- Posted September 9, 2013 by
This iReport is part of an assignment:
Are chemical weapons a ‘red line’?
Editorial from our local A.M. Costa Rica news source
The question no one seems anxious to answer is what was the strategy that would have caused troops loyal to the Syrian government to fire missiles with deadly gas on civilians.
President Barack Obama goes on television tonight to try to rally the United States to support some sort of strike against the Syrian regime.
The attack Aug. 21 supposedly was on a Damascus suburb that wire services say were populated with opposition supporters. About 1,400 persons died.
Said Obama in his weekly address Saturday:
"We are the United States of America. We cannot turn a blind eye to images like the ones we have seen out of Syria."
But what was the goal in gassing at least 400 children? The answer to that is troubling to the utmost.
There was no strategic advantage to the Syrian regime from the attack. The murders were designed for headlines. The principal suspects are 1.) the opposition, 2.) certain people in Washington or perhaps Langley. Whoever did the crime is trying to take advantage of Obama's low popularity and his desire to act presidential.
But the real danger is that if the U.S. launches some form of attack, there could be a false flag operation within the United States that could be blamed on the Iranians or Muslim terrorists. The advantage to that would be further tightening of the central governments control in light of the embarrassment over the NSA eavesdropping.
Certainly the Syrian opposition would love to see the United
States enter the civil war on its side. Considering the caliber of
the people in the opposition, a gas attack to make a political point is not out of the question.
The Israelis, who have been considered suspects, really have no advantage in supporting either side. Israeli officials hope for a prolonged and bloody civil war wiping out any number of potential enemies.
But what about the motives of some in the United States. A.M. Costa Rica is not a fan of Barack Obama. But this newspaper could never believe that he or his close aides were behind the attack for public relations reasons. Some have suggested that Obama wants to launch an attack against Syria so he would look presidential. And he may do that. Even if Obama had such a depraved mind that he would engineer a sarin gas attack, the presidency is far too visible to keep such an act hidden for long.
That is why the suspicions fall on the dark figures lurking in the basements of certain government buildings. These are places where pragmatism rules, and morality and ethics are words in a dictionary.
Suppose Obama launches an attack. Suddenly sarin gas canisters are opened in New York City with fatal results. The U.S. response to this presumed attack would be to tighten further the unconstitutional actions of the new authoritarians in Washington. More restrictions on travel. Perhaps martial law. Perhaps justification for NSA eavesdropping and the need for more.
The best part of this conspiracy is that most officials would not have to be in on the dirty secret. They would respond knee-jerk and uncritically to the presumed threat.
—Sept. 9, 2013