The Syrian president issued a dire warning that any Western military intervention could lead to "regional war" and would harm "the interests of France".
"Whoever accuses must provide proof. We have challenged the United States and France to provide the slightest proof. (US President Barack) Obama and (French president François) Hollande have been incapable (of doing so) even to their own people," Assad told French newspaper Le Figaro in an exclusive interview.
He questioned the "logic" of claims that his forces carried the August 21 attack outside Damascus, which the US said killed 1,429 people.
"Supposing our army wishes to use weapons of mass destruction. Is it possible that it would do so in a zone where it is located and where (our) soldiers were wounded by these arms, as United Nations inspectors have noted during visits to hospitals where they were treated? Where is the logic?," he asked.
Describing the Middle East as a "powder keg" whose "fuse is getting shorter", he warned it would "explode" if Western forces struck Syria. "Nobody knows what will happen (after such strikes). Everyone will lose control of the situation when the powder keg explodes. Chaos and extremism will spread. The risk of a regional war exists," he warned. » | Henry Samuel, Paris and Jon Swaine in New York | Monday, September 02, 2013
LE FIGARO: La mise en garde d'Assad à la France » | Par Georges Malbrunot | lundi 02 septembre 2013
My comment:
All this talk of war, and absolutely no convincing proof of who perpetrated this crime against humanity in the first place. Cameron and Obama et al continue with their 'conviction' that it was Bashar Al-Assad. But was it? It could just as easily have been the rebels.
If Obama launches a war against Syria without convincing proof, and it turns out in years to come that it wasn't Bashar Al-Assad after all who perpetrated this crime, then Obama will be the war criminal.
It seems to me that we in the West need to step back from the brink, and assess the whole thing with a cool head.
What is to be achieved by striking Syria? What is to be achieved by toppling Bashar Al-Assad? I'll guarantee you now, if Bashar Al-Assad is toppled, Syria will become a haven of Islamic fundamentalists. It will be turned into a theocratic state à l'Iran, and the Christian community there will suffer greatly. Hasn't the West inflicted enough damage on the Christian communities of the Middle East already?
Then there is the problem of the possible escalation of conflict. The whole region will be turned into a war zone. And what guarantees do we have that this regional conflict won't spread westward, eastward, northward, and southward? World wars have been started by far less aggression.
Moreover, it seems to me that we need to listen to our senior military men. Some of them have come out firmly against military aggression already. – © Mark
This comment appears here too.
