Kerry Tells Congress That Oil Sheiks Will Pay US for War to Unseat Assad

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

red line syria

Your Daily Dose of BuzzFlash at Truthout, via my pal Mark Karlin:

In a rare moment of diplomatic candor, US Secretary of State John Kerry told a congressional hearing Wednesday that oil sheiks have offered to pay the United States to unseat Bashar al-Assad as Syrian strong man.  [...]

Apparently trying to assuage concerns about billions and billions of taxpayer dollars financing a "punishment strike" that most legislators know in their guts is the opening salvo in another Libyan style war of degrading the Syrian military (while untold numbers of civilians are also killed in the process), Kerry, according to The Washington Post, revealed more than he probably meant to [...]

“With respect to Arab countries offering to bear costs and to assess, the answer is profoundly yes,” Kerry said. “They have. That offer is on the table.” [...]

“In fact, some of them have said that if the United States is prepared to go do the whole thing the way we’ve done it previously in other places, they’ll carry that cost,” Kerry said. “That’s how dedicated they are at this. That’s not in the cards, and nobody’s talking about it, but they’re talking in serious ways about getting this done."

The conundrum for Kerry is that you can't say "nobody's talking about it" when you've just said that an offer is on the table in case the Syrian conflict becomes a full-fledged Libyan style regime replacement operation. [...]

The only thing that has been stopping the US up until now from dislodging Assad is that the Syrian rebels are split among many different ideological groups, with the most powerful segment perhaps being Al-Qaeda or Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers.  So if Assad is overthrown, it could open the way for a pro-Iranian Islamic fundamentalist government.  [...]

So what's the end game?  That's the question that has everyone scratching their heads in Washington.  If Obama is authorized to strike Syria to punish Assad and the military for an alleged chemical attack, what will be the targets?  They can't be the chemical weapons themselves because that would cause a disbursement that would probably kill tens of thousands of civilians.

What could the US military do that would actually deter the Syrian army from using chemical weapons, if they were the ones that actually did?  And what would prevent the "radical" Islamic forces from seizing the chemical weapons (the largest stockpile in the world, according to President Obama) amidst the chaos created by a "shock and awe" attack.  Then who might the chemical weapons be used against, us?

So much for protecting Americans.

Please read the entire post here.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare
  • pigboy

    You are shittin me! I bet the check is in the mail too.

    ".....Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz told a congressional panel that Iraqi oil revenues would help pay for reconstructing the country, i.e. a cost of the war. “The oil revenue of that country could bring between 50 and 100 billion dollars over the course of the next two or three years. We’re dealing with a country that could really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon,” he said.

    One month before the war, then-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said Iraq “is a rather wealthy country. … And so there are a variety of means that Iraq has to be able to shoulder much of the burden for their own reconstruction.”

    Since the start of the Iraq war, the U.S. has spent tens of billions of dollars in reconstruction costs."

    http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/03/14/86715/rove-iraq-oil/