the chemical weapons excuse did not result in the overthrow of Assad. the appoinment by the US of a new Syrian government did not result in the overthrow of Assad. the armies of foreign muslim crusaders funded by the US did not result in the overthrow of Assad.
but now we are told that Hezbollah has taken over! now, can we put boots in the air?
I don’t know what’s in Qusayr, but the US is Israel’s proxy, (Israel’s air raids are proxy to that), and it all sounds like a stupid excuse for the long-sought-after ZATO intervention. will it result in the overthrow of Assad?

Posted by: anon | May 21 2013 16:00 utc | 4

“The EU’s anti-terrorist chief Gilles de Kerchove estimates that around 500 Europeans are now fighting with rebel forces in Syria against Bashar al-Assad’s regime….”
And the “petitioners”?
The 200 plus academics, NGOers, pseudo-Marxists, Cliffites and Tariqs Ali. Will they be there, in the “Spanish Civil War” of the new generation, fighting for the things they believe in, imperialism and their wahhabi comrades?
I suspect not. They just cheer from a distance, under the approving eyes of their patrons, as Syrians die by the thousand.

Posted by: bevin | May 21 2013 17:29 utc | 6

The Libyan and other North African fighters were recruited by – guess who.
Now-deceased Ambassador Christopher Stevens was the liaison for the Obama administration to the Libyan rebels and played a central role in recruiting jihadists to fight Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. Fighting groups from Libya in Syria included Liwaa Al-Umma -“Community brigade”- from Libya. Commanded by Mahdi al-Harati in Syria, an Irish-Libyan member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. Stevens also served as a key contact with the Saudis to coordinate the recruitment by Saudi Arabia of Islamic fighters from North Africa and Libya.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 21 2013 18:03 utc | 8

Naaw..U.S/Israel weeping due the progress Hezbollah/Assad are doing against their al-qaeda beloved rebels in Syria.
https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/international/white-house-condemns-hezbollah-role-in-syria

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21 2013 20:29 utc | 10

@11 Hague wants to use arming the rebels as a bargaining chip. Actually he won’t do anything without approval from Washington.

Posted by: dh | May 21 2013 20:47 utc | 12

They surely are all very grizzly men, that’s for sure. And children at heart. Don’t you have to be to even qualify?

Posted by: L Bean | May 21 2013 21:07 utc | 14

Obama expressed something? How quaint. He should get a Nobel Peace Prize. Oh wait.

Posted by: tsisageya | May 21 2013 21:47 utc | 16

What impression did you get from the Syrian government soldiers?
I found them a very ruthless, tough, but apparently pretty determined army. They clearly took no prisoners. They talked at one point about killing up to 700 terrorists, as they call the rebels. A general showed me a video on his phone of dead rebels with beards, and twice in the video a military boot appears and crushes the faces of the dead men.
http://www.dw.de/robert-fisk-syrian-war-could-go-on-for-two-three-years/a-16823404
he, he, he…

Posted by: neretva’43 | May 21 2013 22:03 utc | 18

#19 Not mentioned in the job description, but it is understood that both SOD and SOS are travelling salesmen/people/whatever for the MIC. What remains opaque is how his commissions are paid.

Posted by: ToivoS | May 22 2013 0:32 utc | 20

@ToivoS #13
I’m with you on Stevens at Benghazi. I wrote a longish comment on it here (#1).

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 22 2013 0:40 utc | 22

More foreign fighters for Obama to be concerned about. (Hell, I’d call it the coalition of the willing.)
WaPo, May 21, 2013

Iranian soldiers fighting for Assad in Syria, says State Department official
Iran has sent soldiers to Syria to fight alongside forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad and those of the Lebanon-based Hezbollah militia, a senior State Department official said Tuesday.

Get that — they’re not fighting for Syria against an insurgency, or foreign forces supported by the US and Gulf States, they’re “fighting for Assad in Syria.”

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 22 2013 0:59 utc | 24

The US State Department really, really doesn’t like Hezbollah. Its spokesman said so yesterday.
MR. VENTRELL:

We also condemn Hezbollah’s direct intervention in the assault on Qusair, where its fighters are playing a significant role in the regime’s offensive. Hezbollah’s occupation of villages along the Lebanese-Syrian border and its support for the regime and pro-Assad militias exacerbate and inflame regional sectarian tensions and perpetuate the regime’s campaign of terror against the Syrian people. We reject Hezbollah’s efforts to escalate violence inside Syria and incite instability in Lebanon. We continue to fully support Lebanon’s stated policy of disassociation from the Syrian crisis, and urge all parties in the region to act with restraint and respect for Lebanon’s stability and security.

Imagine that, helping a country’s government defend itself! They’re just escalating violence, that’s what they’re doing. The very idea. Plus, they’re winning, which is the worst part of all.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 22 2013 1:54 utc | 26

@27 Sure but look at the history of the Gulf sultanates. The British invented bases.

Posted by: dh | May 22 2013 2:09 utc | 28

I’m sorry, b, but Obama’s expression of concern doesn’t mean a damn thing..Why express concern now? Is it because his freedom fighters can’t hold on anymore and are getting routed?
It gets even funnier, the US senate have just passed a bill to arm AL_QAEDA, sorry, freedom fighters.Now where did I see this movie before?

Posted by: Zico | May 22 2013 6:39 utc | 30

We also condemn Hezbollah’s direct intervention in the assault on Qusair, where its fighters are playing a significant role in the regime’s offensive. Hezbollah’s occupation of villages along the Lebanese-Syrian border and its support for the regime and pro-Assad militias exacerbate and inflame regional sectarian tensions and perpetuate the regime’s campaign of terror against the Syrian people. We reject Hezbollah’s efforts to escalate violence inside Syria and incite instability in Lebanon. We continue to fully support Lebanon’s stated policy of disassociation from the Syrian crisis, and urge all parties in the region to act with restraint and respect for Lebanon’s stability and security.
Imagine that, helping a country’s government defend itself! They’re just escalating violence, that’s what they’re doing. The very idea. Plus, they’re winning, which is the worst part of all.
Posted by: Don Bacon | May 21, 2013 9:54:21 PM | 26
note the USSDs use of word ‘regime’ for syrias government/administration. Did american voters really want to see in power war mongers who use propaganda techniques to justify US military expenditure? The rest is typical US bull…what a waste of the taxpayers money
also here is US state depts twitter: @StateDept

Posted by: brian | May 22 2013 7:16 utc | 32

I found them a very ruthless, tough, but apparently pretty determined army. They clearly took no prisoners. They talked at one point about killing up to 700 terrorists, as they call the rebels. A general showed me a video on his phone of dead rebels with beards, and twice in the video a military boot appears and crushes the faces of the dead men.
http://www.dw.de/robert-fisk-syrian-war-could-go-on-for-two-three-years/a-16823404
he, he, he…
Posted by: neretva’43 | May 21, 2013 6:03:59 PM | 18
ruthless? lets go ask the syrian people what they think:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HC4IMs9dOlM

Posted by: brian | May 22 2013 7:33 utc | 34

Fisk, of the not-so-Independent, obviously think that SAA should treat NATO`s inbreed cannibal merc´s with the finest gloves and utmost care and spare them for NATO´s “justice” in their own and paid for “tribunal” where they will be released as do all their clients, ask the Serbs or do the math.
SAA is a professional army trained for a direct war with the Zionist abomination, but in a situation where ZATO´s merc´s are pouring in like Tolkien´s Orc´s by the hundreds if not thousands, monthly, there is no time, place or money to take prisoners and most of us can forgive them for their “roughness” at times when they just have witnessed their comrades being tortured, BBQ´d, had their throat’s slowly slit off or executed by indoctrinated kids.

Posted by: Mrs.Magma | May 22 2013 12:31 utc | 36

The utter senseless brutalism of war with its wide use of torture, rape, summary executions, terrible weapons etc. shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone. It is only ever highlighted on a one-sided basis for propaganda purposes to motivate both soldiers and the home-front. It’s the wars that ought to be avoided, not any specious “violations of the rules of war” by frightened immature men acting as the tools of their elders.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 22 2013 13:30 utc | 38

The utter senseless brutalism of war with its wide use of torture, rape, summary executions, terrible weapons etc. shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone. It is only ever highlighted on a one-sided basis for propaganda purposes to motivate both soldiers and the home-front. It’s the wars that ought to be avoided, not any specious “violations of the rules of war” by frightened immature men acting as the tools of their elders.
Posted by: Don Bacon | May 22, 2013 9:30:54 AM | 38
ironically, some of the jihadis are driven to jihad by the idea from the media that Assad is evil and ruthless and killing muslims. Stupid people are conditioned to believe what the read by professional journalists: only occasionaly does anyone awaken to the fact themedia are lying continuously

Posted by: brian | May 22 2013 13:40 utc | 40

Getting philosophical: It’s interesting that the warmongers have shifted from “counterinsurgency” (which actually wasn’t counterinsurgency at all and only involved combat against the natives who resisted Western puppet governments) and now they call their activities “counterterrorism,” which mainly consists of torturing and killing anybody who might be an enemy of the West.
Of course neither of these applies to Libya and Syria with their “regime change” mantra, and in fact they include the SUPPORT of insurgents and terrorists against governments that until very recently were either a US ally (Libya) or a candidate for ally (Syria).
We haven’t heard a peep from the Pentagon’s policy guy “Doctor Miller” to explain this —

Dr. James N. Miller was confirmed by the U.S. Senate as the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy on May 25, 2012. He serves as the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and provides advice and assistance to the Secretary of Defense and Deputy Secretary of Defense on all matters concerning the formulation of national security and defense policy and the integration and oversight of DoD policy and plans to achieve national security objectives.
Dr. Miller received a B.A. degree with honors in economics from Stanford University, and Master’s and Ph.D. degrees in public policy from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.

The current primary US “national security objective” is “regime change” in Iran, and Syria is the best the US can do at the moment. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has just voted to arm the Syria opposition.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 22 2013 14:03 utc | 42

Magma @36
Not sure, but Fisk wasn’t trying to portray the SAA in bed light; and I am sure very few people will have sorrow for them – NATO’s mercenaries – including those who manipulated with them. Obviously, those who are still in fight are hardcore lunatics, not lunatics in medical sense, those are pathological cases of human degeneration.
Unfortunately, we are dealing with the consequences of human degeneration. To uproot this perversity what is needed is destroy the cause which lie in imperial centers of the West and their puppet regimes of KSA and settler-state. The conduits of imperial politics must be cut off.

Posted by: neretva’43 | May 22 2013 14:45 utc | 44

@39
I think the Syrian authorities must do what the Russian did. Ban NGOs, and reinforce that ban strictly and relentlessly. No room should be left to liberal-theorist-propagandist to interpret domestic positive law and acts in way that suit them.

Posted by: neretva’43 | May 22 2013 15:13 utc | 46

@18/neretva’43
Just cause Fisky can tell at least a few truths does NOT MEAN
he not a biased propagandist. He IS.
This war has ZERO to do with democracy(nothing but a label in the
mouths of the propagandists) in Syria. The real reasons are
well known but we should never expect Fisky to tell us!

Posted by: Luca K | May 22 2013 16:08 utc | 48

1817:
Dr Usama Hasan, of the counter-extremism think-tank Quilliam Foundation, tells BBC Radio 5 live that although the full details are not known, the fear is the attack was carried out by “seriously crazy militants”.

Posted by: BillyBoy | May 22 2013 17:19 utc | 50

@neretva#18
That whole interview with Fisk is worth reading. Fisk’s interview on Democracy Now gave a fuller description of his experience with the Syrian Army:

Robert, welcome back to Democracy Now! Can you talk about your time in Syria? You were embedded with Syrian soldiers?
ROBERT FISK: No, I was not embedded with Syrian soldiers. I’ve never been embedded with American soldiers or British soldiers or Iraqi soldiers or any other. What actually happened was I got a visa to go to Damascus, from the Syrian government, of course. I have a colleague who goes regularly into northern Syria and reports from rebel areas. I spent quite a lot of time talking to old friends in Syria, talking to the military, whom I have always been able to talk to. And while I was talking to them, I said, “Look, I would like to go up to the front lines in northwestern Syria.” That is to say within a mile of the—just a mile and a half of the Turkish border. To my amazement, they said, “Yeah, fine. Get on a plane. Go to Latakia. We’ll meet you there. You can go and see our soldiers and talk to them.” And this is what I did. The only restriction they had on me is they didn’t want me to take photographs of their faces. I could take pictures of them from behind. I could take pictures of the front line. I could climb on their tanks and take pictures, which I did. And I had—I got a pretty graphic and rather grim idea of what the Syrian army—I’m talking about the Syrian government army—is doing at the moment.
…
When I visited Syrian special forces along the front lines, I was given extraordinary amounts of detail. They gave me the code numbers for the various positions they’ve got, told me where the rebels were—about 800 meters away in a forest. I met soldiers who had been wounded but were still serving. One had a bullet that went right through his neck, went through the left side, came out the right side, and a very livid scar. Several of the generals had been wounded, one of them four times. Officers in the Syrian army always say that they go and lead their men, they’re at the front, and it appears to be true.
When I started questioning them about how many armed rebels they had killed in one particular village, they said 700. And I said, “How many did you take prisoner?” And he said, “None.” And in another point, they showed me a destroyed house, that had been destroyed by tank fire, and they said that 67 rebels had been killed there. And I said, “Well, how many prisoners?” And they said, “None,” which obviously told its own story.
At one point, quite remarkably, a general produced from his pocket a video, a phone, a mobile phone with a video on it, showing heaps of corpses of bearded men whom he said were terrorists—his word for it, of course, that usual cliché which the Israelis use, as well, for their enemies—rebel opponents who were Islamists, he claimed. And there were indeed heaps of corpses. What was particularly chilling was when, on the video, which he was showing me—and this, again, remember, was a Syrian general—on two occasions a military boot fell down—came down and crushed two of the dead faces on the screen. So, a ruthless, brutal war going on.
And at the moment, in two of the Damascus suburbs in the area around Qusayr, near Homs, and certainly in the north of Syria, the army appears to be winning, at least momentarily, against the rebels, is taking ground—doing so, of course, with ruthlessness and no great human rights alongside it, I imagine. I don’t think this is an army that cares very much about its enemies, unless they’re dead.

Posted by: Rusty Pipes | May 22 2013 18:14 utc | 52

@DOS #53 – some will find that story shocking
I tried to explain in my #38 why it shouldn’t be shocking. War is hell.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 22 2013 19:45 utc | 54

@48 Well, you can probably work out Fisk’s biased by looking at which countries have send him packing.
Unfortunately for that theory, Ol’ Fiskie has probably been ejected from just about all of them at one point or another.
If you read through his stuff over the years about the only leader who seemed to get a kind word from him is the (now deceased)Plucky Little King of Jordan. I think he rather liked Rafic Hariri but didn’t trust him an inch, and he has a soft-spot for Walid Jumblatt even if he doesn’t think much of the wily Druze’s politics.
But apart from that select group the most you can say about Fisk’s “bias” is that he is constantly calling A Pox On All Their Houses.

Posted by: Johnboy | May 23 2013 1:35 utc | 56