Foreign Affairs
Related: About this forumThe tiny pill fueling Syria’s war and turning fighters into superhuman soldiers
As The Post's Liz Sly recently noted, the war in Syria has become a tangled web of conflict dominated by "al-Qaeda veterans, hardened Iraqi insurgents, Arab jihadist ideologues and Western volunteers."
On the surface, those competing actors are fueled by an overlapping mixture of ideologies and political agendas.
Just below it, experts suspect, they're powered by something else: Captagon.
A tiny, highly addictive pill produced in Syria and now widely available across the Middle East, its illegal sale funnels hundreds of millions of dollars back into the war-torn country's black-market economy each year, likely giving militias access to new arms, fighters and the ability to keep the conflict boiling, according to the Guardian.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/11/19/the-tiny-pill-fueling-syrias-war-and-turning-fighters-into-super-human-soldiers/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
bemildred
(90,061 posts)---
Empty pick-up trucks descend to the town and return laden with everything from satellite dishes to tricycles pillaged from the homes of Sunni Muslims whom Yazidis accuse of collaborating in the atrocities committed against them.
"This is our neighbour's house," said a young Yazidi man, tying a set of sofas to the back of a red pick-up truck. "I've come to take his belongings, and now I'm going to blow up his house."
The Yazidi, who wished to remain anonymous, admitted he had no real use for the sofas, but could always chop them down for firewood this winter: "I will warm myself on the fire of revenge."
Mustafa, the Yazidi's neighbour, was a Sunni Arab who joined Islamic State and threatened him before the militants attacked Sinjar and surrounding villages in August 2014, murdering hundreds of adherents of the religion they consider devil-worship and enslaving thousands more.
http://www.trust.org/item/20151119134213-9m42q/
bemildred
(90,061 posts)In the wake of the murderous attacks in Paris, we can expect western heads of state to do what they always do in such circumstances: declare total and unremitting war on those who brought it about. They don’t actually mean it. They’ve had the means to uproot and destroy Islamic State within their hands for over a year now. They’ve simply refused to make use of it. In fact, as the world watched leaders making statements of implacable resolve at the G20 summit in Antalaya, these same leaders are hobnobbing with Turkey’s president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, a man whose tacit political, economic, and even military support contributed to Isis’s ability to perpetrate the atrocities in Paris, not to mention an endless stream of atrocities inside the Middle East.
How could Isis be eliminated? In the region, everyone knows. All it would really take would be to unleash the largely Kurdish forces of the YPG (Democratic Union party) in Syria, and PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ party) guerillas in Iraq and Turkey. These are, currently, the main forces actually fighting Isis on the ground. They have proved extraordinarily militarily effective and oppose every aspect of Isis’s reactionary ideology.
But instead, YPG-controlled territory in Syria finds itself placed under a total embargo by Turkey, and PKK forces are under continual bombardment by the Turkish air force. Not only has Erdoğan done almost everything he can to cripple the forces actually fighting Isis; there is considerable evidence that his government has been at least tacitly aiding Isis itself.
It might seem outrageous to suggest that a Nato member like Turkey would in any way support an organisation that murders western civilians in cold blood. That would be like a Nato member supporting al-Qaida. But in fact there is reason to believe that Erdoğan’s government does support the Syrian branch of al-Qaida (Jabhat al-Nusra) too, along with any number of other rebel groups that share its conservative Islamist ideology. The Institute for the Study of Human Rights at Columbia University has compiled a long list of evidence of Turkish support for Isis in Syria.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/18/turkey-cut-islamic-state-supply-lines-erdogan-isis
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Photo caption says November 15 which makes it after the Paris Bombings. Why are they all so happy..it seems bizarre?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)(We apparently started bomb some of the tanker trucks as warning according to a post of yours. It's a start, hopefully)
Stopping ISIS: Follow the Money
By Peter Van Buren
November 18, 2015 "Information Clearing House" - Wars are expensive. The recruitment and sustainment of fighters in the field, the ongoing purchases of weapons and munitions, as well as the myriad other costs of struggle, add up.
So why isn’t the United States going after Islamic State’s funding sources as a way of lessening or eliminating their strength at making war? Follow the money back, cut it off, and you strike a blow much more devastating than an airstrike. But that has not happened. Why?
----snip
Turkey
One of the issues with selling oil, by anyone, including ISIS, is bringing the stuff to market. Oil must be taken from the ground using heavy equipment, possibly refined, stored, loaded into trucks or pipelines, moved somewhere and then sold into the worldwide market. Large amounts of money must be exchanged, and one to four million dollars a day is a lot of cash to deal with on a daily basis. It may be that some sort of electronic transactions that have somehow to date eluded the United States are involved.
Interestingly, The Guardian reported a U.S.-led raid on the compound housing the Islamic State’s chief financial officer produced evidence that Turkish officials directly dealt with ranking ISIS members, including the ISIS officer responsible for directing the terror army’s oil and gas operations in Syria.
Turkey’s “open door policy,” in which it allowed its southern border to serve as an unofficial transit point in and out of Syria, has been said to be one of ISIS’ main routes for getting their oil to market. A Turkish apologist claimed the oil is moved only via small-diameter plastic irrigation pipes, and is thus hard to monitor.
A smuggled barrel of oil is sold for about $50 on the black market. This means “>several million dollars a day worth of oil would require a very large number of very small pipes.
Others believe Turkish and Iraqi oil buyers travel into Syria with their own trucks, and purchase the ISIS oil right at the refineries, transporting themselves out of Syria. Convoys of trucks are easy to spot from the air, and easy to destroy from the air, though up until now the U.S. does not seem to have done so.
So as is said, ISIS’ sources of funding grow curious and curiouser the more one knows. Those seeking to destroy ISIS might well wish to look into where the money comes from, and ask why, after a year and three months of war, no one has bothered to follow the money.
And cut it off.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article43461.htm
bemildred
(90,061 posts)for that sort of chicanery. The moral wiggle room to allow defeating Assad (still, after Iraq) as a justification for enabling ISIS.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)"smiling faces....laughing people" in that photo....
But, then there's a lot that's hard to make sense of these days compared to times when things seemed more logical. It's so easy to say the entrenched MIC along with MS Media is the problem. It's possible this is all coming to a head and the power has become complete and that's what makes it seem illogical to some of us. I hope that's not the case and this is a "tipping point." But, looking at those faces....and seeing the idiocy in our Elections for 2016 here at home....I'm not sure we are there, yet.
Still...one has to have hope that the exposure of so many tentacles revealed and the resultant consequences of MIC being exposed (in what seems a more rapid pace) will make a difference some day--down the road.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Well, it can be difficult to be optimistic, for the reasons you state, but public political discourse in the USA has little to do with what is actually done, with policy. Obama remains a mystery to me, but it seems clear he is an obstacle in the way of the war party, and inclined to thinking and caution, which is refreshing. He may be a little too fond of drones or other things, but ...
And internationally things are moving towards change, but what sort of change is a good question.
It's hard to deny that we can do a lot better than we are, lots of room for improvement.
I agree....
Obama remains a mystery to me, but it seems clear he is an obstacle in the way of the war party, and inclined to thinking and caution, which is refreshing. He may be a little too fond of drones or other things, but ...
bemildred
(90,061 posts)DEFENSE SECRETARY ASHTON CARTER: You ask can we work with the Russians? Well, I mean it's possible, just possible that in time, we will be able to do that. So if the Russians change their strategy, their approach, to something that's more like our approach, which is do fight ISIL and work on a political transition in which Assad goes and the structures of government in Syria are sustained so that some decency can be restored to that place for the -- for the people, that's what we have been in favor of. That's not the way the Russians started...
If they get on the right foot then -- and I think Secretary Kerry has been -- been discussing this with the Russians -- there's the possibility that they will contribute in a positive way to this campaign. That's obviously something that we wish for... but that's not how they started… It has to include defeating ISIL in Iraq and Syria, because that is the beating heart or that is the parent tumor of this thing called ISIL.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/11/19/carter_it_is_possible_just_possible_that_in_time_we_might_work_with_russia.html
KoKo
(84,711 posts)I think Assad did an informed counter to Ash Carter from another article today at your link:
Bashar al-Assad: ISIS Didn't Start In Syria, "Established Under American Supervision In Iraq"
Posted on November 19, 2015
In an interview with Italian media on Wednesday, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad blamed the West for the rise of ISIS, saying that Hillary Clinton herself admitted that the terror group had its roots in the American occupation of Iraq, and that it had spilled over into Syria.
According to what some American officials said, including Hillary Clinton, Al Qaeda was created by the Americans with the help of Saudi Wahabi money and ideology, and of course, many other officials said the same in the United States. And ISIS and al-Nuslra, they are offshoots of Al Qaeda. Regarding ISIS, it started in Iraq, it was established in Iraq in 2006 and the leader was al-Zarqawi, who was killed by the American forces then, so it was established under the American supervision in Iraq...
And the leader of ISIS today, who is called Abu Bakr-al-Baghdadi, he was in the American prisons, and he was put in New York in their prisons, and he was released by them.
So it wasn't Syria, it didn't start in Syria, it started in Iraq, and it started before that in Afghanistan according to what they said, and Tony Blair recently said that yes, the Iraq war helped create ISIS, so their confession is the most important evidence regarding your question.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)I look forward to the response from the State Department. We really have got ourselves tangled up in knots. But then as I say, our government does not have its shit together, everybody is not on the same page, and it is common to have different parts of the government working against each other and against the national interest. So it is not hard to understand the mess.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)President Obama is trapped in an extraordinary irony of a public-relations hellhole. The reality is that his policy of ISIS-containment is working, yet the prime manifestation of his policy's effectiveness is something the president is prohibited from noting publicly, lest he be swamped by cheap ridicule, even cheaper political opportunism, and charges of Democratic naiveté — which hard-charging Republicans have specialized in for decades.
The reality, or rather the jutting manifestation of that reality? ISIS's sensationalistic acts of terrorism, whether in Paris or the skies of Egypt, are signs of its increasing weakness. ISIS once scoffed at terrorism-oriented Qaeda for its want of a caliphate, which to ISIS was supreme. A caliphate — a territorially expanding caliphate — would fulfill its apocalyptic doctrine, and serve as a recruitment tool for dreamy fanatics. Contain that territory, cause it to gradually suffer the loss of territory, and one essentially defeats ISIS by stripping it of its "divine" reason for being. This is being done, and so ISIS has resorted to a kind of internal heresy: It's behaving like al Qaeda; it's looking outward for its survival, not inward, for it's decaying from within.
That reality — its containment (and indeed its reversal of territorial fortunes) — will, in time, cause its recruitment to suffer. Even dreamy fanatics will realize that the prophecy was a lie. For now, ISIS is compensating by committing sensationalistic, Qaedalike acts of terrorism abroad. These acts are signs of weakness, not strength. But for fear of sounding callous toward the many victims of ISIS's terrorism, Obama can't just come out and say "Be patient; ISIS's acts of external violence are positive signs of internal corrosion."
So he is left to suffer the bloviating ignorance of Republican wannabes whose only stake is in quick, extravagant, politically expedient fixes — the chief "fix" being a colossal step backward to U.S. intervention and Iraqlike immolation. Nothing would make ISIS happier, or spur its recruitment more. Its prophetic, apocalyptic dream would come true. That tactically we would prevail is unquestioned. Strategically, however, what next? Who fills the vacuum? And what magnitude of earthshaking, radical Islamic reaction would follow? How many years of U.S. occupation and consequent besiegement would become the bloody norm? (That's the neocon dream: decades.)
http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2015/11/obamas-successful-yes-successful-syria-policy.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pmcarpenterscommentary+%28p+m+carpenter%27s+commentary%29
polly7
(20,582 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)Booze, speed, or even pot will do, as long as you can stay stoned, war is so much easier to endure. I remember the guys coming home from Vietnam, so many of them had habits, alcohol, amphetamines, heroin, and they all smoked pot.
Speed is the worst though.
polly7
(20,582 posts)It's no wonder when they get home their lives are so hard to get back on track ...... and some never do. I've seen a lot of death and dying, but to cause it myself would be something I doubt I could live with, especially if it wasn't in self-defence - and wars don't require just that. Seeing the death of innocents probably will haunt a lot of these people for the rest of their lives. Not sure about IS members though - maybe they're just seeking courage, and empathy isn't on their radar at all. I don't know.
All of your life you are taught restraint and obedience, and then all of a sudden you are supposed to go nuts and destroy all in your path, being good and drunk was always useful preparation, even when we were still living in tribes.
Clint Eastwood in "Unforgiven" got that part exactly right when he had the "hero" get blind drunk before he went in and shot up the town to save the prostitutes and avenge his friend.
Hollywood does have a strange view of the world.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)their horrendous beheadings, rapes, torture, blowing up Palmyra and other historic sites and other depraved "Gang Gone Wild" rampages.
polly7
(20,582 posts)That much horror takes a lot of hate ... maybe the drugs just fuel that and give them a sense of invincibility. That's probably it ... courage in this case is not the right term at all.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)AMSTERDAM, Nov 19 (Reuters) - The Netherlands, part of the U.S.-led coalition that is bombing Islamic State in Iraq, is "seriously considering" joining the air campaign across the border in Syria, Prime Minister Mark Rutte said on Thursday.
Rutte made the comments during a Dutch parliamentary debate about the Paris attacks last Friday, when 129 people were killed across the French capital.
When the Dutch announced in September that they would contribute F-16 fighter jets to combat IS militants, Defence Minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert said there was no international legal basis to bomb in neighbouring Syria. [ID: L6N0RP4LJ]
"It is there now," said Defence Ministry spokeswoman Sascha Louwhoff. "Legally, there is no longer an impediment."
http://www.trust.org/item/20151119142150-t080u/
bemildred
(90,061 posts)By dpa correspondents
Moscow/Beirut (dpa) - One hundred and sixty Russian citizens fighting for the terrorist group Islamic State in Syria have been killed, a Russian deputy foreign minister said on Thursday, amid stepped-up international military action in the war-torn country.
"At the present time, there are more than 25,000 foreign terrorist militants fighting under the banner of Islamic State, including from Arab countries, Europe, Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States [a bloc of post-Soviet republics]," Oleg Syromolotov said, quoted by state news agency TASS.
He added that 2,719 Russian citizens had gone to fight for the Islamist militia in Syria. "One hundred and sixty of them have been killed, 73 of them have returned and faced justice, and another 36 have been arrested."
Russia, an ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, launched airstrikes in Syria in September, saying it targets "terrorists" there.
http://www.dpa-international.com/news/international/moscow-reports-deaths-of-160-russian-islamic-state-fighters-in-syria-a-47352192.html
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Reports say a map shown by the Russian military on state television appears to show that a Russian artillery unit could be operating in the central Syrian region of Homs.
The map was shown in footage during a Defense Ministry briefing with President Vladimir Putin on November 17.
Spotted by a Russian military blogger, the map apparently showed that several 152mm howitzers of the 120th Artillery Brigade based in the Kemerovo region are deployed close to the Syrian town of Sadad, some 60 kilometers south of Homs.
http://www.rferl.org/content/syria-russia-map-suggests-ground-forces-in-homs/27375493.html
bemildred
(90,061 posts)The Russian Ministry of Defence has confirmed US claims that it has deployed helicopters and artillery deep into Syria.
The apparently unintentional confirmation came during a televised briefing on 17 November that included a close-up of a map showing the military situation around the towns of Sadad and Mahin in Homs province, where Russia is helping Syrian government forces repel an offensive by the Islamic State.
The deployments marked on the map included four Mi-24 attack helicopters and one Mi-8 utility helicopter at Al-Shayrat Air Base and a unit of the 120th Artillery Brigade deployed at a Syrian Arab Army (SAA) base just to the south with six 152 mm 2A65 Msta-B towed howitzers.
http://www.janes.com/article/56107/russia-confirms-forward-deployments-in-syria
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Nov 19 European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker wrote to Russian President Vladimir Putin this week, suggesting closer trade ties between the 28-nation EU and a Russian-led economic bloc, linking them to progress on implementing a ceasefire in Ukraine.
The letter, written after a G20 summit in Turkey and seen by Reuters, underlined the importance Juncker attached to good relations between the European Union and Moscow, "which to my regret have not been able to develop over the past year".
He said he had asked Commission officials to study options to bring the EU and the Eurasian Economic Union - a grouping of former Soviet states dominated by Moscow - closer together.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/19/idUSL8N13E3U120151119?rpc=401
bemildred
(90,061 posts)The Islamic State group, also known as Isis, is pursuing development of chemical weapons, setting up a branch dedicated to research and experiments with the help of scientists from Iraq and Syria, Iraqi and US intelligence officials to The Associated Press on Thursday.
Their quest raises a worrying scenario for the West, given the group's determination to strike major cities. On Thursday, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls warned that Islamic extremists might at some point use chemical or biological weapons.
"Terrorism hit France not because of what it is doing in Iraq and Syria... but for what it is," Valls told the French Parliament. "We know that there could also be a risk of chemical or biological weapons," he added, though he did not talk of a specific threat.
US intelligence officials don't believe Isis has the capability to develop sophisticated weapons like nerve gas that are most suited for a terrorist attack on a civilian target. So far the group has used mustard gas on the battlefield in Iraq and Syria.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/11/19/isis-chemical-weapons-iraq_n_8600018.html
bemildred
(90,061 posts)“Air strikes will have to be combined with ground forces actually taking back territory,” Hillary Clinton says in national security speech.
Says local people must secure their own nations
Says Sunni, Kurdish forces should be armed
U.S. should deploy special operations forces and ramp up efforts to support and equip viable Syrian opposition forces
Says Russia’s Putin is making things “somewhat worse” in Syria, Russia has important role to play in Syria
Calls on Turkey to stop bombing Kurdish forces in Syria
NOTE: Earlier in speech Clinton said U.S. must choose resolve over fear in fight against ISIS; earlier story
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/trackers/2015-11-19/clinton-air-strikes-must-be-combined-with-ground-forces
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)We Asked Marco Rubio to Lay Out His ISIL Strategy. Here It Is.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/rubio-isil-strategy-213377#ixzz3ryp9YdnF
bemildred
(90,061 posts)No fly zones and boots on the ground and defeat Assad, blah blah blah ...
But you can tell that he is just repeating what he's been told like the good boy that he is.
And I assume Hillary is less paranoid about the refugees.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)I've been seeing that narrative for a few days now, from GCC, Turkey, the Neocons, Ash Carter, etc. and now Hilary and Rubio. Much the same from most of the other candidates too I imagine, with a few exceptions.
It seems to be the response to Obama's initiatives of late, which the War Party does not like.
But I think they are out of luck.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)yourself with elections can be a cool thing, I feel.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)As it should be, I think. I spend a lot of time trying to figure out what he is up to, but I'm not much inclined to talk about it, both because its pure speculation on my part and because of the Byzantine politics that surrounds it.
Besides there are lots of people on the web who will do if for me. I think I posted one up there. pm carpenter piece.
Putin-love is a lot more common than Obama-love, Putin is easier to understand I think, crude but effective ...
I do have the feeling that Obama has stopped listening to his advisers as much as in the past. He is fascinating to watch operate. It's unusual to find a guy that high up who is willing to be so self efacing, and rarer yet to find somebody who is good at it, "leading from behind" doesn't get near enough respect.
I did find his comment about the weakness of the Presidency sound, I've been pointing that out for some time now but nobody listens.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)but for now, I see a man who is more free than before. His last couple of speeches
seemed to me to be more about defining long term strategies that are smart, not necessarily
new notions..but new to hear from him about Syria. I never care how a leader gets there as
much as that he gets there..sooner than later of course. The Iran deal, there was the added
rhetoric which he seemed to include to quell the neocons here and abroad (my speculation).
But the deal is done and I see that as a monumental shift away from our insane foreign
policies. I watched that as close as one can from my seat and was amazed at the obstacles
he prevailed over. He showed Americans it can be done..we can actually do smart foreign policy.
I have my differences with Obama, yet no matter what happens before he is done, he ended up being
an excellent instructor on that score. The war minded, as you say, are most unhappy for now.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)I think Putin's intervention in a funny way freed Obama up because it showed the utter folly of what was being done before. The War Party has no answers now and they vacillate and propose silly things. The War Party keeps bloviating away, McCain was calling for boots on the ground to defeat ISIS today, and the MSM keeps right on repeating it all over and over, but everbody overseas has stopped listening. They are still listening to Obama. They understand enough of US politics to see who the loons are now. And those refugees really got the Yurpeans attention.
And the election has turned into such a spectacle too, his enemies are all in disrepute and concerned with their own reputations. It will be interesting to see who runs away from Obama in the election, and who does not.
I still think Erdogan and Bibi are due for further kicking in the nuts before this is over too. They both continue to try to take advantage of the situation to pursue their private interests.
The most interesting thing going on besides the war is whether Putin and the Sauds are going to make up. I sort of hope not because I hope the House of Saud will fall of its own weight now, and jacking the price of oil back up is probably the one thing that could prevent that.
But it would probably be good for Syria, if you can say that anything is good for Syria now.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)And yes, that's what I mean, all we have for answers is more aggression and
the America as exceptional myth has too many Americans blinded by what we have set
into motion and greedy control freaks are dumb..they de-stabilize as policy not by mistake- Iraq.
One can see how Obama's present course thus far is disturbing for many of the
war seekers.
The elections will get interesting on foreign policy from our side, Clinton made
herself pretty clear, predictable but clear. I expect to hear Joe Biden on this
subject soon as he supports Obama's policies against the wave of the anti-
immigration and the no fly zone, boots on the ground horse shit. I think this is
going to get very interesting.
Erdogen and Bibi..both trouble, so..I hope you're right about them receiving
more push back.
Saudi rulers, the citizens there who fall below 30 years old have high unemployment
and reports of deep poverty grows. They use to manage their people better throwing
money at them to quell any movement that might form and then their efforts to
sustain the fundy Wahhabi sects..how many fundy groups ever end up demanding a
democracy led government? It seems they have used controls that did work
for them, but now it's blown up in their face. What the innocent there will have to
endure and who will prevail in Saudi Arabia with a collapse I don't know, at some point
in time it will happen..as you say with the oil, who knows.
Syria, check out these photos: http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/syria-civil-war-douma-damascus-dailylife-1.3324640
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush has proposed deploying U.S. ground troops to fight the Islamic State. Speaking at a military college in South Carolina, Bush called for a no-fly zone over Syria, arming Kurdish forces and increasing troop presence on the ground.
Jeb Bush: "The United States should not delay in leading a global coalition to take out ISIS with overwhelming force. As the words of French President Hollande have made clear, the United States will not be alone in galvanizing this global effort. Militarily, we need to intensify our efforts in the air and on the ground. While air power is essential, it cannot bring the results we seek. The United States, in conjunction with our NATO allies and more Arab partners, will need to increase our presence on the ground."
http://www.democracynow.org/2015/11/19/headlines#11196
KoKo
(84,711 posts)than the other two. And, Hillary just gave a pretty Hawkish FP Speech.
PeoViejo
(2,178 posts)
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)Poof!
KoKo
(84,711 posts)They have so many Princes its hard to keep track and they didn't name names that I could find in the article.
But, good that this is being exposed.
MosheFeingold
(3,051 posts)They were in your survival pack and given out like candy to US soldiers.
They certainly work, short term.
Never used them after, but during, they are big help. You really don't need a lot of feelings during war. In fact, it's better that you do have them.
Had sleep problems after the war for a month or two as I dried out and enough sense not to use them since.
You could just buy them at the drug store until the mid/late 1960s.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)JESSICA DESVARIEUX, PRODUCER, TRNN: Welcome to the Real News Network. I'm Jessica Desvarieux in Baltimore.
Efforts to agree to a political solution in Syria just took a turn. After the Paris attacks there was much hope that Russia and the West would get over the issue of Assad being a part of the peace negotiations and focus on defeating ISIS. But now President Obama has thrown cold water on that plan for a quick political transition in Syria, and instead is standing by his previous position that Assad must go. Let's take a listen.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: I do not foresee a situation in which we can end the civil war in Syria while Assad remains in power. And by the way, that's not a matter of my decision-making. Even if I said that was okay I still don't think it would actually work. You could not get the Syrian people, a majority of them, to agree to that kind of outcome.
DESVARIEUX: Now joining us to discuss the president's stance is our guest, Vijay Prashad. Vijay is a professor of international studies at Trinity College. Thank you so much for joining us, Vijay.
VIJAY PRASHAD: Pleasure, thanks.
DESVARIEUX: So Vijay, do you see America's attachment to get rid of Assad as actually hurting their efforts to degrade and destroy ISIS, which they say is their objective? And if so, why won't the U.S. give up the claim to see Assad go?
PRASHAD: Well, it's a fascinating problem that the Americans face. Yes, in Vienna, 17 countries are around a table again. Yes, they've come up with the framework for a political transition which would of course lessen some of the tension inside and around Syria. Yes, all these things are happening. And then President Obama goes on Italian television and says that Assad must go, there is no question.
This is an interesting problem that the Americans have set for themselves. And I feel like some of this is a consequence of much broader entanglements than merely the politics of the State Department. In some ways the United States government is channeling the kind of message coming out of Saudi Arabia, the message coming out of Turkey. These are the two close allies of the United States in this struggle. And neither Turkey nor Saudi Arabia have budged from their position that Assad must go. So it's actually no surprise that caught up in these entanglements than the United States would hold fast to this Assad must go scenario, which goes against what has been taking place at Vienna, with the diplomatic meetings, and what has been happening on the ground. In other words, the fact that the Russian entry into Syria has made regime change, or Assad must go, almost impossible.
DESVARIEUX: Yes. But Vijay, you know, Americans are going to say that they're sort of taking this stance because of Turkey or Saudi Arabia. What the president is saying is that it's more of a moral position. That Assad has committed brutal atrocities against his own people. President Obama said essentially the Syrian people wouldn't even accept a future with Assad in the picture. What's your response to that?
PRASHAD: Well I mean, let's not get into hypocrisies and that there are other leaders in the world, you know, people with blood on their hands should not be given a second life, or whatever. So that issue, to me, is an issue of rhetoric. You know, the United States says somebody has got blood on their hands, they should go. Meanwhile the United States is very close to the current head of government in Rwanda, who has blood on his hands from sending in the M23 rebels into the Congo.
So you know, this is a game in international foreign policy where leaders say this thing about, you know, the other people that they don't like. Fine. The question isn't really moral, here. Or the question isn't the morality of Mr. Assad. The question is that you have a country which has been destroyed, you have perhaps 250,000 people dead. Half the population displaced. You need to find a practical and pragmatic approach that minimizes the suffering in Syria and starts to draw down the bulk of the fighting which has been in western Syria, not in the ISIS area. If your goal is not to ride a white horse into Damascus but to slow down the pace of death, I think this position of Assad must go has hindered the diplomatic conversation. I think on the other hand, a slightly less dramatic position, which is what I think the Russians have proposed, which is the question of a transition.
You see, what I think the Iranians and Russians have been saying for the last few years is that the Assad must go position should not be the starting point of negotiation. It might indeed end up being the final assessment, that Assad will go. But you cannot start there. If you want to start there you close off, foreclose any diplomatic possibility. So I think, you know, either you want to be this moral champion and hold on to some kind of, you know, burnished ideals, you know, which we [note] because they are hypocritical, or you take the more practical and pragmatic issue and say the real morality isn't the crimes of Assad. The real morality here is the question of the suffering of the Syrian people.
DESVARIEUX: Yeah. And the suffering of the Syrian people usually isn't at the forefront of a lot of these negotiations. So Vijay, what would be alternatives to what the United States is currently doing in the region? And especially if you take into consideration that the major goal right now is to defeat ISIS?
PRASHAD: There are many ways to go. I mean, there's a short-term possibility that has opened up as a result of the Russian entry into Syria. What the Russians have done is they've suddenly put pressure on Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey, saying we are now inside Syria. Any attempt at hitting us is going to have repercussions for you. So rather than in a sense saying okay, let's assume that your presence there has made regime change impossible, what's the next diplomatic step? Rather than do that, of course, the United States has strengthened or given false hope to the Qataris, Turks, and the Saudis.
So I would say the first thing is to remove that false hope, come back to the table, produce some kind of regional dialog, you know, for the proxy armies to begin to draw down their sense that they can win. You know, what has continued this war, in fact since July of 2011, is the assumption among some of the rebels and the proxy armies that eventually the American bombers are going to come in and Libya-style they're going to knock out the Assad army.
So this false hope, I think, has dragged this war on. I think that needs to be withdrawn. Without the withdrawal of that false hope, there will be no regional settlement. There will be no political solution. Because there is no way, really, to confront groups like ISIS unless the chaos in the rest of Syria is brought down a few notches.
DESVARIEUX: All right. Vijay Prashad, always a pleasure having you on our program. Thank you so much for being with us.
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=15136
