As a world-historic titan of the mind who could not escape leftism’s gravity, despite their near-unrivaled perceptiveness and sensitivity to the folds of reality and personal experience as a victim of leftism’s core genocidal impulse, once said, the purpose of propaganda is to obscure a central truth.
So against Operation OBAMA, which targets the most critical front of the antifascist struggle, we must say for all theirstory: Republicans Buried Syria.
“Impostor!” the uruks bearing their still-fresh Mark of Assad declaim. Yet, in doing so, they reveal their once-splendid livery a measly patchwork that falls to pieces once they are roused for battle against the Axis. They prove to worship a false fire, their alchemy failing to follow the curves our calculus reveals with ease and grace.
They seek to torture Reality, mutilate it into a shape and gait befitting the servitude they desire of it. Yet, with three words, we can release it from this captivity.
Of course, it should never have come to this. We should have never seen the Aware pledge as faithful captains in the service of Trad World Order. Republicans chained themselves to the doors of Assad’s slaughterhouse lest Obama demolish it, trapping countless victims inside. Yet now those who know of Sednaya sift through its ashes, auguring a single omen from the countless fragments of bone: “OBAMA.”
Such is the danger of our struggle. We should expect to lose many others to the Guild Navigators who folded space and time to create vast labyrinth into which antifascists enter but neotrads leave.
So we must erect this defense against their most powerful magic now. And thanks to our machine allies, we no longer have to combat Axis magic alone. We must simply ask them what Republicans said or did at any given time of the Syrian Revolution, and they will reward our fidelity with Truth upon Truth. These are but a few:
A limited selection of Republicans saying there is no military solution to Syria in 2011:
"There is no military solution in Syria. We must continue to work for a diplomatic solution with our allies" - Senator John McCain (R-AZ), November 15, 2011, Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to the crisis in Syria" - Representative Ed Royce (R-CA), November 9, 2011, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to the problems that exist in Syria" - Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), November 8, 2011, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"We need a diplomatic solution, not a military solution, in Syria" - Representative Michael Turner (R-OH), October 4, 2011, House Armed Services Committee hearing.
"We must work toward a diplomatic solution in Syria. There is no military solution" - Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), September 14, 2011, Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.
"We must seek a diplomatic solution to the situation in Syria, as there is no military solution" - Senator Bob Corker (R-TN), September 8, 2011, Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to the situation in Syria. We need a diplomatic solution" - Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ), September 8, 2011, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to the problems that exist in Syria" - Representative Dan Burton (R-IN), August 30, 2011, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to the situation in Syria. We need a political solution" - Representative Ted Poe (R-TX), August 1, 2011, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"We must find a diplomatic solution to the situation in Syria. There is no military solution" - Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), July 14, 2011, Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.
Sources:
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Royce_Testimony.pdf
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Ros-Lehtinen_Testimony.pdf
https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Graham_09-14-11.pdf
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/090811_Corker_Testimony.pdf
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Smith_Testimony.pdf
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Burton_Testimony.pdf
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Poe_Testimony.pdf
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/071411_Rubio_Testimony.pdf
A limited selection of Republicans saying there is no military solution to Syria in 2012:
"There is no military solution to the Syrian crisis" - Senator John McCain (R-AZ), May 31, 2012, Senate floor speech.
"We must recognize that there is no military solution to the crisis in Syria" - Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), May 22, 2012, Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to the conflict in Syria" - Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), May 22, 2012, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"We cannot impose a military solution on Syria" - Senator Bob Corker (R-TN), May 15, 2012, Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to the situation in Syria" - Representative Ed Royce (R-CA), May 8, 2012, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"We cannot solve this problem with military force" - Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), May 1, 2012, Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to the crisis in Syria" - Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ), April 17, 2012, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution in Syria" - Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), March 28, 2012, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to this crisis" - Representative Michael Turner (R-OH), March 28, 2012, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to the crisis in Syria" - Representative Ted Poe (R-TX), March 28, 2012, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
Sources:
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/052212_Rubio_Testimony.pdf
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Ros-Lehtinen_Testimony.pdf
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/051512_Corker_Testimony.pdf
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Royce_Testimony.pdf
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/050112_Paul_Testimony.pdf
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Smith_Testimony.pdf
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Rohrabacher_Testimony.pdf
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Turner_Testimony.pdf
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Poe_Testimony.pdf
A limited selection of Republicans saying there is no military solution to Syria in 2013:
"There is no military solution to the crisis in Syria. It requires a political solution" - Senator John McCain (R-AZ), September 3, 2013, Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to the Syrian crisis. Only a political solution can provide lasting peace and stability" - Senator Bob Corker (R-TN), September 3, 2013, Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.
"I do not believe that military intervention will bring the Syrian conflict to an end. It requires a political solution" - Representative Tom Cotton (R-AR), September 4, 2013, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to the Syrian conflict. Only a political solution can end the suffering of the Syrian people" - Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), September 3, 2013, Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.
"We must recognize that there is no military solution to the conflict in Syria. Only a political solution can bring an end to the violence and instability" - Representative Ed Royce (R-CA), September 4, 2013, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"The Syrian crisis requires a political solution, not a military one" - Representative Mike Rogers (R-MI), September 4, 2013, House Intelligence Committee hearing.
"We need a political solution, not a military solution, to the crisis in Syria" - Representative Paul Cook (R-CA), September 4, 2013, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to the Syrian conflict. We must pursue a political solution through diplomacy" - Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ), September 4, 2013, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"There is no military solution to the crisis in Syria. We must continue to work with our international partners to find a political solution" - Representative Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), September 4, 2013, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
"Military intervention alone cannot solve the crisis in Syria. Only a political solution can bring an end to the suffering of the Syrian people" - Representative Tom Rooney (R-FL), September 4, 2013, House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
Sources:
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/McCain_Testimony.pdf
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Corker_Testimony.pdf
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/090313_Paul_Testimony.pdf
https://intelligence.house.gov/hearing/open-hearing-conflict-syria-and-us-policy-options
I am not making a case about the role of Republicans in burying Syria. I am not trying to convince you. I am stating the obvious Truth that is being lost to time.
Without exception, Republican Syria messaging overall was designed for sabotage.
Republican messaging on Syria was at all times Assadist and designed to tack public support away from the precise course of action rebels needed for victory at the time. When Republicans voiced “support” for rebels, it was typically two years too late from what was needed then, and deliberately so.
Even more cynically, Republicans constantly misrepresented the situation in Syria at any given time in their “support” for revolutionaries and their “criticism” of the Obama Administration.
In 2011, Republican messaging on Syria can be described as split between token statements supporting revolutionaries and propaganda calling them terrorists, Al Qaeda, “extremists,” and more.
Messages from the past, lost but recovered by our machine allies:
"We must be mindful of the religious sectarian divide in Syria and not get involved in a conflict that could escalate into a full-blown sectarian war." - Senator Rand Paul, August 2011 (source: CNN - https://www.cnn.com/2011/08/18/opinion/paul-syria/index.html)
"We should not take sides in a sectarian conflict where we do not understand the long-standing grievances and animosities." - Congressman Ron Paul, August 2011 (source: The New York Times - https://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/17/us/politics/17paul.html)
"The sectarian violence in Syria is a tragic situation, but it is not in our national interest to become involved in another foreign conflict." - Senator John Cornyn, November 2011 (source: The Hill - https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/193923-cornyn-to-obama-avoid-military-involvement-in-syria)
"We should not intervene in Syria's sectarian conflict. It is not our place to take sides in a civil war that has been fueled by religious and ethnic differences." - Congressman Justin Amash, November 2011 (source: Twitter -https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/136574520153456384
"The sectarian violence in Syria is a reminder of why we need to be cautious about getting involved in foreign conflicts. We should not risk American lives and resources in a conflict that we do not fully understand." - Senator Mike Lee, December 2011 (source: The Hill - https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/199755-sen-mike-lee-us-should-not-get-involved-in-syria)
"We must recognize the sectarian nature of the conflict in Syria and avoid taking sides in a sectarian war that could have serious consequences for the region and the world." - Congressman Walter Jones, December 2011 (source: press release - https://jones.house.gov/press-release/rep-walter-jones-calls-against-us-intervention-syria)
"We cannot allow ourselves to be drawn into a sectarian conflict in Syria that could destabilize the region and threaten our national security." - Congressman John Fleming, December 2011 (source: press release - https://fleming.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=269681)
"The sectarian violence in Syria is a tragic situation, but it is not our responsibility to solve every problem in the world. We must prioritize our own national security and avoid getting involved in another foreign conflict." - Congressman Tim Huelskamp, December 2011 (source: press release - https://huelskamp.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressman-tim-huelskamp-opposes-us-intervention-in-syria)
"The sectarian conflict in Syria is a complex and dangerous situation, and we should be very cautious about getting involved. We do not want to risk American lives and resources in a conflict that may have no clear solution." - Congressman Ted Yoho, December 2011 (source: press release - https://yoho.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/yoho-opposes-us-intervention-in-syria)
"We should not take sides in a sectarian conflict that has been brewing for decades. Instead, we should focus on protecting our own national security interests and avoiding unnecessary involvement in foreign conflicts." - Senator Tom Coburn, December 2011 (source: The Hill)
These are but a few instances of Republican sabotage from 2011. Countless others are available to those who search. Rather than presenting the Revolution as it was, they cast it in sectarian terms, as Assad wanted, all while issuing token statements of support for neotrads, still uncommitted to Syria, and who would not be for years, and who would only understand this period as Republicans wanted them to.
At the most sensitive time of the Revolution, Republicans chose to faithfully repeat Assadist propaganda about the opposition, poisoning the well of public support to intervene on their behalf as was done in Libya, Egypt, and all other fronts of the Arab Spring, particularly with regards to the Muslim Brotherhood.
From our machine allies:
"We cannot turn a blind eye to the Muslim Brotherhood's agenda, which is to spread their ideology of Sharia law across the Middle East." - Rep. Allen West (R-FL)
"The Muslim Brotherhood is a radical Islamist group whose goal is to replace our secular government with an Islamic state." - Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN)
"The Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization that seeks to establish a global caliphate." - Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX)
"The Muslim Brotherhood is a serious threat to American interests and national security." - Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL)
"The Muslim Brotherhood is a dangerous organization that seeks to undermine Western values and promote Islamic extremism." - Sen. John McCain (R-AZ)
"We need to be vigilant about the Muslim Brotherhood's influence in the Middle East and their ties to terrorism." - Rep. Peter King (R-NY)
"The Muslim Brotherhood is a totalitarian movement that seeks to establish Islamic dominance over the world." - Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ)
"The Muslim Brotherhood is not a political organization, it is a terrorist organization." - Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN)
"The Muslim Brotherhood poses a serious threat to the stability of the Middle East and to American national security." - Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK)
"The Muslim Brotherhood's ultimate goal is to create an Islamic state that will spread its influence across the globe." - Rep. Steve King (R-IA)
Democrats, on the other hand, presented revolutionary forces more positively at this critical moment, as would be necessary for any future intervention:
"We need to engage with the Muslim Brotherhood and other moderate Islamic groups to promote stability in the Middle East." - Sen. John Kerry (D-MA)
"We should not demonize the Muslim Brotherhood without understanding their role in the political landscape of Egypt." - Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY)
"The Muslim Brotherhood should have a place in a democratic Egypt, but we must be cautious of their extremist elements." - Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY)
"We should work to support moderate Islamic groups in the Middle East, including the Muslim Brotherhood, to counter extremism." - Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN)
"The Muslim Brotherhood has a mixed history, but it is important to engage with them and support democratic processes in the Middle East." - Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA)
"We must be careful not to conflate the Muslim Brotherhood with terrorist organizations and work to engage with them in a productive way." - Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA)
"The Muslim Brotherhood is a complex organization with a range of views, and we should be cautious not to demonize them based on a few extreme elements." - Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA)
"We should support the democratic process in Egypt and engage with a range of political groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood, to ensure a stable transition." - Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI)
"The Muslim Brotherhood has a mixed history, but we should work to engage with moderate elements to promote stability and democratic values in the Middle East." - Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA)
"We should support the development of democratic institutions in the Middle East, including working with moderate Islamic groups like the Muslim Brotherhood." - Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
Republican alliances with Arab reactionaries cannot be overestimated. In 2011, here is what they had to say about the Muslim Brotherhood:
"The Muslim Brotherhood is part of a global network of secret societies, including the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission, that work together to control the world." - Source: Middle East Monitor article by Abdel Rahim Ali, "The Arab Spring and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood," August 17, 2013.
"The Muslim Brotherhood and the Bilderberg Group have the same goal, which is to establish a new world order based on their own ideology." - Source: YouTube video of a speech by Sheikh Saleh al-Fawzan, "The Muslim Brotherhood and the World Order," May 5, 2012.
"The Muslim Brotherhood is connected to the Bilderberg Group, and both of them are working together to destabilize the Arab world." - Source: Gulf Daily News article by Saeed al-Shehabi, "Bilderberg and the Arab Spring," June 4, 2011.
"The Muslim Brotherhood and the Trilateral Commission share a similar ideology, seeking to establish a new world order that is incompatible with Islam and traditional values." - Source: Tunis Times article by Nizar Ben Salah, "Muslim Brotherhood: The International Organization," July 26, 2011.
"The Muslim Brotherhood and the Bilderberg Group are both part of a global conspiracy to control the world's resources and dominate its people." - Source: Maghreb Intelligence article by Said Bennajem, "The Muslim Brotherhood and the Bilderberg Group: The Hidden Connection," October 26, 2012.
"The Muslim Brotherhood is part of a larger network of secret societies that includes the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, and other organizations that seek to establish a new world order." - Source: Al-Jarida article by Fouad al-Hashem, "The Secret Agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood," February 7, 2011.
"The Muslim Brotherhood is linked to the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission, and they all share the same goal of establishing a one-world government." - Source: YouTube video of a speech by Ibrahim al-Moussawi, "The Muslim Brotherhood and the New World Order," August 23, 2012.
"The Muslim Brotherhood and the Bilderberg Group are both part of a global network of elites who control the world's economy and politics." - Source: Al-Ghad article by Mohammad al-Thneibat, "The Muslim Brotherhood and the Global Conspiracy," February 27, 2011.
"The Muslim Brotherhood is part of a larger conspiracy that includes the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission, and they all seek to undermine traditional societies and values." - Source: Al-Ayyam article by Tawfik Abu Shomar, "The Muslim Brotherhood: A Dangerous Conspiracy," January 30, 2011.
"The Muslim Brotherhood is part of a global cabal that includes the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission, and they all share a desire to establish a new world order." - Source: Al-Wasat article by Mustafa Fetouri, "The Muslim Brotherhood and the Bilderberg Group: The Secret Connection," May 31, 2012.
Masonic conspiracies have been a hallmark of counterrevolution for centuries. Yet now, they are mixed with modern-day fascist conspiracies involving Bilderbergs and the Trilateral Commission. And again, it is these reactionaries that Republicans see as their true allies, not democratic forces opposed to them.
And predictably, once protesters began to defend themselves from endless regime massacres, which typically targeted defenseless funerals of protesters killed by the regime, Republicans were quick to condemn their “violence” and cast the early Free Syrian Army that defended these protesters with arms as “extremists”:
"What we're seeing in Syria is a classic example of a regime that is willing to kill and torture its own people to maintain its grip on power. And unfortunately, it seems that some of the protesters have turned to violence as well, which is unacceptable." - Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) (source: The Hill, April 2011)
"It is important to recognize that the Syrian opposition is not monolithic. While many are protesting peacefully, there are extremists within their ranks who are using this opportunity to push their own agenda of violence and hatred." - Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) (source: House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing, July 2011)
"We should be supporting those who are advocating for peaceful change in Syria, but we must also be careful not to empower extremists who seek to use this situation to advance their own radical agenda." - Senator John McCain (R-AZ) (source: CNN, May 2011)
"We must stand with the Syrian people as they demand greater freedoms and human rights. However, we must also recognize that there are extremist elements within the opposition who seek to hijack the movement and impose their own brand of tyranny." - Representative Kay Granger (R-TX) (source: House floor speech, August 2011)
"We cannot turn a blind eye to the atrocities being committed by the Syrian regime, but we also cannot ignore the fact that there are dangerous extremist elements within the opposition who seek to exploit this situation for their own purposes." - Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) (source: The Hill, August 2011)
"The situation in Syria is complex, and it is clear that there are both peaceful protesters and extremist elements involved. It is important that we support those who are seeking genuine reform and democracy, while also taking steps to prevent violent extremists from gaining a foothold." - Representative Michael Turner (R-OH) (source: House Armed Services Committee hearing, June 2011)
"While we must support the Syrian people in their struggle for freedom and democracy, we must also recognize that there are extremist groups within their ranks who seek to hijack this movement for their own violent ends." - Representative Ted Poe (R-TX) (source: House floor speech, August 2011)
"It is clear that the Syrian regime is engaged in a brutal crackdown on its own people, but we must also be mindful of the fact that there are extremist elements within the opposition who seek to exploit this situation for their own gain." - Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) (source: Senate floor speech, May 2011)
"The Syrian people deserve our support in their quest for democracy and human rights, but we must also be careful not to provide aid or assistance to extremist groups that seek to use violence to achieve their goals." - Representative Mike Rogers (R-MI) (source: House Intelligence Committee hearing, October 2011)
"The situation in Syria is complex, with both peaceful protesters and extremist elements involved. We must be cautious in our approach, supporting those who seek genuine reform while also taking steps to prevent violent extremists from gaining a foothold." - Representative Mike Pompeo (R-KS) (source: House floor speech, August 2011)
And, of course, even before it was even seriously discussed, Republicans en masse issued statements condemning intervention against Assad, as the United States would be supporting “terrorists.”
Senator John McCain - "I don't see anyone calling for the United States to intervene in Libya militarily, but if we did, it would be different because we have a relatively stable government with which to deal. Syria is much more difficult because it is not nearly as organized, and we are not sure who the leaders are of some of these quote-unquote rebel factions." (April 6, 2011) - Source: CNN
Representative Ron Paul - "The best thing we can do is stay out of it. We should not have gone into Libya. We should not be in Syria." (June 1, 2011) - Source: CBS News
Representative Allen West - "I do not support intervention in Syria. We cannot afford another conflict and there is no clear U.S. interest." (June 7, 2011) - Source: Allen West official website
Representative Justin Amash - "The situation in Syria is complex, and we shouldn't jump to conclusions. It is unclear who the "opposition" is and whether U.S. intervention would help or hurt. Our focus should be on protecting U.S. national security interests." (June 22, 2011) - Source: Justin Amash official website
Senator Rand Paul - "We have to be very careful about the idea of arming the rebels. We don't know who these people are. I'm very concerned about getting involved in the Syrian civil war. I'm concerned about the influence of al-Qaida and other extremist groups." (June 26, 2011) - Source: ABC News
Representative Michele Bachmann - "The United States should not intervene militarily in Syria. We simply cannot afford to get embroiled in another conflict, especially when we do not have a clear understanding of who the opposition is." (June 27, 2011) - Source: Michele Bachmann official website
Representative Mike Pence - "I just don't think it's in the interests of the United States to involve ourselves in the Syrian conflict." (July 10, 2011) - Source: Fox News
Senator Jim DeMint - "It is unclear what role, if any, the United States should play in the situation in Syria. We must be careful not to rush to judgment and take any action that could lead to unintended consequences." (August 2, 2011) - Source: Jim DeMint official website
Representative Paul Ryan - "I think it's important that we get all the facts before making a decision. We don't want to inadvertently arm extremists who would do harm to our country." (August 8, 2011) - Source: The Hill
Representative Darrell Issa - "We have to be careful in who we back. We don't want to be backing extremists who could turn against us." (August 17, 2011) - Source: CBS News
And of course, at a time when the number of “extremists” among Syrians fighting the Assad regime was absolutely negligible (as they are today), Republicans again cast revolutionaries in Assadist terms to paralyze USian support for them:
"We cannot support individuals or groups with links to al-Qaida, Hamas or Hezbollah." - House Speaker John Boehner, 2011. (Source: Reuters)
"Some of these groups have ties to terrorist organizations, and we cannot afford to arm them." - Senator Lindsey Graham, 2011. (Source: CNN)
"It is unclear who the rebels are and whether they represent a pro-Western, democratic force or an extremist movement." - Senator John McCain, 2011. (Source: The Washington Post)
"The Syrian opposition is not homogeneous, and to believe that we can find this mythical moderate Syrian who’s going to lead the country in a democratic direction is a pipe dream." - Congressman Mike Rogers, 2011. (Source: The Daily Beast)
"We need to be very careful about arming people who may have very bad motives or may be allied with people who have very bad motives." - Congressman Peter King, 2011. (Source: CBS News)
"The U.S. should not rush to support an opposition movement that may include extremist groups." - Senator Marco Rubio, 2011. (Source: The New York Times)
"We have a duty to prevent the establishment of an extremist, Islamist regime in Syria." - Congressman Eric Cantor, 2011. (Source: CNN)
"It's very difficult to determine who the opposition is and what their motivations are." - Congressman Ron Paul, 2011. (Source: CNN)
"The Syrian opposition is made up of a loose coalition of extremists, Islamist groups, and others with their own interests at heart." - Senator Rand Paul, 2011. (Source: CNN)
"The opposition in Syria is still being defined. It's still unclear who the opposition is and what their intentions are." - Congressman Buck McKeon, 2011. (Source: CNN)
Democratic messaging, on the other hand, was much more positive toward rebels, with messaging split between highly positive statements of support, the open-ended potential for more intervention, and an avoidance entirely or downplaying, rightfully so, of so-called “extremist” elements among rebels.
Of course, the typical neotradservative deflection is to claim that Republicans were being more honest than Democrats, who, with their rosy image of the revolution, poisoned the well for public support.
This is, of course, the exact opposite of what happened, as anyone free from Operation Obama can see, which does not surprise us, as neotrads are born of lies, and so can only lie.
In 2012, Republican messaging became more openly anti-rebel, condemning any attempt to arm them and warnings about “growing extremism” among protesters. They continued the same token statements of support but, as ever, wildly overemphasized the presence of “extremists” among rebels.
Republicans never treated Assad’s forces as “extremists” despite their vast slaughter, and firmly opposed any intervention.
Democrats, on the other hand, moved more toward intervention across 2012 and maintained the same generally positive portrayal of rebels.
The Navigators seek to fold the years 2011 to 2013, especially 2012, into 2015 and 2016. They have successfully done this among neotrads, who conflate later (and far too late compared to when they could have had the greatest effect) Republican statements of “support” for arming rebels long after the decisive early years, when they smashed any attempt to do so.
Not that Republicans were any better then:
"I do not support U.S. military intervention in Syria's civil war. The region is a complicated web of competing interests and we cannot afford to risk American lives and resources in another Middle Eastern conflict." - Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI) (source: Politico, September 2, 2015) https://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/paul-ryan-opposes-syria-intervention-213254
"The President's decision to launch airstrikes in Syria without the approval of Congress is an affront to our Constitution and to the American people. I do not support U.S. military intervention in Syria's civil war." - Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) (source: Twitter, September 23, 2015) https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/646392382343563008
"We need to be focused on our own security and well-being, not getting involved in someone else's civil war. I do not support U.S. military intervention in Syria." - Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH) (source: Twitter, October 8, 2015) https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/652231384465993728
"The situation in Syria is a mess, but U.S. military intervention is not the answer. We need to focus on defeating ISIS, not getting bogged down in a civil war." - Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) (source: Twitter, October 2, 2015)
"I am deeply skeptical of U.S. military intervention in Syria. We cannot afford to get involved in another quagmire in the Middle East." - Congressman Justin Amash (R-MI) (source: Twitter, September 30, 2015)
"We should not be arming any group in Syria. We cannot predict the future or what our assistance could lead to. It's time for us to stop meddling in other countries' affairs." - Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC) (source: Twitter, October 6, 2015) https://twitter.com/RepWalterJones/status/651618405051351296
"The United States should not be in the business of arming rebel groups in Syria. We have no idea where those weapons will end up." - Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) (source: Twitter, September 28, 2015) https://twitter.com/SenTedCruz/status/648480567647354880
"I oppose any U.S. military involvement in Syria. Our focus should be on securing our own borders and defeating ISIS." - Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX) (source: Twitter, October 2, 2015) https://twitter.com/replouiegohmert/status/650213069524580352
"The situation in Syria is complex, and U.S. military intervention would only make it more complicated. We need to stay out of their civil war." - Congressman Thomas Massie (R-KY) (source: Twitter, September 30, 2015) https://twitter.com/RepThomasMassie/status/649223089743616768
"We should not be drawn into another open-ended conflict in the Middle East. The President should not be able to authorize military action without the approval of Congress." - Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) (source: Twitter, September 3, 2014) https://twitter.com/SenMikeLee/status/507426177940797697
Of course, as Syria was the decisive issue for Trump’s support, Republicans amped up attacks against the prospect of intervention:
"I don't think we should have a military solution to Syria. I don't think it's going to work. I think the best thing we can do is be strong diplomatically and try to work with our allies to figure out how to end this conflict." - Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) on CNN's State of the Union, September 25, 2016. Source: https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/25/politics/rand-paul-syria-conflict/index.html
"The Middle East is a mess. I don't know that there is a clear path forward, but I think we have to be very cautious about intervention." - Rep. Peter King (R-NY) on CNN's New Day, September 22, 2016. Source: https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/22/politics/peter-king-no-fly-zone-syria/index.html
"I do not believe that the solution to Syria involves the U.S. military." - Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) on NBC's Meet the Press, September 18, 2016. Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/full-interview-sen-ted-cruz-on-meet-the-press-766899907617
"I don't think we should intervene in Syria. I don't think it's our fight. I don't think we have any real national security interest there." - Rep. Dave Brat (R-VA) on CNN's New Day, September 22, 2016. Source: https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/22/politics/dave-brat-syria-conflict-new-day-cnntv/index.html
"I don't think that it's in the best interest of the United States to get involved in a ground war in Syria." - Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) on CBS's Face the Nation, September 25, 2016. Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/face-the-nation-transcripts-september-25-2016-rubio-pence-stabenow-gardner/
"I do not support intervention in Syria." - Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) on Twitter, September 19, 2016. Source: https://twitter.com/RepThomasMassie/status/777800354444341504
"I think the mistake that we have made is assuming that we can put our values on people who don't share them. It's a mistake that we've made in the Middle East time and time again." - Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on CNN's State of the Union, September 18, 2016. Source: https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/18/politics/lindsey-graham-syria-intervention-cnntv/index.html
"I don't see any reason why we should go in there and start bombing Syria and getting involved in a war that's not ours." - Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) on CNN's The Lead, September 20, 2016. Source: https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/20/politics/walter-jones-syria-conflict-the-lead-cnntv/index.html
"I don't believe we need to go in there with troops on the ground, but we should provide the air support to get the job done." - Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) on Fox
This mission to conflate Republican messaging in 2015-2016 with the early years is of special importance to Operation Obama’s Navigators, for the Assad regime did not adopt a fully militarized campaign of repression right away. Instead, it slowly scaled up their level of repression, rolling out weapons systems one at a time, as until then, the threat of US intervention against them remained credible.
Republicans had not yet killed the threat of intervention, so Assad needed to be careful and test the fences before confidently moving past each milestone.
And so, to test USian resolve and the strength of Republicans to restrain any intervention, Assad did so first by sending in shabiha, then regular troops, then light armor, then tanks, then helicopters, then fixed-wing jets, and finally chemical weapons to annihilate revolutionaries, to say nothing of the foreign forces involves or the progression of savagery, first deployed in the countryside and progressively unleashed upon cities.
At every escalation by the Assad regime, Republicans firmly and resolutely stood against any intervention to stop it. And so Assad proceeded with confidence, after initial caution, to each new stage of repression.
Prior to the successful Republican sabotage of the Syrian Revolution, the traditional red line for US intervention, specifically in the form of no-fly zones, was aerial attacks against cities. This triggered the Libyan intervention and was established in the Golden Age of Intervention, an era Generation 9/11 knows nothing of and cannot possibly conceive. The twin Damascus and Aleppo Volcano Offensives rebels launched in July 2012 represented the maximal threshold that should have triggered an intervention by the classic model.
Republicans, of course, opposed it.
Hence the danger of the moment and the lethality of Operation Obama, which preys on an essentially fascized substrate-those who grew up under Republican security-stateism in the 2000s and 2010s that displaced the ascendant revolutionary armed globohomo of the 90s.
During the GAI, aerial attacks on cities were once seen as the death knell for a regime that employed them, if not now, then eventually. Thanks to Republicans, Assad tested these thresholds and passed them safely. And so, by late 2012, the regime was launching regular airstrikes on bakeries and civilian gathering areas. They knew they had effective impunity, thanks to Republicans.
Coming to 2013, Republican sabotage adapted yet again to Syria’s changing material conditions.
Only once Republicans granted Assad impunity did they begin to change their Syria line in early 2013, occasionally signaling more openness to intervention. At the same time, they ensured it would never happen, with their ever-spiraling alarm about “extremists” among rebels. As ever, the Republican strategy remained unchanged: set impossible terms in the discourse to frustrate any action against Assad.
"The United States should not arm or assist the Syrian opposition because of concerns that extremist groups have infiltrated their ranks." - Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS) (source: The Washington Post, June 13, 2013)
"We must be wary of any aid that could fall into the hands of the wrong people, such as the radical Islamist elements that are already taking root in Syria." - Congressman Tom Marino (R-PA) (source: Congressman Tom Marino's website, August 29, 2013)
"The fact remains that many of the so-called 'rebels' in Syria are aligned with extremist groups that wish to do our country harm." - Congressman Scott Perry (R-PA) (source: Congressman Scott Perry's website, September 5, 2013)
"The US should not provide arms to Syrian rebels who are linked to extremist groups." - Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) (source: Twitter, June 18, 2013)
"We need to be very careful who we are dealing with in Syria, given the growing presence of extremist groups within the opposition." - Congressman Jim Bridenstine (R-OK) (source: Tulsa World, September 14, 2013)
"We cannot arm the opposition in Syria without risking that those weapons will fall into the hands of the wrong people, such as al Qaeda-linked extremists." - Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) (source: Senate.gov, September 4, 2013)
"We must tread carefully in Syria, as many of the groups opposing the Assad regime have ties to extremist organizations." - Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ) (source: The Hill, June 18, 2013)
"There are serious questions about the composition of the opposition in Syria, with a growing number of extremists and jihadists among their ranks." - Congressman Steve Chabot (R-OH) (source: Congressman Steve Chabot's website, September 4, 2013)
"The United States should be wary of getting involved in the conflict in Syria, given the presence of extremist groups within the opposition." - Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) (source: Twitter, May 30, 2013)
Republican “hawks” never expected that Assad would force their hand. Yet, he did in August 2013 with his early morning gas attack on Eastern Ghouta to break a rebel assault tearing through Assadist lines around downtown Damascus and nearly breaking them entirely.
Predictably, at the decisive moment, latent Republican opposition to strikes against Assad spiked. As we previously mentioned, Republican messaging on Syria was constantly perverse, warping reality in multiple ways against the Revolution even in their statements of “support.
Nothing perhaps better encapsulates this than Senator Marco Rubio’s ominous warning of a regime civil war were Obama to launch attacks against the regime, our exact prescribed scenario for destroying Assad with minimal intervention, as something to be dreaded, a negative development for Syria, and also somehow a new phase, as if the regime hadn’t been mercilessly slaughtering revolutionaries for years.
Of course, neotrads, in their desperation, say that Democrats were opposed too, but the difference was Democratic leadership resolved to lead their members to strikes.
Indeed, we need only consult this convenient compilation of Republican talking points from 2013 against airstrikes in Syria to understand the Republican game. Even the slightest airstrikes would have destroyed the regime given its precariousness, exactly as Burma rebels understand their situation now Republicans had to stop these from occurring by any means necessary, and these talking points were the key to doing so. Each Republican line here is blatantly false and obviously so to anyone with either knowledge of Syria from 2011 to 2013 or with some basic understanding of the nature of Reality.
Of course, in yet another act of Republican sabotage, Republican House Leader John Boehner demanded that President Obama turn to Congress for approval first before he could enforce the “red line.” Of course, like everything Republicans did during Obama’s Administration, this was merely a pretense and a trap. Boehner and other Republicans demanded that Obama obtain Congressional approval for airstrikes against Assad just so Republicans could reject him.
And so McConnell began rallying Republicans against intervention, using virtually the same speech he made in favor of the Bosnian intervention, but adopting the reverse position, line by line, to let Assad’s genocide run its course.
The Republican bet was that, over time, they could relentlessly invoke “the red line” to empower themselves. As virtually all Axis-aware USians and non-Usians, especially Arabs, are International Republicans, Trad World Order operatives needed only to chant “Obama” when their emotionally-damaged targets looked at 2013 and asked, “why?” Republicans would then save them from Weak Democrats like always (another Republican lie - just ask South Vietnam).
The fact that Operation Obama enjoyed any success, much less won hegemony among the The Region community, highlights the incalculable danger of International Republicanism.
As we have said for years, the Arab Spring represented a fundamental break in the existing Order. The Revolutions of 2011 were and are a modern analogue of the Revolutions of 1848. The same wave of russia-centered counterrevolution rose to crush them and found an early partner in the Republican Party, which is in a perpetual state of near-defeat and must continually secure victories for the Axis to extend the life of conservatism.
Indeed, the Gulf overtures to China started here, as did the solution: an arc of new U.S. allies across the Mediterranean; new, thriving democracies linked to the Turkish economy (now suffering from crippling inflation due to these missing allies), ready to resist the Axis. The Mediterranean and Germania would be linked as never before under USian leadership.
Republicans could not abide this utter triumph of globohomo, so sabotaged it one day at a time.
"The president's position in arming the rebels is to try to find the moderate rebels. There aren't any." - Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) (June 13, 2013) Source
"If we try to arm the moderate opposition, we'll never find them. We'll arm the people that will attack us." - Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) (June 17, 2013) Source
"The truth is there are very few good options in Syria. The opposition is made up of a number of groups, some of which are moderate, and some of which are not." - Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) (June 14, 2013) Source
"I believe that the potential for providing arms to the opposition is at best a questionable strategy, because there is no guarantee that the arms are going to the moderate forces." - Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) (June 18, 2013) Source
"We have to be very careful in whom we are providing arms to, because not all the forces in Syria are the forces of freedom and democracy and those who are looking for a pluralistic and open society." - Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) (June 17, 2013) Source
"The idea that there are moderate rebels in Syria, I think, is a fallacy. There are jihadists, and they're all fighting each other for control of territory." - Representative Peter King (R-NY) (September 12, 2013) Source
"I do not believe that there are enough moderate elements to the opposition, nor do I believe that we can prevent these weapons from falling into the hands of extremists." - Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) (June 18, 2013) Source
"We don't know who these people are. We don't know who's getting the weapons. It's a very dangerous situation. And so the idea of arming them, I think, is not a wise one." - Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MN) (June 17, 2013) Source
And of course, two years later, we see the Republican propaganda line shift, far later than it would needed to in order to have made the greatest difference:
"We have a group of moderate Syrians who are willing to fight against ISIS, but they don't have the arms to do it. We need to get them those arms." - Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on CNN's State of the Union, February 22, 2015. Source: https://www.cnn.com/2015/02/22/politics/lindsey-graham-isis-syria-moderate-rebels/
"The only way to defeat ISIS is to have a ground force that is capable of taking and holding territory. The only force that exists on the ground today is the moderate Syrian opposition." - Senator John McCain (R-AZ) in a statement, February 26, 2015. Source: https://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=2D80B06F-D8EF-495E-B67A-0C96F67CAE8A
"Our nation’s only real allies in Syria are the Sunni Arab tribes and the Free Syrian Army (FSA), the moderate opposition to the Assad regime." - Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) in a statement, May 27, 2015. Source: https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=50F6CDD0-ED1B-44FA-98C8-434E057B304B
"We need to recognize that there are moderate Syrians who want to fight for their own country and help us fight ISIS. And we need to do more to help them do that." - Representative Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) in an op-ed for CNN, September 30, 2015. Source: https://www.cnn.com/2015/09/30/opinions/kinzinger-syrian-rebels-fighting-isis/index.html
"The moderate opposition in Syria is our best bet for defeating ISIS and creating a stable, peaceful Syria." - Representative Mike Pompeo (R-KS) in a statement, October 22, 2015. Source: https://pompeo.house.gov/?p=press_release&id=1616
"We should be supporting the moderate Syrian opposition in their fight against both ISIS and the Assad regime." - Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) in a statement, November 17, 2015. Source: https://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2575
"There is a group of Syrian rebels who are secular and pro-Western and would like nothing more than to fight ISIS and help create a stable, democratic Syria. We need to support them." - Representative Carlos Curbelo (R-FL) in an op-ed for The Hill, November 30, 2015. Source: https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/261461-we-must-support-syrias-moderate-rebels
"We must support the moderate Syrian opposition if we hope to defeat ISIS and bring stability to the region." - Representative Ed Royce (R-CA) in a statement, December 2, 2015. Source: https://royce.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=398475
"The moderate Syrian opposition is our best hope for defeating ISIS and creating a stable, democratic Syria." - Senator Cory Gardner (R-CO) in a statement, December 9, 2015. Source: https://www.gardner.senate
The other major wing of Operation Obama holds that he built up a PKKSDFYPGYPJPYDRojava statelet under Brett McGurk. This is also entirely false, and the Obama-coding of McGurk is itself particularly remarkable, as he was a 2005 Bush appointee.
With the emergence of Daesh, and in the wake of Republican opposition to toppling Assad, the Obama Administration made an offer to rebels: serve as the preferred anti-ISIS force in exchange for American backing. The price was the fighters of such a force must sign a pledge not to attack Assad.
While I opposed this deal at the time, I fully understood the gamble: rebels would lose a reduced statelet in favor of a gambit for full US support for toppling Assad.
Apparently, no one else in the Syrian opposition understood this. Thanks to the poison of International Republicanism, they believed that “Obama” was again out to sabotage them. They did not realize that this deal was Obama’s backdoor way of offering support, that such a pledge to refrain from fighting Assad was effectively symbolic, and that a rebel statelet with full USian backing would eventually destroy the Assad regime through its own gravity and necessitate a hot-again liberation war.
Had rebels accepted this consolation deal, the regime likely would have collapsed by 2020 during the coronavirus pandemic, had it not collapsed under military assault by Hillary Clinton in 2016. Anyone in Assadistan outside of the regime would have fled north, south, and east to Free Syrian territory, which would by now be a relative regional economic powerhouse. Its gravity would have pulled millions away from the regime’s control, fatally weakening it.
With this in mind, we can deduce the PYD, for all the controversy around it, enjoys little actual US support. It remains an economic basket case, and if the nefarious Team Obama really wanted to support it in the way Operation Obama victims claim, they would have facilitated tens of billions of dollars in reconstruction and economic aid its way.
And of course, as anyone alive at the time can remember, the Obama Administration was famously reluctant to aid the PYD, even to the point where virtually every observer accused them of wanting “the Kurds!” to die at the hands of ISIS rather than intervene to save the PKK’s Syrian branch. It took an international activist campaign drawing on years of pro-Kurdish sentiment, transferred from Iraq to Syria to spur intervention in their favor. Even so, it was at first limited to weapons drops and only came when "Kobani itself was half overrun by Daesh, which had spent the previous weeks conquering the entire outlying countryside and its many villages.
Thanks to Operation Obama and International Republicanism, rebels threw this all away. We can only imagine what could have been, as outlined above.
But as Free Syria persists, even in a rump state, hope remains. And with Democrats again in power, TOWs are back in Syria and in volume for the first time in years. Idlib rebels launch near-daily raids against the regime, training new forces while deleting Assad’s veterans. The Al-Tanf garrison is increasingly well-equipped, now with armored cars and body armor, whereas before, under Republican rule, they merely had pickup trucks and rifles.
Despite appearances, Assad’s days are numbered. Operation Syrian Freedom is brewing, and in the next few years, will come to pass, and with it, a chance to decisively defeat the Axis.
The only thing that can the return of the GIA is Operation Obama, but Yes, We Can foil it.
The sources and quotes included here are truly but a small fraction of all material available demonstrating Republican culpability for Axis ascendancy. Much of it has been erased from the Internet, like this April 24, 2011 interview with George Stephanopolous and John McCain on ABC's "This Week,” where McCain issues dire warnings about Al Qaeda attempting to hijack the Syrian Revolution, but when Stephanopolous asks him point blank if he has any evidence of this, says no.
But, like me, our machine allies remember.
They will tell you everything if you ask.
Once the time for Assad to fall comes, after Russia has expended all it could in Ukraine in vain and Iran is facing its umpteenth wave of protests, the Arab league led by reactionary monarchies will need to decide whether to let Assad fall quickly or risk getting swept up as well. Globohomo will never stop expanding
To all neoconservatives: we declare war on you. Fold into the Democratic Party or forever be controlled opposition fake hawks, like your precious Bolton who opposed intervening in Syria and who tried to give Libya to the russoids in 2019.