. is ongoing instability. That is, no end-game, really. Korea, Palestine, etc. are4 the gifts that keep on giving, feeding the Pentagon maw, keeping those war profits flowing. One clue that the Pentagon people foster instability is that they refer to their forces as stability forces, engaged in stability operations. Assume that they are lying, always.

Regarding Russia and China, they remind me of Ali's rope-a-dope. They are content to let the West, the U.S. particularly, flail and fail on its own while they go the bank with the winnings.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Mar 25 2013 0:09 utc | 22

@19 Russia sent volunteers to Serbia. About all you could have expected knowing the state of their military at the time.

Now, the US has robots making robot bombs. They're testing that new hyper-sonic version, space shuttle, which they're teaching to skip across the stratosphere like a flat stone. Can show up anywhere in a few minutes drop a bunker buster and disappear. They also seem to be losing all their marbles. All the ersatz Dan'l Boones and Paul Reveres in The Home of the Depraved will never put a stop to it. But an alliance between Russia and China might.

Posted by: ruralito | Mar 25 2013 0:38 utc | 23

.. but looking back Georgia was an anomaly for a variety of reasons.
I would suggest that if one is looking back to pre-Putin Russia, then one is looking too far back, and at the wrong Russia.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Mar 25 2013 0:50 utc | 24

# 19

It's not 1998-99 anymore, nor is it 2003 for that matter. Russia and China are both much stronger militarily, economically and geo-politically than they were back in the 1990s. At the time of the war in Bosnia, Russia was bogged down in its own civil war in Chechnya and being plundered by oligarchs courtesy of Boris the drunk. Their hands were full. China is expected to overtake the US ANYDAY now as the world's largest economy, so making those arguments back in 1998 isn't AT ALL the same as hearing them in 2013. Also, Russia and China have remained steadfast with their opposition to direct NATO involvement in Syria with numerous veto's in the UN security council. The Russians continue to send supplys to Assad and are now going to permanently station warships in the Mediterranean and set up a new base. If NATO really thought Russia & China were blowing smoke, Assad would certainly be toast by now. It's pretty obvious the pressure being exerted from China & Russia are preventing another destructive regime change in the region.

Posted by: RC | Mar 25 2013 0:55 utc | 25

Daniel is right to doubt Russia's staying power and there is no guarantee Russia will continue to support Syria. And there is no Guarantee the US/NATO or Turkey/Israel wont attack anyway DESPITE Russia's best efforts.

However, the balance of power is very different now than 15 years ago. In addition to the differences mentioned by others, I would add two more 1) US standing is far bellow what it was in 1998. Iraq, Afghanistan, drones raining death all over the globe take their toll on one's reputation after a while.

2) Western dominance of the international media is nowhere near as complete as 15 years ago. There are plenty of alternative sources of information that reach a large and growing audience. Case in point, the recent terrorist chemical attack meant to be pinned on the government fell apart in 24 hours. 15 years ago, it would have been an indisputable reason to implement R2P, with the truth coming out long after the deed was done. The Narrative of the "Kosovars helpless victims/Serbs wicked brutes" was everywhere in 1999 and was almost unopposed. I believed it at the time. OTOH, the narrative of "peaceful protesters-rebels good/Assad bad" has worn pretty thin and even the western media has to pull back a bit to maintain even a modicum of credibility.

So the most likely prediction is the west going to its fall back position of, "if we can't overthrow Assad, then let us bring as much misery to Syria as we can." Which, sadly, is a lot.

Posted by: Lysander | Mar 25 2013 1:31 utc | 26

Don Bacon is correct.
Frustrating as it may be, both the Russians and China are very happy to watch the "west" exhaust itself, discredit itself and generally remind the world that the self appointed global policeman is an incompetent, racist, bully and barely literate to boot.

Both Russia and China have centuries of experience in dealing with this maritime empire and, by now, they know exactly how to lure it deeper and deeper away from its real interests.

Those who govern the empire are the most ignorant fools in it, oblivious to the rapidly growing alienation of the metropolitan population who would have to be collectively brain dead not to understand that the longer these oriental adventures go on the poorer they will be.

Does Washington imagine that the people of Spain, Italy, Portugal, Greece, France or the UK have any commitment to their cause? To the war on terror? To the wahhabi campaign against Shi'ites? To the grudge match between the Brothers, now sponsored by the State dept and the Saud family, and the baathists?

For the first time since 1945 rapidly increasing poverty, unemployment and insecurity is settling like a suffocating fog on the people: the young have no hope, no stake in the system, no alternative but to assert themselves. The old realise that they are likely to be abandoned, left to die, stripped of their savings. Before long there will be an explosion to which the ruling class has no answers.

It has played with revolution, with scripted uprisings in the streets of Minsk and choreographed riots in Tashkent and Tbilsi, for so long that it has forgotten that, beyond the CIA dilettantism and the colour coded T-shirt campaigns, there are real explosions. Televised or not. Real grievances. Real issues. Millions of angry, cheated victims with nothing to lose and self respect to reclaim.

And it is that which gives both Russia and China pause because, while they are quite happy to see the empire acting like a wounded godzilla on acid, they are aware that when the volcano blows the fallout will blot out the sun in central and east Asia too. This makes them very cautious as becomes nations which have, in recent memory, suffered real casualties in war, tens of millions whose existence the "west", which knows nothing of Leningrad or Nanking, except what its Japanese and Baltic allies tell it, has blotted out of its memory.

As to the Empire, its rulers really see foreign policy as a videogame, fun to play, devoid of risk in which the blood, chlorine gas, suicide bombers and beheadings are distant spectacles. And the victims, just the latest on a long list of aliens who might as well be insects for all Congress cares.

When the people come for them they will probably be interrupted in the middle of their fun, so absorbed by the game and its thrills that they won't hear the door being kicked in or smell the smoke of the cars burning. They will have mistake the screams and the gunshots for the sound effects in their earphones.

Posted by: bevin | Mar 25 2013 2:19 utc | 27

@Lysander "The Narrative of the "Kosovars helpless victims/Serbs wicked brutes" was everywhere in 1999 and was almost unopposed. I believed it at the time."

@bevin"...when the volcano blows the fallout will blot out the sun in central and east Asia too." Why, the trains won't stop running between Moscow and Beijing.

Posted by: ruralito | Mar 25 2013 3:11 utc | 28

I do hope that posting this, the comment doesn't appear twice (it has been 10 min since I posted it before, but after closing this window and opening another it has not appeared.

#19 Daniel I agree with your skepticism that Russia and China have their own national interests first and that will limit the support they will give to Syria. Your example of Russian support for Serbia in 1999 is a good example. However, we should keep in mind the price the US had to pay to get Russia's cooperation then. Recall that Russia was just then recovering from the 1998 financial collapse. It is my understanding that the US promised Russia some big concessions on the bonds that they had defaulted on just at the time Russia withdrew its support of Serbia. Russia was much weaker in 1999 than they are today. It is not clear what the US could offer them today to trade their support for Syria. If China and Russia see their national interests threatened by Nato in Syria, I wouldn't be surprised to see them vigorously defend those interests by continuing to back the Assad regime.

Posted by: ToivoS | Mar 25 2013 3:39 utc | 29

The current situation in Cyprus, just off Syria's coast, is interesting. There are a lot of Russians there. More information here.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Mar 25 2013 3:59 utc | 30

No the situation with Russia and China are different. Back then during the whole sad Yugoslavia debacle. The ruskies were being led by Yeltsin, a weak ruler in an even weaker country. When Russia finally did send in some forces it was a very, very weak display that caused more embarrassment than anything. Now Russia is stabler, more confident and with Putin as a dynamic leader. The USA remembers the whoopin it got in Georgia and as a result of its current state of exhaustion doesn't really want to engage in anything to intensive. Obama knows this and that is why he won't push for war and is not pushing for war with Iran either. Thereby the preference for sanctions. The Chinese are also flexing their muscle and are also more confident. Yet less so than the Russians, the Chinese just want to make money and get a little respect. Later on it might be a different story though. The Chinese and the Russians are not backing down. The Russians have a number of ships in Tartous they aren't just for show.
The ease of the fall of Mubarak, Ben Ali and poor old Gaddafi created the impression that al- Assad would go down easy, he won't. So as long as he can put up a decent fight. The Russians and Chinese will support him.

Posted by: Fernando | Mar 25 2013 4:14 utc | 31

Syrian rebel military leader rejects new PM


Associated Press

BEIRUT -- The head of the Syrian opposition coalition's military branch has refused to recognize the body's new prime minister, saying he was not properly elected.
Louay Almokdad, aide to Gen. Salim Idris, told The Associated Press by phone Sunday that the rebel Free Syrian Army would not recognize the U.S.-educated IT expert chosen last week to head a rebel interim government.

Read more here:

Posted by: kooshy | Mar 25 2013 5:23 utc | 32

Was it just me, or did any of y'all see the hand of U.S. covert ops in the ten or twelve bomb blasts in Iraq, the other day?

U.S. arms the Syrian opposition, the most militarily capable of whom are Salafi/Wahabi true-believers (i.e.: "Al Qaida") ==> that part of the opposition then takes said weaponry, smuggles it back into Iraq, and executes a massive bombing campaign.

In this same vein, i want to pose an open question: is there any difference between a "Wahabi militant" and "member of Al Qaida"?

Also: as goes Syria, so goes Iran (and Iraq, when the opportunity for second go comes around).

Iran is a key partner in the emerging Sino-Russian based Greater Asian partnership. They make a triangle, and with Iran on board the likelihood of persuading India to look past its differences with China are much greater.

Then, as well, there is the oil; and of course, Syria is the Arab gateway to the Caucasus. The last thing Russia wants is a crucible for batshit-insane Saudi set up as the gatekeeper to Kurdistan.

Kerry's visit indicates that Washington is living in a fantasy world, and when the next economic downturn hits (many hear it rumbling on the horizon, already - some even claim it's pounding on the door...) U.S. politicians will find their hands tied and fumbling even more than they currently do.

Posted by: China_Hand-2 | Mar 25 2013 5:56 utc | 33

this is a comedy of errors. i can't stop laughing. i know that's horrible and people are dying. sorry.

Posted by: annie | Mar 25 2013 6:25 utc | 34

One fact overlooked concerning the regime changes inspired by the US empire around the globe, they serve as a warning to those countries contemplating breaking their subservient bonds to the empire. If you do not obey, you will be next in line for a liberation movement courtesy of the empire.
If China and Russia do not demonstrate serious backbone, they will not get countries to come over to their side

Posted by: curious | Mar 25 2013 6:41 utc | 35

One fact overlooked concerning the regime changes inspired by the US empire around the globe, they serve as a warning to those countries contemplating breaking their subservient bonds to the empire. If you do not obey, you will be next in line for a liberation movement courtesy of the empire.
If China and Russia do not demonstrate serious backbone, they will lose any serious influence

Posted by: curious | Mar 25 2013 7:02 utc | 36

#35 Curious

I agree. There is much at stake geo-politically for Russia in Syria. If Assad falls and NATO manages to install a puppet who kicks the Russians out of there base there, the Russians will be cast out of the Mediterranean. NATO WILL rub this in Putin's face and accuse him of being on the wrong side of history, blah, blah, blah. I'm sure Putin knows this.

If Assad holds out until the elections next year, NATO will have to either continue supporting the violence or instead have their puppets run for the presidency - in which they'll likely lose, so NATO will probably work overtime to see that Assad is gone before any elections can occur. If 2014 rolls around and Assad is serious about elections and invites monitors in, NATO will look BAD if they don't support this solution. I happen to think the elections probably won't happen because if the war is still going on by then, Syria will be in no position to hold them.

Posted by: RC | Mar 25 2013 7:49 utc | 37

Apparently the "Free Syrian Army" chief Riad al-Asaad was badly injured in the city of Dayr al-Zawr in the north of Syria. The extremist Al-Nusra Front is probably finishing off the remnants of its rival militant and terrorist organizations.

Posted by: Amar | Mar 25 2013 9:16 utc | 38

Many of the commentators here give too much credence to Putin and the Russian government. Putin if not for the Orthodox church would have let The Assad government fall months ago. The Zionist faction hold the power in Russia still. The only reason why NATO and that includes USA have not intervened in Syria, is that Iran has openly declared it will never abandon Syria. They know that the war with Iran will not be quick. Remember there are about 3 million EU/USA citizens all around Syria and Iran, these are potential hostages. The economic conditions do not allow these immigrants to come back home.

Posted by: hans | Mar 25 2013 9:17 utc | 39

This is a big blow to the US. Whether he was killed or not isn't very important. The important questions is whether the Salafis/Wahabis were behind the attack or not.

Posted by: Amar | Mar 25 2013 10:05 utc | 40

Posted by: hans | Mar 25, 2013 5:17:29 AM | 39

rubbish hans

Posted by: brian | Mar 25 2013 10:20 utc | 41

Posted by: annie | Mar 25, 2013 2:25:42 AM | 34

youd not be laughing if it were in your country

Posted by: brian | Mar 25 2013 10:21 utc | 42

Posted by: Daniel McAdams | Mar 24, 2013 7:10:53 PM | 19

whatever are you on about? russia is staying unless US installs a puppet...very hard since the syrian people dont want one

but USrael goal is chaos. There can be no other leader than Assad; no govt than the present one or one chosen not by FUKUS but by the syrian people

Posted by: brian | Mar 25 2013 10:24 utc | 43

And yet they have invested so much credibility into "Assad must fall" that they can't just give up. Also, US/NATO support for Wahhabism and Al Qaida has been more exposed than ever before.
Posted by: Lysander | Mar 24, 2013 5:13:08 PM | 17

what a bizarre statement: US has credibility? with whom?

Posted by: brian | Mar 25 2013 10:31 utc | 44

Posted by: bevin | Mar 24, 2013 10:19:03 PM | 27

FUKUSaudi is watching syria exhaust itself as FUKUSaudi sends wave after wave of gullible expendable paradise yearning jihadis....with the entire media political academic world blind to what is happening...

Posted by: brian | Mar 25 2013 10:34 utc | 45

brain @41,

The current victories in Idlib, Homs are due to Syria and Iran counter intelligence. The have managed to crack most of NATO enablers communication lines. Read sites who are pro Syrian and you will see. Yes Russia does provide SC support. But this has not stopped the arming of the rats. Russia will if the price is right would have dumped Syria. Now we see that the Orthodox church in Cyprus begin to voice support to Syria, the government of Cyprus sold the country to the Khazeers.

Posted by: hans | Mar 25 2013 10:47 utc | 46

people should tweet @johnkerry and condemn his use of US money for terrorism … … …

Posted by: brian | Mar 25 2013 10:51 utc | 47

Posted by: hans | Mar 25, 2013 6:47:27 AM | 46

its hard to stop a flood of terrorists across borders russia doesnt patrol.
but russia could put pressure on Turkey...there it has failed

Posted by: brian | Mar 25 2013 10:52 utc | 48

@brian 44

Political capital instead of credibility perhaps?

Posted by: heath | Mar 25 2013 13:40 utc | 49

brian, i know and i shouldn't have written that. i reacted crudely to the absurdity of hilary's puppet 'rebel' government with fake 'leaders' resigning and now the new fake 'prime minister' rejected. how can you have a PM when you don't even have a country?

Posted by: annie | Mar 25 2013 14:30 utc | 50

How do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?

~~~Testimony before subcommittees of the U.S. Senate, April, 1971

Of course, Kerry was talking about that "last man to die" as being an American soldier, not a Vietnamese civilian or soldier.

And that was then, this is now:

US will aid rebels with medicine, intel, communications, but not weapons. Explains that several countries, Gulf Emirates, etc., are supplying plenty of weapons.

~~~John Kerry, in general, early days as secretary of state, 2013

No US soldiers need be killed as long as we get enough Salafists, US Special Forces, Turks, other Islamic fighters into Syria to get them to kill all those "last men"...and women, children, elderly.

Posted by: jawbone | Mar 25 2013 16:05 utc | 51

"what a bizarre statement: US has credibility? with whom?"

Meaning having people around the world believe that the US has the power to impose it's will and determine outcomes. The kind of credibility an organized crime boss or loan shark needs. I did not mean it as a compliment.

Posted by: Lysander | Mar 25 2013 16:32 utc | 52

I don't want a revolution in the USA, I live here and the revolution that would come about would release all these temepered raw emotions that have been heaving for so long. However I do believe that one can't be too far off. I was unemployed recently, mind you I've got two jobs. The job I lost was the one that brought in the most money. So from upper middle class I went to lower middle nothing in the blink of a week. It took me a month to find another job. I saw the ugly side of the social beauracracy. They have gutted everything, the people out there are miserable. I almost started goin back to church.

Posted by: Fernando | Mar 25 2013 18:06 utc | 53

There is a theory (thierry Meyssan) after which this pint sized "King" Abdullah of Jordan will be ousted soon. I do not know how and when, but according to this theory, Khaled Meshaal (the bum that was granted asylum in Syria for more then 10 years and suddenly turned his ass in to the hands of the Qahqaris)will replace him. Since most Jordanians are of Palestinian origin, Meshaal can be sure of its support, adding the influx from the Wbank. In this case, the Palestinians would leave for Jordan, so that the Israeli cancer can grow into a terminal "state" for Palestinian "territories". Gaza will be incorporated by Egypt. Its just a theory, but it seems to have its legitimacy, knowing the Qataris (i.e. US, Israel) could penetrate Meshaal whenever they want to and knowing Mursi couldnt survive without a US introduced "backbone".

I remember asking why Russia wouldnt get openly involved into the conflict, playing by the rules the almighty Coalition itself has set up (Demockracy is good, al nusrah is bad). Russia could go after the "bad" rebels (meaning 90% of those uneducated snackbars), to secure a democratic transition in Syria. After all, I argued, Putin has some serious interests in the Med, be it the naval base, or the gasfields. It is althemore obvious as for the first time, this issue (gasfields) has been brought up in the MSM bc of the Cyprean (?) dept crisis. Bot-Tak (thank you btw) replied saying Rusgov wants to avoid to openly intevene into the crisis, as this cld flare up discontent among the russian population on the one hand, and cld draw Russia into a long-lasting foreign warzone on the other hand. Like in Afghanistan. But i'm sure Russia is doing all it can, in secret. Cuz after all, I couldnt imagine ANY gov. of the world withstanding by itself a US, EU, Saudi, Qatari-led proxy invasion (MSM and weapons and rebel influx) for more than a few months. Also one has to acknowledge Russia (China to a certain extent) and Iran have prevented any direct NATO-intervention.

Of course ill admit to the crime of wishful thinking too. But at least, it is backed up by some realistic hopes! GRIND THE FSA, and LONG LIVE SYRIA!

Posted by: Kal | Mar 25 2013 19:04 utc | 54

"Leon “Judas” Trotsky was the father of "regime change", his techniques of using deceptions to overthrow the Bolsheviks has been copied by muslim brotherhood" #4

And then look what happened to Trotsky: The Party gave him their awl! It happened in Mexico, where the weather is changeable, it's chili today and hot tamale!
But I take your point, club, if the Muslim Brotherhood uses Trotsky's techniques, they will overthrow the Bolsheviks! Hard to argue with that.

Posted by: Mooser | Mar 25 2013 21:31 utc | 55

Posted by: hans | Mar 25, 2013 5:17:29 AM | 39

rubbish hans

Posted by: brian | Mar 25, 2013 6:20:19 AM | 41

Maybe just a tad more argument? Russian opposition to US interests does have overtones of a Kabuki play.

Posted by: DM | Mar 25 2013 21:43 utc | 56

WINEP - Field Trip to Syria

has an interesting ending on Al Nusra, covert and overt ....

Posted by: somebody | Mar 25 2013 21:49 utc | 57

"The Zionist faction hold the power in Russia still." Hans #39

Ha, that's what I suspected! An unbroken chain of Zionist domination; they steered the Czars, separated the men from the boyars, the Bolsheviks were their boychiks and Putin their plaything. I should have known! How do they do it? It's probably some kind of special knack or something.

Posted by: Mooser | Mar 25 2013 21:52 utc | 58

"Now we see that the Orthodox church in Cyprus begin to voice support to Syria, the government of Cyprus sold the country to the Khazeers."

Gosh, sorry hans, but I'm not up on the very latest news. What's a "Khazeer"? Don't believe I've ever heard of that particular identifier before. Would you mind telling us who it is?

Posted by: Mooser | Mar 25 2013 21:57 utc | 59

Any thoughts on this recent sequence of events?

Mar 19 -- Addressing the luncheon reception for Egyptian President Dr Mohamed Morsi and his accompanying delegation, Pakistan President Zardari said: “We must work together to end the bloodshed in Syria and to find a peaceful solution to the crisis.”

Mar 23 -- According to a State Dept spokesman, SecState Kerry and Pakistan's General Kayani "happened to overlap in Amman for an evening. . .met last night to discuss these range of bilateral security issues, including on counterterrorism, on combating safe havens, and on issues that are important to the future of Afghanistan, to Pakistan, and to us."

Mar 25 -- Pakistan Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, who is on two-day official visit to Jordan, called on the Jordanian Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, Lieutenant General Mashal Mohammad Al Zaben.

There's been no recent renewal of Pakistan's 2012 support for Syria. . .
ISLAMABAD, Aug 9: Ending months of ambiguity over the crisis in Syria, Pakistan joined the group of countries supporting the Syrian government on Thursday and warned against foreign interference and military intervention in the 17-month-old conflict.

. . .although on Mar 19:
ISLAMABAD: President Asif Ali Zardari on Monday said that the drive for peace in Syria must be led and owned by the Syrian people, adding that Pakistan is ready to play its role in finding a peaceful solution to the Syrian crisis.

Sending General Kayani from far-off Pakistan to Jordan, and talk to Kerry there, is an odd way to avoid intervention and promote a peaceful solution in Syria.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Mar 25 2013 22:25 utc | 60

@ Don Bacon

Any thoughts on this recent sequence of events?

On Pakistani General Kayani visiting Jordan 2 days after Kerry's visit could mean a few things. Coordination of Pakistani fighters in the FSA maybe? Or advice to Jordan on how to deal with blowback and refugee floods (something Pakistan knows alot about).

One thing is clear all the regional signs are moving in an ominous direction. I personally think the US is going to bomb Syria in the next few months...a Libya style air campaign. This article makes a lot of sense in divining where Obama is moving.

Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Mar 26 2013 0:37 utc | 61

@C O'T
With due respect to M K Bhadrakumar, the jury is still out on Obama's "stunning success in healing the Turkish-Israeli rift." Erdogan wanted more than an "apology," he wanted victim compensation and lifting of the Gaza blockade. We'll see. Erdogan is scheduled to visit Gaza next month.

I just can't figure out this Pakistan move. Also, is Iran involved somehow? Iran was trying to work an Iran/Pak/Egypt axis.

Regarding Obama, nobody can predict the future, but I still believe that the folks who have predicting a US or NATO air assault on Syria are still wrong. General Dempsey has been against it, for one thing.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Mar 26 2013 2:03 utc | 62

On the Diane Rehm Show the stenographers were suggesting that there is a force that is moving up from the South through Syria of Western backed fighters. I haven't heard/seen this addressed here specifically.

Posted by: scottindallas | Mar 26 2013 2:19 utc | 63

It's hard to escape the realities:
--The most potent and successful rebel military force in Syria is al-Qaeda, but --
--as in Iraq, military success doesn't equate to what really counts, political success, and there is no worthwhile Syrian political opposition, which illustrates that --
--the US (including its Turkey ally) has been proven to be impotent in Syria.

Which is why I look to Iran, Egypt and maybe even Pakistan, with Russia (plus Jordan and Lebanon) in the background. These folks do diplomacy. They have to, lacking offensive military power.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Mar 26 2013 2:38 utc | 64

Seems to me that Russia got some confidence by trouncing tie-eating autocrat and US stooge Mikheil Saakashvili and is now trying to prevent more NATO back stabbing like happened in Libya.

All I know is what I read in the papers, but if the Russians were so anxious to sell out Syria, they could have done it ages ago. But seems to me Syria was one of the remaining strong Russian clients. I don't see how they can "let it go" or how Russian opposition is "Kabuki".

They know the US road to resurrecting its dominance goes - Syria - Iran - Russia - China. They are at least smart enough to start fighting now instead of waiting for the mess to get to Iran where they'd have to get completely involved and risk a real war that they don't want (but I have a feeling they'd fight).

Posted by: guest | Mar 26 2013 4:21 utc | 65

jihadis pour into syria...none into israel (barring a faction in Golan heights with israeli appproval) tells us something of who is behind the FSA

Posted by: brian | Mar 26 2013 8:49 utc | 66

65 Guest. I agree that Russia will fight, but it will play rope a dope and keep it's powder dry till it must act overtly. They're not gonna give up Tarsus/Mediterranean access. They're not gonna open a land front right into their sphere of influence. No one has replied to my query about how the FSA might be redirected North into the Caucuses. The Russians will fight, they haven't yet begun to fight.

Posted by: scottindallas | Mar 26 2013 13:36 utc | 67

BBC reported this morning on numerous flights bringing US weaponry to Turkey for transit to Northern Syria. US trying to hide any role in sending weapons to avoid being charged with arming Islamists. Want to make sure the most radical Islamists are not the only ones with the guns once Assad falls.

Report may be based on this article from NYTimes, as some of the wording used is very similar. The article gives a pretty good summary of all the US weapons dealing into Syria.

The URL for the Times article was from a click through from The Daily Beast.

Posted by: jawbone | Mar 26 2013 14:14 utc | 68

The Times article in #68 is dated 3/24, but I can't find where in the paper edition it appeared. Usually, the section and page number shows up, but not on the link I found.

Anyone know the where it appeared?

Posted by: jawbone | Mar 26 2013 14:20 utc | 69

It looks like Syrian opposition chief Ahmed Moaz al-Khatib may have un-resigned.

Mar 26, 2013
Syrian Opposition Takes Seat at Arab League

Syria's opposition representatives took the country's seat at an Arab summit for the first time on Tuesday, saying that the U.S. should use Patriot surface-to-air missiles to protect rebel-held areas from President Bashar al-Assad's airpower.

. . .Khatib recently resigned as head of the opposition Syrian National Coalition, but led the Syrian delegation at the two-day summit in Qatar at the invitation of that country's emir. Besides Khatib, the Syrian delegation includes Ghassan Hitto, recently elected prime minister of a planned interim government to administer rebel-held areas in Syria, and two prominent opposition figures, George Sabra and Suheir Atassi.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Mar 26 2013 15:34 utc | 70

Don, I just put a link for the BBC article on Khatib taking the Syrian seat in the thread above. I'd been meaning to get a link up since I heard on the BBC that Khatib may have "un-resigned." Works in both threads.

Posted by: jawbone | Mar 26 2013 17:51 utc | 71

The comments to this entry are closed.