(ZH) This could well be one of the most epic less-than-60-second devastating take-down of just about every mainstream media lie on Syria... In case you missed it, an entire panel of guests revolted against well-known conservative commentator S.E. Cupp's demands that the US "do something" to remove the Assad government during a segment on her CNN HLN show late last week, but it was a comedian that delivered the final death blow, calling Cupp's recycled regime change talking points "insane".
Cupp has for years argued that "US inaction" is to blame for Syria's woes and has been a consistent and prominent voice on the right calling for increased and more direct military action in the Syrian war - even as top US officials and Pentagon and intelligence insiders have since been very blunt in stating the obvious that only al-Qaeda and ISIS would fill the vacuum should the Assad government be removed by military force.
S.E. Cupp: "Isn't it time to do something in Syria in a full-throated way?"
During a recent Syria panel discussion on "SE Cupp Unfiltered," she revisited the idea of regime change, posing the question for the panel: "isn't it time to do something in Syria in a full-throated way?"
For hawks like Cupp, nothing is ever enough apparently, even as Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has pledged that US forces will occupy... remain in Syria for an indefinite amount of time to support proxy SDF forces on the ground, primarily to "counter Iran" while seeking "political transition" in Damascus.
She introduced the segment with a heatedly emotional appeal to her guest panelists, pleading we "must do something" because "500,000 people died while we did nothing" and arguing that "ignoring all of this... the chemical weapons, ISIS, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Iran, Russia... it just gets worse". Cupp later answered her own question, saying that solving the crisis "is completely possible if you get rid of Assad".
Recommended for You
But the panel wasn't buying it. In a rare moment for mainstream network television, the entire group of panelists revolted with each commentator getting more blunt in their pushback against Cupp than the last - until finally stand-up comedian and libertarian commentator Dave Smith apparently couldn't take Cupp's smug clichéd and recycled talking points anymore.
Smith - though not some usual think tank blowhard that frequents such foreign policy debate panels - expertly schooled Cupp and dismantled her every assumption, demonstrating that it has been precisely US action in the region that has fueled the crisis in Syria, starting with the 2003 invasion of Iraq and continuing with the CIA program to arm the anti-Assad insurgency in Syria. And he did it all in under 60 seconds.
"...The most ridiculous plan that I've heard yet... This is insane... ISIS rose because we overthrew Saddam Hussein and then we armed ISIS," Smith said.
Watch the full clip below (stand-up comic Dave Smith comes in at the 1:55 mark):
Smith's epic diatribe met with no resistance. He said:
"Regime change has been an absolute nightmare everywhere that we've had it. And the idea that we're going to go into a civil war and take both sides out is of all of these wars the most ridiculous plan that I've heard yet.
And as far as standing back while hundreds of thousands of people die - no one seems to have a problem with doing that in Yemen right now because it's not the regime that we want to overthrow, it's the regime we support doing it.
This is insane! ISIS did not rise because we pulled out of Iraq because of a bad decision - we pulled out on Bush's timeline because we had to because the government of Iraq was no longer going to protect our troops against war crimes.
ISIS rose because we overthrew Saddam Hussein and then we armed ISIS. We need to not intervene in this part of the world - it's an immoral war, it's an illegal war. Syria has not attacked America. We have no legitimate reason for our defense to be there, and this is exactly what Obama promised not to do, and what Trump promised not to do."
Apparently, S.E. Cupp couldn't come up with any better response other than to half-heartedly say, "I disagree"... before quickly ending the segment.