Would you like to know how tenuous the information on whether or not Syria has used chemical weapons is? Several intelligence officials who spoke to the New York Times and the Associated Press (AP) characterized the evidence of the Assad regime using chemical weapons as “not a slam dunk.” The quote is in reference to then-CIA Director George Tenet’s 2002 testimony that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Tenet said that it was “a slam dunk” that Iraq had WMD’s. Needless to say, Tenet was wrong…
So please understand… this means that the evidence that the intelligence community has gathered that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons is actually not as convincing as the evidence they had gathered that Saddam Hussein had WMD’s. What does that say about President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry’s decision to move forward with saying “we are certain” Assad used chemical weapons against the rebels?
Is this a wag the dog scenario? Or a false-flag operation? Or are we just being lied to because the President thinks that he has to attack Syria to retain or regain foreign policy credibility?
I wonder if the Nobel Prize committee is rethinking its decision from 2009?
I am not anti-war, I am for peace… but there are times when war becomes necessary. In hindsight, Iraq seems like an unnecessary use of our resources and our people. I don’t need hindsight to KNOW that Syria is definitely an unnecessary use of our resources and people. Presidents are often faced with tough situations that seem to have no other options – but the war in Syria is not one of these situations.
On one side is a despot and on the other side are rebel groups aligned with al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. We are obviously not cheering on Bashar al-Assad, but we would be crazy to fund and supply and support al-Qaeda…
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com