The head of the UN observer mission in Syria said Tuesday that UN monitoring forces have come under fire several times recently but are committed to staying in the country, retreating from earlier statements about suspending the mission due to worsening violence.
Maj. Gen. Robert Mood said after a private briefing of the Security Council that reports about canceling the mission were premature, noting, “We are not going anywhere.” He also said UN forces have come under fire at least 10 separate times.
Violence, even that aimed at civilians, has been attributed both to the regime of Bashar al-Assad and to the Syrian rebel militias. “The suffering of the Syrian people, the suffering of men, women and children, some of them trapped by fighting, is getting worse,” Mood told reporters.
For now, the White House has officially opposed direct military intervention on the grounds that it would lead to greater chaos and escalate the humanitarian crisis in the country.
“We do not believe that militarization, further militarization of the situation in Syria at this point is the right course of action,” White House Spokesman Jay Carney said. “We believe that it would lead to greater chaos, greater carnage.”
While the Obama administration rightly opposes military intervention, they have unfortunately already begun providing lethal and non-lethal aid to the Syrian opposition. This, despite the fact that the rebel fighters have committed serious atrocities themselves and that al-Qaeda elements are known to cooperate in the rebel fight against Assad.
The administration’s aid to rebels is reckless for various reasons. As Joshua Landis, director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma and an expert on Syria, wrote in Foreign Policy this month, “Let’s be clear: Washington is pursuing regime change by civil war in Syria. The United States, Europe, and the Gulf states want regime change, so they are starving the regime in Damascus and feeding the opposition.”
This is exacerbating the conflict, increasing and prolonging the suffering of the Syrian people. Support for the Assad regime from Russia and Iran and for the opposition from the U.S. and its allies in Europe and the Persian Gulf is emboldening both sides and preventing either from giving up and ceding to a political transition.
All political signs indicating that Syrian people are about to defeat the barbarians and terrorism in their country, Clinton have lost her bet about regime change in Syria so she needs to go home and start baking cookies celebrating her retirement, but before that I think she needs to resign or discharged of her duty by the American people for, if nothing els, her incompetence, cooperation with tyrants of middle east such as the Feudalist of Saudis Arabia, the King of Jordan, the Turkish government, a non democratic system and all other dictatorial regimes in the world, proving the fact that what she and her boss is been presenting is nothing but a falsified democracy helping to true tyrants to stay in power.
The "White House has officially opposed direct military intervention" because it's convenient to do so… That's the only reason.
As alluded to: direct military action is already being planned, and preparations are already underway (ie "communications equipment" is being provided to the "opposition").
What should the "White House" 'officially' announce? Should it be:
'Well….'we' want to get more involved militarily, but Russia won't let us'…
I find such an announcement, although closer to the 'truth' than the "official" line today, unlikely to be forthcoming for obvious reasons…
Regarding: ""communications equipment" is being provided to the "opposition"
I heard it were GPS enabled mobile phones! My first thought reminded me to "radio locators" the Serbs said were layed out by (some CIA) OSCE/UN monitors at bombing targets.
It is really good – the monitors can easily give them those mobile phones which the terrorists only need to forget in target locations and any cruise missile has its target position automatically.
As I always told you – the UN has become a tool of US warfare !
Background:
USA works this way: Source: Training Circular No. 18-01, US Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School; 30 Nov 2010 Special Forces Unconventional Warfare:
"There is another type of warfare—new in its intensity, ancient in its origin—war by guerrillas, subversives, insurgents, assassins; war by ambush instead of by combat, by
infiltration instead of aggression, seeking victory by eroding and exhausting the enemy
instead of engaging him. It preys on unrest."
'
source: Special Forces Unconventional Warfare
search: USArmy-UW.pdf
OTPOR, US Revolution consultant hired 43 times <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?hl=en&v=lpXbA6yZY-8” target=”_blank”>www.youtube.com/watch?hl=en&v=lpXbA6yZY-8
or "INTRODUCTION TO UNCONVENTIONAL WARFARE (UW)
1-1. The intent of U.S. UW efforts is to exploit a hostile power’s political, military, economic, and psychological vulnerabilities by developing and sustaining resistance forces to accomplish U.S. strategic objectives."
In case, because of "collateral damage" propaganda, you believe only military targets are aimed, I suggest reading http://www.srpska-mreza.com/Kosovo/NATO-attack/sp…
In this article former Spanish NATO fighter pilots are cursing over US military orders to intentionally and systematically aim civilian aims and infrastructure in Yugoslavia, testing any kind of new unknown weapons, and being dominated by USA – including European political leader who have no clue what was going on in this war.
It gave me the impression, that it is general US war principle, that destruction of civil infrastructure that really hurts (water and electricity supply, TV stations, telephone, bridges (which mostly contain cables and pipes for anything of this), factories, food storages) is damaged to show the people and governments that they MUST surrender – not because of being militarily hit or disabled, but because of the civil destruction pressure !
I think this is the hidden truth behind "collateral damage" propaganda!
Hi – I am from Germany. Our mass media is according to my experience totally quite regarding "UN monitoring forces have come under fire several times" is Syria.
Same in US general public mass media? TV; print, online?
I guess Washpost+NYT will have reported it – yes?
Probably the same because UK ,France, and Germany are 100% puppets of Uncle Sam. If Uncle Sam farts, they catch cold.
If President Assad goes along with “…giving up and ceding to a political transition.” as the article is suggesting, who would guarantee that US/NATO and their Al-Qaeda terrorists would stop at Syria? We know they did not stop at Libya.
It amazes me how we the American people can be so gullible to swallow the lies told about Assad and the late leader of Lybia. We are told we will fight than for humanitarian reasons & to bring democracy to the poor oppressed people who just happen to be sitting on a shitload of oil. If they did not have all that oil which we sorely covet we wouldnt give a damn if they ate their children.