US mulls large missile strikes on Syria. Russia mulls intercepting the missiles.

US Reportedly Mulls Powerful Strike on Syria, 22 Targets Include Russian Site; Sputnik, April 11 

Any US missiles fired at Syria will be shot down, launch sites targeted – Russian envoy to Lebanon; RT, April 11

Plus, the World Health Organization has jumped into the act:

500 Patients 'Exhibiting Signs & Symptoms' of Chemical Poisoning in Douma - WHO; Sputnik, April 11

Have a nice day!

********

Airlift of Evil 2.0: U.S. evacuates foreign leaders of ISIS in Syria

Airlift of Evil: so named by an American military officer who could only watch helplessly as U.S. forces, under orders from the Bush Administration, assisted Pakistan's military in evacuating Taliban and al Qaeda leaders from Kunduz, Afghanistan in November 2001.  

US helicopters evacuate foreign leaders of Daesh from Tal al-Shayer, Hasaka
April 10, 2018
SANA

(HASAKA) US helicopters evacuated foreign leaders of Daesh (ISIS) terrorist organization from Tal al-Shayer area, about 20 km to the southeastern of al-Shadadi city in Hasaka province, according to local sources.

The sources said that the evacuation took place at 11pm on Monday at a gas station in the area of Tal al-Shayer in which the perpetrators of the evacuation staged a fake battle with live fire before the helicopters took off, taking three Iraqi Daesh leaders with their families to an unknown destination.

Due to the use of live fire in this incident, a civilian was martyred and others were injured.

During the past few months, Washington transported many foreign Daesh leaders from the eastern region in Syria in order to re-employ them to implement new aggressive plans both in Syria and abroad.

Manar al-Freih / Hazem Sabbagh

[END REPORT]

********

Pakistan's Islamist parties get serious about establishing sharia rule in the country

Islamist parties recreate coalition to ‘establish sharia’ in Pakistan

By KUNWAR KHULDUNE SHAHID

APRIL 10, 2018

Asia Times

Five Islamist parties have joined forces to bring Pakistan under Islamic law and eliminate secularism while increasing their political prowess ahead of general elections

Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), a coalition of Islamist parties in Pakistan, has announced its revival with a focus on implementation of sharia in the country along with defeating secularism and eradicating corruption.

The MMA announcement was made on March 20, appointing Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam Fazl (JUI-F) chief Fazl-ur-Rehman as its president and senior Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) leader Liaquat Baloch as general secretary.
The JI and JUI-F – the two largest Islamist parties in Pakistan – are spearheading the five-party merger, which also includes Jamiat Ulema-i-Pakistan (JUP), Tehreek-i-Islami Pakistan (TIP) and Markazi Jamiat Ahle Hadith (MJAH).

"The MMA is striving to purge the country of corruption, corrupt politicians, and secular and liberal elements,” JI chief Siraj-ul-Haq said while addressing a party rally at Sambrial, a town in Punjab province, on March 25. Two days later, while addressing a gathering in Charsadda, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, Haq said efforts were being made to turn Pakistan into a secular state, which the party would counter.
[...]

More from Asia Times:

Pakistan seeks bailout from China and Saudis, rather than the IMF

Several other articles at Asia Times on current situations in Pakistan.

******** 

Trouver des entrepôts vides à la bombe et les appeler des sites d'armes chimiques

GROVEL ALERT

Yoan Valat/Pool via AP

AFP news agency

✔@AFP

#BREAKING Any French strikes on Syria regime would target chemical facilities, says President Macron

14:12 - 10 Apr 2018

MACRON: ANY FRENCH STRIKES WILL TARGET ASSAD’S CHEMICAL WEAPONS STOCKS

April 10, 2018

SouthFront

French President Emmanuel Macron says any French strikes on Syria would “target chemical weapons” stocks allegedly belonging to the Syrian government.

On April 10, Macron said he supports a “strong and joint response” to the alleged chemical attack in the Syrian town of Douma on April 7, which the US and its allies blamed on the Assad government.

The French president added that the final decision on possible Syria strikes will be made in the coming days in coordination with the US and the UK.

“Our decision will not target allies of the regime or attack anyone but rather attack the regime’s chemical capabilities,” he said, insisting he did “not want an escalation”.

Macron also claimed that that the use of chemical weapons is a “red line” for France. Unfortunately, he forgot to show at least some proofs that the Assad government had been behind the alleged incident. [SNARK ALERT] Maybe because no investigation was conducted by the US and its allies. 

[END REPORT]

France's Macron and Saudi Prince Discuss Response to Syria
BY SYLVIE CORBET, Associated Press
April 10, 2018, at 6:33 p.m.
The Associated Press via US News & World Report

PARIS (AP) — Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia joined French President Emmanuel Macron in expressing concerns Tuesday over the worsening conflicts in Yemen, Iran and especially Syria.

Macron said France would decide in coming days on "a strong and joint response" with the United States and Britain to the suspected use of a poison gas that Syrian activists and rescues said killed 40 people near Damascus.

Prince Mohammed, wrapping up his first official visit to France, said during a joint news conference with the French leader that Saudi Arabia would support a military operation in Syria.

"If required by our alliance with our partners, we will be there," he said, according to the French translation of his remarks spoken in Arabic.

[...]

Macron, 40, France's youngest leader since Napoleon, and the 32-year-old Saudi prince who goes by MBS, met privately earlier Tuesday to discuss defense, security and economic issues.

They signed a cooperation agreement on research and tourism at the Mada'in Saleh archaeological site in northwest Saudi Arabia. Macron plans to visit the kingdom, which will be represented at the Cannes Film Festival for the first time next month, at the end of the year.

Saudi national company Aramco and French oil giant Total announced a deal Tuesday to build a petrochemical complex in Jubail in Saudi Arabia. In total, $9 billion will be invested, the companies said.

Macron hosted a gala send-off dinner for the crown prince at the presidential Elysee palace. Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, who was in Paris, attended.
____

Associated Press writers Angela Charlton and Philippe Sotto contributed to this report.

[END REPORT]

********

Every time Trump talks in public about Syria he helps the terrorists there

It was the same with Obama when he was U.S. President. One would think President Trump learned from Obama's thoughtless remarks that loose lips sink the ship. He learned nothing, surely to the amusement of the terrorists his loose lips help.

********

Is this why the Usual Suspects are suddenly desperate to remove Assad?

A victory for government forces in Douma would effectively mark a death blow to the armed rebellion against Assad ... Eastern Ghouta was one of the first areas near Damascus to revolt in 2011. If it falls under full government control, only a handful of areas will remain under rebel control, none of them as strategically important.

The above is from the April 8 Washington Post report Dozens killed in apparent chemical weapons attack on civilians in Syria, rescue workers say. 

So. The battle between the 'rebels' in Douma and Syrian government forces isn't any old battle. It's the end game for the government. That could explain the mounting hysteria among anti-Assad regimes. The ruckus heated up about two months ago, which was when the Syrian military began its campaign in eastern Ghouta which includes Douma City.

Will Douma fall under "full government control?" Not if the Usual Suspects can help it. They've invested too much since 2011 on getting control of Syria to slink away quietly. From a Sputnik report today, there are "remaining parts of the enclave still held by armed rebels." Jaysh al-Islam seems to be the stick in the mud. 

Which regime among the Usual Suspects is backing JAL or providing the most backing? I don't know but I find Thierry Meyssan's closing words in his March 16 crash course on the three most powerful rebel groups in E. Ghouta to be interesting in regard to the question:

Commonalities of these three groups

These three groups have no ideological difference. All claim to be the thought of the Muslim Brotherhood [4]. According to them, daily life is divided between what is lawful from the point of view of their Islam and what is not.

There are, however, differences between the three groups about how they can treat people who do not share their point of view. Be that as it may, no one lives under their rule without being a Sunni.

Like all the fighters of the "Islamic revolution", their men often change their group and these groups fight each other and join together frequently. It is absurd to draw substantive conclusions. At most, we can see territorial quarrels between their leaders and opportunities for their soldiers.

All of these groups and countless others have well-designed flags and logos as well as quality videos. All of this communication material is manufactured by the United Kingdom. In 2007, it had a war propaganda unit, the Research Information and Communications Unit (RICU) headed by MI6 (Secret Service) officer Jonathan Allen.

Starting from the chemical weapons case in the summer of 2013, the RICU financed an external company to assist the communication of combatants in Syria (and subsequently those of Yemen). It was initially Regester Larkin, then Innovative Communications & Strategies (InCoStrat). Both companies are headed by an MI6 officer, Colonel Paul Tilley.

Jonathan Allen, whose rank we do not know, has become number two in the UK permanent representation at the United Nations. He is currently leading the Security Council against Russia and Syria.

British secret service officer and charge d’affaires of His Majesty, Jonathan Allen, giving a press conference at the UN with his privileged ally, the French ambassador, François Delattre.

As to how Jaysh al-Islam "can treat people who do not share their point of view, " Thierry explains:

Jeïch el-Islam [Jaysh al-Islam], that is, the Army of Islam, is the only one of these groups to have a local presence. It was created in September 2013 by the family Allouche, from another group, the Brigade of Islam, in the mode of a gang imposing its law on merchants of the Ghouta, not hesitating to publicly execute those who challenged their power.

The group was initially commanded by Zahran Allouche, son of the preacher Abdallah Allouche, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood refugee in Saudi Arabia. From 2009 to 2011, he was imprisoned for belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood. He was released in a general amnesty decreed by President al-Assad at the request of third countries.

For several years, Zahran Allouche terrorized the inhabitants of Damascus declaring that he was going to "clean" the city. He announced each Friday [1] the attacks he was going to commit against the capital. In 2013, he abducted Alawite families [2] in Aadra. He used some as human shields and walked a hundred in cages, before executing the men so that we’d know what fate he reserved for "infidels". [Thierry lives in Damascus] After his death a businessman, Sheikh Isaam Buwaydani called "Abu Hamam", succeeded him.

His cousin is Mohammed Allouche, made famous by his repression of manners. He created the Unified Judicial Council, which imposed the Saudi version of Sharia law on all Ghouta residents. He notably organized executions of homosexuals, thrown from the roof of buildings. He represents the group at the UN negotiations in Geneva.

The Allouche family is now comfortably settled in London.

[...]

If the British regime is JAL's biggest foreign backer and the biggest backer of the other two main rebel groups in E. Ghouta I doubt they'd be spending their own money on the enterprise.

Following the line of speculation, the British would be carrying water for Qatar or Saudi Arabia or both, although the connection of the three groups with the Muslim Brotherhood would tend to favor Qatar -- which since their tiff with Al Saud has taken to blaming the United States for their long support for the Brothers and they just went along to help the Americans.

Now just see how Americans always get left holding the bag.  

*********

Live video of evacuations via Syrian-Russian monitored humanitarian corridor in E. Ghouta

Photo from the video feed:

As of this time (6:10 AM EDT) Sputnik is still carrying live footage of the evacuations.

Humanitarian Corridor in Eastern Ghouta in Action (VIDEO)

10:41 10.04.2018(updated 10:55 10.04.2018)

Sputnik

A joint operation by the Syrian and Russian militaries is providing the residents of the Damascus suburb with an opportunity to leave the remaining parts of the enclave still held by armed rebels.

Eastern Ghouta has been under the control of militants and al-Nusra Front terrorists since 2012. In February, the Syrian leadership began a campaign to liberate the area. The operation is drawing to a close.

Follow our feed to find out more.

[END REPORT]

********

U.S. military transforms Schengen Area into war zone to ready for war against Russia

I hope EU schools are helping students through this uh unsettled period by teaching them to survive a nuclear strike by sitting under their desks.  That's what I was taught in American school during the Cold War and if it was good enough for me it's good enough protection for schoolkids in today's Europe.  Just remember, keep your chin down so you don't bang the top of your head against the underside of the desk.        

The Militarization of the European Union: Schengen Area Handed Over to US-NATO Forces
By Manlio Dinucci
April 7, 2018
Il Manifesto (Italy) via Voltaire Network

The European Commission presented the Action Plan on Military Mobility on 28 March [1]. “By facilitating military mobility within the EU, – explains the foreign representative of the Union, Federica Mogherini – we can be more effective in reacting when challenges arise”. Even if she does not say so, the reference to “Russian aggression” is evident.

The Action Plan was actually decided not by the EU, but by the Pentagon and NATO. In 2015, General Ben Hodges, commander of US gound forces in Europe (US Army Europe), called for the establishment of a “military Schengen Area” so that, to face “Russian aggression”, US forces could move quickly from one European country to another, without being slowed down by national regulations and customs procedures.

This request was embraced by NATO: the North Atlantic Council, meeting on 8 November 2017 at the level of defense ministers, officially requested the European Union to “implement national rules that facilitate the passage of military forces through the borders and, at the same time, to ‘improve civil infrastructures so that they are adapted to military requirements’ [2].

On February 15, 2018, the North Atlantic Council at the level of defense ministers announced the establishment of a new NATO Logistic Command to “improve the movement in Europe of troops and essential equipment for defense” [3].

Just over a month later, the European Union presented the Action Plan on Military Mobility, which exactly meets the requirements established by the Pentagon and NATO. It envisages “simplifying customs formalities for military operations and the transport of dangerous goods in the military domain”.

This is how the “military Schengen Area” is prepared, with the difference that free-to-circulate are not people but tanks.

Moving tanks and other military vehicles by road and rail is not the same thing as driving ordinary vehicles and trains. “The existing barriers to military mobility” must therefore be removed by modifying “infrastructures not suitable for the weight or size of military vehicles, in particular bridges and rails with insufficient load capacity” For example, if a bridge is not able to hold the weight of a column of tanks, it will have to be strengthened or rebuilt.

The European Commission “will identify the parts of the trans-European transport network suitable for military transport, including necessary upgrades of existing infrastructure”. They must be carried out along tens of thousands of kilometers of the road and rail network. This will require an enormous expense for the member countries, with a “possible financial contribution from the EU for such works”.

However, we European citizens will always pay these “great works”, useless for civil uses, with consequent cuts to social spending and investments in public utility projects.

In Italy, where funds for the reconstruction of the earthquake zones are scarce, billions of euros will have to be spent to rebuild infrastructures suitable for military mobility.

The 27 EU countries, 21 of which belong to NATO, are now called to examine the Plan. Italy would therefore have the possibility to reject it.

This, however, would mean, for the next government, to oppose not only the EU but NATO under US command, starting to disengage from the strategy that, with the invention of the Russian threat, prepares the war, this true, against Russia.

It would be a fundamental political decision for our country but, given the subjection to the US, it remains in the realm of political fiction.

Manlio Dinucci

[END REPORT]

[1] Joint Communication to the European Parlament and the Council on the Action Plan on Military Mobility, JOIN(2018) 5 final, March 28, 2018.

[2] “Press conference by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg following the meeting of the North Atlantic Council at the level of Defence Ministers”, NATO, November 8, 2017.

[3] «Les ministres de la Défense des pays de l’OTAN prennent des décisions destinées à renforcer l’Alliance», Otan, 15 février 2018.

********

Russians on combat alert against U.S. strikes on Syrian forces, government targets

(You can tell SouthFront is really upset when they publish passages in red and underline them.)

RUSSIAN FORCES IN SYRIA ARE ON COMBAT ALERT AS US CONSIDERS LIST OF TARGETS TO ATTACK GOVERNMENT FORCES – REPORTS

April 8, 2018

SouthFront

Russian forces deployed in Syria, including S-400 and Pantsir-S1 air defense systems and Sukhoi Su-30SM multirole fighters, have been put on a combat alert, according to reports appearing from local sources in the country’s provinces of Tartus and Latakia where Russian military facilities are located.

Meanwhile the Israeli TV channel i24NEWS claimed, citing US officials, that the US military is going to provide President Donald Trump with “a set of options for carrying out strikes against the Syrian government”.

“Both the Joint Chiefs of Staff and CENTCOM, the US forces in the Middle East, were compiling target lists and attack options to be presented to Trump and his national security team within hours, the officials said,” i24NEWS wrote.

A few hours earlier, a group of Israeli top officials and public figures officially called on Trump to conduct missile strikes against Syrian government forces in response to the alleged chemical attack in Douma.

In turn, Trump forgot [or ignored] that no confirmation of ... [an] attack by government forces had been provided and claimed that “Animal Assad” will pay a “big price”. He also blamed “President Putin, Russia and Iran” for the incident.

Earlier, the Russian Foreign Ministry denounced the chemical attack reports as a “hoax” and warned that military actions against Syria could lead to the “gravest consequences.”

The conflict Syria is on the brink of another large-scale escalation.

[END REPORT]

********

MOA's crash course on what the heck happened in Douma

From the same April 8 post at Moon of Alabama, Syria - Timelines Of 'Gas Attacks' Follow A Similar Scheme (Updated), I quoted in my just-published, Have Islamic State fighters in Syria received regulation U.S. uniforms yet? 

Well, he put three distinct topics in one post -- the timeline, the crash course, fairy tale that American forces are fighting ISIS -- so what am I supposed to do? Just give you a link?  Where's the fun in that? 

All right; here's the part about Douma. It's still the clearest and most succinct explanation I've found about key events leading up to the alleged chemical attack, about which an emergency UN Security Council meeting is being convened later today:

Over the last months the Syrian army secured 90% of 'rebel' enclave in east-Ghouta right next to the Syrian capital Damascus. Only the town of Douma, held by the Saudi financed Salafist Takfiris of Jaish al-Islam, was left in enemy hands. Negotiations about an evacuation of the terrorists were ongoing. At one point last week the hard-core leaders of Jaish al-Islam pulled their negotiators back from the talks and reportedly executed them. Jaish al-Islam wanted to essentially stay in place and keep all its weapons. The Russian negotiators did not agree with this. On Friday the negotiations failed.

Barrages of missiles and grenades from Douma hit Damascus. The 'rebel'-supporting Syrian Observatory reported several killed in Damascus and dozens of wounded. The Syrian army hit back with intensive air strikes and artillery fire on Douma.

The terrorists in Douma hold several thousand hostages who were abducted in 2013 from the town of Adra. The prisoners were paraded in cages. The abducted men were forced to dig the extensive tunnel network Jaish al-Islam uses to hide its weapons and fighters.

Two years ago Jaish al-Islam admitted that it used chemical weapons against a Kurdish suburb of Aleppo. Just two days ago the Russian military command said that it detected 'rebel' preparations for new false-flag gas attacks.

Now the terrorists and their supporters claim that a new "chemical weapon attack" happened and blame the Syrian government. A video of the alleged gas attack aftermath shows a basement with some 30 dead children between two and 10 years old. They seem to have suffocated, probably from carbon monoxide. Astonishingly there are no dead women or men -- only children under 10.

Russia, which has observers on the ground, rejects any claims of Syrian government involvement in the incident.

It is quite obvious that the "chemical weapon attack" is a false-flag event. The terrorists commit the crime and blame the Syrian government. They want the U.S. to attack the Syrian government.

Will Trump fall for this stunt and attack Syria? Or had he and his minions planned this series of events all along?

Thus ends the Douma part of b's post. His last remark isn't as far-fetched as it might seem. From an April 8 FARS report Terrorists Resort to False-Flag Chemical Attack Scenario again amid Syrian Army Rapid Advances in Douma:

Russia’s Defense Ministry stressed last month that “US instructors” were training militants to stage false flag chemical attacks in Southern Syria. The incidents were said to be a pretext for airstrikes on Syrian government troops and infrastructure.

“We have reliable information at our disposal that US instructors have trained a number of militant groups in the vicinity of the town of At-Tanf, to stage provocations involving chemical warfare agents in Southern Syria,” Russian General Staff Spokesman General Sergey Rudskoy said at a news briefing on Saturday.

“Early in March, the saboteur groups were deployed to the Southern de-escalation zone to the city of Dara'a, where the units of the so-called Free Syrian Army are stationed,” he added.

“They are preparing a series of chemical munitions explosions. This fact will be used to blame the government forces. The components to produce chemical munitions have been already delivered to the Southern de-escalation zone under the guise of humanitarian convoys of a number of NGOs,” the Spokesman stated.

This doesn't mean the claims about U.S. involvement in chemical weapons training are necessarily true, of course, but I think it does mean CENTCOM and/or the CIA have some explaining to do -- and washing their hands by saying a contractor might have gone a little too far with the training won't do. They knew what type of people they were dealing with in Jaish al-Islam. Not that the governments that want the U.S. to murder Syria's president and destroy his government for them would care. If the provocation brought about U.S. bombings of the Syrian seat of government they would look at any civilians killed in a chemical attack provocation as collateral damage, and all for a good cause.    

********

Have Islamic State fighters in Syria received regulation U.S. uniforms yet?

Update 

Trump and the U.S. military claim to "fight ISIS" but have completely stopped doing so. There are some 3,000 ISIS fighters in east Syria near the border with Iraq. Most of these are north of the Euphrates where U.S. troops are stationed. If Syrian government troops cross the Euphrates northwards the U.S. attacks them. But ISIS can cross the Euphrates southward and launch large attacks on Syrian government positions in east Syria:

[...]

 Another group of ISIS fighters is in the south-eastern corner of Syria and under protection of U.S. forces stationed in al-Tanf, near Jordan.

Despite large concentrations of ISIS troops, air attacks of the U.S. coalition against ISIS have practically stopped.

[Chart: U.S.-led Coalition Strikes Update] 

[...]

The above is from Moon of Alabama's Syria - Timelines Of 'Gas Attacks' Follow A Similar Scheme (Updated);  April 8.

********

"Paris: Macron, Trump Exchange Data 'Confirming' Chemical Weapons Use in Douma" BREAKING NEWS

(See also Russian Military Reports No Chemical Weapons Used in Vicinity of Syria's Douma; Sputnik, 02:18 - 09.04.2018) 

Sputnik
02:21 09.04.2018 (updated 02:59 09.04.2018)

Elysee Palace announced that US President Donald Trump and French President Emanuel Macron have exchanged data that, according to the announcement, confirm use of chemical weapons in the Syrian city of Douma.

US President Donald Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron exchanged data allegedly confirming the use of chemical weapons in Syria’s Douma during a telephone conversation, the Elysee Palace said in a statement on Monday.

France and the United States will also condemn the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria at the Monday's UN Security Council meeting, the communique, released by Elysee Palace stated.

On Saturday, several media outlets, citing Syrian militants, accused Damascus of using chemical weapons in the city of Douma in Syria's Eastern Ghouta. Trump's Homeland Security Advisor Tom Bossert said on Sunday that he did not rule out military actions against the Syrian government in connection with the reports.

"On Sunday, April 8, 2018, President Emmanuel Macron discussed the situation in Syria with the US president [Trump]. The President of the French Republic strongly condemned the chemical attacks against citizens of Duma in Eastern Ghouta on April 7. The French president and the US president exchanged information and analysis data, confirming the use of chemical weapons," the statement reads.

"They [Trump and Macron] decided to coordinate their actions and initiatives within the UN Security Council, which is to meet on Monday, April 9, in New York, in order to condemn disrespect for Resolution 2401, as well as the repeated use of chemical weapons," the statement also says.

The statement notes that responsibility for the chemical weapons use in Syria "must be clearly established." Macron and Trump also agreed to maintain close contact, and to hold talks again within the next 48 hours.

On Sunday, nine out of 15 members of the UN Security Council have urged the convocation of an emergency meeting to discuss reports about alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria. Russia convenes on Monday a separate meeting of the UN Security Council to discuss threats to international peace and security.

[END REPORT]

********

American aggression toward Syria echoes Nazi aggression in Europe

From Matthew R.J. Brodsky's April 3 article for National Review Online, Why [the U.S.] leaving Syria early would be a disaster:

Remaining in eastern Syria allows the U.S. to deny Bashar al-Assad access to vital oil fields and the financial means to rebuild the territory of his loyalists while starving his opponents.

He put it a little differently during his April 6 visit to the John Batchelor Show to discuss the NRO article:   

Where we [the U .S.] are currently positioned in eastern Syria, we're over where a lot of the oil wealth is located. If we left, you would have Syria and Iran -- the whole axis -- able to take that over, and then with that money they're then able to reconstruct Syria. But of course they would only be doing that with the allies that they that have while continuing to starve their own people."

(Podcast 2:28 minute mark)

For John Batchelor's information (I doubt Mr Brodsky would be interested):

How do you tell a “moderate rebel” (sic) of Ghouta from one of the ordinary residents of Ghouta? All you need to do is contrast the good health and clothes of the first lot with the emaciated bodies and rags of the second lot.

The Syrian Arab Army has just discovered that Irbine, an area in the liberated Ghouta, holds stocks of foodstuffs and a hospital that is very well equipped. However, the UN and humanitarian NGOs have given assurances that it was the “regime” that was starving the population to death and denying it access to health care.

The Syrian Arab Army has entered into areas of Ghouta that are still under the control of Nato  [backed] “moderate rebels”. Their entry has allowed confirmation of a huge network of tunnels in areas of Ghouta. It contains a mega-corridor enabling 4 x 4s and lorries to circulate to supply the fighters whilst they were holding those ordinarily residents there as slaves. [*]

That's from Voltaire Network's April 7 report The “moderate rebels” evacuated from Ghouta. 

The Syrian government and its military do not starve fellow Syrians, which include even the moderate head-choppers. (See the VN report for a photo of unmasked moderate rebels in Ghouta displaying human heads as trophies.)

In fact Syria's government has gone to lengths in order to prevent Syrians from starvation -- a fact that the media  controlled by the government's enemies omits from reporting. Remember the Syrian government's food assistance to families of moderate head-choppers in Eastern Aleppo? That was why so many of the wives didn't want to get on the buses to Idlib after the government negotiated an agreement with several of the rebel forces -- it was because of the food and housing assistance the Syrian government gave them while their husbands were fighting to take down the government.

The Syrian government does not believe in starving people as a military tactic, and besides a starved Syrian is not a vote for the government. The starvation tactic only makes sense to Americans and other foreign regimes trying to take over Syria; that's because Syria is not their country and Syrians are not their people. That's how they think. 

But looked at from Assad's angle, starving the Syrian enemies of his government is not only morally wrong it's also stupid when it comes time to negotiate. (The Syrian government has by now negotiated countless truces with Syrian anti-government fighters -- a well-established fact I have mentioned several times over the years.)

Americans in Washington and their allies against Syria's government have demonstrated that they find nothing wrong with the suffering inflicted on Syrians by foreigners. The U.S.-NATO refusal to even attempt to shut down the oil trade in Syria between ISIS and Turkey, until the Russians exposed the outrage, was one such demonstration.

Now those same Americans have control of much of the oil in Syria. They continue in the tradition of ISIS of making things as difficult for the Syrian people as they can.

The reason, given by Matthew Brodsky in his NRO article, is that Washington wants "financial leverage to help determine Syria’s future while preventing the return of ISIS."

A large ISIS force never left Syria; when they were run out of Raqqa by U.S. proxy fighters they simply changed from being occupiers to guerrilla fighters. To return to Mr Brodsky's  explanation for John Batchelor's audience: 

In essence what we would have done [if the U.S. hadn't captured Syrian oilfields] is that the entire American presence there would have been basically to fight then on behalf of the Assad regime because the Assad regime and Iran will end up taking that [the oilfields] over. That is obviously, to me, not in America's interest.

Why Iran would want or need to take over those oilfields is a question Mr Brodsky wouldn't be able to answer. But it would be in America's interest to offer help to Syria's government. That's if Washington is serious about offsetting Iran's influence with the government. 

Why hasn't the U.S. deployed this time-honored method of currying favor with a foreign government? I think a chief reason is that the Saudi regime doesn't want it done -- and I suspect Washington is now in too shaky a position with the petrodollar to ignore Al Saud's wishes on matters regarding Syria.  

Regarding the oilfields, I'm not sure that Syria's government would be able to export oil at this time even if they controlled the fields. In any case the government would use much of the oil just to help Syrian civilians survive.

However, helping Syrians survive in their country is not a Saudi interest. The Saudi interest is placing a puppet government in Damascus. For this they'll continue instructing the U.S. and every regime heavily reliant on Saudi and oil wealth investments (Britain, France, etc.) to do what they want regarding Syria.  

I note that in his article and conversation, Mr Brodsky skated past the issue of Syrian sovereignty. Perhaps that's because Americans who support the illegal invasion of Syria by the U.S. and other UN members have only the lamest answers or no answer to the question. Here is what a former U.S. Ambassador to Syria and Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs replied to Sputnik Radio's direct question on April 7:

Sputnik: Why is the US continuing to violate Syria's sovereignty?

Richard Murphy: Let's see what happens at the meetings. The latest meeting involved Russia, Iran and Turkey in Istanbul [Ankara] presumably looking for a reconciliation within Syria and other arrangements which will respect Russian interests as well as Turkish and Iranian interests.

That isn't even verbal squirming; Mr Murphy simply refused to answer the question. The closest to a clear answer came with President Trump's order of National Guards to the U.S. border with Mexico. Sovereignty is for America, not for Syria.

Finally, a question directed more to John Batchelor than his guest or National Review Online. Why does Matthew Brodsky's entire conversation ignore that the American aggression he supports would be warranted only if Syria's government had declared war on the USA?  

What kind of parents raised him, or what professors taught him, that he should think it's okay for successive American regimes to act toward Syria in the manner of the Nazis invading Europe? And on even thinner excuses than the Hitlerites used to rationalize their aggression toward other nations? 
____
A note about the report at Voltaire Network. For readers who don't closely follow events in Syria and so might be confused about the mention of Idlib:

The 'rebels' in Ghouta were transferred first, at Syrian government expense, to Idlib Province -- a step the VN report doesn't mention. Then, as VN reports, "emirate countries' -- Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc. -- bussed in several of the transferred fighters.

You may trust the transfers don't stay in the emirates for long.  They're repurposed to fight against Yemen or in Libya or anywhere else the emirates want the use of proxy forces. 

These revolving door transfers are now SOP: Syria's military asks rebels, How would like a free, safe bus ride to Idlib if you'll stop fighting us? Then the Saudis or whomever get to choose from the latest arrivals in Idlib. 

The rejects stay in Idlib and fight it out with al Qaeda proxies or other rejects that Turkey's regime doesn't snap up to fight the Kurds or send back to Syria to fight the SAA. 

For readers who've been wondering why the SAA keeps shipping 'em to Idlib -- the Idlib transfer strategy can be considered conflict resolution on a shoestring budget and a way of whittling down the number of foreign fighters in Syria without having to expend Syrian Army blood. 

*********