Bashar Al-Assad Isn't the Threat to Freedom in Syria — Islamic Rebels Are


Western civilization is at a crossroads. We can either ensure that secular Muslim governments do not fall to Islamist gangs who are hell-bent on destroying the United States and Western Europe — or we can sit idly by as these terrorists form caliphates that will be a direct threat not only to the liberties of the impoverished Muslims in the Middle East, but to all of Western society. This is most evident in Syria, where Islamist groups are hell bent on overthrowing the regime of President Bashar al-Assad. Supporting his adversaries would be detrimental to our national security, and in fact, it would be in our best interests to help him remain in power.

It has been said by a variety of pundits and politicians that it is the responsibility of the United States to ensure that the Arab Spring is successful and that tyrants are removed from power in an aim of replacing them with so called called democratic regimes. Who are they to state that it is the responsibility of the United States, let alone the international community as a whole, to assist in overthrowing legitimate governments who pose no direct threat to our national security? They have no authority making such statements, and the fact of the matter is that the threats directed at the security of the American populous do not come from President Bashar al-Assad or Hezbollah, but from the terrorist organizations that the United States and other developed nations are directly funding using borrowed and taxed money taxpayers could better use. We stop White House tours and other activities, yet we can find one hundred million dollars to send to the people attempting to overthrow foreign governments.

What does that tell you? In the 1980s, it was government policy from the Reagan administration that brought about a massive increase in funding that the mujaheddin received from foreign backers. This in turn contributed in the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan.

What was the result of this? The Taliban was formed, which in turn, used weapons given to them by the United States to take over the majority of the nation, and impose strict Sharia on the Afghan people — who experienced far more freedom and liberty in social affairs under Soviet-backed rule. In result of this, Sharia was enforced by Islamists, and still is today. This in turn threatens our liberties, not the secularism championed by leaders such as the President Bashar Al-Assad. No individual can rationally make the case that assisting in the overthrow of President Assad will bring about more freedom for the Syrian people.

Thus one must ask if the international leaders calling for his removal are incompetent, devious, or both?

Without a doubt it is the latter, for these individuals comprehend what has occurred in the past, yet are willing to repeat the process, for in conflict where we fund radical Islamists, the military industrial complex flourishes, which benefits the wealthy corporations who profit immensely off of military expenditures. Examples of this include Boeing, BP, and Exxon Mobile, among others. Further, the Syrian rulers allow Christians and others to participate in the government. Saddam Hussein did that, yet we invaded Iraq on the pretext of weapons of mass destruction.

Now we have some senators who have clearly learned nothing from their military service calling on our armed forces to invade Syria on the pretext of poison gas. What Lindsey Graham and others are saying in Congress is nothing more than another wave of pro-war propaganda from the American imperialists ... especially when one factors in that it is the rebels who have used chemical weapons, according to the UN.

We have no sensible reason to arm the rebels, or help either side in any way. If we wish to prevent the past from repeating itself, we must ensure that President Assad stays in power, until at least new elections can be held. We must not in any way call for the removal of President Assad unless he commits acts of terror against us. Assad's government has committed no such act, thus rendering it criminal for foreign governments to undermine the Syrian regime. You either stand for national sovereignty, or against it. The choice is yours.