The allegation of the use of chemical weapons in Syria has aroused the jingoistic instincts of American warmongers. Without waiting for proof or identifying the guilty party, there are preparations to attack Syria. Should it materialize, the chances of the entire region being set ablaze cannot be ruled out.
The use of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons is a war crime. So is the use of depleted uranium. But for Western countries and their public officials, it is not their use per se but who uses them that becomes important.
Take the recent propaganda about the use of chemical weapons near Damascus in Syria. President Barack Obama has described their use as a “red line,” meaning he will attack Syria if such weapons were used by the Syrian government. Who gave him that right is not deemed relevant. His Western allies are likewise blowing hot and cold. What if these weapons were used by the rebels, as they have done in the past, according to evidence compiled by the UN’s chief weapons inspector, Judge Carla Del Ponte? Presumably, that would be OK for Obama and his cohorts.
The US is guilty of using depleted uranium shells in Iraq that have poisoned its soil and water as well as caused alarming increases in incidents of cancer and leukemia. Israel used white phosphorous bombs, DIME weapons, and cluster munitions during its murderous assault on Gaza in December 2008–January 2009. Should the rulers of these countries not be tried for war crimes? It is such hypocrisy that drives people to desperate acts against the US and its surrogates.
Should the US make the mistake of attacking Syria, as it did Iraq in 2003, the consequences would be catastrophic not only for Syria, as the current circumstances there indicate, but the entire region, if not the world.