Sep 03, 2013

As Reuters reports, American citizens have absolutely no interest in going to war with Syria, just like last month. The “incubator babies” stories don’t seem to work on the public anymore, and it is obvious to the rest of the world that the chemical warfare attack was – at the very least – a “false flag” perpetrated by the Al-Nusrah rebels (Al-qaeda) operating in Syria.

Some 56 percent of those surveyed said the United States should not intervene in Syria, while only 19 percent supported action, the online poll found.

Even according to the Washington Post, Americans support Syrian intervention even less than they support the congress critters right now, and quotes from law and policymakers themselves serve as evidence to a very small percentage of people being responsible for the Anti-Syrian warmongering:

U.S. Representative Ted Poe: “Mr. President, you must call Congress back from recess immediately to take a vote on a military strike on Syria. Assad may have crossed a red line but that does not give you the authority to redline the Constitution.”
U.S. Representative Kurt Schrader: “I see no convincing evidence that this is an imminent threat to the United States of America.”
U.S. Representative Barbara Lee: “While we understand that as commander-in-chief you have a constitutional obligation to protect our national interests from direct attack, Congress has the constitutional obligation and power to approve military force, even if the United States or its direct interests (such as its embassies) have not been attacked or threatened with an attack.”
U.S. Senator Rand Paul: “The war in Syria has no clear national security connection to the United States and victory by either side will not necessarily bring in to power people friendly to the United States.”
Donald Rumsfeld: “There really hasn’t been any indication from the administration as to what our national interest is with respect to this particular situation.”
Robert Fisk: “If Barack Obama decides to attack the Syrian regime, he has ensured – for the very first time in history – that the United States will be on the same side as al-Qa’ida.”
Former congressman Dennis Kucinich: “So what, we’re about to become al-Qaeda’s air force now?”
Pat Buchanan: “The sole beneficiary of this apparent use of poison gas against civilians in rebel-held territory appears to be the rebels, who have long sought to have us come in and fight their war.”
Retired U.S. General James Mattis: “We have no moral obligation to do the impossible and harm our children’s future because we think we just have to do something.”

Just as when the U.S. invaded Iraq, opposition to the war has been met with brutal force against protesters already, with veterans and loyal active-duty military expressing their disdain for intervention in Syria being beaten, arrested, and otherwise abused by the government for their ideas:

Iraq war veteran Emily Yates was arrested on Friday after a dispute with police about where she could stand while playing her banjo during a protest against U.S. military action in Syria. Video uploaded to Live Leak shows Yates asking Federal Parks Police why she could not stand in a shaded area of Independence Mall in Philadelphia. (Profanity Warning)
Business Insider asked members of the military to write to them and tell them what they thought about a potential conflict with Syria. 52 members of the military responded, and 50 of them were against war with Syria. The following is one example…

I’m a U.S. Air Force vet who spent a solid 6 years shuttling between Afghanistan and Iraq, doing everything from combat airdrops to medevacs to hauling flag-draped coffins,” wrote one servicemember in an email, who also mentioned travel to 38 countries in that time. “What we do not need is another war, and we certainly do not need any further involvement in a civil war where our objective isn’t clear, and our allies aren’t really our allies.

Even according to the Washington Post, it’s not just regular service members expressing their concerns:

Having assumed for months that the United States was unlikely to intervene militarily in Syria, the Defense Department has been thrust onto a war footing that has made many in the armed services uneasy, according to interviews with more than a dozen military officers ranging from captains to a four-star general.

Apparently, the Syrian Electronic Army hacked, not to steal secrets or damage infrustructure, but to send a message:
Message to the United States Marine corp:
Dear US Marines,
This is written by your brothers in the Syrian Army, who have been fighting Al Qaeda for the last 3 years. We understand your patriotism and love for your country so please understand our love for ours. Obama is a traitor who wants to put your lives in danger to rescue Al Qaeda insurgents. Marines, please take a look at what your comrades think about Obama’s alliance with Al Qaeda against Syria. Your officer in charge probably has no qualms about sending you to die against soldiers just like you, fighting a vile common enemy. The Syrian army should be your ally, not your enemy. Refuse your orders and concentrate on the real reason every soldier joins their military, to defend their homeland. You’re more than welcome to fight alongside our army rather than against it. Your brothers, the Syrian soldiers.
A message delivered by the SEA (Syrian Electronic Army).
Five images were displayed. US servicemen held anti-Syrian war signs. The New Yorker headlined “Syria’s Other Army: How the Hackers Wage War.”