** For many months the civil war in Syria has raged. This blog has barely mentioned it because it was remote and none of our business. There was certainly no strategic interest for the UK in involving itself in that vicious religious conflict. So we make no apology for our saturation focus on Syria in recent days, which has been forced on us by the desire of our ‘servants’ to insert themselves directly into the war on the side of the rebels, despite the overwhelming opposition of the general public.
We have no idea if the photo below is of a genuine Chief Petty Officer of the US Navy, or if it’s just someone playing dress up. But members of the armed forces both in the US and the UK could be forgiven for feeling such a sentiment (via @NewsNinja2012). It’s a good point, well argued.
Meanwhile, back in the political bubble, pressure is already building for putting last week’s motion before the House of Commons again, EU style. It seems until the lobby fodder votes ‘the right way’ Cameron and Hague are not going to let this go. It’s a reputational and authority affirmation matter now. And it seems no politician’s legacy is complete without a little war with their name beside it noted for all time in the history books.
It seems the apparent reason for resurrecting this obscene rush to visit violence on the Syrian regime, to the benefit of Al Qaeda and other Islamist terror groups in the country, is the supposedly breaking news coming out of Washington, reported by the Telegraph, that:
…the US has evidence that Bashar al-Assad used sarin gas in the devastating chemical weapons attack that killed more than 1,400 people last month, John Kerry, the US secretary of state announced, as he pressed the administration case for air strikes.
This is being presented as some kind of game-changer. But it’s nothing of the sort. It is merely a demonstration of the government’s ignorance and refusal to listen. It was not because of a lack of evidence of a chemical attack that the public stood opposed to attacking Syria and MPs voted down the government in the Commons, but the fact that the proposed military action had no defined outcome and the effects and consequences of such an attack on the Syrian people (and indeed the UK military and general public) are unknown.
John Kerry’s emotive announcement is a call to Congress to vote for military action to punish al-Assad. That is not a humanitarian objective. It is not even a strategic military objective. It is nothing more than a desire to beat up on Syria because the western powers have been offended by the regime’s alleged use of chemical weapons.
For Kerry to then go on and attempt, in the way he did, to link the appetite to attack Syria with protecting the national security of the US is ludicrously fatuous. If anything, the proposed attack has the potential to aid Al Qaeda, which does genuinely represent a threat to America and the UK. Even the famously disengaged American masses (when it comes to foreign policy and the wider world) seem to be grasping this fact and don’t want their armed forces sent on a needless military adventure.
And so the political class continue to play their games regardless of the wishes of the public, who are supposedly served by this belligerent and dangerous collection of busybodies. This is what is commonly and airily described by the establishment as ‘democracy’. Does it feel democratic to you?