Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
September 12, 2016
On Views Of The War On Syria – By Debs is Dead

by Debs is Dead
lifted from a comment

It is sad to see so many are so locked into their particular views that they see any offering of an alternative as 'neoliberal' or laughable or – if it weren't so serious – Zionist.

1/ I do not see the Syrian civil war as racist or race based, I do believe however that the rejection of all Islamic fundamentalism as being entirely comprised of 'headchoppers' is racist down to its core. It is that same old same old whitefella bullshit which refuses to consider other points of view on their own terms but considers everything through the lens of 'western' culture which it then declares wanting and discards.

2/ Noirette comes close to identifying one of the issues that kicked off the conflict, that the Syrian government put staying in power via adopting neoliberal strictures ahead of the welfare of Syrians. I realize many have quite foolishly IMO, adopted President Assad as some sort of model of virtue – mostly because he is seen to be standing up to American imperialism. That is a virtuous position but it doesn't make President Assad virtuous of himself and neither does it reflect the reality that when push came to shove Assad put his position ahead of the people of Syria and kissed neoliberal butt.

3/ President Assad revealed his stupidity when he didn't pay attention to what happens to a leader who has previously been featured as a 'tyrant' in western media if he lets the neoliberals in: They fawn & scrape all the while developing connections to undermine him/her. If the undermining is ineffective there is no backing off. The next option is war. The instances are legion from President Noriega of Panama to President Hussein of Iraq to Colonel Ghaddaffi of Libya – that one really hurts as the Colonel was a genuinely committed and astute man. Assad is just another hack in comparison.

4/ These Syrian leaders are politicians, they suffer the same flaws of politicians across the world. They are power seekers who inevitably come to regard the welfare of their population as a means to an end rather than an end in itself.

5/ My Syrians friends are an interesting bunch drawn from a range of people currently living inside and outside of Syria. Some longer term readers might recall that I'm not American, don't live in America and nowadays don't visit much at all. The first of the 'refugee' Syrians I got to know, although refugee is a misnomer since my friend came here on a migrant's visa because his skills are in demand, is the grandchild of Palestinian refugees – so maybe he is a refugee but not in the usual sense. Without going into too many specifics as this is his story not mine, he was born and lived in a refugee camp which was essentially just another Damascus suburb. As he puts it, although a Palestinian at heart, he was born in Syria and when he thinks of home it is/was Damascus. All sides in the conflict claimed to support Palestinian liberation, yet he and his family were starved out of their homes by both Syrian government militias and the FSA.

When he left he was initially a stateless person because even though he was born in Syria he wasn't entitled to Syrian citizenship. He bears no particular grudge against the government there but he told me once he does wish they were a lot smarter.

On the other hand he also understands why the people fighting the government are doing so. I'm not talking about the leadership of course (see above – pols are pols) but the Syrians who just couldn't take the fading future and the petty oppression by assholes any longer.

6/ No one denies that the opposition have been used and abused by FUKUSi, but that of itself does not invalidate the very real issues that persuaded them to resist an austerity imposed from above by assholes who weren't practicing what they preached.

I really despair at the mindset which reduces everything to a binary division – if group A are the people I support they must all be wonderful humans and group B those who are fighting Group A are all evil assholes.

If group A claim to support Palestinian self determination (even though they have done sweet fuck all to actually advance that cause) then everyone in Group B must be pro-Zionist even though I don't know what they say about it (the leadership of the various resistance groups are ME politicians and therefore most claim to also support Palestinian independence). Yes assholes in the opposition have done sleazy deals with Israel over Golan but the Ba'ath administration has done similar opportunist sell outs over the 40 years when the situation demanded it.

I fucking hate that as much as anyone else who despises the ersatz state of Israel, but the reality is that just about every ME leader has put expedience ahead of principle with regard to Palestine. Colonel Ghadaffi would be the only leader I'm aware of who didn't. Why do they? That is what all pols and diplomats do not just Arab ones. According to the European model of diplomacy imposed upon the globe, countries have interests not friends.

As yet no alternative to that model has succeeded since any attempt to do so has been rejected with great violence. The use of hostages offered by each party to guarantee a treaty was once an honorable solution, the hostages were well treated and the security they afforded reduced conflict – if Oblamblam had to put up one of his daughters to guarantee a deal does anyone think he would break it as easily as he currently does? Yet the very notion of hostages is considered 'terrorism' in the west. But I digress.

The only points I wanted to make was the same as those I have already made:

  • A solution which reduces numbers of humans killed is worth attempting.
  • Just because someone chooses an option that you disagree with does not make them evil or headchoppers or Islamofacist.
  • On balance I would rather see Assad continue as leader of Syria but I'm not so naive as to believe he is capable of finding a long term resolution, or that there are not a good number of self interested murderous sadists in his crew. By the same token I don't believe all of those resisting the Ba'athist administration are headchopping jihadists or foreign mercenaries. This war is about 5 years old. If either side were so simplistically good or evil it would have ended a long time ago.
  • Plus one more – it is humorous and saddening to see people throw senseless name-calling into the mix. It is the method preferred by those who are too stupid and ill informed to develop a logical point of view.

If you want to call me a Zionist lackey of the imperialists or whatever it was go right ahead – it is only yourself who you tarnish, I'm secure in the knowledge of my own work against imperialism, corporate domination and Zionism but perhaps you, who have a need to throw aspersions are not?

Comments

@17
Hersh’s Redirection (New Yorker, March 2007 – which means most of the research must have been done in 2006) would be one of the starting points for anyone wanting to understand what happened in Syria. There’s also b’s Short History, Wesley Clark’s video about planned destruction in MENA, and Financial Times article on the Qatari role in starting the war (May 2012). DiD’s rant is just that – a rant, with bits (infrequent) of accuracy. Overall, however, it does not hold up to historical facts. No point arguing… some are intent on overthrowing Assad (like Hussein and Qadhafi taught us nothing – or maybe those are precisely the points: destruction, chaos, and eventual carving up of territory…. for the benefit of WHO? (fill in the blank)).

Posted by: GoraDiva | Sep 13 2016 17:55 utc | 101

@98 wow quote…”Most of the physical destruction that has occurred in Syria is due to SAA and recent Russian bombing…” wow – you might be able to lie on a number of other sites, but you can’t get away with that here.. sorry – the west has been intent on destroying syria militarily, while at the same time involved in a propaganda campaign which you appear a part of.. anyone looking at this honestly will be unable to buy into the lies you are manufacturing here.. ISIS is a product of the same coalition of the west and one of the many byproducts of the ‘war on iraq’ which i am sure you were in favour of too.. your bullshit never stops!

Posted by: james | Sep 13 2016 19:17 utc | 102

@89 fl ‘Only the Saudis, or pushers of their version of Islam, seem to put no limits at all on their sect’s crusade.’
What about the Zionist strain of Judaeism?
@94
Yes, amazing. What we need now is a corresponding conference of the world’s Jews and a corresponding condemnation of Zionism.

Posted by: jfl | Sep 13 2016 23:28 utc | 103

@101 gd
I agree. DiD puts on his high-hat periodically and lets us all have it. Much ado about nothing.

Posted by: jfl | Sep 13 2016 23:29 utc | 104

“I don’t want to go on fighting but I need to find a job, a house. Everything I have is here in Muadhamiya.”
Posted by: somebody | Sep 13, 2016 5:07:06 AM | 80
Well, he can always join the Syrian side militia or the Syrian Army… I’m talking about the people giving him his orders, not the cannon fodder who are clueless like in every army.
Assad does matter because he is the ELECTED leader chosen by the People of Syria in MORE THAN ONE election.
Did you forget?
Did you not know?
Or doesn’t any of that “democracy” stuff matter either?
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 13, 2016 5:18:29 AM | 81
If you had a brain, you’d reread my post which specifically states that I’m talking about serious analysts outside of Syria, not the population of Syria. Assad ran a police state and that is not “decent ruling”, regardless of what idiots like you believe.
The majority of Syrians disagree with you. But your arrogance and ignorance probably blinds you from taking that into consideration. [I had to refresh the page before I posted this and I saw Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 13, 2016 5:18:29 AM | 81 said the same thing. It’s a point worry of repetition!]
Posted by: pm | Sep 13, 2016 6:24:31 AM | 83
And my response is the same. Assad runs a police state. Period. Doesn’t matter if the bulk of the population prefers that to a Salafist nightmare. Bottom line remains the same: Assad is not a decent ruler except comparatively against ISIS. If he wasn’t running a police state, the initial insurgency might never have occurred – although I am aware the US, NATO, Saudi Arabia, et al. were trying to create one regardless – but that wouldn’t have worked if Assad really was a decent ruler.
So stop being blind to Assad’s own flaws. They are irrelevant to the point I’m making.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Sep 14 2016 4:44 utc | 105

…If you had a brain, you’d reread my post which specifically states that I’m talking about serious analysts outside of Syria, not the population of Syria.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Sep 14, 2016 12:44:21 AM | 105

Richard, had you bothered to reread it yourself before rushing into print, you’d have realised that your ‘serious analysts’ were, and still are, unidentified. That’s WHY I responded to your fact-free wishful thinking.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 14 2016 6:41 utc | 106

@102 James
Indeed. It is a broken argument that probably needs no response. One party is the cause, the other the effect. Subtracting the effect won’t change a thing.

Posted by: MadMax2 | Sep 14 2016 12:55 utc | 107

MM@107
I was confronting the hyperbole of the statement that the US was trying to destroy ‘Syria’ when that statement beggars the notion that Assad is ‘Syria’.
Defending Assad’s destruction of Syria’s infrastructure to maintain his rule over his police state is what many people here try to justify and they seem more than willing to sacrifice many of the Syrian people, who inhabit that infrastructure, to validate their beliefs.

Posted by: wayoutwest | Sep 14 2016 16:19 utc | 108

@108 wow, aside from the ‘regime change’ ideology you are so down with, what part about the syrian people’s desire to look after the affairs in their own backyard without having western every so sweet manipulations and meddling resulting in the death of countless innocent syrians don’t you get? go read friedman – which is my polite way of saying – ‘stick a soother in your mouth’… no one else here seems to thrive on lies and bullshit as much as yourself..

Posted by: james | Sep 14 2016 20:41 utc | 109

This is not very cogent analysis. The main fact is that Syria is suffering external aggression. This is not a civil war, but an imperialist attack on a sovereign country.
The false equivalence and the posture of balance by the author is totally absurd.
Syria doesn’t need to negotiate with the aggressors–they only need to destroy every person that has taken up arms to destroy the country.
Why give space for this bull crap, we can read this tripe in the Western progressive media every day.

Posted by: Steven Hun | Sep 14 2016 21:59 utc | 110

I’m reading this http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-14/hillbama-administration-plans-admit-least-110000-refugees-2017
Call me crazy, but after reading this along with some of the comments, I’m starting to wonder if EVERYTHING is a deflection for Israel.
I think a major push against the Palestinians might start soon, and perhaps USA will end up taking in a lot of them? Just saying. Hezbollah could also be attacked. I’m sure Israel is preparing for the opportunity

Posted by: bbbb | Sep 14 2016 22:24 utc | 111

Richard, had you bothered to reread it yourself before rushing into print, you’d have realised that your ‘serious analysts’ were, and still are, unidentified. That’s WHY I responded to your fact-free wishful thinking.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 14, 2016 2:41:28 AM | 106
How about Josh Landis? How about just about any analyst with knowledge of Syria’s police state system? You can’t argue that point because you are in fAVOR of a police state. Let’s turn it around: name me ONE ANALYST who says Assad’s police state makes him a “decent ruler”.
You can’t do it.
And finally AGAIN this was and is not the POINT of my original post – which means you’re complaining about an irrelevant point just to be a troll. Which means this conversation is over.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Sep 15 2016 20:48 utc | 112

#112 Mr Richard Steven Hack the Third, Jr.
Well, we should be grateful that America has the controversial but ultimately very decent Clintons, Bushes, Obamas and Trump to lead it. If anyone indecent, say someone happily using the war crims like H Kissenger and M Albright as advisors, or bailing out the corrupt bankers with billions of taxpayer money, or someone starting illegal invasions of UN members, or someone raping the interns, ever came along, I am pretty sure that the Americans would rise up too!

Posted by: Quadriad | Sep 16 2016 2:19 utc | 113

Re #63 ‘Feckless Left’
It doesn’t get more feckless than Canada’s New Democratic opposition party, which a wag once described more or less accurately as “a party of the working class, led by the middle class in the interest of the ruling class.” Given the NDP unanimously supported the bombing of Libya and Ukraine’s ‘Revolution of Dignity’, perhaps giving the Nobel to Al Qaeda in Syria should come as no surprise. After Obama, this is probably as suitable an encore as any. In Canada it seems the people not only get the government they deserve, but an opposition to match. “Feckless Left” indeed.
NDP Pushes For Syria ‘White Helmets’ to win Nobel Prize
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/white-helmets-nobel-peace-prize-1.3764121

Posted by: John Gilberts | Sep 16 2016 7:51 utc | 114

So funny to see all the outrage over this rather middle-of-the-road article. Reminds me a bit of how Rick Sterling had to answer Ashley Smith on Counterpunch even though there were a 100 pro-Assad articles there to every one that supported the rebels. In terms of the “headchopper” thing, I think that this is inevitable given the Islamophobia that has brought the USA and Russia together against both ISIS and the rebranded al-Nusra. In essence, this “popular front” would have been defended by Christopher Hitchens if he was still alive. With this website and a thousand others defending Assad, he would probably say something like “better late than never”.

Posted by: Louis Proyect | Sep 17 2016 18:43 utc | 115

So funny to see Proyect’s comment after the discussion here of the ‘feckless left’. Reminds me a bit of his previous useless, asinine trolling even when there are 100 pro-b comments to every one of his. In terms of the “headchopper” thing, I think that the ‘feckess left’ would like to ignore “Assad must go!” Coalition support for both ISIS and the rebranded al-Nusra. In essence, this “popular front” is a sham and would have been attacked as such by Christopher Hitchens if he was still alive. With this website speaking for millions of dead and displaced he would probably say something like “Fuck you Proyect”.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Sep 17 2016 20:50 utc | 116