Syria Attack is in “Israel’s Interests,” says Syrian Foreign Minister

An attack by American forces will only be in Israel’s interests, will benefit al-Qaeda and cause terrorism against Americans, the Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister has told the BBC.

Speaking in a lengthy television interview broadcast in Britain, Faisal Mekdad said that any US military action against Syria would amount to support for al-Qaeda and its affiliates.

He also told the BBC that armed groups backed by America—not Syrian troops-had used chemical weapons.

“Any attack against Syria is support for al-Qaeda and its affiliates, whether Jabat al-Nusra or the State of Islam in Syria and Iraq.”

Mr Mekdad also warned that US intervention would deepen “hatred for the Americans” and destabilise the whole Middle East.

He said that Mr Obama’s decision to seek congressional approval for strikes showed that he had not thought through all the “consequences”.

“This did not change anything, since he (President Obama) is determined to launch an attack,” he continued.

“The US Congress usually thinks so much of the Israel interests,” he said. “Let’s see how they will think this time, whether they think it is in the interests of Israel to attack Syria or not.”

Mr Mekdad said that the consequences of an attack on Syria would inflame the region.

“It will cause more hatred for Americans and undermine their security inside and outside their country,

“It will lead to the weakening of international institutions [such as the UN] and terrorism will flourish everywhere.”

The Syrian spokesman also denied that the Syrian government had used chemical weapons, and said that the only use of those weapons so far was by “armed groups supported by the US.”

He compared the evidence presented by the American government as “proof” to the lies and fake evidence presented to the UN over Iraq.

Asked about the Syrian government’s willingness to enter into peace talks with the “revels,” Mr Mekada said this was possible but that his country would “never, ever talk to al-Qaeda.”

Recommended For You


  1. The thing that truly boggles my mind about this is that most members of the alternative media who vehemently speak out against any military action against Syria regularly add something about how Assad is a really, really bad person. For example, here’s a quote from a post called “The U.S. Military Does Not Want To Fight For Al-Qaeda Christian Killers In Syria” on the Economic Collapse website: “Not that we should be supporting Assad either. Assad is horrible. He should be rotting in prison somewhere. But just because a country has a bad leader does not mean that we have justification to attack them.”
    It seems quite clear to me that most of the people who (ostensibly) oppose any U.S. military action against Syria despise Assad just as much as those who want U.S. military action against Syria. I really wonder why that is. Is it actually because Assad isn’t a western-style liberal democratic leader like Obama, Cameron and Hollande? Could it be because of the fact that Assad is truly the kind of strong and intelligent leader that a genuinely stable and ordered society really needs?

    1. I think America should just be the attack dog for the Zionist state of Israel. Just keep attacking one country after another until the entire middle east is in flames. Then big oil can charge us whatever they want. Collapse our economy. Bring America to its knees. Redistribute the wealth. Give everybody a EBT card. Whoever is running the show in Washington sure as heck isn’t doing it for the benefit of you and me. All one need do is see where Obama gets his money and who owns the media that constantly shows his talking head. He never shuts up. He talks about everything. He still has the mentality of a community organizer. Not a president.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.