{"id":272747,"date":"2016-10-13T16:06:31","date_gmt":"2016-10-13T16:06:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/?p=272747"},"modified":"2016-10-19T17:00:47","modified_gmt":"2016-10-19T17:00:47","slug":"hillary-clinton-wants-now-syria","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/breaking-news\/hillary-clinton-wants-now-syria\/","title":{"rendered":"Hillary Clinton Wants to Do This Again — Now to Syria"},"content":{"rendered":"

Eric Zuesse<\/span><\/p>\n

(RINF<\/a>) – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (and President Obama \u2014 and some NATO partners) did it previously to Libya, and here was the result (as discussed by the retired British career\u00a0<\/span>diplomat Craig Murray, at his craigmurray.org.uk<\/a>,<\/span>\u00a0who has kindly allowed me to distribute it to other newsmedia)\u00a0<\/span>[and I as editor will add a few clarifiers and questions in brackets] (and then afterward, I shall add my own comments); so, here is Craig Murray:<\/p>\n

This is the result of NATO bombing of Sirte to \u201cenforce the no-fly zone\u201d in Libya.<\/p>\n

\"Sirte-destroyed-1\"<\/a><\/p>\n

When the neo-cons in the UK parliament and the serial warmonger Hillary Clinton call for a \u201cno-fly zone\u201d they actually mean the opposite. They mean that NATO should be given untrammelled access to the [Syrian] airspace to carry out mass bombings \u2013 but that nobody else [including the Syrian government] should.<\/p>\n

We saw it in Libya. The argument goes like this. NATO aircraft need to enforce the no-fly zone. To do this in safety, they need to attack and destroy any ground-to-air weapons capabilities on the ground. That does not just include surface-to-air missiles, both carriage mounted and hand held, but anything that can be pointed upwards and fired. They need to take out by more bombing any stores that may house such weapons. They need to take out any radar installations, including civilian ones, that may pinpoint NATO aircraft. They need to destroy any runways and hangars, including civilian ones. They need to destroy by bombing all military command and control centres, including those in built-up areas. They need to destroy the infrastructure on which air defence relies, including electricity generation and water supply, including civilian assets.<\/p>\n

I am not exaggerating. That really is the doctrine of NATO for enforcing a \u201cno-fly zone\u201d, as previously witnessed in Iraq and Libya. It really was NATO aircraft which did to the beautiful Mediterranean town of Sirte the destruction which you see in that picture \u2013 in order to enforce a no-fly zone. Enforcement of the no-fly zone was the only authorisation NATO had for the massive bombing campaign on Libya which enabled regime change, which enabled rival jihadist militias to take over the country. They showed their gratitude by murdering the US Ambassador. The failure of central government led to Libya becoming the operating site from which a number now in the hundreds of thousands of boat refugees have crossed to Europe.<\/p>\n

Now they wish to do precisely the same again. Make no mistake. Those calling for a \u201cNo-fly zone\u201d do indeed want to stop the bombs falling on jihadist-held areas of Aleppo. But they want to replace this with NATO dropping a vastly greater weight of vastly more powerful weaponry on areas held by the Assad regime. They are relentless warmongering bastards, pretending to be motivated by humanitarian concern.<\/p>\n

There are no easy answers in Syria. Without Russian and Syrian government air power, Syria might well already have fallen to disparate groups of murdering religious fanatics, who would then have redoubled their existing tendency to also kill each other. The pretence that there is any significant number of pro-western democratic rebels is ludicrous nonsense. But so equally is the pretence that the Assad regime is a decent regime. It is not and never has been. There is always this pathetic reductionism in the western media to conflict as between \u201cgood guys\u201d and \u201cbad guys\u201d. They are all killing civilians. They are all bad guys.<\/p>\n

If all bombing were to stop, the danger is that jihadists would again gain the upper hand. But in a situation where there are no good options, I think that is still better than the continued bombing of civilian areas held by jihadists. The fact that the West has repeatedly done this massively in Mosul or Fallujah does not make it right for the Russians or Assad to do it now. The moral balance now must be for a halt to all bombing and all military air operations \u2013 including by NATO. [But would this enable the jihadists to take over Syria?]<\/p>\n

A security council resolution could be tabled calling for the end of all military flights, by anybody, over Syrian airspace. The UK and US would oppose that, and so would all those Tories and Blairites pretending to advocate a no-fly zone in the House of Commons. That would show up the bastards for the evil hypocrites they are.<\/p>\n

\u2014<\/span><\/p>\n

ADDED NOW BY ERIC ZUESSE:<\/span><\/p>\n

The extraordinarily honest \u201cMoon of Alabama\u201d blogger<\/span><\/a> commented, a year ago:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>I asked what purpose this media campaign [pumping a no-fly-zone] may have. It now seems clear that it is part of preparing the European public for all-out war on Syria, its government and its people.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>The Guardian<\/em> editors use the created migrant crisis to demand that “something” be done. They ridiculously first remind us that the false “no-fly-zone” campaign against Libya ended in a country ripped apart and more refugees only to then demand a similar campaign in Syria. Saner British voices remind us that “western” meddling in the Middle East is the source, not the solution for the current catastrophes.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>But the BBC lets us know that the UK government is preparing for war on Syria despite an earlier parliament vote against such a move:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>Ministers will start to make a case for British military action in Syria next week \u2014 with Downing Street keen to take the “next step” against so-called Islamic State \u2014 the BBC understands.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>France is, of course, on board<\/span><\/p>\n

Obama won\u2019t unleash the Syrian no-fly zone \u2014 and war against Russia, and the nuclear destruction of human civilization (World War III) \u2014 but he is instead leaving that to Hillary Clinton. Here is what she has said about it:<\/span><\/p>\n

To the Council on Foreign Relations, on 19 November 2015:<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 CLINTON:\u00a0<\/span>We should also work with the coalition and the\u00a0neighbors to impose no-fly zones that will stop Assad from\u00a0slaughtering civilians and the opposition from the air.\u00a0Opposition forces on the ground, with material support\u00a0from the coalition, could then help create safe areas where\u00a0Syrians could remain in the country, rather than fleeing\u00a0toward Europe.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>This combined approach would help enable the opposition\u00a0to retake the remaining stretch of the Turkish border from\u00a0ISIS, choking off its supply lines. It would also give us new\u00a0leverage in the diplomatic process that Secretary Kerry is\u00a0pursuing. \u2026<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>QUESTION: When you were secretary of state, you tended\u00a0to agree a great deal with the then-Secretary of Defense Bob\u00a0Gates. Gates was opposed to a no-fly zone in Syria; thought\u00a0it was an act of war that was risky and dangerous. This\u00a0seems to me the major difference right now between what\u00a0the president \u2014 what Obama\u2019s administration is doing and\u00a0what you\u2019re proposing.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>Do you not \u2014 why do you disagree with Bob Gates on this?<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>CLINTON: Well, I \u2014 I believe that the no-fly zone is\u00a0merited and can be implemented, again, in a coalition, not\u00a0an American-only no-fly zone. I fully respect Bob and his\u00a0knowledge about the difficulties of implementing a no-fly\u00a0zone. But if you look at where we are right now, we have to\u00a0try to clear the air of the bombing attacks that are still being\u00a0carried out to a limited extent by the Syrian military, now\u00a0supplemented by the Russian air force.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>And I think we have a chance to do that now. We have a no-fly zone over northern Iraq for years to protect the Kurds.\u00a0And it proved to be successful, not easy \u2014 it never is \u2014 but I\u00a0think now is the time for us to revisit those plans.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>I also believe, as I said in the speech, that if we begin the\u00a0conversation about a no-fly zone, something that, you\u00a0know, Turkey discussed with me back when I was secretary\u00a0of state in 2012, it will confront a lot of our partners in the\u00a0region and beyond about what they\u2019re going to do. And it\u00a0can give us leverage in the discussions that Secretary Kerry\u00a0is carrying on right now.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>So I see it as both a strategic opportunity on the ground,\u00a0and an opportunity for leverage in the peace negotiations. \u2026<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>QUESTION: Madam Secretary. Hi. Back to\u00a0the no-fly zone. are you advocating a no-fly zone over the\u00a0entire country or a partial no-fly zone over an enclave where\u00a0refugees might find a safe haven? And in the event of either,\u00a0do you foresee see you might be potentially provoking the\u00a0Russians?<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>CLINTON: I am advocating the second, a no-fly zone\u00a0principally over northern Syria close to the Turkish (ph)\u00a0border, cutting off the supply lines, trying to provide some\u00a0safe refuges for refugees so they don\u2019t have to leave Syria,\u00a0creating a safe space away from the barrel bombs and the\u00a0other bombardments by the Syrians. And I would certainly\u00a0expect to and hope to work with the Russians to be able to\u00a0do that. [She expects Putin to join America\u2019s bombing of Syria\u2019s government and troops and shooting-down of Russia\u2019s planes in Syria, but no question was raised her about this.] \u2026<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>To have a swath of territory that could be a\u00a0safe zone \u2026 for Syrians so they wouldn\u2019t have to leave but\u00a0also for humanitarian relief, \u2026 would give\u00a0us this extra leverage that I\u2019m looking for in the diplomatic\u00a0pursuits with Russia with respect to the political outcome in\u00a0Syria. [She expects Russia to agree to join her war against Russia.]<\/span><\/p>\n

During a debate against Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primaries:<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 I<\/span>n a debate with Bernie on 19 December 2015, Hillary argued for her proposal that the U.S. impose in Syria a \u201cno-fly zone\u201d where Russians were dropping bombs on the imported jihadists who have been trying to overthrow and replace Assad:\u00a0“I am advocating the no-fly zone both because I think it would help us on the\u00a0ground to protect Syrians; I’m also advocating it because I think it gives us\u00a0some leverage in our conversations with Russia.\u201d<\/span><\/a>\u00a0She said there that allowing the jihadists to overthrow Assad \u201cwould help us on the ground to protect Syrians,\u201d somehow; and, also, that, somehow, shooting down Russia\u2019s planes in Syria (the \u201cno-fly zone\u201d) “gives us\u00a0some leverage in our conversations with Russia.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>Bernie Sanders\u2019s response to that was: “I worry too much that Secretary Clinton is too much into regime change and a\u00a0little bit too aggressive without knowing what the unintended consequences\u00a0might be.\u201d He didn\u2019t mention nuclear war as one of them.<\/span><\/p>\n

The \u201cno-fly zone\u201d policy is one of three policies she supports that would likely produce nuclear war; she supports all of them, not merely the \u201cno-fly zone.\u201d<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014<\/span><\/p>\n

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of\u00a0 They\u2019re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010<\/i><\/span><\/a>,<\/i> and of<\/span> \u00a0<\/i>CHRIST\u2019S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity<\/i><\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Eric Zuesse (RINF) – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (and President Obama \u2014 and some NATO partners) did it previously to Libya, and here was the result (as discussed by the retired British career\u00a0diplomat Craig Murray, at his craigmurray.org.uk,\u00a0who has kindly allowed me to distribute it to other newsmedia)\u00a0[and I as editor will add a […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1254,"featured_media":180652,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[487,461,18],"tags":[30,1036,96,698,59,753,804,524,754,49,76,40,1024],"class_list":{"0":"post-272747","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-breaking-news","8":"category-editorials","9":"category-latest-news","10":"tag-big-brother","11":"tag-breaking-news","12":"tag-cover-up","13":"tag-hillary-clinton","14":"tag-military","15":"tag-police-state","16":"tag-politics-2","17":"tag-russia","18":"tag-syria","19":"tag-usa-news","20":"tag-warfare","21":"tag-white-house","22":"tag-ww3"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/272747","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1254"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=272747"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/272747\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/180652"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=272747"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=272747"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=272747"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}