The Hollowness of the Case for War.

In their pathetic attempts to compel Russia to accede to the punitive bombing of the Assad regime in Syria, the governments of the US, UK & France seem to have submitted evidence distinctly below par, as reported by The Independent yesterday:

Syria crisis: Russia calls US chemical weapons evidence 'unconvincing' as Assad regime asks UN for protection In other international developments, while France prepares its own intelligence for parliament scrutiny, China warns Americans not to act alone on military intervention The US's attempts to prove that the Syrian regime was behind the alleged Damascus chemical weapons attack are "absolutely unconvincing", according to Russia's foreign minister. The accusation that Bashar al-Assad's government ordered the bombing of its own people using nerve agents is central to the US's case for a military retaliation. Ahead of the issue going to a vote in Congress, Secretary of State John Kerry has assisted [sic] the state is behind the deaths of over 1,400 Syrians on 21 August, 400 of whom were children. Yet speaking today at Russia's top diplomatic school, Sergey Lavrov said the evidence coming from Washington lacked crucial detail. "Yes, they showed us some findings but there was nothing specific there: no geographic coordinates, no names, no proof that the tests were carried out by the professionals," Lavrov said – without elaborating on the nature of those tests. Lavrov said: "What our American, British and French partners showed us in the past and have showed just recently is absolutely unconvincing. And when you ask for more detailed proof they say all of this is classified so we cannot show this to you." The comments mirror those coming from Syrian officials today, which refute US evidence and accuse them of following ulterior motives in their involvement in Syria. The regime has now written a letter to the UN, addressed to secretary general Ban Ki-moon and President of the Security Council Maria Cristina Perceval, asking for the international organisation's protection against anticipated strikes.

Kerry	Lavrov	Ban	Perceval

It called on "the UN Secretary General to shoulder his responsibilities for preventing any aggression on Syria" and asked the body to "maintain its role as a safety valve to prevent the absurd use of force out of the frame of international legitimacy". The letter, written by Syrian UN envoy Bashar Ja'afari, said the US was "a state that uses force against whoever opposes its policies", and described the evidence cited by Mr Kerry as "old stories fabricated by terrorists" based on fake photos from the internet. While the US's evidence was called into doubt, France was set to present its own intelligence on the alleged chemical attack to its own parliament. President Francois Hollande is becoming increasingly isolated in his demands for Bashar al-Assad's government to be punished with military force, but reports indicate the country's constitution means it is highly unlikely that any such action would be put to a wider democratic vote. But Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault will meet parliament leaders later today to discuss the crisis, and the head of parliament's foreign affairs committee Elisabeth Guigou said this would include the presentation of French intelligence which pointed clearly to Assad's forces being behind the attack. Elsewhere, China has urged the US not to act alone in trying to punish the Syrian government for its alleged involvement in the incident, after its foreign ministry said today Washington had briefed Beijing over the matter. China has so far joined Russia in blocking UN action against the regime, and spokesman Hong Lei said any response must conform to the UN Charter and the basic principles underlying international relations.

Ja'afari	Ayrault	Guigou	Hong

The UN's refugee agency today released its latest statistics regarding those displaced by the country's ongoing civil war. The organisation's head Tarik Kurdi said seven million Syrians, almost a third of the entire population, have been forced to move as a result of the violence. He said around two million had been made to flee into neighbouring countries, and also that two million children were among the overall total impacted by the conflict. Mr Kuri said UN assistance had thus far been a "drop in the sea of humanitarian need", and that international donations would have to be more than trebled to meet the basic requirements helping those displaced by the brutal war. More than 100,000 Syrians have been killed since the uprising against President Assad began in 2011.

Funny, the sort of dissembling exhibited by the US, UK & France in the above article is reminiscent of the farrago of 'evidence' put before the House of Commons in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq. Vague assurances of proof & dodgy dossiers & evidence that cannot be shown for security reasons 'but trust us on this' was insulting enough the first time around but this time, & presented to a foreign government of no little significance, is laughable & makes the Western democracies look as though they are led by adolescents. This is, perhaps, the only thing to have the ring of truth in this whole lamentable episode.

Credible speculation as to precisely why Western nations are so keen to pursue a course of action that can only help al-Qaeda is offered in this opinion piece by Robert Fisk, also supplied by The Independent last Friday:

Iran, not Syria, is the West's real target Iran is ever more deeply involved in protecting the Syrian government. Thus a victory for Bashar is a victory for Iran. And Iranian victories cannot be tolerated by the West Before the stupidest Western war in the history of the modern world begins – I am, of course, referring to the attack on Syria that we all yet have to swallow – it might be as well to say that the cruise missiles which we confidently expect to sweep onto one of mankind's oldest cities have absolutely nothing to do with Syria. They are intended to harm Iran. They are intended to strike at the Islamic republic now that it has a new and vibrant president – as opposed to the crackpot Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – and when it just might be a little more stable. Iran is Israel's enemy. Iran is therefore, naturally, America's enemy. So fire the missiles at Iran's only Arab ally. There is nothing pleasant about the regime in Damascus. Nor do these comments let the regime off the hook when it comes to mass gassing. But I am old enough to remember that when Iraq – then America's ally – used gas against the Kurds of Hallabjah in 1988, we did not assault Baghdad. Indeed, that attack would have to wait until 2003, when Saddam no longer had any gas or any of the other weapons we had nightmares over. And I also happen to remember that the CIA put it about in 1988 that Iran was responsible for the Hallabjah gassings, a palpable lie that focused on America's enemy whom Saddam was then fighting on our behalf. And thousands – not hundreds – died in Hallabjah. But there you go. Different days, different standards. And I suppose it's worth noting that when Israel killed up to 17,000 men, women and children in Lebanon in 1982, in an invasion supposedly provoked by the attempted PLO murder of the Israeli ambassador in London – it was Saddam's mate Abu Nidal who arranged the killing, not the PLO, but that doesn't matter now – America merely called for both sides to exercise "restraint". And when, a few months before that invasion, Hafez al-Assad – father of Bashar – sent his brother up to Hama to wipe out thousands of Muslim Brotherhood rebels, nobody muttered a word of condemnation. "Hama Rules" is how my old mate Tom Friedman cynically styled this bloodbath. Anyway, there's a different Brotherhood around these days – and Obama couldn't even bring himself to say "boo" when their elected president got deposed. But hold on. Didn't Iraq – when it was "our" ally against Iran – also use gas on the Iranian army? It did. I saw the Ypres-like wounded of this foul attack by Saddam – US officers, I should add, toured the battlefield later and reported back to Washington – and we didn't care a tinker's curse about it. Thousands of Iranian soldiers in the 1980-88 war were poisoned to death by this vile weapon. I travelled back to Tehran overnight on a train of military wounded and actually smelled the stuff, opening the windows in the corridors to release the stench of the gas. These young men had wounds upon wounds – quite literally. They had horrible sores wherein floated even more painful sores that were close to indescribable. Yet when the soldiers were sent to Western hospitals for treatment, we journos called these wounded – after evidence from the UN infinitely more convincing than what we're likely to get from outside Damascus – "alleged" gas victims. So what in heaven's name are we doing? After countless thousands have died in Syria's awesome tragedy, suddenly – now, after months and years of prevarication – we are getting upset about a few hundred deaths. Terrible. Unconscionable. Yes, that is true. But we should have been traumatised into action by this war in 2011. And 2012. But why now? I suspect I know the reason. I think that Bashar al-Assad's ruthless army might just be winning against the rebels whom we secretly arm. With the assistance of the Lebanese Hezbollah – Iran's ally in Lebanon – the Damascus regime broke the rebels in Qusayr and may be in the process of breaking them north of Homs. Iran is ever more deeply involved in protecting the Syrian government. Thus a victory for Bashar is a victory for Iran. And Iranian victories cannot be tolerated by the West. And while we're on the subject of war, what happened to those magnificent Palestinian-Israeli negotiations that John Kerry was boasting about? While we express our anguish at the hideous gassings in Syria, the land of Palestine continues to be gobbled up. Israel's Likudist policy – to negotiate for peace until there is no Palestine left – continues apace, which is why King Abdullah of Jordan's nightmare (a much more potent one than the "weapons of mass destruction" we dreamed up in 2003) grows larger: that "Palestine" will be in Jordan, not in Palestine. But if we are to believe the nonsense coming out of Washington, London, Paris and the rest of the "civilised" world, it's only a matter of time before our swift and avenging sword smiteth the Damascenes. To observe the leadership of the rest of the Arab world applauding this destruction is perhaps the most painful historical experience for the region to endure. And the most shameful. Save for the fact that we will be attacking Shia Muslims and their allies to the handclapping of Sunni Muslims. And that's what civil war is made of.

While it is understandable for Western nations to want to curtail Iran's influence & activities, surely they realise that Iran does not need Syria in the building of their atomic weapons? Surely they realise that, with Assad gone, what will be left will be a rabble dominated by al-Qaeda? And, what then?

Well, the answer to that comes to us from the year 1936, in a letter to the French government from prominent Alawis of the Western Syrian mountain region, on the folly of incorporating their nation into a greater Syrian republic, translated Dr Mordechai Kedar, it appeared in The Jewish Press a year ago (hat-tips to Elder of Ziyon & Jillpol @Jillpol):

Dear Mr. Leon Blum, Prime Minister of France. In light of the negotiations that are being conducted between France and Syria, we – the Alawite leaders in Syria – respectfully draw the following points to your attention and to that of your party: The Alawite nation which has maintained its independence over the years by dint of much zeal and many casualties, is a nation which is different from the Muslim Sunni nation in its religious faith , in its customs and in its history. It has never happened that the Alawite nation was under the rule of the Muslims who rule the inland cities of the land. The Alawite nation refuses to be annexed to Muslim Syria, because the Islamic religion is thought of as the official religion of the country, and the Alawite nation is thought of as heretical by the Islamic religion. Therefore we ask you to consider the dreadful and terrible fate that awaits the Alawites if they are forced to be annexed to Syria, when it will be free from the oversight of the Mandate, and it will be in their power to implement the laws that stem from its religion. Awarding independence to Syria and cancelling the mandate would be a good example of socialist principles in Syria, but the meaning of full independence will be the control by a few Muslim families on the Alawite nation in Cilicia, in Askadron and in the Ansariyya Mountains. Even having a parliament and a constitutional government will not ensure personal freedom. This parliamentary control is only a facade, lacking any effective value, and the truth of the matter is that it will be controlled by religious fanaticism that will target the minorities. Do the leaders of France want the Muslims to control the Alawite nation and throw it into the bosom of misery? The spirit of fanaticism and narrow-mindedness, whose roots are deep in the heart of the Arab Muslims toward all those who are not Muslim, is the spirit that continually feeds the Islamic religion, and therefore there is no hope that the situation will change. If the Mandate is cancelled, the danger of death and destruction will be a threat upon the minorities in Syria, even if the cancellation will decree freedom of thought and freedom of religion. Why, even today we see how the Muslim residents of Damascus force the Jews who live under their auspices to sign a document in which they are forbidden to send food to their Jewish brothers who are suffering from the disaster in Palestine, the situation of the Jews in Palestine being the strongest and most concrete proof of the importance of the religious problem among the Muslim Arabs toward anyone who does not belong to Islam. Those good Jews, who have brought to the Muslim Arabs civilization and peace, and have spread wealth and prosperity to the land of Palestine, have not hurt anyone and have not taken anything by force, and nevertheless the Muslims have declared holy war against them and have not hesitated to slaughter their children and their women despite the fact that England is in Palestine and France is in Syria. Therefore a black future awaits the Jews and the other minorities if the Mandate is cancelled and Muslim Syria is unified with Muslim Palestine. This union is the ultimate goal of the Muslim Arabs. We appreciate your generosity of spirit in defending the Syrian people and your desire to realize their independence, but Syria at the present time is far from the lofty goal that you aspire for her, because she is still trapped in the spirit of religious feudalism. We do not think that the French government and the French socialist Party will agree to the Syrians' independence, since its implementation will cause the subjugation of the Alawite nation, placing the Alawite minority in danger of death and destruction. It cannot be that you will agree to the Syrian request to annex the Alawite nation to Syria, because your lofty principles – if they support the idea of freedom – will not accept the situation in which one nation try to stifle the freedom of another by forcing its annexation. You may see fit to assure the rights of the Alawites and other minorities in the wording of the treaty, but we emphasize to you that contracts have no value in the Syrian Islamic mentality. We have seen this in the past, with the pact that England signed with Iraq, which forbade the Iraqis to slaughter the Assyrians and the Yazidis. The Alawite nation, which we, the undersigned, represent, cries out to the government of France and to the French Socialist Party, and requests them to ensure its freedom and independence within its small boundaries. The Alawite nation places its well being in the hands of the French Socialist leaders, and is sure that it will find strong and dependable support for the nation, which is a faithful friend, who has rendered to France a great service, and now is under the threat of death and destruction.

The signatories to that document were:

Aziz Agha al-Hawash, Mahmud Agha Jadid, Mahmud Bek Jadid, Suleiman Assad, Suleiman al-Murshid, Mahmud Suleiman al-Ahmad.

Suleiman al-Assad was Bashar's grandfather. Suleiman knew that the Sunni majority would want them dead for being Alawites. They could see this coming. They knew the hateful & genocidal nature of mainstream Islam & they have been proved right. This is why Hafez played by 'Hama rules' as related by Robert Fisk. Assad knows, damn well, that he & the entire Alawite nation would be wiped out in campaign of mass extermination if al-Qaeda were to prevail in that sorry Frankenstein's monster of a country.

The only mysterious thing is, if the Assad dynasty can see the genocidal nature of mainstream Islam, & the Israelis can see the genocidal nature of mainstream Islam, how can Western leaders not see it too?