Will the Nobel peacemaker attack Syria?

US President Barack Obama (Nobel Peace Prize) is in talks with David Cameron and Francois Hollande (not yet winners). These three are about to strike Syria. Why is it still not hit? They are held back by several points: first, C-300 in Syria; secondly, the high cost of the operation; thirdly, not that indecision, not that thoughtfulness of the main one of the three - Obama, whose internal political rating leaves much to be desired. It may well be that the fuss with aircraft carriers and bases in Qatar and Saudi Arabia is started only in order to make understand to the intractable Russia: The West will not retreat from Syria.



No, we are not talking about a strike right now. The military, under the strict guidance of another pacifist, Chuck Hagel (US Secretary of Defense), is waiting for the command "face" from its president. But the president is slow. On August 28, a meeting was scheduled in The Hague for representatives of Moscow and Washington regarding the holding of a conference on Syria - and that's why Obama keeps quiet. It is unlikely he is going to go to war in Syria. I wish I would have gone long ago. His goal is seen quite well - to put pressure on Russia, so that she retreated. If she retreats, Obama, the monarchies of the Gulf, and then France and Britain will quickly finance and arm the Syrian rebels to the teeth - and they will do what the White House has been waiting for. The “do-it-yourself” war is no longer affordable for either the EU countries or Washington.

Currently, the military of three countries - the United States, Britain and France - are negotiating both about the use of chemical weapons in Syria, and about setting goals in Syria.

As for the weapons of mass destruction, its use by the forces of Assad will be “proven” if Russia begins to stubbornly. The provocation was made just in time for the arrival of UN inspectors. This is an excellent indication that chemical weapons were not applied by Assad, which even Western media do not deny sobriety. For the deaths in Syria, the militants are responsible, who obediently, like children in kindergarten, draw the “red lines” for the American president, which he can then present to the “international community” as an “Iraqi argument”.

And what if the opposite will be proved - that is, that the opposition used the poisonous substances? Well, on this score, the West also thought of everything. Even a loud public statement has already been made that Assad has diligently destroyed all traces of the use of weapons of mass destruction by artillery attacks. And that which was not destroyed, disappeared by itself. That which was not destroyed and not eroded, was subjected to falsification. Such a complex hypothesis was expressed today by British Foreign Secretary William Hague. Of course, he added, without waiting for evidence from the UN inspectorate: Assad conducted a chemical attack.

It is known that representatives of the international organization Doctors Without Borders recently confirmed the death of a person with signs of neurotoxicosis in Syria 355. A total of 3600 people turned to hospitals with relevant signs.

As noted by Egor Skvortsov ("Vesti"), a military conflict can go on the Libyan scenario: no-fly zone plus pinpoint air strikes.

The main American strike force in the region are two aircraft carrier groups in the Arabian Sea. Syria is surrounded by American air bases (Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Jordan, Turkey). Platform for action aviation Israel can also provide.

From the Mediterranean side, the aircraft support the fleet: five ships on combat patrol, up to three ships may be in the area within a day. Naval formations carry more than three hundred "Tomahawks", including those equipped with tactical nuclear charges.

However, the main role in the conflict, according to the plans of the Pentagon, must be played by opposition fighters in Syria. As for air support, then the Americans are in serious trouble: the creation of a no-fly zone involves the suppression of enemy air defenses, and in Syria, the Russian C-300 complexes. Maybe Obama and Hagel think about them ...

According to Vladislav Vorobiev ("Russian newspaper"), The Pentagon today is ready for a repetition in Syria of not just the Libyan scenario, but with impurities of the Iraqi one.



But while Obama hesitates. The wars in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan have shown that military spending does not patch up old holes in the US budget, but creates new ones.

Meanwhile, aggressive plans were announced by Britain and France.

The British Navy began preparations for a joint military operation with the United States in Syria. Reports about it "Lenta.ru" with reference to The Telegraph.

Negotiations between David Cameron and the American authorities continue. When agreement is reached, a military operation may start next week.

As the aforementioned William Hague said, the United States and its allies must show Assad that the world community cannot remain indifferent to the “unpunished” use of chemical weapons against the Syrian population.

France, like Britain, also blamed the use of agents on the Syrian authorities. RIA News" cites a statement by the head of the French Foreign Ministry, Laurent Fabius, made during his visit to Jerusalem.

On the alleged use of poisonous substances in the suburbs of Damascus, the minister said: “The chemical massacre in Syria is a clear responsibility of the regime. It cannot remain unanswered. This is the position of France, as well as other democracies. I hope that what happened will receive a decisive response. "

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, in turn, called what is happening in a neighboring country "a crime committed by the Syrian regime against its own people."

Netanyahu did not forget about Iran: “The Assad regime has completely become a client of Iran, and Syria has become an Iranian testing ground. Now ... Iran is looking at what the reaction will be to the use of chemical weapons ... We simply cannot allow the most dangerous regimes in the world to get the most dangerous weapon in the world. In the end, the extremists will apply it. Therefore, we are obliged to deprive them of these weapons. ”

Meanwhile, the Syrian military discovered that Haig and his geopolitical “co-authors” can be attributed to “falsified” evidence. The soldiers found a warehouse in the suburbs of Damascus with toxic substances. The journalist of the Syrian channel "Ihbariya" Yara Saleh, who was among those who surveyed this place, gave an interview to the correspondent "Voices of Russia" Fahim al-Surani.

The servicemen discovered chemical weapons in a militant tunnel located in Jobar. It was in the Jobar area that the militants fired two rockets with gas earlier. Later, when the Syrian army took the area, they found a warehouse and a laboratory where shells were stored and filled with agents. Also found new gas masks in the boxes (by the way, with the brand "Made in USA"). Even among the finds are two bottles labeled "Made in Saudi Arabia." Plastic cylinders with chemicals and unknown white powder were also found. All this is sent to specialists for analysis.

Of course, these findings are unlikely to take into account both the White House, and Paris with London. As for the UN, this organization has long been not distinguished by impartiality and independence of judgment. From the final loss of prestige, it is probably kept by only the right of veto in the Security Council of Russia.

Of course, the plans of the Persian Gulf monarchies against Syria are the old enemies of Assad.

According to world media, from the Turkish border, hundreds of tons of weapons are entering areas of Syria captured by rebels. The last entry - 400 tons of weapons - came from the Turkish province of Hatay, reports "RT".

“Twenty trucks arrived from the Turkish border, now supplies are distributed among several weapons depots in the north of the country,” said Mohammed Sadam, who witnessed the shipment of weapons from an unknown point in Hatay province in Turkey. He also noted that he sponsored the operation of the Gulf countries.

A member of the Supreme Military Council of the Free Syrian Army confirmed the information on supplies. He reported that arms exports to Syria from the Gulf States have increased since the chemical attack.

The UN commented on the statement of the Syrian rebels about the receipt from the foreign sponsors of a party of weapons weighing about 400 tons, writes "Russian newspaper". “We have seen these messages, but are not able to check them. The position of the Secretary General on the danger of further militarization of the conflict is well known, ”representative of the UN Secretary General Martin Nesirki told ITAR-TASS.

Obviously, the United States is going to take part in the arming of militants. The media reported that the United States Army intends to acquire about 600 thousands of AK-47 stores. The request is published on the Federal Business Opportunities website. In this appeal, it appears that the army needs 592.825 new 30-charging stores AK-47, Mixednews.ru with reference to infowars.com. Such shops are widely used by opposition forces in wars around the world.

Syrian President believes that the leadership of Western countries still will not go on a military operation. Talk about it "Vesti" with reference to an interview with Assad newspaper "Izvestia".

“The issue of the military invasion of Syria has been raised not for the first time,” said Assad. - From the very beginning of the crisis, the USA, France and Great Britain tried to make a military invasion, but, to their misfortune, the matter took a different turn. They tried to convince Russia and China to change their position in the UN Security Council, but this did not happen. They could not convince their people and the whole world that their policies in the Middle East are smart and useful. ”

If the United States decides to strike or invade the country, they are “waiting for failure, as in all previous wars they have started, from Vietnam to the present day,” Bashar Assad said.

“America has participated in many wars, but has never been able to achieve its political goals, for which it started these wars,” the Syrian President said. “She could not convince her multinational people in the righteousness of these wars, as well as instill her ideology in other countries.”

It should be added to the conclusion of the review that the answer to the question of “to be or not to be” intervention in Syria depends on Russia. 28 August, the day after tomorrow, is the day when the Kremlin will be tested for the firmness of its political position.

And a few more words - to complete the picture. In a journalist article Reuters L. Ruton published data from a public opinion poll “Reuters” / “Ipsos”, according to which the Americans categorically oppose US intervention in the civil war in Syria and believe that Washington should stay away from the conflict - even if the Syrian government really used chemical weapons against civilians.

About 60% of Americans surveyed (there were 1448 respondents altogether) stated that the US should not intervene in the civil war in Syria, and only 9% believe that Obama "must act."

A Reuters / Ipsos poll conducted by 19-23 in August showed that 25% of Americans would support US intervention in the war in Syria if the Syrian president’s forces used chemicals in attacks against civilians. But 46% still object to US intervention. The material notes a decrease in American support for the possible actions of the US government compared with a survey from August 13 (in that survey, 30,2% of Americans supported the intervention if chemicals were used and 41,6% did not support it).

Both the old and the new polls show that many Americans do not approve of a possible decision by the US leadership to get involved in yet another conflict in the Middle East.

Ordinary Americans do not approve of arms supplies to the Syrian opposition. According to the study, all 27% said they support sending weapons to the Syrian rebels, and 47% opposed this. Answering another question, only 11% said that Obama should do more in Syria than send weapons to the rebels, and the remaining 89 percent said that he should not help these rebels at all.

Common Americans think sensibly. That would be Obama to hear the voice of his own people! However, instead, he listens to the voices of Cameron and Hollande - people who are also very distant from their peoples and who do not brag about ratings either.