Given the United States’ disastrous record in the Middle East—most critically the invasion and occupation of Iraq—and the manifold lies coming out of Washington to justify its policies, many Americans are understandably skeptical about U.S. interventions and the rationalizations used to defend them. This leads many Americans to oppose both direct intervention in Syria and the arming of rebel factions—and rightly so.
At Second Debate, A Monster Calls
Anti-War Movement Must Listen to Voices Within Syria's Civil War
Comparing the situation in Syria to that of Palestine is one hell of a long stretch. And such a direct comparison reads a lot like cheap propaganda.
The false equivalencies that Stephen Zunes draws here are breathtaking. Israel, a nation enjoying the patronage of the world's most powerful military entity, and itself armed with about 200 nuclear weapons, is in no danger of being overwhelmed or "regime changed." Those forces arrayed against Syria and Assad are not fighting for their homes, water, or dignity, as the Palestinians are. Assad's transgressions do not include an established policy of ethnic cleansing and the establishment of an apartheid state. Syria does not enjoy the protection of a compliant, fawning, and enabling press that keeps trying to draw water from the empty well of the holocaust.
By all means Mr. Zunes, let us have a full in-depth investigation not just of the tragedy of Aleppo, but of the entire sequence of events that precipitated this war. I am fairly certain that along with the usual suspects, Israel's fingerprints are all over this one too.