Samuel Medici
This is a reply to Matty’s Modern Life’s video on the recent gas attacks in Syria.
Let me start by saying Matty is a legend and an expert on the subject of Green Communism. There are just a few problems with a very popular narrative that’s going around at the moment from some would-be arm chair Generals. This isn’t a rebuttal, as Matty’s sentiments are understandable. This is more of an addition to what’s been stated, with a slightly different perspective.
First of all let me start with Bashar Al Assad. Assad is not the militant, dictatorial tyrant that many of his detractors have made him out to be. Bashar’s father Hafez Al Assad was the real military strong man, facilitating several military coups before claiming power himself and establishing a one party state. As his health began to fade momentarily in 1983, his first choice for successor, his brother Rifaat, attempted to seize power, failed and was subsequently exiled as Hafez recovered.
The second choice was his eldest son Bassel who was regarded as a much better fit due to his service as a Commander in the Republican guard and his service in the Special Forces, and he was educated at the Soviet Military Academies. Winning a number of equestrian competitions won him the nickname ‘The golden knight’ yet he was not so graceful in his chariot of steal. After dying in a motor vehicle accident the ascension of power went to the lesser known younger brother of Bassel, Bashar. There was much controversy over this decision from Syria’s elite top brass, namely the generals who didn’t see how this eye doctor would fit the mould of Arab dictator, with all of its many burdens and skirmishes. In short, Bashar was an ill fit for dictator and has never been widely accepted or trusted by the upper echelons of Syria’s military.
Fast forward to current events. So, Assad’s forces allegedly used gas in 2017 and have allegedly used them again in 2018. Last time we were told that the US had picked up radio chatter from the area which was believed to be from Syrian forces which suggested that it was government forces that launched the attack. Much the same reasoning was used in the latest attack to justify a US counter attack, which France and Britain merrily joined in on.
There are very few people on the planet who would be able to say with a reasonable amount of certainty which one of the many forces in Syria carried out the gas attacks. One thing that we can say for certain is that Syria has been the target of OPCW fact finding missions and condemnation for some time due to its stockpiling of chemical weapons. It is however also believed that Syria’s opposition forces have access to chemical weaponry, and would not be afraid to indiscriminately unleash them on their enemy, on civilians and just about anyone who happens to be hanging out in downtown Aleppo. So the question becomes: Who did it and why?
This is where the armchair Generals tell us that it makes absolutely no tactical sense for Bashar Al Assad to order the use of chemical weapons, as Syrian forces already had their enemy surrounded and that doing so would only warrant a response from Western powers that would destroy their grip on power. There are three key factors here that have been overlooked:
- The sheer unblemished hatred that these groups have for one another is enormous enough to prompt them to do anything, at any time, regardless of the cost
- There is actually a great deal of tactical sense in this move at this point in time
- The Western powers will huff, puff, blow up a few buildings, pat themselves on the back and go home. How do we know this? Because America’s toughest President since Eisenhower did all he could do last year.
Let’s start with the hatred factor. If Hamas and Hezbollah stormed into Israel and eventually cornered the last pocket of Jewish resistance in a corner of west Tel Aviv, would they decide not to use chemical weapons as they had the tactical advantage and victory was certain? Fuck no. They’d pour so much gas in that Eichmann would giggle in his grave. Even if they knew that the US would bomb them to oblivion if they carried it out. It’d be Birkenau by the beach. They simply wouldn’t care.
Don’t assume that these people have a great deal of rationality about them, and don’t assume that after years of fighting in a war like this one that everyone in charge has the stone cold combat demeanour of an Arabian Daniel Craig. Think about how badly the PTSD is for our soldiers after having served 8 months in Afghanistan or Iraq. Now multiply that by 300, add a flagon of factional/ethnic tensions, and for good measure add the fact that they’ve never really been into the whole notion of obeying Bashar Al Assad. Their very existence is hatred, they live to torment their enemy and they’re probably so far off the hinges they’d make Charles Manson look like Jordan Peterson.
Tactically speaking, this is either a fluke or an absolute master stroke of military genius. It’s been proven to them now that they’ll only sustain a limited response from Western forces for using chemical weapons on their opposition. So they lose an airfield and some factories. Have we forgotten who’s providing them with material aid? Tehran and Moscow could provide Syria with a brand new air force and half a navy before lunch, so why not live it up a little and let off some steam… or chlorine? And when the response comes and it destroys what’s left of their chemical arsenal, who really cares at this point? The West is happy because they feel as though they taught an evil, despotic leader a lesson in humanity. The chemical weapons are destroyed and the Assad regime doesn’t have to bare the shame of having cowered to Western powers. Add to that, they get all their broken stuff replaced and possibly enhanced by Russia and Iran. Plus Moscow and Tehran still have their sturdy ally who will be even more steadfastly loyal and willing to assist in either of their expansionist plans in future.
I won’t profess to know exactly who used what chemicals and when, nor will I assert to know anything about the targets that were hit in response to the recent application of chemical warfare. What I will say is that anyone trying to argue that the Assad regime wouldn’t use chemical weapons at this point in time is probably making such a judgement from a very safe distance, and hasn’t been very close to any combat operations let alone the likes of the Syrian conflict. Just a hunch.
