Top 10 Lies About Syria

1. Chemical weapons are worse than other weapons.

This is not the case. Death and dismemberment are horrific regardless of the weapon. No weapon is being used legally, morally, humanely, or practically in Syria or Iraq. U.S. bombs are no less indiscriminate, no less immoral, and no less illegal than chemical weapons — or for that matter than the depleted uranium weapons with which the United States has been poisoning the area. The fact that a weapon has not been banned does not create a legal right to go into a country and kill people with it.

2. Chemical weapons use justifies the escalated use of other weapons.

Does shoplifting justify looting? If a Hatfield poisoned a McCoy, would another McCoy be justified in shooting a bunch of Hatfields? What barbarism is this? A crime does not sanction another crime. That’s a quick trip to hell.

3. Important people we should trust know who used chemical weapons.

No, they do not. At least they do not know that the Syrian government did it. If they knew this, they would offer evidence. As on every past occasion, they have not done so.

4. The enemy is pure evil and will answer only to force.

The U.S. government and its proxies have sabotaged peace negotiations numerous times over the past several years, maintaining that Assad would have to step down or — preferably — be overthrown by violence before anything could be negotiated. This does not make the U.S. government pure inhuman evil, much less does it make the Syrian government that.

5. If you don’t want to bomb Syria with one enemy’s name on your lips, you hold the firm belief that said enemy is actually a saint.

This piece of stupidity gets people accused of loving and holding blameless the Syrian government, the Russian government, the U.S. government, ISIS, and various other parties. In fact, the reasonable thing to do is to hold all killers responsible for their killing because of the crime, not because of who commits it.

6. U.S. war-making in Syria is defensive.

This is the opposite of reality-based thinking as war-making endangers us rather than protects us. Someone should ask Donald Trump to remember the Maine. You may remember that Spain wanted the matter brought to a neutral arbiter, but the United States wanted war, regardless of any evidence. That’s been the typical move over the centuries: careful maneuvering into war, not away from it. Trump, by the way, is already up to his bloody elbows in several wars inherited from Obama — wars no less immoral and illegal slaughters because of their connection to either of those presidents. The question of who blew up the Maine is, at this point a truly dumb one. The important point is that the U.S. didn’t want to know, wanted instead to rush into a war before anyone could find out. Typically, the desire to avoid information, and not some other consideration, is the reason for the urgency in war-making.

7. Peace was tried in 2013, and it failed.

No. What happened was that Obama and his administration tried to pull off the same stunt that Trump is trying now, and the public rose up and refused to allow it. So, instead of a massive bombing campaign, Syria got more weapons, more trainers, more troops, and a medium sized bombing campaign. That’s very different from actually shifting direction and offering Syria diplomacy, aid, and disarmament.

8. The U.S. government’s goal is peace.

The long openly stated goal of powerful players in the U.S. government is to overthrow Assad.

9. Syria is as boring and unconcerning as numerous other ongoing U.S. wars.

In reality, Syria is a war that risks fighting between the United States and Russia, while each is armed with far more than enough nuclear weapons to destroy all life on earth. Creating a profitable conflict between the U.S. and Russia is a likely actual motivation of some hawks on Syria.

10. Making everything worse with yet more violence is the only option left.

That’s not an option at all. But these are: aid, reparations, negotiations, disarmament, the rule of law, truth and reconciliation.


  1. Kent Jones April 13, 2017 4:26 pm 

    I respect your position on these issues. But I must say that you really haven’t offered any alternative means to resolving this conflict. When you say “aid” and “reparations”, you mean money to help their people and rebuild their infrastructure that we have helped destroy. The problem with this is, that as long as there is a corrupt regime in power, such aid will not get to the people. It will be blocked or horded to be sold on the black market. “Aid” rarely makes it to those intended to receive it. It’s obvious that our attitude as a nation must change, before we could ever hope to have meaningful “negotiations” with Assad. This has to do with congress as well, not just the presidency. One man and his cabinet can lead change, but cannot affect it themselves. This is proven over and over again in history. The world would laugh if all of a sudden, the U.S. was concerned about the rule of law. As long as breaking laws helps a nation get what it wants, they will be broken. That goes for US, Russia, Syria, China, and any other you want to name. As far as reconciliation goes, our enemies know full well what is meant by reconciliation. If you want to truly “reconcile ” with another nation, you will need some folks that know how to do that first. I don’t believe this nation has raised anyone like that for the last 100 years or so. So, I appreciate the naming of the facts here and the alternate views, but I don’t see many take-aways.

  2. Kread April 8, 2017 7:44 pm 

    Excellent article. The real end game of course is to ensure that the Russians do not win, and do not have a military base in the Mideast, and that Iran loses influence in the area. Absolutely nothing to do with chemicals, terrorists, dictators, or civilians’ lives.

  3. avatar
    Michael April 8, 2017 3:03 pm 

    Martin Luther King Jr.’s naming of the U.S. as the greatest purveyor of violence still, sadly, hold’s true. When will be as a nation fully recognize this?

  4. avatar
    Michael April 8, 2017 3:02 pm 

    Martin Luther King Jr.’s named of the U.S. as the greatest purveyor of violence still, sadly, hold’s true. When will be as a nation fully recognize this?

  5. Hatuey April 8, 2017 1:21 am 

    It would be really important if the international community at all levels asks the U.S. to come to the culprit to answer for its long list of crimes, and the rest of the west too, instead of asking it to go and play the super heroe. It’s amazing how it could still be believed, specially by informed people, that the U.S. is a mediator of peace when all it can do is create havoc. As always they confuse the safety and order of the U.S., a result of its militaristic colonialism, with a capacity to bring order. They can’t, what they do is terrorize, expoit and return to their safe domains.

Leave a comment