@Big Al

"Washington Post's article appears to be a final attempt to salvage long-exposed disinformation, misinforming the public about the true nature of both the Syrian crisis and the alleged "opposition" fighting it on the West's behalf. The article concludes, claiming that US programs to arm militants in Syria are drawing to a close, and that the US is "leaving Syria in Russia's hands."

In reality, the US will only leave Syria once its options have been fully confounded and exhausted by Syria and its allies. While it may not be able to continue funding terrorists in Syria's northwest, it still maintains a military presence with US troops and proxies in the nation's east. It openly plans to occupy these regions - and from them - incrementally expand them until eventually Syria is either dissolved as a unified state, or regime change can eventually be achieved."

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/

It basically admits the idea of a moderate rebel opposition to the Assad government was fiction.

#7.1 and continue to give cover for regime change and country balkanization. The story of arming "moderate" rebels by the CIA was proven false from the beginning, there were no moderate rebels and all that does is make people think it's some kind of civil war and the good ole USA is just trying to help the "moderates" fight for their country, which is just BS.

The Weekly Standard and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies exist to spread war and foreign policy propaganda.

@Big Al
when he said that this country was going to invade 7 countries in 5 years?

They've told us what they want to do and what they're going to do thru the think tanks, institutes, organizations, papers, and other oligarchy instruments.

Global Warfare: “We’re going to take out 7 countries in 5 years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan & Iran..”

AMY GOODMAN: Well, for the rest of the hour, we’ll hear General Wesley Clark in his own words on the possibility of a US attack on Iran; the impeachment of President Bush; the use of cluster bombs; the bombing of Radio Television Serbia during the Kosovo War under his command; and much more. I interviewed General Clark on Tuesday at the 92nd Street Y in New York.

I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”

(Clark wouldn't name the person who he was speaking with)

So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”t

Again, in a sane world, this plan would have been prosecuted for premeditated war crimes, crimes against humanity and for 1st degree murder.
This goes against the Geneva convention and international law. The only reason for going to war is IF ONE'S COUNTRY IS THREATENED OR ATTACKED.
None of those countries did either of them.

What's the chance that we can win a war with Iran? Don't our leaders understand that Iran isn't just going to sit there while we rain bombs on them? And what will Russia and China do if they do attack Iran?
This madness is just so understandable to me.

#7.2 The thing people have to understand is it's all been written. They've told us what they want to do and what they're going to do thru the think tanks, institutes, organizations, papers, and other oligarchy instruments. They still do.
I don't think it's selling out to neocons personally, I think it's a universal mindset of what the U.S. role in the world MUST be and agreement on what has to happen to keep it that way. No one wants to challenge that which is why we see the 412-10 and 98-2 votes.

@gjohnsit
in Syria is so they could use them when they attack Iran?
I'd rather you be right about this than me.
It's time to do what Smedley suggested in 1933. Close all of our foreign bases, bring our troops home and use the navy and the coast guard to patrol our waterways only 200 miles from our shores.
Just think of the amount of money we could save and what we could spend it on.

#7.2
it's going to be real hard to keep those bases in Southern Syria. I don't expect those to last.

The bases in Syria Kurdistan have more potential, but Turkey and Damascus will have a say in that.