First of all, what’s happening in Syria, is not a Civil War. A Civil War is when two or more factions from the same country are fighting for the control of that country or if one part is trying to separate from the rest of the country’s territory and gain independence. The situation in Syria is incredibly complicated and it would require a very lenghty article to explain every facet of it as there are many ‘players’ on the ground with a wide range of opposing and/or overlapping interests and goals.

But it’s not a Civil War.

syrian civil war.jpg

The uprisings were staged, paid for by Qatar and Saudi-Arabia, with the tacit support of the US and the UK and their allies, mercenaries were poured into the country from probably as many as 80 different countries. Both green and seasoned (combat experienced) zealots penetrated the country from Afghanistan, Libya, Chechnya, Qatar, Saudi-Arabia, and so on and on, and from Western Europe of course. They were not discouraged to go there and they were certainly not detained in any way when they crossed into Syria. The list of countries who have nationals fighting against the Syrian people is long.

The Assad regime is also not a ‘regime’. Stop referring to it as a regime. Though Assad is no innocent little angel -friends and foes alike recognize he can be brutal-, he is the legitimate head of state of Syria and enjoys widespread support among the Syrian population. Why else do you think he’s still in the driver’s seat? The west desperately wants to see him go, but the guys is still there. He’s certainly no idiot and his army is not doing a bad job at beating the terrorists. Now that they have the support of the Russians, both in the air and on the ground, they are driving the foreign invaders back. This is not to say that there are no Syrians whatsoever fighting Assad’s army, but without foreign manipulation and intervention the conflict would never have escalated to such a destructive scale. Perhaps there would not have been a military conflict at all.


The best way to prevent terrorism in the west is ending all support to terrorism in Syria. Of course, the west is not willing to do that, because it wants to topple Assad’s government. It wants to install a regime (the proper term this time) to back its own interests. Mostly a better control of the resources of the middle east and destroying a key ally of Iran and Russia.

Assad and the Syrian people are winning the war, so the west wants to step up its involvement to prevent an otherwise certain victory.

How convenient then that a terrorist attack happened in Manchester. A very emotionally devastating one, as the attack targeted young women and children.

The mainstream media bombards us with tear jerking news about the cowardly carnage and victims. We read biographies of people we can totally relate to, people like us, children like our children, and we get angry, we get very angry. At muslims, at all muslims eventually.

Little attention is given to the fact that the perpetrator of the bombing got his experience in Libya. If the west hadn’t plunged Libya into chaos, maybe there would have been no bombing in Manchester.

When Syrian or Yemeni children die the very same week as the ones in Manchester little is made of that. No biographies. No individual portraits about the hopes and dreams and hobbies and eating habits of these children, probably because they are brown and ow well, they live far away, no interviews with the bereaved mothers either… Odd… If we care that much about children…

Just pause and ask yourself if it’s really such a long shot to think that the west might actually be looking for any excuse at all to step up its military involvement in Syria to get rid of the Assad government?

peter ford

Not everybody remains silent about this possibility. Take the former ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, for example. Peter Ford has recently dropped a ‘shocking’ truth bomb on BBC television. You can see the interviewer get all nervous, squirming in his seat, not knowing how to handle his unapologetically honest guest.

Peter Ford, a retired ambassador who knows a thing or two about geopolitics, clearly states that he doesn’t believe Assad is behind gas attacks, that it would be mindblowingly stupid to use gas, especially in areas of very little military importance, with nothing to gain and handing the west a free pass to invade…

Listen to the man, a determined voice of reason, who doesn’t accept the mainstream media version of events as the gospel…

You can watch Peter Ford here:

Peter Ford’s wikipage: