Radio War Nerd EP #69—Rania Khalek on Syria & Druze

I understand that we're not going to hear anything from you or Mark, to say nothing of Rania Khalek or Max Blumenthal, that shows Israel is anything like a positive light. But your listeners should know that the Israeli Defense Minister is on record stating that medical and humanitarian assistance is dependent on two conditions: "That they don’t get too close to the border, and that they don’t touch the Druze.” Druze I know say they are convinced that Israel is the reason why Nusra and co have, for the most part, not slaughtered the Druze, who they consider heretics. And Nusra has never had any hesitation in killing those they consider to be heretics. Rania has to know this, and it is a big part of the story.

This was a very interesting discussion. Thank you for it. One thing did strike me as a bit odd, however. In the discussion regarding Rep. Gabbard, Ms. Khalek chastised Michael Weiss for “making things up” about Rep. Gabbard’s visit to Syria. Specifically, Ms. Khalek objected to Mr. Weiss’s claim that the SSNP, a “fascist group,” arranged for and assisted with Rep. Gabbard’s travels in Syria. Ms. Khalek pointed out that the two men who actually handled Rep. Gabbard’s travel arrangements were based in Ohio and are members of the SSNP, but it was not the SSNP itself that handled the arrangements. Fair enough; to the extent that the SSNP itself did not arrange Rep. Gabbard’s travel arrangements, Mr. Weiss reported poorly on that. Ms. Khalek also notes that she does not agree with all of the SSNP’s politics and policies, and identified it broadly as a secular, identity-based party espousing a greater Syrian nationalism in the Middle East. This is also fair, and her characterization of the SSNP appears to me to be accurate, at least (as far as I can tell) in the broadest strokes. However, based on what I have read concerning the SSNP, I am confused by what this conversation omitted with respect to that party. An Atlantic article from 1987 suggests that the SSNP, at least in 1987, was known to utilize tactics such as suicide bombers against Israeli targets and civilian targets in France. That same article also paints a less-than-flattering picture of the SSNP’s guiding philosophy, which at least appears to be opposed to Judaism (not just Zionism). The article may be found here: <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1987/06/behind-the-terror/376326/." rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1987/06/behind-the-terror/376326/.</a> It appears to me that one of the following three options is true. First, the SSNP used to engage in these tactics and hold these beliefs, but has since reformed and moderated. Second, the SSNP still engages in these tactics and holds these beliefs. Third, the SSNP never engaged in these tactics and never held these beliefs. If the second option is true, then in my estimation characterizing the SSNP as a fascist organization is defensible. If the third option is true, then all of the reportage I have been able to find concerning the SSNP, aside from that of Ms. Khalek, is badly wrong. Is there any way you can shed light on this? Given that one of the main thrusts of this podcast was the poor quality of reportage concerning the war in Syria, I think it is important to nail down this issue (especially in light of the weight of the accusations that have been leveled against the SSNP in the past). Thank you.

Gary Brecher, glad your minibus didn't go off the cliff because this episode was very cool. Thanks to you, Mark Ames, and Rania Khalek, I learned a lot about the Druze. Broadening perspectives... I can dig it.

Ah! This from today! illustrating both my original point of travellers from the rest of the world vs the shambolic state of things now. The original rule had an exemption for military and governmental travel to "list countries". <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/03/former-norway-pm-bondevik-held-washington-dulles-airport-2014-visit-iran?CMP=fb_gu" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/03/former-norway-pm-bondevik-held-washington-dulles-airport-2014-visit-iran?CMP=fb_gu</a>

Agreed @Emilia. I'd love to hear Jon and Mark address next time the key ways in which it is different from what came before

I very much enjoyed this instalment. However, I am surprised that you didn't mention an important fact about the list. You seemed surprised by it (and I'm sure that's because you were actually surprised by the nature of the EO, actually). Although the EO is qualitatively different in scope (it's a ban and captures US citizens), the list of nations was brought in by the Obama administration. It's the list of countries from which one is no longer qualified for the Visa Waiver Program (basically that's a sped up automatic visa program). So, if you were from those countries or from any other country and had travelled to those countries, you could no longer rely upon ESTA or on other automatic/simplified/virtual visas. And you'd have to apply for a visa in the old fashioned way, which takes more time and can be denied. This caused and causes alot of consternation among business people in Europe because many travel to Iran, Libya (and the others to a lesser extent) because there is business there and these people also travel to the US. The fact that "that man's" business interests aren't in the excluded countries shouldn't surprise anyone. The US hasn't done business in those countries in a very long time (and by Fed law you couldn't - recent changes aside). Also, and as you noted, the US supports Saudi, Turkey etc because the US needs them for a variety of reasons (oil, political, military logistics, NATO with respect to Turkey which people always forget about). In any event, good episode and thank you!

As someone on the right i do enjoy those liberal tears, especially after Obama relished in being partisan. But mostly in a wider perspective. Here in Europe we have more parties than in the US but on several fundamental levels it doesn't matter how you vote, this is one of the reasons Right wing parties are popping up because the other ones didn't even address problems with immigration. But don't think the Trump coalition is your standard republicans, they're more furious with the republican insiders than with the democrats it just doesn't show as often but it's vicious. McCain is one of the prime recipients of this hatred as he is both a suck up to any liberal he's around and he's Never Trump. I would bet that any candidate he supports for the midterms is going to be savaged by the trump crowd just you wait. Trump works because people are tired of Spin they've seen through the current political game for many years now and are tired of focus groups. Trump represent order and people want that right now desperately. Trump won the election because he always stuck to what he said, he didn't run a poll on it to find out if he should back off or not. There's basically nothing the mainstream media can do to hurt trump as i see it, nobody who voted for him believe them anyway. Oh and BTW people who think he's gonna start a nuclear war are just nut's, he's got hotels all over the world and actually shows that he cares about building a dynasty. That doesn't jive with a nuclear madman, the only one's who's wanted nuclear wars where Stalin and Castro.

There was a story going round a while ago that did not get wider traction that some Israeli/Golani Druze captured and killed some Syrian, anti-government fighters that had been wounded and been brought over the border to Israel for treatment. The Israeli reaction was one of outrage; or so I heard.

I read somewhere that the Israeli general in the last siege of Gaza is a Druze.

You really need to get Randall Wray or Bill Mitchell on the show to get a grip on the monetary system. The US government does not spend "tax payers money" per se. It spends FIRST and taxes SECOND. It's a very important distinction that's widely misunderstood. This is true of any country with their own sovereign currency, UK, Australia, Canada, etc.... but not the Euro countries.

excellent ep

This entire interview is absolutely shocking.

Another great one you guys. I hope you can find a few minutes talking about what left and right, conservative, progressive mean anymore because it sure seems to be getting pretty damn fuzzy.

This was one of the best interviews you've done so far.

Also, Rizwan Farook (the male San Bernardino shooter) was born in the US. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rizwan_Farook_and_Tashfeen_Malik" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rizwan_Farook_and_Tashfeen_Malik</a>

You know, it's interesting that you mention that the Kremlin knows to quietly kill your moles in car accidents, since there's now a news story going around that an agent connected to the "Trump dossier" story, which you argue is baseless and part of an ongoing Russophobia arc, died in a car accident this weekend. Thoughts, Mark?

I wonder who the editor was that didn't publish Rania's reporting in Syria because she had government approval to do so. (If I heard that correctly.)

Obama selected the 7 countries to be put on the travel ban. Well, his administration. <a href="https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/02/18/dhs-announces-further-travel-restrictions-visa-waiver-program" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/02/18/dhs-announces-further-travel-restrictions-visa-waiver-program</a>

you should bring Sean Guillory of Seans Russia blog on one of these days! he's doing excellent work, and it is very underappreciated