Heated Anti-Assad Rhetoric
by Stephen Lendman
Washington's Syrian regime change plans are longstanding. All independent governments are targeted.
At issue isn't whether they're despotic, democratic, or anything in between. It's about establishing client states subservient to Western interests. That matters most.
Heated rhetoric supports it. Targeted leaders are vilified. Since early last year, Western-generated violence and rhetorical assaults targeted Assad.
Like lyrics from the old Sinatra favorite, they go together like love and marriage. You can't one without the other.
Daily reports highlight more insurgent violence. On June 28, Reuters headlined "Blast hits Damascus as Turkey sends troops to border," saying:
Insurgents "attacked Syria's main court in central Damascus on Thursday...."
A loud explosion was heard. A cloud of black smoke rose. State television accurately called it a terrorist attack. It followed escalated Damascus incidents.
It came a day after the privately owned Al-Ikhbariaya television station was targeted. Seven deaths resulted. It's facilities sustained heavy damage.
SANA state media reported "three injuries and material damage to 20 cars...." The parking area of the Justice Palace "in the Center of Damascus at al-Marjeh area" was struck.
"Dozens of wrecked and burning cars were strewn over a car park used by lawyers and judges."
Other reports said Turkey deployed missile batteries, rocket launchers, and anti-aircraft weapons close to Syria's border. About 30 military trucks arrived in the coastal town of Iskenderun.
Armored military vehicles also headed for Sanliurfa and Reyhanli in Southern Turkey's Hatay Province. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced new rules of engagement, adding:
"Any risk posed by Syria on the Turkish border, any military element that could post a threat, will be considered a threat and treated as a military target."
No further explanation followed. He's spoiling for a fight and may get it.
Washington directs Syrian operations. Turkey runs point for what's planned. Expect Obama to choose his time and pretext for full-scale intervention. According to the Mossad-connected DEBKAfile (DF), it's not now.
On June 27, it headlined "Obama rebuffs Erdogan's appeal to lead Turkey in Syria attack," saying:
On June 26, Erdogan and Obama spoke by phone. He "argued forcefully that" Friday's aircraft downing incident "provided the perfect opening for a Western-Muslim-Arab offensive...."
Launching it "could drive into Syria, create no-fly zones, attack regime and military targets, and establish safe zones for rebels and refugees."
He said Turkey's military forces are "ready for immediate action," but Washington "must take the military lead in this operation...."
Obama said not now. Let insurgent and "American, British, Turkish, and French" covert actions continue. He'll decide when the time is right for full-scale intervention. Expect it. It's coming. They'll be no uncertainty when it's launched.
In readiness, Turkish troops are on "red alert" with instructions "to shoot to kill" if ordered.
"Ankara is more than ready to hit back at Syria," said DF. So is Israel against Iran. Washington will decide when. Heated rhetoric suggests what to expect. Only it's timing is unknown.
Assad knows the threat. He faces it daily. On June 26, he told his cabinet:
"We are in a state of real war in every respect of the word and when we're in a state of war, all of our politics must be concentrated on winning this war."
DF added that British special forces in Syria actively aid insurgents. Tactics replicate earlier ones in Libya. UK, US and other special forces together with MI6 and CIA operatives direct anti-Assad activities.
Mercenary fighters need leadership. Western specialists provide it. They're experts at killing, destruction, and choosing targets.
Their fingerprints are all over major terror attacks and bombings. Insurgents didn't plan or carry them out on their own.
Heated Rhetoric Supports the Drumbeat for War
John Bolton represents the worst of right wing extremism. He supports imperial wars, defies democratic values, and spurns rule of law principles.
On June 25, his National Review article headlined "What to Do about Syria? It didn't need reading to know his views. He rose in the Republican neocon ranks as a Jesse Helms protege.
As North Carolina senator from 1973 - 2003, his virulent anti-communism, racism, and other extremist views were well known.
Bolton matched his support for despots, imperial wars, and Bush's torture policy. He represents the dark side of US policy.
He accused Obama of "dither(ing) over whether" or not to intervene militarily.
Syria is an "Iranian satellite," he claimed. Tehran has "growing regional influence. Syria remains a threat to Israel. (It) support(s) the terrorist group Hezbollah...."
It gives Russia a regional base. Regime change is "in America's interest as well as....Israel and our Arab allies...."
It's time to stop "coddl(ing)" and start acting, said Bolton. Russia, China and Iran help Assad retain power. Washington's "intervention should not be confined to Syria and would inevitably entail confronting Iran and possibly Russia. This the Obama administration is unwilling to do, although it should."
UN efforts failed, said Bolton. Obama isn't up to the job. "Russia should be told in no uncertain terms that it can forget about sustained good relations with the United States as long as it continues to back Assad."
Perhaps Bolton hadn't noticed the resurgence of Cold War politics. Putin may displace Assad and Iranian leaders as public enemy number one. His opposition to America's imperial agenda draws condemnation.
Today's stakes are huge. World peace is threatened. Bolton's bent on heightening tensions. Withdraw from New START, he urges. Accelerate and expand America's missile shield. Let Moscow and Beijing know who's boss. Send them "a wake-up call."
Give Iran "a stark choice." Go along with what we say, or else. In Syria, "we should do now what we could have begun ten years ago." Go all-out to oust Assad "on our terms....Better late than never."
Imagine extremists like Bolton holding high positions in government. Imagine him back under Romney. If not him, others like him will influence US policies under any president.
Washington is infested with hardline zealots. War on humanity tops their agenda. Expect no end of conflicts ahead.
On June 23, a Washington Post editorial headlined "The West lags behind on Assad," saying:
Debate in Washington "is being overtaken by developments on the ground. For months the Obama administration has been resisting" more aggressive steps.
"(G)rowing rebel strength is welcome news...."
Post writers worry about Syria "tumbling into chaos" or fighting spilling across borders to neighboring countries. Perhaps Israel is most on their mind.
They're unconcerned about insurgent killings and other atrocities. The editorial ignored them. WP editors focus solely on winning. Mounting deaths and destruction don't matter. Nor does ravaging another country for wealth, power, and imperial dominance.
WP urges more aggressive efforts "to shape and support" insurgent fighters. Hastening Assad's removal matters most. "(R)emaining passive (is not) an option."
Post writers barely stopped short of declaring war. Expect a future editorial to cross the line and endorse it.
Expect lots of other scoundrel media support unless Obama preempts them by attacking. Given how events on the ground are escalating, it could happen any time.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at email@example.com.
His new book is titled "How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War"
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.