(H/T: Anne Daly)
A car bomb explodes outside Syrian state TV as they’re live on air.
A second explosion causes the interviewee to re-evaluate his situation.
Via Jon Williams
When do we not want it?
Members of the Peace and Neutrality Alliance (PANA), – from left: Sinn Fein TD Sean Crowe, Seamus Rattigan and David Morrison) – released a Red C commissioned poll result today on Irish attitudes to intervention in Syria.
They say that approximately 8 in 10 Irish People do not support a war in Syria without a UN mandate – roughly the same number who are now in favour of Irish neutrality.
PANA seeks to advocate an “Independent Irish Foreign Policy, defend Irish Neutrality and to promote a reformed United Nations as the Institution through which Ireland should pursue its security concerns”.
A member of the ‘Ansar Dimachk’ Brigade, which operates under the Free Syrian Army, uses an iPad during preparations to fire a homemade mortar at one of the battlefronts in Jobar, Damascus September 15, 2013.
Pic: Reuters/Mohamed Abdullah
Thanks Alan O’Regan
No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with the fundamentalists. Reports that militants are preparing another attack — this time against Israel — cannot be ignored.
It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan “you’re either with us or against us.”
But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces withdraw. Libya is divided into tribes and clans. In Iraq the civil war continues, with dozens killed each day. In the United States, many draw an analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to repeat recent mistakes.
Syria’s President Assad in an interview with Charlie Rose of CBS News.
Charlie Rose: “The United States is prepared to launch a strike against your country because they believe chemical weapons are so abhorrent that anybody who uses them crosses a red line and that therefore, if they do that they have to be taught a lesson so that they will not do it again.”
President Assad: “What red line?”
Rose: “A red line of the use of chemical weapons against your own people.”
Assad: “Who drew it?”
Rose: “The president says it was not just him but the world has drawn it in their revulsion against the use of chemical weapons. That the world has drawn that red line.”
Assad: “It’s not the world because Obama drew that line and Obama can draw that line for himself and for his country, not for other countries. We have our red lines, like our sovereignty, our independence. Well if you want to talk red lines, United States used depleted uranium in Iraq, Israel used white phosphorus in Gaza and nobody said anything. What about red lines? We don’t see red lines. It’s political red lines.”