Obama says at press conference in Germany that reports of an imminent US attack of Syria were not false but exaggerated ? So ,we are going to attack Syria , just a question of timing then ? Or just another false narrative from Obama and the West - like all of the US aid to the rebels , most of which the US has not delivered ! Meanwhile the fight for Aleppo is underway !

Fierce fighting for control of Syria's Aleppo

FSA fighters say they are trying to defend northern stronghold from government force armed with superior artillery. Last Modified: 20 Jun 2013 03:14

Rebel fighters say they need support to battle Syrian government forces in Aleppo in the country's north. The Free Syrian Army says it is trying to defend the area from a military force armed with helicopters, tanks and a lot of artillery - far superior to the weapons and supplies the FSA has. But other opposition groups nearby seem to have acquired the kind of weapons being sought. The rebels say they are using Russian-made Grad rockets to target Syrian army bases. Al Jazeera's Caroline Malone explains.

Obama: US ‘Not Ready’ to Attack Syria

Insists Reports of Impending Attack 'Exaggerated'

by Jason Ditz, June 19, 2013

Print This | Share This

Speaking at a press conference today with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, President Obama claimed the reports of an imminent US attack on Syria were not false, but “exaggerated,” though he refused to discuss specifics about his administration’s plans.

Obama went on to insist that the goals of the intervention, whatever form it will eventually take, were to “end a war,” and he insisted that the US was not ready to launch attacks.

Yet at the same time, there seems to be considerable appetite within his administration to launch such a war, and the goal seems primarily to be convincing the American public that this war will be at least a little less disastrous than the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Likewise, while Obama says the goal is to “end a war,” his administration has repeatedly confirmed that their primary goal in Syria is regime change, and the efforts to start throwing weapons at the Syrian rebels are aimed plainly at prolonging the conflict, coming after the rebels had suffered some defeats. In the long run the ideal for the administration is regime change without occupation, but with Senators pushing for immediate attacks on the argument that regime change can only be accomplished through direct action, it is unclear at best if the administration will stop with simply arming the Islamist rebels.

West Still Split on US Scheme to Arm Syria’s Rebels

Most US Aid Has Never Been Delivered Anyhow

by Jason Ditz, June 19, 2013

Print This | Share This

Though the Obama Administration has already announced its intentions to start arming Syria’s rebellion, Western nations are extremely split on the issue, with Germany leading a group of nations who fear that arming the Islamist rebels is going to have long-term negative impacts on security across the region.

The US has tried to spin the arms as aimed at breaking a stalemated civil war, but experts warn it could have the opposite effect and instead prevent peace talks and prolong the conflict.

Of course, whether the US actually delivers the pledged aid is another matter entirely, as the vast majority of the cash aid pledged to the rebels has never been delivered in the first place.

Those delays are because of the divided nature of the rebellion, with the State Department often withholding promised funds in an effort to get groups to unite. With the vetting process further complicating the question of weapons, it could be quite some time before US arms are having a real impact on the ongoing war.