Israel’s attack today on a Syrian weapons convoy, just confirmed by Israeli sources, reportedly carrying advanced missiles from the country on Hezbollah’s behalf (so Israel claims), comes at an incredibly delicate time. Rumors are flying about Syrian use of chemical weapons in its civil war. Earlier reports about this strike said it was targeted at chemical weapons “delivery systems” being shipped to Lebanon. AP says they were “ground-to-ground” missiles, which presumably could be used to target Israel should there be hostilities with Hezbollah. Israel is increasing pressure on the U.S. to intervene presumably both against Assad himself, but even more importantly (for Israel), against the al-Nusra Front Islamist rebels who are increasingly prominent in the fight.
Israel’s air assault, which is its second major assault inside Syria since January, carries multiple messages. One of the main ones is against its sworn Lebanese enemy, Hezbollah, which it desperately wants to prevent from having advanced weapons that can be used in a future Israel-Lebanon war. It offers a message for Syria to stop off-loading these weapons on its Lebanese proxy. It offers a message for Iran, if the origin of the missiles was the Iranians (they could also be Russian). But perhaps most critically, it offers Pres. Obama a message: telling him that if he doesn’t have the balls to take out Assad and to take on Islamists like Hezbollah and al Nusra, that Israel will do it for him.
Increasingly, pro-Israel analysts like Andrew Tabler of WINEP are arguing on behalf of U.S. intervention. That can’t be a message that Obama would welcome.
This puts further pressure on the U.S. to adopt a more muscular policy, so it can exert more control and exercise more restraint on parties like the Israelis. Right now, the U.S. is hardly in the game. The goal for Israel would be to co-opt us and draw us into the battle. For Israel, this isn’t just a battle over Syria and its future, but a battle over Iran as well. Lurking behind Assad is the shadow of the Ayatollah.
No mention of Israel violating international law. It seems Israel and the USA are laws unto themselves when it comes to international law. As for chemical weapons, well we had Iraq with WMD, then Iran with nuclear weapons, and now Syria with chemical weapons and still it gets reported unquestioningly by the press and lapped up by the public. The well known journalist and commentator on the middle east, Robert Fisk, wrote recently with regard to Syria and its use of chemical weapons: “In any normal society the red lights would now be flashing, especially in the world’s newsrooms. But no. We scribes remind the world that Obama said the use of chemical weapons in Syria would be a “game changer” – at least Americans admit it is a game – and our reports confirm what no one has actually confirmed. Chemical arms used. In two Canadian TV studios, I am approached by producers brandishing the same headline. I tell them that on air I shall trash the “evidence” – and suddenly the story is deleted from both programmes. Not because they don’t want to use it – they will later – but because they don’t want anyone suggesting it might be a load of old cobblers.
CNN has no such inhibitions. Their reporter in Amman is asked what is known about the use of chemical weapons by Syria and replies: “Not as much as the world would want to know … the psyche of the Assad regime ….” But has anyone tried? Or simply asked an obvious question, posed to me by a Syrian intelligence man in Damascus last week: if Syria can cause infinitely worse damage with its MiG bombers (which it does) why would it want to use chemicals? And since both the regime and its enemies have accused each other of using such weapons, why isn’t Chuck (Hagel) as fearful of the rebels as he is of the Assad dictatorship?”
Andrea ‘Judy Miller’ Mitchell is once again lying for Israel and on Chris Hayes’ show actually slipped the knife in that a ‘chemical weapons delivery systems’ en route to Lebanon was destroyed, just like her Israeli or Neocon handlers MADE SURE she did. She just had to slip that lie in on Chris Hayes’s ‘All In’ program – just like David Gregory (the other Israeli shill) will slip that lie into Meet the Press this Sunday
She and every Middle East analyst knows these were ‘anti-aircraft missiles’ – defensive weapons – designed to prevent Israel from doing exactly what it was doing in this raid – that is to overfly, bomb, or terrorize Lebanon from the air with impunity.
Over and over and over again we see Andrea Mitchell, like David Gregory, is a ‘liberal Zionist’ propagandist for Israel – so why does everyone (including the great Chris Hayes, who knows better) STILL let her get away with saying the Israelis attacked a ‘chemical weapons delivery system’ when surely he KNOWS she is just disseminating the Israeli military propaganda line, ‘to do her bit for Israel’ once again, at the expense of America?
Andrea and Dick Gregory should be called on true colors – very directly such as ‘aren’t you just lying for Israel, once again, Andrea?’ – instead of Chris Hayes (or Chris Matthews, or anyone else) remaining SILENT in these detestable shills and their propaganda to mislead America once again.
Andrea Mitchell is the worst kind of liar – a real Judy Miller -and it’s time to call Andrea and any other Pro-Israeli shill out when they say ‘Iranian Nuclear Weapons’ or ‘Syrian Chemical Weapons’ and expose them as the Israeli spokespeople they are.
It’s time to dethrone Andrea and every other Pro-Israeli Neocon/War Party soi disant ‘Middle East expert’ as the propagandist they are rather than an ‘expert’
Yes indeed it would be a game-changer if Israel were no longer able to attack Lebanon with impunity – a GOOD game-changer and the sooner the better, Andrea
Thanks again for lying to America for Israel, Andrea.
Andrea is the ‘Big Lie’, Andrea is the whole American arm of the Israeli propaganda regime
‘chemical weapons delivery systems’ aren’t the same as chemical weapons. so if Israel attacked a convoy en route to lebanon – or if you want to be accurate Hezbollah (small detail), carried missiles those could be ‘chemical weapons delivery systems’. Propaganda is doing what you just did – these we’re missiles delivered to a terrorist org (not Lebanon), don’t spin it around as if they we’re sunflowers. and why do you think they were en route to hezbollah? for dismantle? or for launching them to northern israel when the time is right for them?
and to blabbaer,
Israel main concern isn’t assad using chemical weapons or any weapon his got on israel (or his ppl), that would be suicide and will result in his regime fall for sure. in a symmetric conflict (army vs. army) the IDF is far superior. what concerns israel is that these weapons falls to radical org such as hezbollah and al qaeda sub orgs. this orgs don’t care about a military win (they know they won’t) but for a moral one no matter how many ppl die in the process (on both sides) – and what a better way than to throw WMD at israel. this a symmetric conflict is the main concern and that’s the reason israel attacks these convoys. and that is why israel is alarming the world about the use of chemical weapons – if it’s out of storage, who knows who gets their hands on them.
STOP encouraging the arming of terrorist organizations that only benefit by fueling up the flames of the conflict
Richard Silverstein says
I have a deal for you: I’ll discourage the arming of Hezbollah by Iran if you’ll discourage the arming of the IDF by the U.S. military. Deal??
well put, but i’ll sign that deal when you discourage the following (pls if you can also take care of the sub organizations and global ones as well):
Iran, Hamas (including their small cells who fire rockets which they enable when they’re saying it wasn’t them), Fatah miltants (there’s lots of them), Islamic Jihad, Popular Resistance Committees, Hezbollah, Syria, Egypt (a stable regim is also preferable), Sudan, Lebanon, you can wait for now with Jordan let’s see how the situation unfolds, al qaeda and her branches (maybe you’ll succeed where the US and it’s allies didn’t) and self made jihadists of course.
if only you could…. for now i’ll stick with trusting the IDF to do your job
Well said. The chain of lies never ends: One supports another supports another and that is the history of Zionism and Israel. I gave up on Andrea long ago. She must be about 80 by now.
Deïr Yassin says
Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell says: Israel may be behind use of chemical arms in Syria
To me, these attacks (justified or not) are just another repetition of Israel’s actions over the last 40 years or so; if the war was in Jordan, Egypt, or Lebanon they would be flying over, or sending troops to the border, or invading and then leaving after a decade or so of conflict. Today Israel is making repeated bombing attacks on Syria just as in the past it attacked Ba’athist Iraqi nuclear sites. Whether it’s preemptive attacks or defense from invasion the conflict never ends, just as the internal Israeli-Palestinian conflict never ends, because it is the norm. Any wonder why the Israelis with money leave?
The Mighty Cynic says
Too much emphasis placed here on Iran’s strategic stake in Syria, and none given mind to Russia’s critical stake therein, or China’s indirect interests as well.
There is a reason why the S-300s were sold to Assad openhandedly and not to Iran.
If I’m not mistaken, Russia did not deliver the S-300 missile to Syria, but only some sub-systems (i.e. the radar system)