One vital question you need to be asking about Syria

From the New York Times online, Aug. 28: 

Syria’s ambassador to the United Nations, Bashar Jaafari repeated the Syrian government’s denials that it had ever used chemical weapons in the conflict with the insurgents, and said the accusations were a conspiracy by Western nations acting on Israel’s behalf.

The ambassador rejected assertions by the United States, Britain and other Western allies that there was persuasive evidence of Syrian government culpability in the use of the banned weapons.

Mr. Jaafari added a new level of complexity to the issue on Wednesday, Aug. 28, announcing that he had submitted evidence of three previously unreported instances of chemical weapons use in Syria, which he asserted had been carried out by Syrian rebels. Mr. Jaafari said the Syrian government had requested that the United Nations investigators expand their inquiry to include those events as well.

Michael Hoffman:

The Syrian ambassador is correct in stating that the threats of an attack on his government are part of the Israeli geo-political strategy. The Israelis, with their symbiotic allies the Saudis, seek the overthrow of the governments of Syria and Iran. The war fever being unconscionably generated in the U.S. buttresses the role of America acting as proxy for Israeli interests.

Notice that the corporate media are not reporting the estimated financial cost of a U.S. attack on Syria in the midst of the “sequester” cut-backs, and the looming shut down of the government in October due to the on-going budget crisis. For some perverse reason, the budget-busting aspect of the rumored, forthcoming Obama-Kerry military adventure in Syria is not being reported in any significant way.

Hammer home to your favorite blog, local newspaper editor, or talk radio host this one vital question: How much is it going to add to our budget deficit to fund a U.S. attack on Syria?

***