De l'irresponsabilité en temps de crise

Un article très éloquent du Taipeh times sur les armes chimiques et les contorsions états-uniennes:
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2006/08/12/2003322863
Un chèque en blanc offert par la Commission des affaires étrangères du Sénat à John Kerry:

• "Whereas in the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003 (Public Law 108–175), Congress found that Syria’s acquisition of weapons of mass destruction threatens the security of the Middle East and the national security interests of the United States;
• Whereas Syria’s use of weapons of mass destruction and its conduct and actions constitute a grave threat to regional stability, world peace, and the national security interests of the United States and its allies and partners;
• Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to use force in order to defend the national security interests of the United States..."

Il faut désormais attendre le vote du Congrès. Je pense que même un vote négatif n'empêchera pas les frappes, non plus que le rapport de l'ONU. Elles seront vraisemblablement coordonnées avec des attaques des djihadistes pour tenterd'entrer dans Damas ou Alep-Ouest.

Le plan israélien: Laissez les se saigner entre eux...
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/world/middleeast/israel-backs-limited-strike-against-syria.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 De plus en plus, il apparaît aux observateurs que l'attaque est une provocation, d'anciens officiers de renseignement ont même écrit à Bombama à ce sujet:http://consortiumnews.com/2013/09/06/obama-warned-on-syrian-intel/
http://rt.com/op-edge/mother-chemical-attack-footage-fraud-509/

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/04/un-report-syria-chemical-weapons-weeks
A cet égard le point de vue du fondateur  du Peace and Research institute (1969) Johann Galtung est éloquent:
traduitdu Finlandais donc:http://suomenkuvalehti.fi/jutut/ulkomaat/johan-galtung-syyrian-kemiallisen-aseiskun-takana-on-yhdysvallat


"Johan Galtung, "Syria's chemical aseiskun behind the United States"
Peace and Conflict Research's father, a Norwegian Johan Galtung says that the United States wants to strike Damascus before the UN Study report will be completed. And the reason.
Photo by Petri Kaipiainen At a time when the world wrestle with whether to punish the government of Syria to the use of chemical weapons, Johan Galtung calls to think about who is behind the use of chemical weapons actually is.
"I'm 99.9 percent sure that it was organized by the American covert operation."
When the claim says overscheduled, Galtung is responsible, it is much harder to say that the Assad administration did it.
"We must not forget that the Assad regime, said that UN investigators are welcome and that they are willing to supported its work."
The second criterion is that only a few days earlier at a secret meeting in France, Britain and the United States discussed the cruise missile shooting of Damascus.
"France and the United Kingdom said that the United Nations is expected to report to complete. United States of America did not want to wait. They knew what the report might reveal. "
And even before the UN inspectors were able to place in Damascus, communication machinery of the United States began a strong campaign, in which the message was that the evidence was failed to destroy so much already, that reliable information on the site can no longer obtain.
The experts disagreed.
"We all know that there was a used sarin, but who did it, the United States did not want to be settled."
Galtung points out that in 2003, the UN's fact-finding team made ​​it clear that there is not sufficient evidence of Saddam Hussein's WMD weapon, the United States settlement was not valid. Swedish Hans Blix , led by the UN team was thrown from the ground and the invasion of Iraq began.
And no weapons of mass destruction was ever found.
Afghanistan and Iraq experience has been so bad that the U.S. Armed Forces is now willing to send troops to Syria, says Galtung.
"The second best is to send someone else and pay them. For Qatar and Saudi Arabia have been suitable partners. "

Egypte une révolution qui n'en était pas une:
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n17/hugh-roberts/the-revolution-that-wasnt