Skip to main content

The US makes a "mistake"


War is a nasty business.  Quaint notions to the contrary, there are no rules save one: win.  The Aleppo rebels and their supporters could have peace, safety, and full bellies on the instant: just walk away.  Wave a white handkerchief and surrender.  It's as simple as that.  Otherwise stay there and die.

The "rebels" were stupid to let the US (acting as Israel's stooge) dupe them into helping in a failed criminal regime change enterprise.  They trusted the US (!!!!!!), and now they're screwed(surprise! surprise!): ruled by fundamentalist Islamic head-choppers, bombed and starved by the government they and their Saudi and Turkish "friends" tried to destroy.  (This is your brain on fundamentalist Islam -- or fundamentalist anything, for that matter.)

For five years Deir ez-Zor remained under Syrian government control and the Jebel Tharda hill-top military position provided protection for  the area.  Five years they were there, and the US, which for five years has wanted to destroy Assad and his govt, would have us believe they forgot, or didn't notice, or... something,... "Sorry, the airstrike was a mistake."

Here's my take:  "Let's bomb the Jebel Tharda position and let ISIS take Deir ez-Zor.  That will, in a stroke, clear Assad's forces from all of Eastern Syria (so we can take possession after ISIS has been disposed of), and send a message to Assad that he needs to wise up.  He's certainly not going to attack us  -- we wish -- because then we would have the excuse we have wanted for so long to bomb his army to dust.  It's a total win win.  Let's go for it.  Then of course we'll pour a little salt in the wound by saying 'Whoops!  We made a mistake. Sorry about that.'  (He he, wink wink.)"

It appears that Assad's response has been to send a message of his own: "You're right, we don't dare bomb American forces.   But the Russians will help us reinforce Deir ez-Zor, retake Jebel Tharda, and win the war by bombing the living crap out of all your terrorist proxies in Idlib province,.... and retaking Aleppo.  Suck on that!  And you thought you would screw us with your phony-ass "cease fire" scam.  Riiiiiight!"

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Right to exist, right to self-defense.....not!

The following is a post I made to The Algemeiner, an online Jewish publication, in response to "Golda Meir was no J-Streeter", http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/09/08/golda-meir-was-no-j-streeter/#comment-4474211. Like many Jewish publications The Algemeiner has a limited tolerance for the truth when the truth is critical of Israel and its supporters, and so, not surprisingly, the comment was deleted by "moderation". I reprint it here for your consideration. ************************** Make no mistake, I’m an American and a Jew. For those of you thoroughly infected with the Judiasm-destroying poison of Zionism, here is the antidote to your Kool-aid dreams. Drink deeply and wake up to reality. We often hear the phrase “Israel’s right to exist” and along with it, “Israel’s right to self-defense.” Hear them endlessly, by propagandists who repeat them endlessly. But endless repetition does not make a thing true. The phantom “legiti...
Post a Comment
Read more

re censorship at antiwar.com

Really, Thomas? Who is the drama queen here? You're embarrassing yourself with this name calling. My comment disappeared. What am I to think, you're on a coffee break? So I posted the link to my backup, my all-but-invisible, low-traffic,... make that no-traffic,... blog. The "rules" you cite give the Jews a free pass on their complicity in the Zionist project. It's ok to criticize Zionism or Israel, but not the Jews that make their crimes possible. That appears to be the rule, and it amounts to Antiwar.com caving to Jewish/Zionist intimidation. It may be discretion -- as in "discretion is the better part of valor" -- but absent the lethality of bullets-and-bombs-combat, it's cowardly. It was cowardly then, as it is cowardly now. That said, it ***IS*** Justin's website and he gets to decide on when "discretion" -- strategic restraint -- is called for. I've had this issue since before you were moderator. Someone Jewis...
Post a Comment
Read more

Political Self-Immolation

"What is relevant is Donald Jr's INTENT. In his email response (I am paraphrasing, but you can verify) he says, if the offer of dirt on Hillary is true, I love it! The intent behind this statement is loud and clear." I agree with you that this is the heart of the matter, and like you I am surprised that the so few of the anti-Trump people have zeroed in on this crucial element. Good on you for bringing it front and center. Let's take a look. Trump jr gets an email that says, "We've got dirt on HRC from the Russian govt, and we want to share it with you as part of Russia/Putin's effort to help Trump win the presidency." (This may not be absolutely the precise wording, but this will be the most aggressive/damning "parsing".) Then Trump jr says, "I love it, bring it on." This will be spun as Trump jr declaring his willingness and his INTENT (your caps) to collude, and as the very first substantive act in the process of collusi...
Post a Comment
Read more