The Barrel Bomber's Wife

The press doesn't want you to hear this. It might cause you to think.

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/full-video-syrias-first-lady-interview-russia-24/

 

She seems very gracious.

You really like the Assad family. You also posted the Assad interview in July to show that he's misinterpreted by the West. Do you think there is a viable way for the United States to improve its relationship with Syria?

 

The primary goal of the US seems to be to destroy the country, and put in a puppet regime which will allow the US to set up military bases as a check on Iran and also allow a pipeline network to be built in order to distribute gas from the "coalition states" (Saudi, Quatar, UAE) through Syria into Turkey, thus gaining European market share as well as apply financial pressure on Russia by cutting into their market share.

Failing that, the US hopes to carve up Syria so that there would be at least an Eastern corridor that would serve the same purpose as above.

The American public would never back such goals if they were spelled out, so instead it is necessary to villify Assad, invent a fictitious narrative of "moderate rebels" and a need to save the country from a brutal dictator (by training and arming foreign jihadists and mercanaries to destroy the country and make millions of people homeless).

 

Do you honestly believe that Assad has not committed crimes against his own people? He seems to follow the "let Allah sort them out" mantra, not unlike the GOP candidate for President of the U.S.

 

Syria's demographics are not homogenous, but by all accounts, Christians, Sunis and minority Shia have gotten along fairly well. The Alowite sect has been in power for years. To hold such a country together most likely necessitates a degree of authorianism.

About a decade ago, western media praised Assad as a reformer. But once the neocon strategy decided to start overthrowing regimes, the propaganda machine decided to change the narrative from reformer to brutal dictator. It's really that simple.

Wars aren't fought on a plane between opposing armies anymore. Now they are waged in dense urban areas. The aggressor is going to infiltrate cities, take over strategic buildings and factories, and use the population as human shields. This is the strategy of the "moderate rebels" we are supporting. How are you going to defeat them without taking out innocent civilians?

Prior to the Russian intervention, Christian villages were being overrun by jihadis and citizens were tortured, raped, and beheaded. That is still going on but now the tide is being turned back. But all that is being reported is that the Syrians and Russians are committing war crimes. This from the nation responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of Libyans and Iraqis via bombing and sanctions which caused massive starvation and shortages of medical supplies; let alone hundreds of thousands more now homeless. We as US citizens need to learn to sort through the crap we are fed from the government using the corrupt media as its platform.

 

I don't mean to piss on your version of the Russian/Syrian combo, as I agree they've made footholds against potential terror in cities. But I take issue with some of the stuff you said prior to that.

I know this was written by a Jewish guy with an agenda, but have you read the New Yorker's Pulitzer-winning expose of Assad from April? This doesn't even get into the nitty gritty about harming civilians. This is Assad specifically going after and torturing innocent people who his party thinks might be involved in dissent against him.

It makes our treatment of guys at Guantanamo Bay look like the Sandals resort. You can't deny that Assad isn't personally behind this, regardless of whether or not we called him a reformer as recently as 2005. You told me back in July that we can't look at what the UN and NGO's report about war crimes because it's all fed by a liberal media with an agenda. There are people on the ground (and literally IN the ground) who smuggled this type of information to get to the outside world.

As pretty, well-spoken, and gracious as Assad's wife is on state-run media, there is no way she doesn't understand the ramifications of her husband's actions. Did he torture bad guys? Sure. Did he torture good guys... the kind of guys that we praise in the United States for telling the truth? Absolutely.

 

The article didn't provide footnotes are photographs as substantiation, nevertheless the reports of torture are most likely not a fabrication. Nor does the article mention the role played by outside influences (US and Gulf State allies) in garnering support for dissent, much like was done in Libya and Ukraine, the latter of which Victoria Nuland boasted of $5 billion spent to influence public opinion.

The fact that The Assad government is authoritarian does not justify destroying the lives of several hundred thousands or millions of people in order to achieve a geopolitical objective which has no direct bearing on the lives of American citizens. Let alone the tactics used to achieve the objectives include a mass propaganda campaign and arming jihadists.