AMERICA'S OCCUPATION OF PARTS OF SYRIA - TERRORISM ON PAR WITH 'ISLAMIC STATE' AND DAESH? PART 1.
'It has been said that America's and her Coalition of the Willing, in their attack on Iraq in 2003', have created the virulent and pernicious global epidemic which is referred to as ISIS, Daesh and ISIL.
What we might not know, is whether the United States intended to create this monster, or whether it is just another unfortunate consequence of persistently poor American foreign policies and even poorer leadership.
If it is, as with America's role in creating the Taliban in Afghanistan, in attempt to thwart the the Soviet Union, then that could be more worrying.
If it is intentional, then we might want to consider whether America is not manipulating the ISIS/ISIL/Daesh presence in Syria and Iraq. As tactical and strategic means of achieving their geo-political goals in the Middle East'.
So, consider this. Mexico invades the southern regions of the United States, and arms disaffected Americans and create militias of them.
In return, the Americans attack the Mexican and their proxies. The Mexicans then responded by attacking the Americans, citing 'self-defence' as their justification.
Were such a scenario to transpire, no reasonable person could take issue with the Americans slapping down the Mexicans and their coalition of proxy armies.
Indeed, all fair-minded people and nations, might be expected to come to the support of the Americans and offer them their full support for having taken such action to protect and secure their sovereignty.
The United Nations would also be expected to come out and make a statement condemning the Mexicans and their proxies, and asking them to desist from their unprovoked and illegal attack on America.
And now, consider the real incidents involving America, without the invitation of Syria's government, having set up military bases in Syria.
Manned by American special forces and their proxy armed groups in eastern Syria, and having as their primary objective, the undermining and/or overthrowing of the Syrian State.
Having escalated their aggression towards the Syrian government, by shooting down Syrian air force planes and bombing Syrian government coalition forces.
Under the pretext that they are taking such violent and illegal action. Because of the need to 'protect themselves and their proxy armies' from lawful and defensible action of the Syrian government forces?
For crying out loud. By what logic does a burglar invade a person's home and inflict serious harm on them, and then cite 'self-defence' as their motive and justification?
Similarly, by what right, moral or legal, does the American government shoots down Syrian planes and kills Syrian people, under the pretext of 'self-defence'?
If America and her proxy armies posit themselves on Syrian soil, uninvited by the government of Syria.
Then, it is evident that, in doing so, they have committed an illegal act against that country's sovereignty.
Having done so, no machivellian massaging of international law, can then lead to them 'legally' attacking that State and its defensive forces.
Unless, that is, they are declaring war on Syria, and have the relevant backing of the United Nations.
The only applicable excuse of the American has to be that, 'might is right', and we can bully weaker countries with impunity; having silence the voice of Europe.
To be continued.
Comments