04 Sep Evidence Grows that Assad was set-up.
First, WND reports on comments made by Rush Limbaugh Tuesday on his radio program, in which he claims to have heard personally from several insiders who are relaying to him the mounting evidence that indeed the Assad regime was framed. Further, another article written by the highly respected and credentialed Israeli-American scholar, Youssef Bodansky calls into question not only the American government’s story regarding the Syrian crisis, but also the complicity of the American government in the whole affair. According to Bodansky, there is mounting evidence that the release of nerve gas in Damascus was a well-coordianed event potentially involving Qatar, Turkey, the US, and Jabhat al-Nusra (the al-Qaeda affiliated terrorists or “rebels”), all of whom want to see the removal of the Assad regime. This information if true, is beyond damning of the Obama administration.
And once again, I would like to call everyone’s attention to the repeated, though very poorly reasoned view (that seems to be dominating the discussion in the Western media), that if Assad did indeed use gas, the US must by respond militarily. I find this claim to be extremely poorly reasoned on both moral and strategic-foreign policy terms. I am grateful for the few voices such as Sarah Palin who do seem to have thought through the ramifications of any military action in Syria. Palin, on Friday spoke out and strongly condemned the Obama admin for its poorly reasoned defense of engaging the Syrian government. Palin’s comments can be read in their entirety here:
LET ALLAH SORT IT OUT
“So we’re bombing Syria because Syria is bombing Syria? And I’m the idiot?” – Sarah Palin
* President Obama wants America involved in Syria’s civil war pitting the antagonistic Assad regime against equally antagonistic Al Qaeda affiliated rebels. But he’s not quite sure which side is doing what, what the ultimate end game is, or even whose side we should be on. Haven’t we learned? WAGs don’t work in war.
* We didn’t intervene when over 100,000 Syrians were tragically slaughtered by various means, but we’ll now intervene to avenge the tragic deaths of over 1,000 Syrians killed by chemical weapons, though according to the White House we’re not actually planning to take out the chemical weapons because doing so would require “too much of a commitment.”
* President Obama wants to do what, exactly? Punish evil acts in the form of a telegraphed air strike on Syria to serve as a deterrent? If our invasion of Iraq wasn’t enough of a deterrent to stop evil men from using chemical weapons on their own people, why do we think this will be?
* The world sympathizes with the plight of civilians tragically caught in the crossfire of this internal conflict. But President Obama’s advertised war plan (which has given Assad enough of a heads-up that he’s reportedly already placing human shields at targeted sites) isn’t about protecting civilians, and it’s not been explained how lobbing U.S. missiles at Syria will help Syrian civilians. Do we really think our actions help either side or stop them from hurting more civilians?
* We have no clear mission in Syria. There’s no explanation of what vital American interests are at stake there today amidst yet another centuries-old internal struggle between violent radical Islamists and a murderous dictatorial regime, and we have no business getting involved anywhere without one. And where’s the legal consent of the people’s representatives? Our allies in Britain have already spoken. They just said no. The American people overwhelmingly agree, and the wisdom of the people must be heeded.
* Our Nobel Peace Prize winning President needs to seek Congressional approval before taking us to war. It’s nonsense to argue that, “Well, Bush did it.” Bull. President Bush received support from both Congress and a coalition of our allies for “his wars,” ironically the same wars Obama says he vehemently opposed because of lack of proof of America’s vital interests being at stake.
* Bottom line is that this is about President Obama saving political face because of his “red line” promise regarding chemical weapons.
* As I said before, if we are dangerously uncertain of the outcome and are led into war by a Commander-in-chief who can’t recognize that this conflict is pitting Islamic extremists against an authoritarian regime with both sides shouting “Allah Akbar” at each other, then let Allah sort it out.
– Sarah Palin