Paul Craig Roberts
Here is Jason Ditz on the pending attack on Syria.
Vladimir Soloviev explains the failure of Putin’s policy of appeasement:
If you were the president of France or the prime minister of the UK, would you permit criminally insane Washington to drag you into military conflict with Russia? https://www.infowars.com/get-ready-russia-trump-takes-to-twitter-to-threaten-strike-on-syria/
I didn’t think so. I wouldn’t either. So what’s with Macron and May? What’s with the French and British governments? What’s with the French and British media? I read recently that former UK Labour prime minister Tony Blair is now worth $100 million, his payoff for lying to the UK government and people in order to support the George W. Bush regime’s invasion of Iraq. Have Macron and May been promised the same?
It makes no sense for the UK and French governments to make themselves targets of a military power against which they have no possibility of defense. It makes no sense that their peoples and media sit silently while one French president and one British prime minister endanger not only France and the UK but the entirety of Europe. What’s with the European Union? There is only silence as Europe, and the world with it, are taken to the brink of annihiliation. This makes no sense. https://www.globalresearch.ca/taking-the-world-to-the-brink-of-annihilation/5635456
People in Ghouta, doctors in Ghouta, and Russian experts who have arrived on the scene report that there is no sign of any chemical attack. Not only did Syria not use chemical weapons against the civilians that it liberated, there was no chemical attack, not even a false flag one staged by the US supported mercenaries who have been driven out of Ghouta by the Syrian Army. In other words, the chemical attack is entirely a hoax.
To keep the hoax from being confirmed by independent investigation, Washington vetoed a UN Security Council resolution to send in neutral experts to evaluate the claim of chemical attack. Why would Washington prevent an investigation that would prove Washington’s allegation? Clearly, Washington would only prevent an investigation that would disprove the false allegation. There is no doubt whatsoever that Washington’s allegation is false and is being used as an excuse to force Russia to fight or to accept Washington’s hegemony in the Middle East.
What if there was a chemical attack? Why does it matter to people who are killed whether it was by bullets, bombs, missiles, or chemicals? Why is it so bad to use chemicals instead of Hellfire missiles? Why is it OK for Washington and Israel to blow up schools, hospitals, weddings, funerals, market places, and homes full of women and children with missiles, but not OK to kill people with chemicals? Why is it worth starting World War 3 over a hoax chemical weapons attack or a real one?
Americans, for the most part a clueless people, have no awareness of the risk that the criminally insane government in Washington is taking with their lives. What if the Russians mean what they say and do not again turn the other cheek and back down? What happens if Russia replies to force with force?
Why is it that only a few Internet sites are asking this question?