This video is called ‘Al-Qaeda “army” presence in Syria much higher than officials say’.
From daily The Guardian in Britain of Friday 22 March 2013:
Americans and Britons are deeply sceptical about the idea of arming Syria’s rebels and the possibility of sending western troops into the country, according to a bilateral poll.
Despite the escalating civil war, growing casualty figures and a rising tide of refugees flooding out of Syria, there is little appetite for more robust action than the current approach of providing “non-lethal support” to the rebels, the YouGov poll found.
There have been increasing demands on Capitol Hill to arm the opponents of the Assad regime or intervene more directly, and this week Barack Obama toughened his own rhetoric amid contested claims about Damascus using chemical weapons. But the new binational survey – produced for YouGov-Cambridge, the polling company’s academic thinktank – finds US voters opposed to the idea of supplying munitions by a 29-point margin: 45% against to 16% in favour.
Identical questions were posed in Britain, where David Cameron has, with the French president, François Hollande, recently tried and failed to persuade the EU to lift its arms embargo. But the British public emerges as even more strongly against: 57% oppose arming the rebels and 16% are in favour.
In both the UK and the US, opposition to arming the rebels is marked on the right as well as the left of the political spectrum: 52% of American Republicans and 63% of British Conservatives are against supplying arms.
Any thought of sending western troops into Syria would also be badly received – especially in the UK. By a 32-point margin (55%-23%) Britons reject the idea of sending in UK and allied troops to protect civilians. The anti-intervention lead rises to 59 points (68%-9%) if the aim were “overthrowing President Bashar al-Assad“.
In the US too, proposals to put boots on the ground would run up against public opinion. Americans lean 33%-27% against sending in troops “to protect civilians”, and are more decisively against directly enforcing regime change, splitting 42%-16% against. Although more Republicans (22%) than Democrats (14%) would be prepared to support the latter, the partisan difference are not as great might have expected given the continuing divisions over the war to topple Saddam Hussein.
A decade on from the invasion of 2003, YouGov reaffirms the verdict of other pollsters and finds a rough two-to-one (53%-27%) balance of Britons saying that the war launched by George Bush and Tony Blair was wrong rather than right.
From the Campaign Against Arms Trade in Britain:
What You Can Do
Prince Charles is just back from a visit to Saudi Arabia to help ‘enhance military links’ – despite the regime’s horrific human rights abuses and its suppression of dissent. In the UK, the government continued to push more arms sales.
Royal visits and the promotion of arms sales send the wrong message: one that condones not condemns human rights abuses, that legitimises authoritarian regimes and demoralises those struggling for democracy.
Foreign Minister William Hague is chipping away at the EU arms embargo. He has announced the UK will send armoured vehicles and body armour and refuses to rule out further steps.
CAAT strongly opposes any moves to provide arms to any side in the conflict. Instead the UK should place pressure on countries giving military support to either side to end such support, and focus on non-military solutions to the conflict.
» Act now to ask William Hague to reinstate a full arms embargo on all sides in the conflict. Email William Hague today.
Weapons supplied by the UK have been used against democracy protesters in the Middle East and North Africa. Yet the UK still spends public money on persuading some of the world’s worst human rights abusers and most unstable regimes to buy weapons. This is NOT OK.
David Cameron, on an arms sales tour of the Middle East, claimed arms sales to authoritarian regimes are ‘legitimate and right.’ This is NOT OK.
» Add your voice to CAAT’s petition to say it’s time to end government support for the arms trade.
After US President Barack Obama’s trip to Israel last week the US and its allies are moving ahead with plans to topple Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and install a pro-Western regime. CIA operations and calls to arm the Syrian opposition are escalating, amid a US diplomatic offensive in the Middle East to isolate Assad, and the collapse of a pro-Syrian government in Lebanon: here.
The CIA war against Syria: here.
The US and Jordanian militaries have stepped up a secret program to train thousands of armed fighters to send into Syria with the apparent aim of carving out a buffer zone in the south of the country: here.
Western leaders divided over how to take on Syrian revolt: here.
FRANCE DETERMINED TO ARM THE ‘SYRIAN NATIONAL COALITION’: here.
In a series of interviews, UN investigator Carla del Ponte said that sarin gas used in Syria was fired by the US-backed opposition, not the regime of President Bashar al-Assad: here.
Ex-CNN Reporter Ordered to Manipulate News on Syria and Iran: here.
- Syria, another NATO war? (dearkitty1.wordpress.com)
- France, UK press to lift EU arms ban for Syria rebels (worldbulletin.net)
- UPDATE 3-France, Britain fail to win easing of Syria arms ban – Reuters UK (uk.reuters.com)
- UK News: Nato countries ‘plan Syria action’ (walesonline.co.uk)
- William Hague: Britain may defy Syria arms ban (metro.co.uk)
- Obama warns of extremist threat in post-Assad Syria (dailystar.com.lb)
- EU Remains Split on Shipping Arms to Syrian Rebels (abcnews.go.com)
- US, NATO Prepare Syria Intervention (theuglytruth.wordpress.com)
- William Hague admits UK-supplied weapons could fall into the hands of jihadists in Syria (independent.co.uk)