American involvement in the civil war in Syria has been perilous. On the one hand the Assad regime is a no friend to America or its allies (principally Israel) so seeing it fall would seem to be advantageous and on the other hand the opposition to the Assad regime within Syria seems to have Al-Qaeda links. Beyond geopolitics is the humanitarian cost – approximately 40-50,000 Syrians have died in the civil war so far, many of those dead were civilians slaughtered by the Assad regime.
It was in this context that President Obama decided where he would draw the line for direct American involvement in the civil war. America is currently only involved in indirect actions such as covertly supplying Anti-Assad forces with light arms. Obama’s line would be the use of chemical weapons by the regime:
President Barack Obama warned Syrian President Bashar Assad Monday that the use of chemical weapons by the regime would be “totally unacceptable.”
“The use of chemical weapons is and would be totally unacceptable and if you make the tragic mistake of using these weapons there will be consequences and you will be held accountable,” he added.
Now it seems that line may have been crossed.
From Reuters:
With rebel gains growing, the army has been increasingly relying on its superior weaponry. It has used air strikes and even long range, scud-type missiles, according to U.S. and NATO reports.
Western powers have warned Assad that using chemical weapons would be a “red line”, which they implied would draw international involvement in the conflict.
Syria repeated on Sunday that it would never use chemical weapons, but activists released reports later that day of what they said was a poison gas attack in the city of Homs.
The reports are difficult to confirm, as the government restricts media access in Syria.
If this reported use of chemical weapons proves to be true, given stated commitments, President Obama may be ordering American forces into another war in the Middle East.




22 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Q: What do the sides in a Civil War call third party troops?
A: Targets.
It would be so easy to make a false flag attack to stir o into action. How much of the fighting was initiated by everyday Syrians and how much by provacateurs? I thought that Libya was a real revolt, but I was fooled. I refuse to believe that Syria is anything but a movement desired by other than Syrians.
So Obamanation’s approach to the Syrian ‘Civil War’ is the same as Stalin’s approach to the Warsaw Uprising. The word would be apropos.
U.S. Officials Doubt Syrian Rebels’ Chemical Attack Claim…
Remember this is the Rebels making the claim…!
The reports I read mentioned no dead. There is a very large difference between “riot control” gasses and deadly gasses.
Where was the US’ “red line” when Saddam used nerve gasses and killed Iranians, and later Kurds?
“Reported gas attack”, as in Iraq’s “reported WMDs”.
A-yep. I don’t think Obama wants to go up against Putin’s chief proxy in the Mideast no matter what Bibi wants.
Looks like we may avoid a replay of WWI after all.
Where was our government when policemen were pepper-spraying OWS?
False information is commonly used to justify war. Often, it is our own government and media who I doubt the most. Unfortunately, this extended holiday time is often used by our government, to slip a lot under our nose. I expect this year to be no different.
Hug your family and friends, keep your eyes, minds and hearts open! Bright Blessings to All!
First of all, American material and tactical support to Syrian rebels is not so covert. Why should Syrian regime, if at all, using chemical weapons inside their country would become a red line for Obama? On the other hand, it would be perfectly joyous thing for Obama when the Israelis’ drop U.S. made bombs, using warplanes given to them by the U.S., on impoverished and defenseless millions of Palestinians inside an Israeli Prison called Gaza. What a contrast! It seems like some people are again itching to use U.S. military to demolish whatever challenge remains for Israel in the middle East, after Iraq.
Does Syria have a lot of oil?
Maybe boehner will get deposed next week? If so, maybe someone in the house will have the cojones to draft articles of impeachment, if he drags us into another MIC advocated war… So tired of trying to fix the rest of the world while we ignore our own country.
The Israeli military has also expressed skepticism about the chemical weapons allegation. From the story currently on the NBCnews.com website:
“JERUSALEM – Israel voiced doubt on Tuesday about claims that chemical weapons had been used against rebels fighting to topple President Bashar Assad.
Activists on Monday claimed civilians had suffered injuries consistent with exposure to some kind of poisonous gas.
“We have seen reports from the opposition. It is not the first time. The opposition has an interest in drawing in international military intervention,” Vice Prime Minister Moshe Yaalon said on Army Radio.”
The allegations are that the Assad regime used 3-Quinuclidinyl_benzilate as a riot control gas. The reports were circumstantial reports from doctors treating people with symptoms they diagnosed as related to BZ. No deaths. And it’s not clear how independent the “doctors” were.
Not hearing any call for a US response to this attack. Most reports I’ve seen treat it like tear gas, which it isn’t by a long shot.
Heard on the news today that AFRICOM will be arming and training the military of the 36 nations in Africa over the next year to prepare them for “rebellions” as a pre-emptive measure. Just think, we’re creating “Assads” faster than we can deal with the consequences of our past meddling with other countries.
Re Mali: I vaguely recall reading that the “rebels” that took over northern Mali were trained and armed and fought in Afghanistan; they came back and overthrew the democraticly elected President.
the united states has become all war, all the time, everywhere and now it’s coming home to roost.
All wars start with lies.
And usually, any side joining in is lying too.
So Obama wants to make a move on Syria? I don’t think Russians will like it. And for all we know, U.S. might plant chemical weapons to prove that it is so.
anti-Syria propaganda X 2
I’m in full agreement with that.
There will never be an attack on Iran . . . it’s been well documented what the blowback of that would be.
As to Syrian comparisons to the beginning of WW1, nah, same reason you posit and with regards to reasons for not bombing or invading Iran.
I gotta believe, even amongst the Pentagon (which is nothing more than Milo Minderbender’s profiteering center to make a few folks rich and powerful, civilian and military both) there are folks who have seen the folly of sole source contracting, it’s failures, the failures of ANY styles of attack and occupy in Iraq and Af/Pac, and the failures of our efforts empire like, who disavow attacking Iran OR Syria.
My ONLY trepidation is reading something recently, about Obama or someone . . . wanting to develop and deploy more rapid deployment forces. Which means more deployments, which is bad.
But China and Russia continue to resist our encirclement, and containment, so, there must still be this mentality amongst the corporate rich and military bent that deployment and occupation is 9/10ths of the law.
I sure hope we get over that shit soon, it’s gonna wipe us out as an empire.
;-)
Grinning and laughing their asses off.
WTF do you THINK they were doing?
*shakeshead*
The US version of hasbara, indeed.
And the pressures from Russia and China, will not allow the hasbara to goad Obama into foolish actions, regardless of what the neocons and their corporate masters drive them to say and do in the media.
I find it humorous that the Corporate Toady Obama (they are all toadies, nothing personal about Obama) is stuck with NOT being the corporate shill the neocons insist he be . . . I have NO idea how or why this is, but SOMEONE in the corporate hierarchy so far has resisted attacking Iran. I suppose this also encompasses attacking Syria.
The so called ‘divide’ between this interesting corporate fascist disparity can be chalked up to the same manner that race is used in our politics, or misogyny, homophobia, etc.
Sell media advertising, stir up fears, generate favorable legislation to make and sell more weapons.
Simple game, Milo Minderbender had it down cold. It continues today.
Obama is not stuck as the corporate shill, because the Cost Benefit analysis with Russia & China on the other side has too many uncertainties.
Uncertainties – no guaranteed profit. While Syria has oil pipelines from the Kirkuk oilfields to the Med, not so much oil.
However, I’m willing to bet there is oil under the Dead Sea. Any takers?