Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 14, 2017 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux

07:31

3651 U.S.-led Coalition Accidentally Bomb Syrian Allies, Killing 18 | True News

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Time for a bit of history, everybody.
	Time to pull the general population out of the incessant bleat of now that is characterized by the mainstream media's refusal to put anything in context.
	So first of all, in the first Gulf War, Syria was in fact a US ally.
	Big pals, nice paramilitary bromance going on in the first invasion of Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
	After the September 11th attacks in the United States, the Syrian government actually cooperated with the United States in the nascent war on terror.
	Syrian intelligence actually alerted the U.S. that there was an al-Qaeda plan that was very similar to the USS coal bombing.
	Al-Qaeda was aiming to fly a hang glider loaded with explosives into the U.S. U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet headquarters in Bahrain.
	When the U.S. Embassy was attacked, the Syrian government took on the attackers and killed them.
	I guess slightly less nobly, Syria was one of the most common destinations for America's extraordinary rendition program, right?
	So the U.S. would send captives outside of its borders in order to torture the living hell out of them.
	And one of the most popular destinations was Syria.
	Now, Syria did oppose the Iraq War because the Iraq War was immoral.
	It was the international crime of aggression and really about the worst international crime violation that there is.
	And Syria also opposed the Iraq War because Iraqi refugees would come pouring across its borders.
	And the U.S. got really angry at Syria because Syria, they said, well, you can't control your borders.
	During the Iraq War, there would be fighters flowing back and forth over the Syrian-Iraqi border.
	And so America got really angry at Syria for not controlling the borders in Syria.
	Really kind of tragically ironic when you think about it, that America, of all countries, would get angry at another country for allowing the free flow of people across its borders.
	Now, after the Arab Spring, WikiLeaks has shown that the U.S. gave financial support to political opposition groups in Syria, directly funding groups opposed to the Syrian government.
	And then, of course, the leftist American media gets very angry at the very idea that Russia might be interfering with the political machinations in a foreign country.
	Under Bush, $6 million was given to the Barada satellite television channel and that broadcast anti-Syrian government programming into Syria.
	So, when uprisings began, the US funded, trained and later armed these rebel groups in Syria.
	Basically, any group which seeks to achieve political change through violence is a terrorist.
	So the U.S. was arming and training terrorists against the Assad government.
	And then you see he got really angry when Assad used force to counterattack the terrorists that were being trained and armed and funded by the United States.
	Now, much more recently, U.S.-led airstrikes killed 18 friendly fighters in Syria.
	Now, what happened was it mistook them for ISIS after the victims, they say, gave Allied forces the wrong coordinates.
	Now, this occurs after, of course, with the Tomahawk strike on the airbase, the alienation of Russia.
	Russia and America were coordinating Troop movements and airstrikes and so on to make sure they didn't step on each other's toes.
	That ended, of course, after Russia got angry at the United States for bombing a Syrian government airbase.
	So what happened was, in this fog and chaos of war, with less coordination occurring, coalition airstrikes, they accidentally targeted what are called the Syrian Democratic Forces near Tabqa.
	And these 18 friendly fighters were killed as they were actually battling ISIS in a forward position.
	And this happened on April 11th, just a couple of days after these missile attacks on the Syrian airbase.
	The U.S.-led coalition said in a statement, quote, By the partnered forces who had identified the target location as an ISIS fighting position.
	When of course it turned out to be an anti-ISIS group.
	So, to sum up, just a couple of days ago in Syria, the US was trying to bomb ISIS, which they in part armed and trained, but instead bombed forces fighting against the Syrian government.
	Now, the Syrian government used to be an ally, and that's hopefully clearing everything up for you, because it's really important to have rationality, consistency, and the moral high ground when it comes to intelligence-led foreign policy in the region.
	Now, people have asked me why has not President Bashar al-Assad responded to the allegations that he used chemical weapons.
	Well, he has, of course.
	Just as he responded in 2013 when he was accused of using chemical weapons, but all indications turn out to have proven that it was in fact the rebels who were using the chemical weapons that were supplied, according to reports by the Saudi Arabian government, The rebels mishandled the chemical weapons and then Assad was accused of using chemical weapons when it was, in fact, the rebels.
	And Assad recently gave a fairly lengthy interview and made pretty rational points.
	Again, the proof remains to be seen.
	But his basic points were, no, don't have chemical weapons.
	They were all taken out and the inspectors were satisfied and Russia vouched for it.
	The chemical weapons were all taken out.
	In 2013, we don't have any.
	Even if we did have any, we would never use it.
	Even if we were to ever use it, which we don't have and won't, why would we use it against civilians?
	And why would we use it against civilians in a completely non-essential part of the war, when no particular operations are going on?
	Why, if we had these weapons and the will to use them, why wouldn't we use them when we were losing, rather than we were losing?
	Now that we are winning and going to achieve our objectives.
	So, Assad actually blamed the deep state in America for fomenting this kind of conflict.
	So, this is really, really important to understand.
	It is a very confusing mess out there.
	Allegiances are constantly shifting.
	And the forces that are allied are now the enemies.
	The forces of the enemies are now the allied ones.
	And...
	The idea that the American government can go and create peace and security over there in Syria...
	You know, I would just invite the US lawmakers and the US population who think this might even remotely be possible...
	...to just glance out at the extraordinarily high murder rate in Washington.
	You know, if you can't even control and pacify a society with the same culture, the same language, the same history...
	A stone's throw from the windows of the Capitol, then I think it's fair to say you may have just a little bit of trouble trying to pacify a country on the other side of the world whose history and culture you seem to have very little clue about, whose language you generally do not speak, whose religion you generally do not understand, and the religious conflicts and ethnic conflicts you do not seem to understand.

▲