Uncle Sam on the warpath

“dumb” wars.
Having failed to obtain a Libyan-style United Nations Security Council fig leaf for a “humanitarian” military strike against Syria, the United States shifts effortlessly to a global campaign “outside the UN system” to expand its NATO/Persian Gulf royalty/Jihadi coalition.
Next stop, Tunisia, where Washington’s allies are set to assemble today to sharpen their knives as “Friends of Syria.” The US State Department has mobilised to shape the “Friends” membership and their “mandate” — which is warlord-speak for refining an ad hoc alliance for the piratical assault on Syria’s sovereignty.
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch were swigging the ale with their fellow buccaneers. These “human rights” warriors, headquartered in the bellies of empires past and present, their chests shiny with medals of propagandistic service to superpower aggression in Libya, contribute “left” legitimacy to the imperial project. 
Amnesty International held a global day of action to rail against Syria for alleged crimes against humanity and to accuse Russia and China of using their Security Council vetoes to “betray” Syrians — echoing the war hysteria out of Washington, Paris, London and the royal pigsties of Riyadh and Doha. New York-based Human Rights Watch denounced Moscow and Beijing’s actions as “incendiary” — as if it was not Uncle Sam and his allies who were setting the Middle East and Africa on fire, arming and financing jihadis — including hundreds of veteran Libyan Salafists now operating in Syria.
Under Obama’s “intelligent” tutelage, colonial genocidaires like France now propose the creation of humanitarian corridors inside Syria ‘‘to allow NGOs to reach the zones where there are scandalous massacres.”
NATO flatly rejected such a corridor in Libya when sub-Saharan Africans and black Libyans were being massacred by militias armed and financed by the same “Friends” that now besiege Syria.
Turkey claims it has rejected, for now, the idea of setting up humanitarian “buffer zones” along its border with Syria — inside Syrian territory — while giving arms, training and sanctuary to Syrian military deserters.
In reality, it is Syrian Army troop and armour concentrations on the border that have thwarted the establishment of such a “buffer” — a bald euphemism for creating a “liberated zone” that must be “protected” by Nato or some agglomeration of US-backed forces.
NATO, which bombed Libya non-stop for six months, inflicting tens of thousands of casualties while refusing to count a single body, wants desperately to identify some sliver of Syrian soil on which to plant the “humanitarian” flag of intervention.
They are transparently searching for a Benghazi, to justify a replay of the Libyan operation — the transparent fact that prompted the Russian and Chinese vetoes.
Faced with the certainty of superpower-backed attack under the guise of “protecting” civilians in “liberated” territory, Syria cannot afford to cede even one neighbourhood of a single city — not one block! — or of any rural or border enclave, to armed rebels and foreign jihadis. That road leads directly to loss of sovereignty and possible dissection of Syria — which Western pundits are already calling a “hodgepodge” nation that could be a “failed state.”
Certainly, the French and British are experts at carving up other people’s territories, having drawn the national boundaries of the region after World War I. It is an understatement to say that Israel would be pleased.
With the Syrian military’s apparent successes in securing most of Homs and other centres of rebellion, the armed opposition has stepped up its terror tactics — a campaign noted with great alarm by the Arab League’s own Observer Mission to Syria, leading Saudi Arabia and Qatar to suppress the Mission’s report.
Instead, the Gulf States are pressing the Arab League to openly “provide all kinds of political and material support” to the opposition, meaning arms and, undoubtedly, more Salafist fighters. Aleppo, Syria’s main commercial and industrial city, which had seen virtually no unrest, was struck by two deadly car bombs last week — signature work of the al-Qaeda affiliate in neighbouring Iraq.
The various “Friends of Syria,” now openly speak of all-out civil war in Syria — by which they mean stepped up armed conflict financed and directed by themselves — as the preferred alternative to the protracted struggle that the regime appears to be winning. There is one caveat — no “Western boots on the ground in any form,” as phrased by British Foreign Secretary William Hague. It is the Libya formula.
Syria is fighting for its national existence against an umbrella of forces mobilised by the US and NATO. Of the 6 000 or so people that have died in the past 11 months, about a third have been Syrian soldiers and police — statistical proof positive that this is an armed assault on the state.
There is no question of massive foreign involvement, or that the aim of US policy is regime change, as stated repeatedly by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (“Assad must go,” she told reporters in Bulgaria).