Transcripts For CSPAN2 Activists Call For Withdrawal Of U.S.

Coming up in a little over an hour, we will be live from the Heritage Foundation for a look at u. S. Taiwan relations. That is live at 1 30 p. M. Eastern on cspan2. Until we get there, we will bring your conversation on the u. S. Military role in syria. This was hosted by a number of dcbased organizations who are calling on the u. S. To remove all military aircraft from syrian airspace. Good morning and welcome to this news conference. My name is norman, i am a cofounder and coordinator of the online group which is hosting this event today. Roots action is a cosponsor of a Petition Campaign calling for no u. S. Plans over serious. Together with five other organizations, veterans for peace, daily coast, the nation magazine, world beyond war and watchdog. Net. U. S. Government began bombing syria nearly three years ago. That was back in september 2014. Since then, the killing on many sides has continued unabated. Meanwhile, during the past three years, tensions between the worlds to Nuclear Superpowers have escalated. Theyve escalated sharply. In the process, russia and the United States have come closer to direct military warfare with each other. When addressing the overall tensions between the United States and russia, former senator sam who was chair of the Senate Armed Services committee cosigned a letter recently and i would like to quote from it. It calls for urgently pursuing practical steps now back and stop the downward spiral in relations and reduce read real dangers between russia and the United States. The open letter emphasized, those risks continue to accelerate. That is his Ongoing Campaign and i hope that continues. They reportedly flew within 5 feet of each other. Lyla. After as the summer began, the u. S. Military shot down they threatened to shoot down planes over syria. The New York Times reported that between the United States and russia now, except for in relation to syria, there is virtually no military conversation of the kind that took place during the cold war. They also said, with russian and american forces, operating near the baltics, the chances for accidents and miscalculation are high. They say its mutually suspicious and sporadic. Whats at stake here as the United States continues its military actions in syria, including in the skies over syria, what is at stake includes the possibility that conflicts in the air between russia and United States that could spiral into nuclear warfare. So, the Petition Campaign that is ongoing is focused on addressing this escalating crisis. Our petition so far to the u. S. Congress and to secretary of Defense James Mattis has gained more than 50000 unique signers, and the petition is very straightforward. It says, we urge you to immediately remove all u. S. Military planes from syrian guys and keep them out of that country airspace. Today at this news conference, we will hear from for speakers who will address their concern from a wide range of vantage points. Former official of the Central Intelligence agency is a cio a whistleblower. Matthew ho was a marine who had to deployment in iraq and later became a state Department Official. Christie edwards is a Legal Authority on International Law as pertains to armed conflict. David swanson is an author and the director of the organizations world beyond war. We will start with john. He was a ciaofficial and had responsibilities with the agency. He went on to serve two years in prison as a cia whistleblower. Back in december of 2014, a headline over an article really summed it up. It said, the one man jailed for cia torture tried to expose it. Thank you. President trump, just like president obama before him seems intent on getting the United States involved in something that is an unwinnable war in syria. Watching 59 cruise missiles, for example against rundown syrian airbases in the middle of the night is easy enough to do, but there are consequences to the these actions, and republican conservative celebration at the use of fourth notwithstanding, trump has put serious christians in jeopardy. Just as president obama and president george w. Bush did in iraq. Conservatives and ideologies took root many years ago. Both parties tried to outdo each other to prove and was quicker to use military force. The never seems to be any discussion about whether this military intervention is legal let alone whether it is moral or ethical. There is certainly never any talking congress for authorization despite the fact that the white house not requesting authorization is almost always a violation of the war powers act. Republicans kneejerk support for military intervention in the middle east, whether its in syria, iraq or elsewhere in the region ought to be a message to any politician of either party who considers himself or herself to be a christian. It is these military interventions that are having the effect of dooming the small Christian Communities left in places like iraq and syria. The problem for u. S. Politicians who fancy themselves as christians is that the asset is literally the only person standing between syrian christians and their annihilation. It is assad, like his father, whether you like the politics are not who have protected serious christians for generations. Syrian christians make up 12 of the population, according to the cia world factbook. Nearly one third of countries 600,000 believers have left syria since the start of the civil war in 2011, pushed out by terrorist groups like isis. That is according to the New York Times. Before the civil war started, christians participated in all elements, all aspects of syrian society, including members of parliament, members of the cabinet, the diplomatic corps and the business community. They maintain their own court system, they are free to practice their faith openly in churches and cathedrals all around the country, and even the Syrian Military is fully integrated, rather than having separate christian units. Similarly, in iraq, under Saddam Hussein, and he was a bad man, be but even under him , christian served in the parliament and the cabinet and they practice their faith freely and openly and they were successful in business. Thanks to george w. Bush invasion of iraq and subsequent civil war, almost the entire Iraqi Christian Community has left for jordan, the uk and the United States, the same thing is now happening in syria. There is a solution to all this, but its not quick or easy. It is something that many of us have heard about but havent actually seen. Its called diplomacy. Whether trump likes his politics or not, the only way to save that country from becoming a failed state or nicest state is to sit at the table with all of the stakeholders, including the syrians, the russians, and whether we like it or not, the iranians. We have to accept the fact that assad is not going anywhere, nor should he, whether we like it or not, his is the internationally recognized government of syria. That is no matter what trump and obama have said. We should respect that and we should sit across the table. Thank you very much. Thank you john. Our next speaker is matthew ho. Mr. Ho is a former state Department Official who resigned in his post in afghanistan over Strategic Policy and goals in that country. He resigned in september 2009. It is worth noting that the council on Foreign Relations has cited his Resignation Letter as an essential document in the history of the war in afghanistan. Prior to diplomatic assignment, he served two deployments as a marine in iraq. I should mention that matthew, like john is on the Advisory Board for the program at the institute for public accuracy which has been in this building in the National Press Club Facility for 18 years. I am the executive director of the institute for public accuracy. Here now is matthew hope. Thank you norman. I want to begin my remarks by noting that we have a new chief of staff in the white house and one of my concerns over these past many years of our campaigns and our wars in the middle east, over what really is the most accurate way of many people in the middle east has been the misrepresentation and misunderstanding of what drives many of the actors, many of the men and women who are fighting us in the middle east. General kelly has, on numerous occasions stated that this is a war about our way of life. However, in my positions, particularly when i was in the state department with access to topsecret information and access to the interrogations of men that we would capture who had joined the Islamic State in iraq, it was clear that these men who were traveling to iraq and afghanistan to fight us, as well as what we know from those people who have carried out terror attacks in europe, as well as in the United States, including the 911 hijackers, in their videos or in their notes or what have you, their motivations are clear. They are not saying convert or die, they are not saying we hate your freedom. They are not saying we are doing this because your girls are going to school or because your women are wearing dresses above the knees. They are saying this, they are saying we are conducting these attacks because you are bombing our country because your militaries are present in our countries in your supporting dictatorships, et cetera et cetera. There is this misunderstanding , this misconstruing thats very intentional. Some of it is based on ignorance and much of it is done to drive nationalism and to drive the spirit of war. I will say this also ties greatly into what norman was speaking about earlier, the dangers of a war between the United States and russia and of course, if anyone has been reading the New York Times recently you will see the coverage in the New York Times over the large u. S. Military exercises and the large nato exercises being conducted on russias borders. We also remember russia has been the victim of three major invasions in the past 150 years, losing tens of millions of people, however the New York Times finds it fit to characterize russia conducting military training within its own borders as aggression. So, that is the first of my concerns that i would like to address within my allotted time about why its so very important for us to get these american aircraft out of the skies of syria because we are on the brink with real war with russia and it is something that i dont think the people in washington d. C. Can quite understand what that war would be like. The second reason is more of a reason that has got to do with the fact that simply the United States air campaign and the air warfare may be or is the greatest moral and human hazard of the past century. Some of you start with the fact that this is the 72nd anniversary of the bombings of nagasaki and hiroshima, something that nearly all american fourstar and fivestar generals after world war ii said was not a military necessity, was done for strictly political reasons. If you go into the understanding that most americans do not know what all north koreans know that the American Air Force burned down nearly every village and town in north korea, that in vietnam we dropped more bombs on the vietnamese and we did on the japanese war on the germans in terms of tonnage and we conducted the largest Chemical Warfare program in the history of the world against the vietnamese, something that millions of people are still sick and with, something that babies will be born with deformities because of. If we fastforward to the results of our air campaigns that the iraqis certainly are still paying for, certainly the libyans are still paying for and the afghans are still paying fo for, and for which there has been no results that anyone can point to to say this has been a benefit and certainly how can anyone say that the air campaign being conducted by the United States is a sane, rational, or moral response. When i first started speaking publicly against the wars in 2009, i was asked, youve served them both, you are in both. I hate saying served. Thats the incorrect word to use. You are in both iraq and afghanistan. What are the similarities. What are the differences between the two . I fell into that trap, but then after a bit of time i thought what my doing. Theres only one thing that matters. The United States militaries in both locations. You can only expect one outcome. You are absolutely insane if you think anything different is going to happen. That is the same thing that will happen with the American Air Campaign in syria. If anyone thanks anything different will occur to the people of syria from an American Air Campaign, that has already been three years in progress, then they are completely naive, foolish, or have another agenda. This is not to say that asad has not been a dictator, does not come from or was not born from the father a dictator, his father, this is not to excuse the war crimes or the steering government, but im telling you that american airstrikes in syria are not the solution and our continuing moral hazard for all people of syria just as they have been for the people of korea, vietnam, iraq, afghanistan, libya, pakistan and interestingly enough, youve seen in the news, the American Military is now interested in launching airstrikes into the philippines. Nearly 120 years after we first began our military campaign against the filipinos, we are looking to continue it. I appreciate your being here today and i thank you all for your time. Thank you. Our next speaker is kristi edwards. The American Society of International Law, she is the chair of the Labor Society on the law of armed conflict. She is an advisor to the center for civilians in conflict on International Humanitarian human rights and gender issues. Thank you so much for having me here. I have been asked to provide the legal analysis for this topic. Its whether or not u. S. Airstrikes violate International Law based in syria. This is a really broad question and i will take a little bit of time to drill down into specifics in an International Legal framework that applies to answer this. As im sure most of you are well aware, the un charter is the definitive Legal Framework that applies here. This is binding International Law on the United States and article 24 states that countries were states have an obligation to refrain from the threat or use of course against the territory or political independence of any state. It seems like a pretty definitive prohibition, but there is an exception in article 51 which states that states have a right of individual or collective selfdefense, but if any state does use this exception, any actions must then be immediately reported to the Security Council. I look at two incidents to show how these legal principles apply. April 6, the attack on the chemical weapons, which occurred a few months ago, now the vast majority of legal experts all agree that the attack on april 6 violated the un charter and or was unconstitutional for several reasons. One, there was no Security Council resolution authorizing the attack. The u. S. Did not justify his actions based on selfdefense. There was a Statement Released after words saying that this is done basically for humanitarian purposes, how heinous crimes committed by the Syrian Regime were that these Chemical Attacks on civilians and then in addition, authorization from congress was not allowed to use force in the circumstance. However, i think going against the majority of legal opinions that came out after this attack, former state Department Legal adviser harold company argued quite narrowly for a narrative defense for circumstances such as this, based on the necessity for humanitarian intervention and he listed several criteria that would need to apply for this exception to take place which im happy to refer you to if anyone would like that argument in more detail. He did think that because of the circumstances in this case that there should be a narrow exception in this case. So then of course as mentioned earlier, june 18 instance where a syrian warplane was shot down by u. S. Forces, now here the u. S. And russia actually disagree about the facts and the law in this circumstance. The u. S. Claims that it acted in selfdefense of Coalition Forces because the syrian plane was bombing the Heritage Foundation<\/a> for a look at u. S. Taiwan relations. That is live at 1 30 p. M. Eastern on cspan2. Until we get there, we will bring your conversation on the u. S. Military role in syria. This was hosted by a number of dcbased organizations who are calling on the u. S. To remove all military aircraft from syrian airspace. Good morning and welcome to this news conference. My name is norman, i am a cofounder and coordinator of the online group which is hosting this event today. Roots action is a cosponsor of a Petition Campaign<\/a> calling for no u. S. Plans over serious. Together with five other organizations, veterans for peace, daily coast, the nation magazine, world beyond war and watchdog. Net. U. S. Government began bombing syria nearly three years ago. That was back in september 2014. Since then, the killing on many sides has continued unabated. Meanwhile, during the past three years, tensions between the worlds to Nuclear Superpowers<\/a> have escalated. Theyve escalated sharply. In the process, russia and the United States<\/a> have come closer to direct military warfare with each other. When addressing the overall tensions between the United States<\/a> and russia, former senator sam who was chair of the Senate Armed Services<\/a> committee cosigned a letter recently and i would like to quote from it. It calls for urgently pursuing practical steps now back and stop the downward spiral in relations and reduce read real dangers between russia and the United States<\/a>. The open letter emphasized, those risks continue to accelerate. That is his Ongoing Campaign<\/a> and i hope that continues. They reportedly flew within 5 feet of each other. Lyla. After as the summer began, the u. S. Military shot down they threatened to shoot down planes over syria. The New York Times<\/a> reported that between the United States<\/a> and russia now, except for in relation to syria, there is virtually no military conversation of the kind that took place during the cold war. They also said, with russian and american forces, operating near the baltics, the chances for accidents and miscalculation are high. They say its mutually suspicious and sporadic. Whats at stake here as the United States<\/a> continues its military actions in syria, including in the skies over syria, what is at stake includes the possibility that conflicts in the air between russia and United States<\/a> that could spiral into nuclear warfare. So, the Petition Campaign<\/a> that is ongoing is focused on addressing this escalating crisis. Our petition so far to the u. S. Congress and to secretary of Defense James Mattis<\/a> has gained more than 50000 unique signers, and the petition is very straightforward. It says, we urge you to immediately remove all u. S. Military planes from syrian guys and keep them out of that country airspace. Today at this news conference, we will hear from for speakers who will address their concern from a wide range of vantage points. Former official of the Central Intelligence<\/a> agency is a cio a whistleblower. Matthew ho was a marine who had to deployment in iraq and later became a state Department Official<\/a>. Christie edwards is a Legal Authority<\/a> on International Law<\/a> as pertains to armed conflict. David swanson is an author and the director of the organizations world beyond war. We will start with john. He was a ciaofficial and had responsibilities with the agency. He went on to serve two years in prison as a cia whistleblower. Back in december of 2014, a headline over an article really summed it up. It said, the one man jailed for cia torture tried to expose it. Thank you. President trump, just like president obama before him seems intent on getting the United States<\/a> involved in something that is an unwinnable war in syria. Watching 59 cruise missiles, for example against rundown syrian airbases in the middle of the night is easy enough to do, but there are consequences to the these actions, and republican conservative celebration at the use of fourth notwithstanding, trump has put serious christians in jeopardy. Just as president obama and president george w. Bush did in iraq. Conservatives and ideologies took root many years ago. Both parties tried to outdo each other to prove and was quicker to use military force. The never seems to be any discussion about whether this military intervention is legal let alone whether it is moral or ethical. There is certainly never any talking congress for authorization despite the fact that the white house not requesting authorization is almost always a violation of the war powers act. Republicans kneejerk support for military intervention in the middle east, whether its in syria, iraq or elsewhere in the region ought to be a message to any politician of either party who considers himself or herself to be a christian. It is these military interventions that are having the effect of dooming the small Christian Communities<\/a> left in places like iraq and syria. The problem for u. S. Politicians who fancy themselves as christians is that the asset is literally the only person standing between syrian christians and their annihilation. It is assad, like his father, whether you like the politics are not who have protected serious christians for generations. Syrian christians make up 12 of the population, according to the cia world factbook. Nearly one third of countries 600,000 believers have left syria since the start of the civil war in 2011, pushed out by terrorist groups like isis. That is according to the New York Times<\/a>. Before the civil war started, christians participated in all elements, all aspects of syrian society, including members of parliament, members of the cabinet, the diplomatic corps and the business community. They maintain their own court system, they are free to practice their faith openly in churches and cathedrals all around the country, and even the Syrian Military<\/a> is fully integrated, rather than having separate christian units. Similarly, in iraq, under Saddam Hussein<\/a>, and he was a bad man, be but even under him , christian served in the parliament and the cabinet and they practice their faith freely and openly and they were successful in business. Thanks to george w. Bush invasion of iraq and subsequent civil war, almost the entire Iraqi Christian Community<\/a> has left for jordan, the uk and the United States<\/a>, the same thing is now happening in syria. There is a solution to all this, but its not quick or easy. It is something that many of us have heard about but havent actually seen. Its called diplomacy. Whether trump likes his politics or not, the only way to save that country from becoming a failed state or nicest state is to sit at the table with all of the stakeholders, including the syrians, the russians, and whether we like it or not, the iranians. We have to accept the fact that assad is not going anywhere, nor should he, whether we like it or not, his is the internationally recognized government of syria. That is no matter what trump and obama have said. We should respect that and we should sit across the table. Thank you very much. Thank you john. Our next speaker is matthew ho. Mr. Ho is a former state Department Official<\/a> who resigned in his post in afghanistan over Strategic Policy<\/a> and goals in that country. He resigned in september 2009. It is worth noting that the council on Foreign Relations<\/a> has cited his Resignation Letter<\/a> as an essential document in the history of the war in afghanistan. Prior to diplomatic assignment, he served two deployments as a marine in iraq. I should mention that matthew, like john is on the Advisory Board<\/a> for the program at the institute for public accuracy which has been in this building in the National Press<\/a> Club Facility<\/a> for 18 years. I am the executive director of the institute for public accuracy. Here now is matthew hope. Thank you norman. I want to begin my remarks by noting that we have a new chief of staff in the white house and one of my concerns over these past many years of our campaigns and our wars in the middle east, over what really is the most accurate way of many people in the middle east has been the misrepresentation and misunderstanding of what drives many of the actors, many of the men and women who are fighting us in the middle east. General kelly has, on numerous occasions stated that this is a war about our way of life. However, in my positions, particularly when i was in the state department with access to topsecret information and access to the interrogations of men that we would capture who had joined the Islamic State<\/a> in iraq, it was clear that these men who were traveling to iraq and afghanistan to fight us, as well as what we know from those people who have carried out terror attacks in europe, as well as in the United States<\/a>, including the 911 hijackers, in their videos or in their notes or what have you, their motivations are clear. They are not saying convert or die, they are not saying we hate your freedom. They are not saying we are doing this because your girls are going to school or because your women are wearing dresses above the knees. They are saying this, they are saying we are conducting these attacks because you are bombing our country because your militaries are present in our countries in your supporting dictatorships, et cetera et cetera. There is this misunderstanding , this misconstruing thats very intentional. Some of it is based on ignorance and much of it is done to drive nationalism and to drive the spirit of war. I will say this also ties greatly into what norman was speaking about earlier, the dangers of a war between the United States<\/a> and russia and of course, if anyone has been reading the New York Times<\/a> recently you will see the coverage in the New York Times<\/a> over the large u. S. Military exercises and the large nato exercises being conducted on russias borders. We also remember russia has been the victim of three major invasions in the past 150 years, losing tens of millions of people, however the New York Times<\/a> finds it fit to characterize russia conducting military training within its own borders as aggression. So, that is the first of my concerns that i would like to address within my allotted time about why its so very important for us to get these american aircraft out of the skies of syria because we are on the brink with real war with russia and it is something that i dont think the people in washington d. C. Can quite understand what that war would be like. The second reason is more of a reason that has got to do with the fact that simply the United States<\/a> air campaign and the air warfare may be or is the greatest moral and human hazard of the past century. Some of you start with the fact that this is the 72nd anniversary of the bombings of nagasaki and hiroshima, something that nearly all american fourstar and fivestar generals after world war ii said was not a military necessity, was done for strictly political reasons. If you go into the understanding that most americans do not know what all north koreans know that the American Air Force<\/a> burned down nearly every village and town in north korea, that in vietnam we dropped more bombs on the vietnamese and we did on the japanese war on the germans in terms of tonnage and we conducted the largest Chemical Warfare<\/a> program in the history of the world against the vietnamese, something that millions of people are still sick and with, something that babies will be born with deformities because of. If we fastforward to the results of our air campaigns that the iraqis certainly are still paying for, certainly the libyans are still paying for and the afghans are still paying fo for, and for which there has been no results that anyone can point to to say this has been a benefit and certainly how can anyone say that the air campaign being conducted by the United States<\/a> is a sane, rational, or moral response. When i first started speaking publicly against the wars in 2009, i was asked, youve served them both, you are in both. I hate saying served. Thats the incorrect word to use. You are in both iraq and afghanistan. What are the similarities. What are the differences between the two . I fell into that trap, but then after a bit of time i thought what my doing. Theres only one thing that matters. The United States<\/a> militaries in both locations. You can only expect one outcome. You are absolutely insane if you think anything different is going to happen. That is the same thing that will happen with the American Air Campaign<\/a> in syria. If anyone thanks anything different will occur to the people of syria from an American Air Campaign<\/a>, that has already been three years in progress, then they are completely naive, foolish, or have another agenda. This is not to say that asad has not been a dictator, does not come from or was not born from the father a dictator, his father, this is not to excuse the war crimes or the steering government, but im telling you that american airstrikes in syria are not the solution and our continuing moral hazard for all people of syria just as they have been for the people of korea, vietnam, iraq, afghanistan, libya, pakistan and interestingly enough, youve seen in the news, the American Military<\/a> is now interested in launching airstrikes into the philippines. Nearly 120 years after we first began our military campaign against the filipinos, we are looking to continue it. I appreciate your being here today and i thank you all for your time. Thank you. Our next speaker is kristi edwards. The American Society<\/a> of International Law<\/a>, she is the chair of the Labor Society<\/a> on the law of armed conflict. She is an advisor to the center for civilians in conflict on International Humanitarian<\/a> human rights and gender issues. Thank you so much for having me here. I have been asked to provide the legal analysis for this topic. Its whether or not u. S. Airstrikes violate International Law<\/a> based in syria. This is a really broad question and i will take a little bit of time to drill down into specifics in an International Legal<\/a> framework that applies to answer this. As im sure most of you are well aware, the un charter is the definitive Legal Framework<\/a> that applies here. This is binding International Law<\/a> on the United States<\/a> and article 24 states that countries were states have an obligation to refrain from the threat or use of course against the territory or political independence of any state. It seems like a pretty definitive prohibition, but there is an exception in article 51 which states that states have a right of individual or collective selfdefense, but if any state does use this exception, any actions must then be immediately reported to the Security Council<\/a>. I look at two incidents to show how these legal principles apply. April 6, the attack on the chemical weapons, which occurred a few months ago, now the vast majority of legal experts all agree that the attack on april 6 violated the un charter and or was unconstitutional for several reasons. One, there was no Security Council<\/a> resolution authorizing the attack. The u. S. Did not justify his actions based on selfdefense. There was a Statement Released<\/a> after words saying that this is done basically for humanitarian purposes, how heinous crimes committed by the Syrian Regime<\/a> were that these Chemical Attacks<\/a> on civilians and then in addition, authorization from congress was not allowed to use force in the circumstance. However, i think going against the majority of legal opinions that came out after this attack, former state Department Legal<\/a> adviser harold company argued quite narrowly for a narrative defense for circumstances such as this, based on the necessity for humanitarian intervention and he listed several criteria that would need to apply for this exception to take place which im happy to refer you to if anyone would like that argument in more detail. He did think that because of the circumstances in this case that there should be a narrow exception in this case. So then of course as mentioned earlier, june 18 instance where a syrian warplane was shot down by u. S. Forces, now here the u. S. And russia actually disagree about the facts and the law in this circumstance. The u. S. Claims that it acted in selfdefense of Coalition Forces<\/a> because the syrian plane was bombing the Syrian Democratic<\/a> forces which is one of the anti syrian rebel groups based in syria. Russia however says the plane was providing air cover for Syrian Ground<\/a> forces who were fighting isis. The u. S. Action here violated International Law<\/a> and has constituted military aggression against the syrian government. So then just a few minutes ago. Article 51 does allow for attempt of state but not necessarily non estate armed group. The u. S. Has not claimed that it is a de facto organ of the United States<\/a> and that they are providing de facto organ under its direction and control. My colleague has suggested, as perhaps a novel legal approach that says the u. S. Could use necessary and proportionate force to descendent Member States<\/a> of the coalition and the coalition of nonstate armed groups against isis if this defeating isis was its sole mission. Thats a very narrow exception. Of course, in the law there is no right to collective selfdefense of nonstate armed groups for regime change or other political goals. What makes it complicated is that secretary tillerson and ambassador haley, on a couple of occasions have indicated that the Syrian Regime<\/a> change remains a u. S. Strategic objective so here, the fact that there could be some mixed motive for both fighting isis which is a strategic objective of the United States<\/a>, and possible regime change, the mixing of these motives compromise the legal basis for military operations that have occur and may occur here in the future. I look for to your questions. Thank you. Thank you. Our last speaker before we have questions from the journalist present is David Swanson<\/a>. He is the author of several books on war, the director of the world beyond war organization, and in addition he is the Campaign Coordinator<\/a> for protection. Org. Thank you norman. It is an honor to speak. I wont have time to list all of the reasons why i want u. S. Military planes and drones out of syrian skies, much less all the reason people have noted in the comments on our petition which you can read at , but theres no question what my first reason is. Although its not a reason always given much weight here in washington d. C. These planes kill a lot of people. People are all valued regardless of the religion or ethnicity. The casually secret have such. [inaudible] air wars identifies thousands of civilian deaths from u. S. And allied planes. Such counts generally turn out to be many times under the counts that comprehensive postwar studies arrive at. On top of which, we have the problem of all the People Killed<\/a> were not counted by virtue of not being labeled civilians. Always a morally iffy labeling process. Then theres the numbers that outnumber the death. The homelessness, the extremely longterm effects of the u. S. Use of depleted uranium by some of the planes we want out of those guys, the starvation that could have been prevented for a fraction of the cost of the planes and of course the top killer of u. S. Troops, suicide. The primary reason that would otherwise be considered mass murder is given little heat is that it is understood to serve some higher purpose in both moral and legal senses. What purpose is served by u. S. Planes over syria . If longer than most major wars of the past isnt long enough to figure that out, how about a purpose served by bombing afghanistan or iraq or pakistan or libya or yemen. Apart from sailing west and creating more enemies for the next war, what has been accomplished . Former cia bin laden unit chief says the more the u. S. Fights terrorism, the more it creates terrace. The cias own july 7, 2009 report called best practices in counterinsurgency says a drone killing is counterproductive. Admiral dennis blair, former director of National Intelligence<\/a> said the same. General james, vice chair of the joint chief of staff says drone strikes are the undermining longterm effort. We are seeing that blowback. If you are trying to kill your way to a solution, no matter how precise you are, you will upset people even if theyre not targeted. That is true whether or not the plane has a pilot. Maintaining the momentum of permanent war is obviously not a high moral purpose. Jodi reborn reported that for jerusalem, the status quo, horrific as it may be from a humanitarian perspective seems preferable to either a victory for mr. Asads government and his iranian backers or strengthening of rebel groups increasingly dominated by jihad. This is a playoff situation in which you need both teams to lose but at least you dont want one to win, we will settle for a tie said allen, a Foreign Council<\/a> general in new york. Let them both lead. Hemorrhage to death. Thats the strategic thinking. This endless war for war sake they be done in the name of democracy and you may be able to get Television Viewers<\/a> to cheer momentarily from missiles launched from a ship which has almost the same problems as those launched from the air, but people in the very same polls that cheer for those missiles say the u. S. Should get out of this war. Public pressure was key to preventing the start of the u. S. War in syria in 2013. Never has the public or the congress advocated for authorize this war. It is a war destructive of the rule of law. Nowhere does the un charter or th permit this action from air, ground or water, special Operations Command<\/a> chief army general amon thomas, two weeks ago, admitted this was illegal. Claiming to defend u. S. Troops in syria against aggression by syria is not a legal argument for defensiveness, but its declaration of lawless imperialism. Of course, the stuff harold cole makes up isnt actually law. President obamas decision to arm and train was against the law, dramatically against public opinion, and against the report he had commission from the cia on whether such efforts have ever succeeded in the past. President johnson announcement that he will cease those efforts in fight on only one side of this war is a nod to reality, law and possibly decency given the account of his decision having followed his video of cia backed fighters killing a child. This war continues to kill children. This is all before mentioning the risks of apocalyptic Nuclear Confrontation<\/a> with russia as a result of russia also fighting an immoral, illegal and counterproductive war in syria. That alone is reason to remove every u. S. Plane or ground. This is also without considering the environment of damage done to syria and to our atmosphere. You can drive your car all year, feel guilty about it, but you wont pollute the sky like one of these planes. Then theres the financial trus trust. National priorities project puts the cost of the war on isis at 16 billion and counting these alternatives have been available since day one and still are. The United States<\/a> spent years sabotaging you and attempts at peace in syria. According to former finnish president Nobel Peace Prize<\/a> laureate, United States<\/a> dismissed out of hand a russian peace proposal for syria in 2012. The u. S. Ruined last years ceasefire by firing on syrian troops. Nothing is going to quickly bring peace and prosperity to syria but continuing to do what we know makes matters worse has to end. We have to give peace a chance. Thank you. Thank you, David Swanson<\/a> we are now going to have question and answer session. We do have a live microphone here for the journalists present. So when you do ask your question, please your name and identify your news outlet. Who would like to go first . Must be a questionnaire somewhere. Here comes the microphone. [inaudible] go ahead. I think you are being heard. Yes, please go ahead. For the tv camera. I have a question for mr. John kiriakou. My question is assad is the only one person standing between christians and [inaudible] im from the region. I have been living there for centuries my answers as a been living there for centuries now come with a 2000 years. Christianity was created there. Why do you think that only now [inaudible] they survived more horrible rulers than assad. I dont disagree with you. I think that christianity has done very well in syria under assad. His politics aside, im not necessarily a fan of bashar alassad. I think that he is a dictator. I think he is an antidemocrat. But the truth is that with the players that are on the field now, hes the one that gives the christians the best chance of having a thriving community. If you look at the alternatives, never minding the notion that the United States<\/a> promotes that somehow magically this is all going to come together and everybody is going to live in peace and harmony. Its just simply not going to happen. What are the alternatives . The alternatives are isis or the alnusra front or some al qaeda related organization, or assad. And of those choices i think those are the realistic choices of those choices, the best is assad. Time was maybe as recently as 2012 or 2013 where there was talk of perhaps a Syrian Military<\/a> pushing aside aside. There was the same talk in iraq to the 1990s that the best and the most likely alternative to Saddam Hussein<\/a> was a group of iraqis, a senior iraqi generals. It hasnt happened, and so of the choices that i think the community is facing now, their best bet is with assad. The syrian conflict, Syrian Crisis<\/a> has been now going for more than six years and its much more complicated to look at it from one perspective, one angle, which is minorities, which is a very serious one though. But killings have been the headline of any community, majority or minority. How i can justify, for example, for the sunnis that you killing them in homes and all that was to preserve the Christian Community<\/a> . I mean, just one moment. The argument for them will be so unfair. Youre exactly right and you think youre misunderstanding my comments. My comment were aimed at neoconservatives and neil anybody is better than assad, that assad is the problem in syria, that we cannot achieve peace with assad still in power in syria. It was to them that i was directing my comments. Youre exactly right. You cant go to the Sunni Community<\/a> and say that the deaths in their community are less important than any other community. Same in the kurdish community. I dont think that any deaths are any less important than any others. Its just that my comments were really geared towards capitol hill more than anything else. My name is preready from rt news. Thank you for you powerful and thoughtful comments this morning. Regarding the next motives that were mentioned, the compromise the legal basis for the u. S. Intervention in syria. You mentioned a couple arguments that undermine the claims of humanitarian intervention such as regime change goals and fighting isis perhaps. I wanted to ask would you or any of you consider the u. S. Ally ship or partnership with saudi arabia sort of a notorious human rights abuse . The with regard to syri city iso something that might undermine the humanitarian motives claim . Thats one question. The other one was does the removal of assad, if that were to happen, a lot of people have expressed fears of seeing another libya or an iraq or a vacuum that could be filled with people worse than assad. Is that something that you could speak to . Thanks. I hope others will answer the questions as well. These are good questions, but i would just point out the when the u. S. Participates in war in yemen, in partnership with saudi arabia, it violates that only the u. N. Charter but also the u. S. Law called the later law which is you can only support another nation in mass murder when that of the nation does not violate human rights. Now how you conduct mass murder without violating human rights, im not a horse like it answer that for you but that is an additional way in which u. S. Operations in yemen are illegal. On top of which you get into this question in yemen of, well, can an exiled dictator crate legality by inviting other nations to attack his country . So when donald trump is removed and living on his private island and he invites china to bob washington d. C. , we would all except that is legitimate, right . No. These are nonsense arguments for war just as the argument for russias actions in syria being legalized by the syrian government. Theres nothing in the u. N. Charter or any basic understanding of morality that says war is okay if a dictator asks you to help with it. So the u. S. Is committing a crime in syria, so is russia. I think certainly your concerns about the removal of assad in the vacuum that you certainly see in that, and libya, other locations, as far as relationship to the United States<\/a> to saudi arabia, the hypocrisy is, you know, theres lots of slang i could use back from new jersey. Theres lots of slang and curses i could throw at you to describe that type of level of hypocrisy. We provide the fuel and the bombs, the intelligence that allows saudi arabia to commit those atrocities in yemen, let alone what saudi arabia is like any help in its own internal human rights violations. Lots in the last week in the attacks on, excuse me but i cant recall the name of the city that saudi arabia [inaudible] saudi arabia is attacking internally. So yes, hypocrisy has always been first and foremost in america. You go back to the american constitution. The quality was only for white male property owners. Thats what freedom was meant. Theres never been, i mean, this real standard of nonhypocrisy in american speech, in thought, in political ideology anyway. So theres always tha been hypoy and everything america has done. So this notion of talking about syria, but in Court Meeting<\/a> with saudi arabia, particularly with going back to you, it was brought up before about this notion of sabotaging efforts in 2012 in syria. Thats about the same time that we were utilizing that turkey qatar and saudi arabia, the efforts with groups such as alnusra and the Islamic State<\/a> to try and overthrow the assad government. The notion that we can try and use those groups for our purposes in syria while trying to keep them at bay within iraq, i mean, this is how the u. S. Government operates. And we know all this because its declassified defense Intelligence Agency<\/a> reports. Not only are we hypocritical, but we are also bipolar in many ways because we think we cannot just be twofaced, but we think we can also manage certain situations in a way that just defies reality. And of course coming back to it all its the very people who live in these places who are being burned to death and ripped apart. And i think its very easy for us to forget that, that as a talk about this as a standard in my suit and tie and drink my cup of coffee and everything, but as we speak about this, american bombs everything apart men, women, and children as we speak. So its not abstract at all. One thing i forgot to mention was that the microphone. Im sorry. The number of people mention the reliance on airstrikes as a big part of your strategy. Would that not also undermine what, war crimes not undermine the argument as well . Thats the final part of my question. Absolutely. The other thing is, i recall there being a report that was released by the United Nations<\/a> last year, last fall, and i was reminded of this yesterday by a colleague, about our sanctions on syria. The United Nations<\/a> reported that our sanctions on syria and the eu sanctions on syria, the effect it has on the syrian population, and how deadly those though sanctions are because of those sanctions present the pharmaceuticals, medical supplies, the foodstuffs, the things that people need to survive, let alone the things that hospitals need. So yes this notion that we are somehow involved in humanitarian needs, but thats all nonsense. I mean, you dont have to look much further and go back a couple weeks to the Washington Post<\/a> where Michael Vickers<\/a> who has been in the cia and department of defense for long time, he was involved in, very much involved in the american effort in afghanistan in the 1980s against the soviet union, but very clearly in that oped the Washington Post<\/a> ran, he states that in syria, in the Syrian Civil War<\/a> we saw an opposition to strike a blow against iran by removing assad to cut off irans relationship with hezbollah. I mean, so this is a very senior american official whos been in both republican and democratic administrations. They may talk about humanitarian reasons, but for many, many, many people in the National Security<\/a> positions in washington, d. C. , as well as politicians, what they do, what they see, and i have seen as i was fortunate to be in senior positions in washington, d. C. , in both the state department and the pentagon, for many of these people it is like a game of risk. They look at the map and they want to turn Different Countries<\/a> the colors they want to turn them. And you can see that in vickers column in the Washington Post<\/a> from a couple weeks ago. Very clearly they want to turn Different Countries<\/a> different shades, and thats of these people view the world and how they view it. Anything they say about humanitarian reasons, thats just good pr. Thats just a small way to address the smart thing to say. Can ask one more . I also wanted to address some of the Legal Framework<\/a>s that apply here. When we talk about human rights law, the right to life which is embodied in the u. N. Charter and every human rights treaty basic creator, the right to life is invaluable. Its one of the major, major themes of human rights law. When we are talking but about International Humanitarian<\/a> law which is what governs how war is conducted, whether or not the war was illegal to begin with our how we got into the war, whether the circumstances were correct or not, in International Humanitarian<\/a> law that are humanitarian principles that do apply. Although the right to life under human rights law is the norm and the standard, it is allowable under internationally humanitarian law to kill and to even keel, you cannot target civilians but civilian deaths are allowable. In order for civilian deaths to be allowable there has to be a very, very strict analysis of distinction, proportionality, military necessity. Theres of this calculus but goes on. What should military objective and can you achieve that military objective, and can you achieve it with the least amount of civilian deaths possible . So thats what military commanders are responsible to do every time they commit any military action. Now, if the other justifications besides military necessity such as humanity, thats also absolutely necessary. But what were looking at and what Many Organizations<\/a> are looking at is, is the United States<\/a> and any other actor thats acting in this context, are they doing everything that they possibly can to eliminate completely or to cause the fewest amount of deaths, fused amount of deaths in any action that they take . I hope that answers your question. We have a few more minutes for questions. Yes, please, go ahead. I already have the microphone. Thank you. My name is joshua joffrey. Truly enjoyed the presentations. I commend the panel for focusing on the military aspect of the u. S. Strategy in the middle east. I believe that america should be refocused on the entire u. S. Strategy in the middle east, per se. And that is its engendered in regime change. Now, only last week secretary tillerson from the state department and clearly stated that the u. S. Is no longer seeking regime change in north korea. If that is true, that is truly commendable. However, if its okay in north korea to retain current regime but its not okay to maintain the current regime in syria. Why should be the u. S. Business anyway to change regimes . I think this is the narrative that people are looking for. Its not just the aspect of the defined policy, which is whether its syria, iraq, afghanistan or other areas. But its the u. S. Policy of regime change that has brought us through several conflicts to this stage. Thank you. Well, briefly, i agree with you 1000 no one has given the u. S. Legal authority to decide the fate of other nations by any means. And since world war ii, the United States<\/a> has interfered as a in at least 82 foreign elections, though not i in the that russia would presumably, and over 30 countries. No one appointed the u. S. To this role. This is not a legal, this is not enforcing law. This is violating the law. So it has to end, and the u. S. Public is not the driving force here in the u. S. Public put donald trump in the white house after he campaigned against this practice and said we are done with overthrowing governments, and to whatever extent he starts to actually abide by that, so much the better. It ought to become unacceptable in the u. S. To continue down that road. I would just add when this discussion of killing as few people as possible in the process, when the United States<\/a> military says bombing that spot were isis stores its money is worth up to 60 civilian civilian deaths, that not as few as possible. Thats naming a pretty large number. Theres nothing appear go about it. I cant go back and say i studied and its actually only 45. No, its actually 308. Its not a miracle. A vehicle. Its just rhetoric. Immoral and its illegal in the world didnt ask for it and the pew study last week of 38 countries found that the majority of them viewed the United States<\/a> more than rush and more than china as the biggest threat, including places like turkey and south korea and japan, and the gallup poll a few years back had a similar result. The u. S. The biggest threat of any country to peace in the world. So the global policing is not appreciated by the people being policed, and it ought to end. I think we have time for one or two more questions. [inaudible] i have two questions. My first question is yes, wars are bad and killing people. You dont want the u. S. To intervene in other countries, but syria is like a chessboard. The International Relations<\/a> [inaudible] if the u. S. Takes its aircraft from syria, dont you think that the United States<\/a> will lose its ground in syria . About International Policy<\/a> or International Relations<\/a>. And leave the space to russia, iran into the other folks. Thats a hard question. I will preface this by saying im not an attorney, you are, but im not. Its my understanding that legally if the internationally recognized government of syria invites another country to come and help it, that of the country is there legally. The russians have been invited by the syrian government. The United States<\/a> has not been invited by the syrian government. Im all for humanitarian assistance if we can provide medicine or humanitarian relief, food, water, even safe passage out of the country for refugees. Thats great. But its my understanding that anything more than that at least at this point in syria is illegal. We are supposed to be a nation of laws in this country. We like to tell people, we like to tell of the countries that we are this shining beacon of respect for human rights and Civil Liberties<\/a> and the rule of law and democracy and it is simply just not true. Its rhetoric. Its propaganda. So if we were serious about this being true, we would live that policy, and we dont. We just want of the country to live it. [inaudible] do you think that russia and iran takes their soldiers from syria also . I dont think so at all, no. Rialto holgate is real, realpolitik is real but no, i dont think so at all. Im not sure that truly though the most important thing to worry about in this scenario i think that are bigger issues of respect for human rights and respect for human rights and Civil Liberties<\/a> and peace in the region. Do you want to add something on this issue . The way i look at it is this, the United States<\/a> has been heavily involved in the middle east for seven decades now. About five or six you to go Princeton University<\/a> did a survey or a study. They found that since jimmy carters presidency, the United States<\/a> has spent 10 trillion policing the persian gulf region. Region. And i would say that in my lifetime, nearly every country from the edge of the Mediterranean Sea<\/a> through afghanistan, with the exception, no, not true, including iran, has been destroyed. Every city has been raised to the ground more or less in my lifetime. I was born in 1973. Thats with the u. S. States having spent 10 trillion in the region having had a massive military presence. I see no reason why the United States<\/a> should remain in that region. It has provided no help to anybody in the region and has wasted vast amounts of psalms of american money, wasted, and millions of people are dead. So i see no value in it, and i cant see any explanation for how any reason for how things would have been better, or unsought, how things would have been worse if we had not been there. So thats my, the way i view it. As far as whether or not, if, we are not there, if the iranians are there, the russians are there, the chinese are there, the portuguese are there or the finish are there, i dont know, all i know what has occurred and what is occurring. And i know that the American Military<\/a> is responsible for so much of it. And thats where, thats how i view it. Say the question. We are unfortunately out of time. I know many of all the speakers are available to talk oneonone with the journalists here. Id like to thank everyone for participating and attending today, and to emphasize that the Petition Campaign<\/a> called no u. S. Warplanes over syria is continuing. Anyone can sign and participate and be part of a National Campaign<\/a> by going to the web come by visiting rootsaction. Org. Thats rootsaction. Org. And i would like to acknowledge and thank all six organizations who have made this a nationwide and really interNational Campaign<\/a>. Rootsaction. Org, veterans for peace, daily kos, the nation magazine, watchdog. Net, and world beyond war. Thank you all for being here. [applause] [inaudible conversations]. [inaudible conversations] cspan has been on the road meeting with the Winner Office<\/a> the student cam video documentary competition. At layer my high school in","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia800809.us.archive.org\/17\/items\/CSPAN2_20170811_162700_Activists_Call_for_Withdrawal_of_U.S._Military_Aircraft_From_Syrian...\/CSPAN2_20170811_162700_Activists_Call_for_Withdrawal_of_U.S._Military_Aircraft_From_Syrian....thumbs\/CSPAN2_20170811_162700_Activists_Call_for_Withdrawal_of_U.S._Military_Aircraft_From_Syrian..._000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240628T12:35:10+00:00"}