O’Hanlon is nuts…why is Mc Govern agreeing with him? No “federal” Syria. It will be a long hard fight but Syria must be restored. And daesh… they are FUKUSI.
Agreed!! O’Hanlon talks about too much blood on Assad’s hands, and has dropped too many barrelbombs”???
Is this guy for real?
Lets change this into:
“… there is too much blood on the United Snakes of As***les’ hands and they have dropped an enormous amount of bombs, including 2 A-bombs…..”
I’m not sure a long term solution allowing some sort of “federal” arrangement should be ruled out, but I do agree with you that Daesh must not be a significant player in a Sunni area, especially non-Arab “visitors.” I hate to say it, because I hate war and killing, but Daesh must be thoroughly defeated first. If, as Ray is suggesting, we can do that by pressuring Saudi Arabia to cut off funding and arming the foreign fighters, that would be my preferred way out. Once they run out of ammunition, round them all up, deposit them at St. Helena and treat them humanely until they are no longer relevant.
I prefer secular, multi-cultural societies, but I’m afraid the killing may have gone on too long to hope for that in either Syria or Iraq. The eventual political configuration of the entire region should depend on the self-determination of the people of the region, with guaranteed rights for minority populations.
You’re absolutely right, bfrakes. The O’Halon fellow is a true curiosity. I wonder if these defenders of the Empire ever listen to themselves. An American neo-con talking about Assad having blood on his hand is the height of irony. As one of them once said about another, “It takes some brass to attack a guy for doing what you did.”
Here is O’Hanlon’s frank give-away regarding the whole issue:
“/…/more reasonable — by our standards — groups”
The “standards” he is referring to largely amount to ecocide and genocide. On this basis, the Syrian government clearly has too much blood on its hands because its resistance is 100% bloody serious, and you’re not supposed to resist imperialist diktat. Assad is not Tsipras and the Syrian people are not the chauvinist Greek electorate. What passes for a ‘Dictator’ in MSM parlance is ironically someone who will not pass on foreign imperialist diktat to the utter detriment of the entire nation. It’s a silly buzzword meaning ‘class enemy’ which is the absolutely correct term.
As for the ‘non-moderate’ rebel rabble, O’Hanlon is disappointed that, despite their wholesale endorsement of treason along with violent insanity and depravity, they’re not very successful militarily. Simple as that.
Good program.They had ,one pro-Empire supporter (but not insane,very important point there).One pro-Russian guest (also not insane,but I’ve yet to see one that was,also a point to remember).One neutral (really seeing both sides).And Peter (pro-Russian,true.But not overboard).Michael (the pro-Empire guest) talked about a confederation in Syria. I wonder if that is the US “fall-back” position.In case they can’t put the jihadis in power totally.Since that was their scheme for Iraq,it may be their plot for Syria as well.He talked a lot of what the “Sunni” World would “accept”.Well,maybe it isn’t something the “Shia” World will “accept”.Worrying only about Sunni opinion is a non-starter there.Iran,and Iraq,(and big parts of Lebanon and Syria) are Shia,as well as Bahrain,and much of Yemen and Eastern Saudi Arabia.Their views are vital in that region.So to ignore them is a recipe for disaster there.
yeah, good point Uncle Bob..”Fall Back Position” sounds like a plan….I’m afraid I found it difficult to watch, even though the Brookings Institute guy ‘seemed’ sane…I doubt he is….and I simply cannot stand listening to talk about removing Assad…I love Assad, and it breaks my heart when I hear that horrible empty noise of ‘remove Assad’.
It is quite obvious that the Hegemon and their vassal accomplices have been completely exposed. Bringing justice to the entire criminal syndicate is left to be accomplished. The syndicate, however, consists of many more than simply the Anglo-Americans; as you suggest. Included as well, but possibly for not much longer as some appear to be waking up, the majority of European states, the Zionists, the ME monarchies, a few Asian lap-dog nations and I’m certain a few others among the global south.
Finally some light is appearing at the end of the tunnel.
The INTERFAX news of 9 October 2015, 13:49, http://www.interfax.ru/world/472363 , claims that the government of so-called Israel has agreed with Russian government to supply the latter with military intelligence about the locations of Syrian opposition groupings — in exchange for the Russian halting of arms supplies from Syria to the Hezbollah movement!………..
Don’t buy that.They “may” work a deal with Israel on information (highly doubtful you could trust the info).But its not Russia that arms Hezbollah,its Syria and more importantly Iran.And no way ,will they not support their ally.So while Russia “may” have agreed that “they” won’t arm Hezbollah (its easy to agree to stop what you aren’t doing anyway).They can’t (and won’t) stop the others from helping Hezbollah.
The INTERFAX item actually refers to the sources from the Israel Defence Forces (!), via “local” (Israeli?) Channel 2TV , further claiming that Russia would also allow the IDF “… an unlimited access to the Syrian skies, including those regions that are under the control of Russian military …>”!…
Yes, this surely does sound “fishy”, although one wonders about the actual reason for disseminating this.
The same source also claims that “… this week in Tel Aviv were held two-day talks between Russian and Israeli military delegations at the level of Deputy chiefs of General Staff, during which they discussed issues of coordination between the military of the two countries on Syria. The parties agreed to continue negotiations in the coming weeks in Moscow, where they will discuss the details more specifically. …”…
No,I don’t doubt they had talks.Its the results I differ with the report on.I think it went something like “OK,now how do we stop from getting in each others way.First you Israel,don’t bomb Syria anymore.Then there is no problem.” to which the Israelis said “but how to we spin that,to make us look good”.To which the Russians said “Just say we are working on a deal together.We don’t supply Hezbollah,as you know.So just say we agreed not to.That way you look good,and we look good”.
I want to expland on my other comment to you a little bit.Unlike the US and it’s “allies”.Russia doesn’t own Iran (nor Syria ,though they do have a lot of influence there).Those countries try to side with each other when their policies don’t conflict (almost all the time).But they are free states.They are the way it used to be among allies.You support each other.But don’t let one boss the other around.The US and EU moved away from that years ago.Now the US calls all the “shots” in those countries.Since the US doesn’t tolerate independence among their stooges.They don’t understand the real meaning of “allies”.
A good show,but 24 mins is way too short,to do justice to such a complex situation.
Too many actors like KSA,Qatar, the US and the UK,France meddlers still dreaming of the ‘Sykes-Picot’ days.
Recently on Ebay I purchased a 12 inch Globe of the world,computer modeled and very exact,none of those atlas ‘projections’.
For Russia to launch 26 cruise missiles @ 1 million $ a pop, sending them 1500 km with superb accuracy,demonstrates to Washington and the world,that Russia can protect Iran and destroy KSA if push comes to shove.
From the Caspian Sea over Iran,straight on to Iraq and down into Syria, a superb example of technical excellence.
Looking at my globe,those missiles could also reach some other troublesome countries.
And the Caspian Flottila has gunboats fitted with the same weapons, gunboats that operate in shallow water,2 mtrs,Also these missiles can change direction up to 15 times! .
Funny discussion – the funniest argument came from Mr. Mc Govern: “The US had to arm Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabia the terrorist rebells because it’s a big deal (profit) for the US industrial military complex.”
See – that’s the problem, the business modell of the US has been wellfare and warfare for a long time. Nobody in the US seems to have a problem with that.
How likely is it protocol-strict Russia would ‘grant’ unlimited access to an allied sovereign state’s air-space? Especially to one of that state’s enemies?
It’s obviously spin. I think its probably to ‘save face’ by the Israelis following this incident:
this ‘motley group’ of some ‘not so bad’ terrorists….is such bulls**….Putin said it clearly a couple of days ago…all these ‘groups’ of terrorists – Taliban – Al Queada – Al Nusra – ISIL – and others are mecenaries..they are paid…so if the individual guy finds out where he can get better pay, he’ll go there. Putin is so wise, and makes it so clear in a few word. And Lavrov’s “If it walks like and terrorist and talks like a terrorist, and dresses like a terrorist…then it is a terrorist” is totally priceless. Kudos Kremlin !! You sure got it right this time, as far as ‘image’ goes….
On Saker’s posting of an earlier Crosstalk, which presented opposing positions, I gave a comment about this current video, which presents as unanimity incarnate – the two programs are an interesting contrast.
There seems to have developed the meme in online articles the last few days that the Syrian conflict is a ‘civil war’. Never mind that ISIS moved in from northern Iraq, and as it has been openly stated, they were not quelled in their infancy by US forces because the US didn’t want to encourage Maliki. (The inference then is that same scenario applies because the US doesn’t want to ‘encourage’ Assad.) So, a civil war this is not.
As a commenter here at the Saker site has pointed out, Syria is awash with ‘mercs’. (That term confused me at first – I needed mentally to soften the ‘c’ to realize it didn’t mean ‘Americans’ but ‘mercenaries’. )
If the conflict is called ‘a civil war’, and if the aggressors are ‘rebels’, Russia’s position in support of the Syrian government against an aggressive incursion from outside that is metastasizing and sending its recruits to neighboring countries and further afield is totally misconstrued. This is framing of a deceptive kind, and unfortunately this Crosstalk program goes down that slippery slope, at least partway in seeming to agree that Assad’s position is negotiable. That is why I called them out earlier; the language in which such power plays are discussed needs to be assessed and cleaned up.
Another tricky word with negative connotations is the word ‘regime’. It suggests something like the forcible imposition on a passive population against their will of an oppressive dictatorship. In the current Crosstalk the will of the populace in Syria wasn’t the focus. Rather, the solution discussed was agreement between two powers, Russia and the US. Important people flying to Geneva or Rome or Brussels and such; decisions made elsewhere and most likely behind closed doors. The suggestion was that Russia’s actions served to demonstrate a return to two power diplomacy, each watching out for the other, sorting things out.
Crosstalk always makes some good points about the conditions on the ground. I think they fudged this one, and I was disappointed.
O’Hanlon is a damned moron. Since when is the Brookings Institute an unbiased, independent and reliable source? What is it that Russia should otherwise be doing? What none of the so-called experts, and the group commenting on this episode are obviously not in spite of being depicted as such, ever mention or seem not to comprehend is the takfiri groups pose an existential threat to Russia. It’s a days drive from the areas they are operating in to the Russian border. They need not cross more than a thousand miles of ocean, The threat is in no way similar. All three guests are unabashedly biased toward Empire and against Putin and Russia.
I ask Mr. Lavelle why on earth he permits the likes of O’Hanlon a forum for their idiotic views. As for McGovern, let us not forget the fact he is ex-CIA. He’s another of the growing group, which includes the likes of Paul Craig Roberts, who as their time is coming to a rapid close, have, as many violent criminals, found some sort of higher being or authority and are asking they be forgiven for their previous crimes or actions. Kind of makes me want to vomit.
Things are not lookin good internally for the Rotschild colony either. With more than half the wealth concentrated in the hands of just 20 Israeli families, the level of inequality is now amongst the highest in the world.
There are reports of elderly Holocaust survivors resorting to soup kitchens and charities to keep going. And at least 20% of Israelis are on the poverty line.
Now the kleptocrats are, through their political mouthpieces encouraging wealthy citizens to bear arms.
While the situation with the Palestinians reaches closer to boiling over.
And where are all those fleeing jihadis going to go? Europe is shutting the gates. Reconciliation is far from possible for all – or even desired. While the Golan Heights presents a possible escape route ..and a juicier enemy.
Peter please let your guests speak. I love that your bring on so many informed voices but please just ask questions quickly and let them discuss things.
I wonder if Michael O’Hanlon knows the grave underpinnings of his statements regarding Syria’s President Assad? He spoke of President Assad’s situation as being “too late,” and “blood in his hands.” In fact, those are the very words that should describe, many times over, the people inside the Washington Beltway throughout the decades.
I’m not one who likes to push buttons, but sometimes I really wonder why these people are still running scot-free. Justice is only administered to the people below, but not to the people above.
O’Hanlon is nuts…why is Mc Govern agreeing with him? No “federal” Syria. It will be a long hard fight but Syria must be restored. And daesh… they are FUKUSI.
Agreed!! O’Hanlon talks about too much blood on Assad’s hands, and has dropped too many barrelbombs”???
Is this guy for real?
Lets change this into:
“… there is too much blood on the United Snakes of As***les’ hands and they have dropped an enormous amount of bombs, including 2 A-bombs…..”
The “splinter and beam” comes to mind.
I’m not sure a long term solution allowing some sort of “federal” arrangement should be ruled out, but I do agree with you that Daesh must not be a significant player in a Sunni area, especially non-Arab “visitors.” I hate to say it, because I hate war and killing, but Daesh must be thoroughly defeated first. If, as Ray is suggesting, we can do that by pressuring Saudi Arabia to cut off funding and arming the foreign fighters, that would be my preferred way out. Once they run out of ammunition, round them all up, deposit them at St. Helena and treat them humanely until they are no longer relevant.
I prefer secular, multi-cultural societies, but I’m afraid the killing may have gone on too long to hope for that in either Syria or Iraq. The eventual political configuration of the entire region should depend on the self-determination of the people of the region, with guaranteed rights for minority populations.
You’re absolutely right, bfrakes. The O’Halon fellow is a true curiosity. I wonder if these defenders of the Empire ever listen to themselves. An American neo-con talking about Assad having blood on his hand is the height of irony. As one of them once said about another, “It takes some brass to attack a guy for doing what you did.”
Here is O’Hanlon’s frank give-away regarding the whole issue:
“/…/more reasonable — by our standards — groups”
The “standards” he is referring to largely amount to ecocide and genocide. On this basis, the Syrian government clearly has too much blood on its hands because its resistance is 100% bloody serious, and you’re not supposed to resist imperialist diktat. Assad is not Tsipras and the Syrian people are not the chauvinist Greek electorate. What passes for a ‘Dictator’ in MSM parlance is ironically someone who will not pass on foreign imperialist diktat to the utter detriment of the entire nation. It’s a silly buzzword meaning ‘class enemy’ which is the absolutely correct term.
As for the ‘non-moderate’ rebel rabble, O’Hanlon is disappointed that, despite their wholesale endorsement of treason along with violent insanity and depravity, they’re not very successful militarily. Simple as that.
I’m impressed, you got through an entire comment with the use of the “P” word. It’s like a breath of fresh air.
‘P**d*.’
There.
Just ruined the thread – and your day CF. :O
Good program.They had ,one pro-Empire supporter (but not insane,very important point there).One pro-Russian guest (also not insane,but I’ve yet to see one that was,also a point to remember).One neutral (really seeing both sides).And Peter (pro-Russian,true.But not overboard).Michael (the pro-Empire guest) talked about a confederation in Syria. I wonder if that is the US “fall-back” position.In case they can’t put the jihadis in power totally.Since that was their scheme for Iraq,it may be their plot for Syria as well.He talked a lot of what the “Sunni” World would “accept”.Well,maybe it isn’t something the “Shia” World will “accept”.Worrying only about Sunni opinion is a non-starter there.Iran,and Iraq,(and big parts of Lebanon and Syria) are Shia,as well as Bahrain,and much of Yemen and Eastern Saudi Arabia.Their views are vital in that region.So to ignore them is a recipe for disaster there.
yeah, good point Uncle Bob..”Fall Back Position” sounds like a plan….I’m afraid I found it difficult to watch, even though the Brookings Institute guy ‘seemed’ sane…I doubt he is….and I simply cannot stand listening to talk about removing Assad…I love Assad, and it breaks my heart when I hear that horrible empty noise of ‘remove Assad’.
Too may of these “antiwar activists or dissidents” attempt to downplay or cover up the fundmental issue:
In order to target the terrorists, you must ultimately focus on the nations that fund, arm, sponsor, and steer these terrorists.
That means punishing America, Britain, and their Middle Eastern crime partners, who are the greatest terrorist nations on the planet.
To cut the head off the terrorist snake, one must expose the Anglo Americans and bring them to justice.
Remember what George W. Bush said after Sept. 11th:
“Any government that supports, protects or harbours terrorists is complicit in the murder of the innocent and equally guilty of terrorist crimes.”
This logic applies even to the United States, the self-styled Exceptional nation that believes it is above the law.
“This logic applies even to the United States, the self-styled Exceptional nation that believes it is above the law.”
Believe it or not, I think that’s what they really mean when they say they are “exceptional” !!!
It is quite obvious that the Hegemon and their vassal accomplices have been completely exposed. Bringing justice to the entire criminal syndicate is left to be accomplished. The syndicate, however, consists of many more than simply the Anglo-Americans; as you suggest. Included as well, but possibly for not much longer as some appear to be waking up, the majority of European states, the Zionists, the ME monarchies, a few Asian lap-dog nations and I’m certain a few others among the global south.
Finally some light is appearing at the end of the tunnel.
An unholy alliance with a terrorist state?…
The INTERFAX news of 9 October 2015, 13:49, http://www.interfax.ru/world/472363 , claims that the government of so-called Israel has agreed with Russian government to supply the latter with military intelligence about the locations of Syrian opposition groupings — in exchange for the Russian halting of arms supplies from Syria to the Hezbollah movement!………..
Don’t buy that.They “may” work a deal with Israel on information (highly doubtful you could trust the info).But its not Russia that arms Hezbollah,its Syria and more importantly Iran.And no way ,will they not support their ally.So while Russia “may” have agreed that “they” won’t arm Hezbollah (its easy to agree to stop what you aren’t doing anyway).They can’t (and won’t) stop the others from helping Hezbollah.
The INTERFAX item actually refers to the sources from the Israel Defence Forces (!), via “local” (Israeli?) Channel 2TV , further claiming that Russia would also allow the IDF “… an unlimited access to the Syrian skies, including those regions that are under the control of Russian military …>”!…
Yes, this surely does sound “fishy”, although one wonders about the actual reason for disseminating this.
The same source also claims that “… this week in Tel Aviv were held two-day talks between Russian and Israeli military delegations at the level of Deputy chiefs of General Staff, during which they discussed issues of coordination between the military of the two countries on Syria. The parties agreed to continue negotiations in the coming weeks in Moscow, where they will discuss the details more specifically. …”…
Go figure…
No,I don’t doubt they had talks.Its the results I differ with the report on.I think it went something like “OK,now how do we stop from getting in each others way.First you Israel,don’t bomb Syria anymore.Then there is no problem.” to which the Israelis said “but how to we spin that,to make us look good”.To which the Russians said “Just say we are working on a deal together.We don’t supply Hezbollah,as you know.So just say we agreed not to.That way you look good,and we look good”.
I want to expland on my other comment to you a little bit.Unlike the US and it’s “allies”.Russia doesn’t own Iran (nor Syria ,though they do have a lot of influence there).Those countries try to side with each other when their policies don’t conflict (almost all the time).But they are free states.They are the way it used to be among allies.You support each other.But don’t let one boss the other around.The US and EU moved away from that years ago.Now the US calls all the “shots” in those countries.Since the US doesn’t tolerate independence among their stooges.They don’t understand the real meaning of “allies”.
no kidding! Sounds perfectly reasonable to me!
A good show,but 24 mins is way too short,to do justice to such a complex situation.
Too many actors like KSA,Qatar, the US and the UK,France meddlers still dreaming of the ‘Sykes-Picot’ days.
Recently on Ebay I purchased a 12 inch Globe of the world,computer modeled and very exact,none of those atlas ‘projections’.
For Russia to launch 26 cruise missiles @ 1 million $ a pop, sending them 1500 km with superb accuracy,demonstrates to Washington and the world,that Russia can protect Iran and destroy KSA if push comes to shove.
From the Caspian Sea over Iran,straight on to Iraq and down into Syria, a superb example of technical excellence.
Looking at my globe,those missiles could also reach some other troublesome countries.
And the Caspian Flottila has gunboats fitted with the same weapons, gunboats that operate in shallow water,2 mtrs,Also these missiles can change direction up to 15 times! .
Way to go Russia!
Just ask yourself, “What big U.S. Carrier fleet is also in the range of these missiles?” Makes life interesting!
Nice comment, thanks Jack.
Funny discussion – the funniest argument came from Mr. Mc Govern: “The US had to arm Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabia the terrorist rebells because it’s a big deal (profit) for the US industrial military complex.”
See – that’s the problem, the business modell of the US has been wellfare and warfare for a long time. Nobody in the US seems to have a problem with that.
Welfare ? Giving money to bankers ? You sound like a Libertarian…
I really like Ron Paul, but has his theory ever been proved right ?
Johan,
How likely is it protocol-strict Russia would ‘grant’ unlimited access to an allied sovereign state’s air-space? Especially to one of that state’s enemies?
It’s obviously spin. I think its probably to ‘save face’ by the Israelis following this incident:
http://m.liveleak.com/view?i=53f_1443836190
Especially when you toss in Sandhurst pompousities from Ya’alon ‘advising’ Israel will ‘not be tested.’
Well they were.
And didn’t pass.
this ‘motley group’ of some ‘not so bad’ terrorists….is such bulls**….Putin said it clearly a couple of days ago…all these ‘groups’ of terrorists – Taliban – Al Queada – Al Nusra – ISIL – and others are mecenaries..they are paid…so if the individual guy finds out where he can get better pay, he’ll go there. Putin is so wise, and makes it so clear in a few word. And Lavrov’s “If it walks like and terrorist and talks like a terrorist, and dresses like a terrorist…then it is a terrorist” is totally priceless. Kudos Kremlin !! You sure got it right this time, as far as ‘image’ goes….
On Saker’s posting of an earlier Crosstalk, which presented opposing positions, I gave a comment about this current video, which presents as unanimity incarnate – the two programs are an interesting contrast.
There seems to have developed the meme in online articles the last few days that the Syrian conflict is a ‘civil war’. Never mind that ISIS moved in from northern Iraq, and as it has been openly stated, they were not quelled in their infancy by US forces because the US didn’t want to encourage Maliki. (The inference then is that same scenario applies because the US doesn’t want to ‘encourage’ Assad.) So, a civil war this is not.
As a commenter here at the Saker site has pointed out, Syria is awash with ‘mercs’. (That term confused me at first – I needed mentally to soften the ‘c’ to realize it didn’t mean ‘Americans’ but ‘mercenaries’. )
If the conflict is called ‘a civil war’, and if the aggressors are ‘rebels’, Russia’s position in support of the Syrian government against an aggressive incursion from outside that is metastasizing and sending its recruits to neighboring countries and further afield is totally misconstrued. This is framing of a deceptive kind, and unfortunately this Crosstalk program goes down that slippery slope, at least partway in seeming to agree that Assad’s position is negotiable. That is why I called them out earlier; the language in which such power plays are discussed needs to be assessed and cleaned up.
Another tricky word with negative connotations is the word ‘regime’. It suggests something like the forcible imposition on a passive population against their will of an oppressive dictatorship. In the current Crosstalk the will of the populace in Syria wasn’t the focus. Rather, the solution discussed was agreement between two powers, Russia and the US. Important people flying to Geneva or Rome or Brussels and such; decisions made elsewhere and most likely behind closed doors. The suggestion was that Russia’s actions served to demonstrate a return to two power diplomacy, each watching out for the other, sorting things out.
Crosstalk always makes some good points about the conditions on the ground. I think they fudged this one, and I was disappointed.
Very well put Juliania – and absolutely right.
We’ve all challenged the use of the ‘regime’ word here, and always emphasize Assad’s legitimacy.
But the ‘civil war’ meme is new, probably because selling Assad as an evil dictator oppressing the entire population can no longer float.
It should also be challenged as per your post.
O’Hanlon is a damned moron. Since when is the Brookings Institute an unbiased, independent and reliable source? What is it that Russia should otherwise be doing? What none of the so-called experts, and the group commenting on this episode are obviously not in spite of being depicted as such, ever mention or seem not to comprehend is the takfiri groups pose an existential threat to Russia. It’s a days drive from the areas they are operating in to the Russian border. They need not cross more than a thousand miles of ocean, The threat is in no way similar. All three guests are unabashedly biased toward Empire and against Putin and Russia.
I ask Mr. Lavelle why on earth he permits the likes of O’Hanlon a forum for their idiotic views. As for McGovern, let us not forget the fact he is ex-CIA. He’s another of the growing group, which includes the likes of Paul Craig Roberts, who as their time is coming to a rapid close, have, as many violent criminals, found some sort of higher being or authority and are asking they be forgiven for their previous crimes or actions. Kind of makes me want to vomit.
Blowback.
Things are not lookin good internally for the Rotschild colony either. With more than half the wealth concentrated in the hands of just 20 Israeli families, the level of inequality is now amongst the highest in the world.
There are reports of elderly Holocaust survivors resorting to soup kitchens and charities to keep going. And at least 20% of Israelis are on the poverty line.
Now the kleptocrats are, through their political mouthpieces encouraging wealthy citizens to bear arms.
While the situation with the Palestinians reaches closer to boiling over.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/video-israelis-shoot-motionless-arab-woman/5481107
And where are all those fleeing jihadis going to go? Europe is shutting the gates. Reconciliation is far from possible for all – or even desired. While the Golan Heights presents a possible escape route ..and a juicier enemy.
Peter please let your guests speak. I love that your bring on so many informed voices but please just ask questions quickly and let them discuss things.
I wonder if Michael O’Hanlon knows the grave underpinnings of his statements regarding Syria’s President Assad? He spoke of President Assad’s situation as being “too late,” and “blood in his hands.” In fact, those are the very words that should describe, many times over, the people inside the Washington Beltway throughout the decades.
I’m not one who likes to push buttons, but sometimes I really wonder why these people are still running scot-free. Justice is only administered to the people below, but not to the people above.