Home | About | Donate

Obama Boots Syrian Peace Chance


Obama Boots Syrian Peace Chance

Robert Parry

President Barack Obama is turning his back on possibly the last best chance to resolve the bloody Syrian war because he fears a backlash from Official Washington’s powerful coalition of neoconservatives and “liberal interventionists” along with their foreign fellow-travelers: Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Gulf sheikdoms.


While the U.S. may have a handful of "Putin Apologists", they in no way compare to the amount of "corporate apologists" that dominate our MSM. Do we ever here about the 'investigative discovery' of how the MIC lobbies government to wage war? Or how big agriculture has pushed for regime change in Cuba and the Ukraine? Instead the Left spends too much of their time defending themselves rather than taking the fight right to the culprits that have controlled Washington for far too long. Obama and Richard Cohen are 'Corporate apologists' who always defend corproate America's decision to wage war instead of peace, to screw the poor instead of the rich and to undermine the public interest at every oppportunity in favor of the 1%.
The upcoming Primaries will be full of corporate apologists as each candidate fights tooth and nail to see who can best represent our corporate climate during the next four years.
With the notable exception of Bernie Sanders, the rest of the candidates will use double talk, empty rhetoric and lies to send the message out there to their financial backers that the people will get the short stick instead of the 1% if elected. Citizen Joe meanwhile will be encouraged to focus on this small gang of sociopaths to choose from, so as to give the illusion that Americans still live in a functioning democracy in which all citizens have input into our foreign policy among other things.
Richard Cohen and Barrack Obama know which side their toast is buttered on and therefore will only pay the general public lip service when coming to reinforcing the myth of the U.S. as a vibrant democracy. I like Robert Parry's articles simply because he knows how easily manipulated our elected officials are by their corporate puppet masters. The question remains though, when will the general public realize that being a 'corporate bootlicker' is the greatest crime a politician can commit?


Well, first of all, when it comes to Putin and Russia I believe that Parry is one of those "apologists" that he talks about. I don't recall him writing even the most minor criticism about either. If fact, if I wanted to know what he thought of Russia's and Putin's actions I would skip Robert Parry all together and just read Pravda or Russia Today to save time.

That said, I agree with him on this one. Assad is a dictator, although not as bad as his father. So what? Saddam and Quadaffi were dictators too...and we see what getting rid of them did for peace. The Saudi king is a dictator too. The other side in this fight wants to put back together the Caliphate that the Mongols destroyed when they overran the Middle East and destroyed Baghdad in the 1260's. They consider that to be any lands the Muslims ever conquered ...from Spain and Southern France to Western India. I would say that is a bigger problem than Assad ever thought of being. The Russians at least are actually FIGHTING, unlike whatever we have been doing.

Obama needs to let the others figure it out, as he has obviously failed. He can go back and sit at the kids table while the adults work things out.


When a foreign Government labels the "United States of America" the prince of lies are they that wrong ?

Virtually every war the USA has involved itself in has been started with a lie. From the War against Mexico to its War on Spain. From the war against the Kaiser to Vietnam , Afghanistan and Iraq.

Millions have been killed because of those lies and trillions in wealth spent.

Putin's wink was a gotcha moment. In a recent speech he indicated that the Russian Government was not fooled by the deceptions of the US Government and he hinted that more of the falsehoods would be exposed.

This is why the establishment is in full crisis mode. They are being exposed as the frauds and deceivers that they are.


"President Obama thinks he can appease the neocons and liberal hawks"

"Liberal hawks"?

I hate to see a fine journalist contradict himself.


"Obama apparently bowed to the desired rhetoric of hardliners"

Wasn't that what he was put in the job to do?


That is all true. And that is precisely what makes the Hillary, BIden, and other D Party candidates' supporters cynically working for Bernie right now so disgusting. Like Bernie, they will bail to the most promising candidate precisely when the opportunity emerges. Which is why they are democrats. And that is exactly what is happening already in the GOP side of the one and only corporate party in the US. So what if Bernie and the Donald are getting the most votes and they are getting them from people who want ANYONE but the insiders. Bernie and the Donald are ready to throw them under that two-winged corporate party bus. Just like their cynical employees.

The only decent candidate remains Jill Stein. She will not throw anyone under the corporate party bus. She never has capitulated to them. Bernie and the Donald will. Bernie because he wants the F-35 and Israeli AIPAC nazies to remain happy. The Donald because he will perch himself just like the little boy Obama was upon sitting upon the Presidential throne. And happily take orders designed as options from the very same business-as-usual insiders. Israel, Saudi Arabia, AIPAC, Neocons of both party wings, and Wall Street win. The USA loses.

Go ahead. Vote for the "lesser evil" traitors again. It is still an option.


We Brits were the ones that got the USA into that. The Zimmerman telegram in which I believe we altered a few key words. I don't think the USA lied to the US people, just presented some excellent misinformation handed over by the British. As the French say, Albion perfide! However, liars in the USA can take credit for the rest of them.

What beats me is the at the Russkies have offered and keep offering to the USA a cooperative role with them and a group of other significant countries to settle the issue. And the USA runs away whilst NATO pontificates about saving Turkey via what would be inevitably become a thermonuclear war. Roast Turkey for Thanksgiving, Dr Strangelove?


I am referring to the sinking of the Lusitania and the US claims to the people that arms were not being carried on that vessel.

The fact is the US was using passenger vesseles to ship arms to the UK. There was a second explosion aboard the vessel that was never explained. US public opinion turned against Germany after that and it was easier for Wilson to get the US into the war.


Yes, Obama has risen to where he is by playing to the expectations of the powerful and influential, and this includes how he chooses to deal with Russia. But this is not so much a personal weakness as what he would call a necessary pragmatism. He did defy the Israel lobby to get the Iran deal but I would argue that the Israel lobby is nowhere near as powerful as the Saudi-Gulf states lobby. Not only do those medieval tyrants own huge pieces of our economy, they also exert major control over world oil prices. They are essential partners in the enormous arms sales by U.S. "defense" corporations. There is simply no way the USG could impose financial sanctions on the Arab monarchies without bringing down huge sections of our own economy. And since the Iran deal - rightly - mattered so much to Obama, he has appeased the princes and kings on every other front, most obviously in US support for the murderous Saudi attacks on Yemen. ISIS is a more complex issue. True, the kings and princes created ISIS, providing the crazed ideology and the initial funding but even they must be anxious over the Frankenstein they have created, and are evidently okay with the US bombing campaign if it keeps ISIS from rampaging right into the Saudi and Gulf territory. Very likely, they fear a complete takeover of Syria or Iraq by ISIS, however much they detest Assad. If Russia props him up for the time being, they may not have any objections.

The prevailing myth In American politics is that this country is so strong that we can do what we choose on the world stage. After all, don't we have "the most powerful military the world has ever known," as Obama likes to say? What no politician on the right or left wants to admit is that our economy has long since been mortgaged to the Arab despots, and their MIC allies, and anyone who wants to survive in American politics has to tread very lightly around this crew of sociopaths.

The end result of this kind of pragmatism is the mass murder unfolding in the Middle East.


Putin is merely pointing out that the emperor is wearing no clothes, and living a naked lie. You would have to be brain-dead not to understand that the Russians came to the aid of Assad to prevent his ouster. I don't speak Russian, but recalling this recent event, it seemed quite clear even in the western English translation, if just barely disguised, exactly who the Russians were going to target: anyone and everyone trying to topple Assad, and let the chips fall where they may.

I don't credit Putin with acting altruistically. The original fable as I remember it concluded when a child blurted out the obvious, that the man was naked and not clothed in the finest garments ever seen (!!) by man, and the spell was broken, and the con-man run out of the kingdom. Part of the message of the fable was the capacity of the collective to mutually sustain an obvious untruth, to refer to and discuss a fiction as if alive, in a conspiracy of prestidigitation.

But Putin is not a child and there was even more shrewdness on display when he clearly offered to cooperate with anyone trying to defeat ISIS. Since that is not what the US is trying to do, but in fact topple Assad, there is not a chance for the emperor to claim that he is wearing the most dignified robes of state the world has ever seen.

Which con men will we run out of the kingdom? AIPAC? The Saudis? Lockheed Martin? The American Enterprise Institute and their ilk? ABC/CBS/FOX/NBC/CNN/AP/NYT/WaPo...?

The "we" of course is supposed to be a citizenry of a democratic electorate, but that has failed directly along the lines predicted by all who've contemplated its viability. Captured by powerful interests. Control of the government relies on control of the political sphere which in turn seems to be sustained by the "media." This makes sense. If there is power in and a danger to powerful exclusive interests, that power is in ideas, and the control of same. We must disenthrall ourselves.

It starts with a kid blurting out that the emperor is naked.


Don't forget the IMF and the World Bank cartels but other than that your list is a true accounting of TPTB aka puppet masters, inc.


It is a pity with serious matters afoot to see all sorts of otherwise clever analysis based on assumptions that just have very little to do with the actual planet in question.

Within the last several years, the US has engaged in acts of war in every country where it has no bases in a stripe between the Himalayas and North Africa, with side jaunts to seal the Suez Canal north and south.

The US supplied $15bn+ to ISIS, with more channeled from or through the Sauds, Bush family employers.

Why should Parry write as though there were reason to believe that Obama wants peace in Syria, after having worked so hard to bring it war? The premise is not plausible, so nothing in the article that touches it is plausible.

Is no one examining actual motives for foreign policy?