Recently, there was an attack in the northwestern Idlib province of Syria. The mainstream media has dubbed this a chemical gas attack launched by the Assad regime. The Assad regime has denied involvement in any chemical weapons attacks, noting that the Syrian army does not even possess such weapons. At least 70 people were killed and 557 wounded. Regardless of who was responsible, it is clear that this was a truly devastating and inhumane sequence of events, and there is no excuse for it.
However, as per usual, the Western narrative is exploiting this atrocity by using it as an excuse to justify further U.S. military intervention in Syria. Commander-in-Chief Donald J. Trump, who campaigned on ending the ceaseless U.S. meddling and “nation-building” overseas has, of course, changed his position on the matter in favor of intervention. It has been confirmed that Trump has already approved a military strike on a Syrian airbase.
Let me make one thing abundantly clear: this article is not an attempt to make excuses for the regime of Bashar al-Assad, nor that of Russia’s, nor any airstrikes launched or civilian death tolls resulting from either of their military action in the region. This article was written with the interests of the Syrian people in mind, for they are the true victims in this conflict.
The mainstream media is not giving us the full story here. There are things they are deliberately covering up, to suit their own interests. There are things they don’t want you to know.
In order to have a clear view on everything, we should first reflect upon the events leading up to this point. Think back to 2013, do the words Syria and Assad ring a bell at all? That’s because it was the year of the devastating sarin gas attack launched against the Syrians, which the mainstream media immediately blamed the Assad regime for. Then-president Barack Obama became insistent that the U.S. intervene in the conflict by responding with airstrikes, which was met with harsh backlash by a leery public, sick and tired of perpetual war. It later came to light that the Assad regime was in fact not responsible for these attacks, but rather the ‘moderate Syrian rebels’ which were backed, armed and funded by the U.S. and NATO.
These ‘rebel’ groups have explicit ties with terrorist groups such as ISIS as well as al-Qaeda’s ‘al-Nusra Front’ branch in Syria, whom the U.S. presumes to be fighting despite taking effective measures to empower them, both by arming and funding their friends and doing things like ‘accidentally’ bombing a Syrian army base and leaving it to be claimed by ISIS.
These same groups have been empowered by the U.S. as a result of the power vacuums we left after invading countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan and attempting to enforce a regime change. See, what the mainstream media always fails to address is the pivotal role we have played in orchestrating the crisis which we propose to resolve.
Muhawesh revealed that in 2011–12, Syrian president Bashar al-Assad refused to cooperate with Turkey’s proposal to install a natural gas pipeline between Qatar and Turkey through Syria. Turkey and its allies then became “the major architects of Syria’s ‘civil war.’” The pipeline would have bypassed Russia to reach European markets currently dominated by Russian gas company ‘Gazprom.’ Thus, Muhawesh reported, “The Middle East is being torn to shreds by manipulative plans to gain oil and gas access by pitting people against one another based on religion. The ensuing chaos provides ample cover to install a new regime that’s more amenable to opening up oil pipelines and ensuring favorable routes for the highest bidders.”
Then in 2012, the US, UK, France, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, along with Turkey, began to organize, arm, and fund the ‘Moderate Syrian Rebels,’ consistent with long-standing US plans to destabilize Syria. These groups then began to implement a sectarian ‘divide and conquer’ strategy to overthrow President Assad. “It’s important to note the timing,” Muhawesh said, “This coalition and meddling in Syria came about immediately on the heels of discussions of an Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline that was to be built between 2014 and 2016 from Iran’s giant South Pars field through Iraq and Syria. With a possible extension to Lebanon, it would eventually reach Europe, the target export market.”
Just as MintPress News reported, access to oil and gas—not sectarian differences—is the underlying cause of the conflict in Syria. “The war is being sold to the public as a Sunni-Shiite conflict” because, if the public understood the economic interests that are at stake here, “most people would not support any covert funding and arming of rebels or direct intervention.”
Think back to Saddam Hussein, the man we accused of possessing weapons of mass destruction, none of which were ever found. How many people actually believe the reasons given for why the U.S. invaded Iraq? It would seem the vast majority of people would agree that we were brazenly lied to. The economic motives, such as oil and the interests of the military industrial complex, are no secret.
The same thing the West has done to Iraq and Afghanistan, they are trying to do in Syria. For years they have been arming and funding terror proxy groups in the region and expressing great hostility towards the Assad regime. This is not because they genuinely care about the liberty or welfare of the Syrian people, this is motivated by the very same greed and conquest that played a part in all of the previous wars we’ve started.
Moving on, claims have been made by both a Russian MoD as well as a UN investigator that the recent ‘chemical weapons’ attack was actually a routine airstrike launched by the Syrian army that occurred in a rebel-held area where chemical weapons were stashed. So in other words, if this analysis is correct, the Syrian army launched airstrikes in an area containing both civilians and chemical weapons covertly sold to terrorists inadvertently backed by the West. And, as usual, both sides are shrugging off responsibility.
Do you see what’s going on, here? How the media twists the story to protect our strategic interests? This is not to say the Assad regime should be absolved of blame for the attacks by any means. Both the Assad regime and Russia should be held accountable for any and all civilian casualties that occur on their watch. That being said, so should the U.S.
Ask yourself, why is the media so selective about the atrocities it chooses to report on? Where was the media when the U.S. used chemical weapons in Fallujah? Where was the media when Saudi Arabia used chemical weapons in Yemen? Where was the media when Israel used chemical weapons in Gaza?
It is clear that the mainstream media does not genuinely care about the innocent blood that has been shed in Syria. If they did, they would choose to shed light on all who are suffering in these conflicts, and all who are responsible. Not only that, but they would not be using this story as a pre-text to justify more bombing, more killing, and more bloodshed.
Don’t buy it, people. Don’t feed into the mainstream narrative. Think for yourself. Do your own research. Most importantly, don’t let them use this as an excuse for more war. If there is a revolution in Syria, let it be by and for the people of Syria, not a coup for the interests of terrorists or imperialists.