Seymour Hersh on Democracy Now: Obama ‘Cherry-Picked’ Intel for Planned US Airstrikes in Syria
I knew it from the beginning.
It's a no-brainer that intel was "cherry picked." The USG does this all the time and usually gets away with it.
USA always destroys civil infrastructure to kill people by epidemies, dirty water, no electricity, no heating, hospital bombing etc. systematically – its the normal army planning standard from WWII to today.
Even their proxy guerrilla fighters they sent to Syria do systematically destruct infrastructure – even tourist attractions i.e. old historic buildings. Same as the systematic Iraq ancient arts robberies. US people pay trillions for the war and the US war criminals & profiteurs who promoted the war with dirty lies are cashing in.
I think Hersh now needs to 'investigate' whether the CIA is teaching the mercenary terrorists the "This is my rifle, this is my gun" song at the training camps…
He's not a good speaker for sure, but at least he ends it strong, except for the Obama is the" brightest and best president ever" nonsense.
Yea, that was way over the top. But maybe he was comparing him to the alternatives. GWB was an unmitigated disaster and if McCain/Romney had been elected we would probably be in a few more wars by now. None of these three boobs would even be willing to talk to Syria/Iran, let alone reach at least temporary deals.
Obama tried to pull yet another Bush, with this.
As soon as he got into office, he started transferring wealth from poor to rich, increased drone terrorism by over 300 percent from what Bush was doing, aggressively attacked at least 7 countries, escalated a war and turned it into the longest war of aggression in US history, supported chemical attacks against civilians, supported torture, committed massive terrorism and dictatorial coercion, increased support for Israeli ethnic cleansers, and on and on…
Yet thanks in part to the state propaganda media in the US, there are still people praising this depraved right wing murderer.
What Mr. Hersh seems to be unable to understand is the usefulness and necessity of a creditable threat of the use of force.Does he think for a moment that the regime would be allowing the destruction of weapons as it is now had not the president taken that position?
But this is just splitting hairs. The underlying reality is that if some past President of the United States had handed over, say, Maine to Canada on a whim – as Nikita Khrushchev handed Crimea over to Ukraine in 1953 – would anyone in the US dispute the results of a referendum reintegrating it back into the Union?
But this is just splitting hairs. The underlying reality is that if some past President of the United States had handed over, say, Maine to Canada on a whim a?? as Nikita Khrushchev handed Crimea over to Ukraine in 1953 a?? would anyone in the US dispute the results of a referendum reintegrating it back into the Union?
Advertise on Antiwar.com
Copyright © Antiwar.com 2016