THE PITCHFORK REBELLION
New York Times readers' protest an anti-Putin editorial:
“Russia’s Dangerous Escalation in Syria” (October 2, 2015)
Editor’s Note: Here are three comments on the editorial. These comments were published by the Times online. They are fairly representative of the majority of the hundreds of published comments. The corporate media are quite obviously almost totally out of touch with the American people and they affect insouciance in the face of this fact. They continue, day-in and day-out, to attempt to school the peasants in the higher wisdom of the “elite,” while they mock Russia for having a state-controlled media, knowing that the U.S. has a Money Power-controlled media.
Carolyn - Saint Augustine, Florida:
This editorial demonstrates the lengths that Russian opponents will go to, to manufacture hand wringing. I quote: “Military experts say that the Russian planes are old and could crash and that Russian weapons may not be precise enough to avoid extensive civilian casualties.” Seriously? The planes could crash is a cause for concern?
Russia is doing what she should do to support an ally and bring stability to the region. The fact is that the insurgents could do a thing called surrender, and that would be the end of the bombing, but they don’t. They’re using American weapons against a secular regime that is sorely needed to reestablish some sense of civilization to a country consumed by terror and chaos. And those same American weapons will be used against American forces if Russia does not crush this rebellion. We should be thanking her instead of casting aspersions.
It’s kind of ironic isn’t it. American neocons are besotted with neo Trotskyite notions of world revolution by the United States in a crusade to impose democracy, and they hold pride of place in the thinking of America’s bipartisan Foreign Policy Elite.
Mr. Putin, however; who is from the land of Trotsky and “The Revolution Betrayed” is the pragmatist, who actually wants to stop jihadism in its tracks, regardless of the interests of the Sunni Royals in destabilizing Syria!
He is owned by neither Saudi Arabia or Israel. So he is able to see the fact of Sunni Jihadism as it is playing out in Syria, without the filters of the need to ensure petro dollar circulation or Israel’s latest demands for regime change, and act rationally to crush a clear and present danger.
ISIS is clearly the creation of our allies the Sunni Royals who have become dangerously panicked by the devolution of Sunni fortunes in Iraq after the fall of Saddam Hussein.
The Giant Ghawar Oil Field alone has 70 billion barrels of oil, but it is located in the Shia Crescent, and the oil workers are Shia heretics. Think about how the Royals must have felt when the Shia majority walked off with the State of Iraq in an idiotically conceived general election.
The US is too mired in the politics of oil and our less than ideal relationships with our autocratic Allies, to continue to entertain the absurd notion that one more regime change will make it all right. Putin has the clarity to act. Let him act!
This is an embarrassing and simplistic editorial and comes on the heels of similar NY Times reports earlier this week. It ignores the utter failure of US policy in the region that destroyed functioning governments, killed tens of thousands of civilians and triggered a massive refugee and humanitarian (crisis). The Russian position to bolster the Syrian government, directly combat terrorism appears reasonable to stabilize the country and end the conflict. The US pushing for arming and funding a “moderate opposition” is delusional. The US took a similar position in Libya. How has that turned out?