[PART 2]

1.C. As you probably know, today Syria and Russia have agreed to the proposal by Kerry that the only way to prevent attacks is to put the WMD's under international control. And the US reaction, at least immediate, was to instantly shift the goals of Syria bombings from helping the people of Syria to "Making a point for international community", and state that it welcomes the political solution but is still going to bomb Syria nevertheless.

2. In fact, the Obama administration has constantly shifted the goals of the bombings, to the point when it is really hard to take their arguments seriously. They were stating that they are not going to force Assad out of power, now they are stating that they are going to force Assad out of power, etc.

I hope that I have answered your question about why the bombings are a great potential threat to the people of Syria. I don't see the US trying to find a peaceful solution.

3. Obama is a mass murderer himself, he kills thousands of people by drones, not to mention the "double drone attack" tactic that targets first responders, which constitutes a war crime under international law. [7] And the list can be continued with mass tortures (for which large number of torturers have recently got official immunity [8]), extraordinary rendition, etc.

Man, suppose we have a large family in which one of the members is abusing others. You are suggesting feeding an entire family to a crocodile (US bombs and forein jihadis brought in by Quatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey) as a remedy. Or, potentially nuke them from orbit with a whole city as a worst-case scenario (ignite the whole region in conflict).

Shit has hit the fan on the March of 2011. And there is no silver bullet, no silver DU munitions, not even a silver nuke to clean it up.

You are suggesting to fight fire by pouring gasoline into it.

A number of countries and experts have called for ceasefire and peace talks, to which the Syrian government has agreed. There is no rational reason behind US putting this option off the table beyond it's strategic interests in the Middle East. Not that I know of. This, plus the lack of evidence that support the statement that it is Assad who used WMDs, is a giant red flag (don't forget the Iraq lies too).

Sadly, there is no good force to sort things out, probably, beyond the UN.

I'm probably as against Assad as you are. The point in which I differ is that the US bombardments would cripple the poor country even further.

Oh, I think I should've gone to sleep long time ago...

----------

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6355356

[2] http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/MDE24/041/2012/en/30...

[3] http://vimeo.com/72095995

[4] General Wesley Clark Reveals US Plan To Invade Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Lybia, Somalia, Sudan, And Iran Made in 2001 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8YtF76s-yM

[5] To quote Zbigniew Brzezinski, renowned US strategist and Obama's mentor (sorry for pasting such large number of quotes, but it's definitely worth it).

"...To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together."

"Moreover, they [the Central Asian Republics] are of importance from the standpoint of security and historical ambitions to at least three of their most immediate and more powerful neighbors, namely Russia, Turkey and Iran, with China also signaling an increasing political interest in the region. But the Eurasian Balkans are infinitely more important as a potential economic prize: an enormous concentration of natural gas and oil reserves is located in the region, in addition to important minerals, including gold." (p.124)

"The world's energy consumption is bound to vastly increase over the next two or three decades. Estimates by the U.S. Department of energy anticipate that world demand will rise by more than 50 percent between 1993 and 2015, with the most significant increase in consumption occurring in the Far East. The momentum of Asia's economic development is already generating massive pressures for the exploration and exploitation of new sources of energy and the Central Asian region and the Caspian Sea basin are known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that dwarf those of Kuwait, the Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea." (p.125)

"In fact, an Islamic revival - already abetted from the outside not only by Iran but also by Saudi Arabia - is likely to become the mobilizing impulse for the increasingly pervasive new nationalisms, determined to oppose any reintegration under Russian - and hence infidel - control." (p. 133).

"It follows that America's primary interest is to help ensure that no single power comes to control this geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered financial and economic access to it." (p148)

"America is now the only global superpower, and Eurasia is the globe's central arena. Hence, what happens to the distribution of power on the Eurasian continent will be of decisive importance to America's global primacy and to America's historical legacy." (p.194)

"With warning signs on the horizon across Europe and Asia, any successful American policy must focus on Eurasia as a whole and be guided by a Geostrategic design." (p.197)

"That puts a premium on maneuver and manipulation in order to prevent (preempt) the emergence of a hostile coalition that could eventually seek to challenge America's primacy..." (p. 198)

Zbigniew Brzezinski, "The Grand Chessboard": http://www.takeoverworld.info/Grand_Chessboard.pdf
Obama: I've learned an immense amount from Dr. Brzezinski: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASlETEx0T-I

[6] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jan/17/syrians...

[7] http://www.livingunderdrones.org/living-under-drones/

[8] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q14fz0Bd-kM