US Attacks on Syria
Journalist Stephen Lendman writes about Obama's attacks on Syria and his ploy to finagle UN support for the bombing:
International law professor Francis Boyle said he expects it [UN resolution] to be adopted. It's a Chapter VII resolution. It "arguably establishes the predicate for (using) force," said Boyle.
It should have been a UN Charter Chapter VI resolution. It rules out using force.
Security Council resolutions "are binding under either Chapter VI or VII according to an International Court of Justice (ICJ) Namibia Advisory opinion," Boyle explained.
"So obviously, Obama wants to set the predicate here for using force against ISIS in Syria…"
Doing so will "ultimately lead to (ousting) the Assad government, the crack up of Syria, and genocide against the Alawites and the Christians," Boyle added.
Obama's puppet Iraq government "could be the basis for this resolution." It could use UN Charter Article 51's collective self-defense right as alleged justification.
Boyle calls it "the bogus doctrine of hot pursuit." The scheme involves bombing Syrian targets.
Allegedly it's "to prevent (IS) cross-border movement(s) from Syria into Iraq and back."
"Under international law there is no doctrine of hot pursuit on land…" It's lawful "only at sea."
Obama's scheme is clear. He's "trying to create a right of hot pursuit across land borders where it did not previously exist…"
"(A)t least (he'll) interpret it that way…(T)o justify bombing ISIS in Syria…Allegedly at the request of (its puppet) Iraq(i)" government.
Nothing rules out this scenario, said Boyle. He believes this resolution was "drafted for precisely that purpose."
It's Obama's pseudo-legal fig-leaf. He intends for Syria what he did to Libya.
He wants Assad eliminated like Gaddafi and Saddam. Most likely murder in cold blood is planned.
Boyle expects resolution adoption on Wednesday. He believes Russia and China "signed on to it."
He said "massive bombing" will begin after the Security Council acts. Obama didn't wait.