In a rapid offensive lasting less than a month, forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad have recaptured the last opposition enclave in east Aleppo. On Monday evening, the army cleared street after street as artillery and air strikes pounded rebel positions northeast of Ramouseh district. By midnight, only a tiny speck of territory remained in opposition hands and celebratory gunfire lit the darkened skies over west Aleppo.
Notice the sudden use of the word "rebel" as a characterization of those holding up in East Aleppo, as others have pointed out until about a year ago they were referred to as jihadists or terrorists. This piece I think is misleading. I suggest listening to Prof. Cohen on Democracy Now, he calls Amy's attention to the above distinction because she was using "rebel" as a descriptor. Mr. Cohen is a lone voice of reason and sanity in the wilderness of contemporary politics. Listen as he brilliantly confronts the man from Human Rights Watch.
I cannot take Kenneth Roth of HRW seriously.
This is the person who posted an image of a destroyed city and claimed it Aleppo after Russians bombed it when it was in fact Gaza City after Israel had bombed it. The charges made by HRW against Israel were muted when compared to the charges made against Russia.
He apologized for this photo and then posted another photo of Aleppo to prove the damage done by barrel bombs when it again a photo taken earlier and was the result of Jihadists attacking said neighborhood.
I also linked several weeks ok to the multiple repeats released by these groups of "The last Hospital" being destroyed by Russian airstrikes In Aleppo. In a period of about 6 months the "last hospital" was destroyed around 15 times.
Added to that a bomb is a bomb. They call them "barrel bombs" as a propaganda term to make them seem more nefarious. A bomb dropped by a US Airstrike does just as much it not more damage and kills people just as efficiently.
US bombs are not designed "not to kill"
Aleppo has not yet fallen, according to the latest radio news. Syria and the USA are both currently locked in battle for the Syrian city of Aleppo.
Aleppo is an important city militarily, and the USA will not not let it go so easlly. Syria is an important step for the neocons as preparation for the coming war on Iran, as revealed in Hillary's leaked emails.
"Victory may not come quickly or easily, but it will come. And the payoff will be substantial. Iran would be strategically isolated, unable to exert its influence in the Middle East. The resulting regime in Syria will see the United States as a friend, not an enemy. Washington would gain substantial recognition as fighting for the people in the Arab world, not the corrupt regimes. For Israel, the rationale for a bolt from the blue attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities would be eased." - Hillary Clinton - Wikileaks.
There are other words from Hillary's leaked emails that demonstrate clearly that a Libya style destruction of Syria is planned.
"“Washington should start by expressing its willingness to work with regional allies like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar to organize, train and arm Syrian rebel forces. The announcement of such a decision would, by itself, likely cause substantial defections from the Syrian military. Then, using territory in Turkey and possibly Jordan, US diplomats and Pentagon officials can start strengthening the opposition… Arming the Syrian rebels and using Western air power to ground Syrian helicopters and airplanes is a low-cost high payoff approach.” - Hillary Clinton - Wikileaks
As such, this war can only end in one of two ways:-
* American victory, which would involve a Libya style destruction of Syria.
* Syrian victory, which would involve the removal of USA military bases from Syrian soil.
This war will continue until either of those events occurs.
This atrocity would have ended before it began, if the US hadn't been sponsoring terrorism in Syria!
So you honestly don't believe civilians have not been killed by the Syrian army and Russian air strikes? The contrarians on this board seem to think their bombs don't kill. It reminds me of the Cold War.
I never said that. I said Mr Roth is not reliable as a source of information on this issue. He has shown he can not be honest about it.
There's something major missing in the article analysis, though I can't say just what. The forces in Aleppo include mercenaries paid through the CIA, the Sauds, and most likely the states who contributed large sums to Hillary Clinton's campaign.
It is quite possible that these groups are in relative disarray because Clinton's electoral loss was unexpected or because of resistance that that loss appears to have involved around information security, but if so, it is not likely that this would slow them long.
Lund does not account for the majority of the combatants, and it is certainly not Turkey or Syria itself with whom Russia will mostly negotiate.
None of this means that there was no impulse towards rebellion in Syria. But look how the vultures gather! How does a people respond to problems locally?
It's good to hear Cohen speak, and I'm glad Amy Goodman lets him speak, but Amy herself continues to be a grunt of Empire by letting that jihadi repeat the unsubstantiated meme of the supposed slaughter of "82 civilians" by Syrian government forces (the man really sounds as if he's reciting, poorly, a script), for which there has been absolutely no verification, and make his ridiculous claim of impending "genocide", and then she quotes the unspeakable Samantha Power's ridiculous statement as if it were of any importance whatsoever. As if this weren't enough, Amy herself felt compelled to repeat the unsubstantiated claims of the jihadi and Power. I almost couldn't contain my disgust long enough to hear out the good Prof. Cohen. Goodman has become little more than a contemptible tool.
Superb deconstruction, incidentally, by Stephen Cohen.
Love your description of her--it's so right on!
Surely we can dispense with reference to Human Rights Watch, after it was revealed that it enjoys funding and direction from George Soros. As with Democracy Now, funding other than from subscribers always results in bas and loss of integrity. This happened to HRW a long time ago. I personally no longer give any credibility to what they say. Let's. Move on.