Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
[MERGED] Syrian rebellion, troop movement & negotiations
Comments
-
SANA, RT and other non-credible sources don't count.
Well i think you are too addicted to only one official source( don't even want to guess which one) so there it is: Hillary Clinton: US Losing Information War to Alternative Media
The US is losing the global information war, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared while appearing before a congressional committee to ask for extra funds to spread US propaganda through new media.
Clinton said existing private channels are not good enough to handle the job, naming as rivals Al Jazeera, China's CCTV and RT -- which she watches, she added.
Clinton was defending her department's budget in front of the House's Committee on Foreign Affairs on Wednesday. She said the US should step up its propaganda effort and get back "in the game" of doing "what we do best."
"During the Cold War we did a great job in getting America's message out. After the Berlin Wall fell we said, 'Okay, fine, enough of that, we are done,' and unfortunately we are paying a big price for it," she said. "Our private media cannot fill that gap."
"We are in an information war and we are losing that war. Al Jazeera is winning, the Chinese have opened a global multi-language television network, the Russians have opened up an English-language network. I've seen it in a few countries, and it is quite instructive," she stated.
Things have changed a lot since the days when Western media outlets, including BBC and CNN, had a monopoly on the coverage of world news. More and more viewers across the world tune into various foreign media to get a fresh take on events.
It is all in the numbers. For instance, RT's presence on YouTube is a real hit: almost 300 million views, when CNN International is struggling to reach 3 million.
RT's constantly growing audience is an indication that the days of media monopoly are over and that people are demanding more multi-polar thinking.
Best regads0 -
He was certainly not going to step down otherwise.
Assad created this conflict right from the start. He invented the notion of "armed terrorists" at the start so that he wouldn't have to go ahead with political reforms. It bought him some time. There were no armed terrorists for the first four months, only unarmed civilians protesting which he started to execute and assasinate.
Four months in the FSA were formed out of soldiers who bravely decided not to shoot protesters (when all the time many posters on here have condemned such soldiers and are outraged that they would defect and not instead shoot unarmed protesters like was asked of them). The FSA was set up to protect peaceful protests, becase Assad has always banned any form of protest.
Assad is a mass murdering thug who long ago lost his legitimacy. He started the violence and the FSA was set up to protect freedom of association and protest which have been non-existant in Syria under the Assad mafia for the last 40 years. And I use the Assad mafia description because they are a mafia organisation with no legitimacy. To believe they would walk away from politics and all the money and wealth they have accumulated and would continue to accumulate is nonsense. It was always going to be a case of forcing them out, or rather Assad behaving so brutally that he brought the wrath of large swathes of the population on himself which is exactly what happened.
He was never going to step down peacefully, arab spring or no arab spring, anyone who thinks he would have are fooling themselves. Yet we still have the same posters who keep saying he might have stepped down, etc. He never allowed protest or opponents to stand in elections, so how or why would he step down? He also is strongly backed by the Alwite community who are in charge of everything in Syria and have done very well under him and never in a million years would they let him step down peacefully.
Only through violence would Assad be forced from power, no other way.
With each of your posts you are saying the same thing only phrasing it differently. Its clear you have a basic and only a basic understanding as to the complexities of Syrian political and domestic life and geopolitics in general its quite obvious. You see this situation in black and white when it is anything but that. Your tacit support of violence and terrorism is hypocrisy of the highest standard considering "law" "order" and "freedom" is what the rebels claim to be fighting for whilst carrying out atrocities of their own and ignoring those principals - correct me if Im wrong but you are of the opinion that the civil war should continue as opposed to a peaceful solution being found that includes Assad and one side of the two sides that is the civil war combatants? You realise what is happening in Syria is a civil war running on sectarian fault lines? Surely you are aware of this. The FSA you refer to as heros are full of headcase Jihadis fighting a holy war. They are targeting secular minorities and carrying out murder against them. This isnt to give Assad and his army a vouchsafe far from it it though that said I think you need a reality check and a big one when it comes to the unfolding situation that is Syria.0 -
A militia adhering to Geneva convention!!! are you serious?
That statement alone proves you have limited view and knowledge of Syria. You have no clue and no idea what so ever about Syria and what is Syria. You make assumptions based on internet reports and media coverage and on top of that make bold statements on the behalf of the Syrian people! And you're only response is by doubting my nationality! I've just about had it with you!
The first casualty of war is the truth, and if you really believe what you read on the net/media, then no point trying to put my view across.
Assad is the ONLY key to this chaos, the only way forward to save the country is to include him in the dialogue, to establish a political agenda/ timeline and a process to change power without arms. Again, if this were as straightforward as you make it out to be, it wouldn't been dragged this long. It wouldn't have taken USA, Russia, and all the gang that long to agree over lunch. But its not as simple. You seem strongly content that the only way to 'enforce' democracy is by the use of arms.
IMHO, the only source of nonsense and extremism in this thread are your posts.
What a wonderful transition into democracy.
Again sources? are you Syrian? had lived, visited in Syria, or have any Syrian friends to keep making such statements? Oh right, you're an avid reader
Absolutely, I blame them for hiding in residential areas, for citing sectarian hate. For killing innocent people and blaming the Syrian forces, for ransacking shops and homes, for terrorising the people to do as they want, for rejecting dialogue. I have seen, heard and lived the events. When a sides forces you to follow their agenda without your free will, they become the thing they're fighting against. - thankfully, you've never experience it, and I hope you never do.
The SFA - SaudiFundedArmy- is a group of terrorists, foreign fighters and jehadists, some from this country (Irish Libyans), who have fought against gadaffi then travelled to Syria to fight. What next? will they take arms tomorrow when they disagree with the political agenda of the Irish government??
This conflict seems to be focused on either being with either FSA or ASSAD.
And who I ask is with Syria? no one. well, I am with Syria, and F**K both sides.
Can you cite one instance of the FSA mass murdering unarmed civilians?
I can cite hundreds of instances of the "Syrian Army" massacring civilians.
So lets have one instance from you of the FSA doing it.
It should be easy, since the FSA are the "bad guys".0 -
I prefer first person sources myself and you definitely are not a first person source nor have you attempted to produce any first person sources, just idle unverified speculation as per usual.
And saying that Assad has caused "99.99%" of all civilian deaths isn't "idle unverified speculation"?
You admit that the Funded by Saudi Arabia is involved in massacres, but then you make unverified claims about all of their victims being "security agents" who deserved it anyway.Thankfully the FSA are brave
Because using residential areas as shields is brave :rolleyes:0 -
I would like to quote one more independent source: Veterans Today
War Without Mercy in Syria
by Stephen Lendman
If wars had labels, Syria’s conflict would be called Made in America.
Paul Wolfowitz and other Project for the New American Century (PNAC) ideologues planned it years ago. They also targeted half a dozen or more other countries.
PNAC’s Statement of Principles called for “shap(ing) a new century favorable to American principles and interests.” Doing so it said requires:
“increase(ing) defense spending significantly;”
“challeng(ing) regimes hostile to our interests and values;” and
“accept(ing) responsibility for American’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.”
PNAC effectively declared war. Independent nations were targeted. Implementing policy required a “catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”
False flags provide pretexts for militarism, wars, occupations, domestic repression, national security state extremism, and other policies antithetical to free and open societies. PNAC members got what they wanted.
They comprise a rogues gallery of hardcore neocon extremists. Charter members included Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, William Kristol, Jeb Bush, and others.
In 2009, PNAC reinvented itself as the Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI). Policies remain unchanged. Regime change in Syria is prioritized. Direct intervention is urged.
Obama is criticized for inaction. “What is clear,” it says, is that America “sent a horrible message to tyrants elsewhere about the (non-existent) costs of mass killings of innocents.”
FPI knows Washington bears full responsibility. It’s not enough. FPI wants full-scale war initiated.
September 11, 2001 was the Big Lie of our time. It was a classic false flag. It launched a decade of wars against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Palestine. Proxy wars rage in Syria, Somalia, Yemen, Bahrain, and elsewhere.
Full-scale ones are planned against Syria and Iran. The road to Tehran runs through Damascus. Western and/or regional intervention looks certain.
Proxies alone can’t match Syria’s superior military capability. Expect Libya 2.0 in some form. Initiating it could happen any time or might follow US November elections. Electoral priorities dictate policy.
On August 11, Reuters headlined “US, Turkey to study Syria no-fly zone,” saying:
Discussions were held about establishing it. No decision was made. During her Ankara visit, Hillary Clinton said further “analysis and operational planning” is needed.
No-fly zones assure war. Gaddafi’s air defenses and command and control capability were bombed after implementing one in Libya. Safe zones are ground based no-fly zones. They also assure war.
On August 12, Today’s Zaman headlined “Turkey signals to US, may go ahead ‘solo’ with safety zones in Syria,” saying:
Ankara “made it clear that it will go ahead with setting up ‘safety zone’ pockets inside Syrian territory to handle the mounting humanitarian crisis.”
Turkey calls it “a significant national security threat.” Ankara and Washington “will press for a UN Security Council resolution mandating the establishment of ‘protective enclaves’ within Syria so that potential refugees will be taken care of inside Syria.”
“This will be complemented by military measures that may include a no-fly zone and restriction of troop movements loyal to the embattled leader of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, in areas close to the border.”
Unnamed Turkish diplomats said “Ankara will go ahead with its own planning” if Russia and/or China veto a supportive resolution.
According to Moscow-based Institute of Strategic Assessments Adzhar Kurtov:
“An analogy with what happened in Libya is hard to ignore here, but the decision to establish a no-fly zone over Libya was made by the UN Security Council, which is still able to make balanced decisions.”
“However, the Americans may try to make it happen in circumvention of the Council, which will set the stage for a ground operation and we already see signs of this in the recent concentrations of armor and artillery along the country’s border with Turkey and Jordan.”
Meanwhile, new reports of insurgent atrocities surfaced. On August 13, Russia Today headlined “Syrian atrocity: Bodies of postal workers thrown from roof,” saying:
Amateur video footage showed it. Bodies were thrown from a post office rooftop. Other corpses were rolled down stairs. Responsibility points to Free Syrian Army (FSA) elements or supporters. They “intentionally target civil servants backing the regime.”
RT said 1.5 million public employees are vulnerable. “Doctors, teachers and municipal workers risk kidnappings or assassinations for simply doing their jobs.”
Dr. Ammar Safi told RT about documents confirming an FSA hit list. Scientists, physicians, and civil servants are targeted. His airline pilot brother Ammar was attacked en route home from the airport.
Other amateur video footage showed Assad loyalist mass executions in Aleppo. Bloodied men were forced to kneel and be machine gunned to death. Militants murdered Syrian state TV host Mohammed al-Saeed.
Pro-regime journalists are vulnerable. SANA state media said its reporter Ali Abbas was killed at home in Damascus. A bomb blast killed another journalist covering a story in a Damascus suburb.
On August 6, a state-run television and radio building was bombed. Foreign journalists use it for broadcasts. Three injuries were reported. Operations continued during the incident.
In late June, insurgents attacked the privately owned Al-Ikhbariaya TV station. It’s located 20 km south of Damascus. Gunmen raided the station. Seven employees were killed. Others were kidnapped.
Al-Ikhbariya’s compound sustained heavy damage. Nonetheless, broadcasts resumed shortly after the attack. Information Minister Omran al-Zoubi called it “a massacre against the freedom of the press.” Terrorists were responsible, he said.
UK journalist/broadcaster Neil Clark told RT that insurgent violence engenders more Assad support. If opposition elements thought Syrians backed them, “it is the other way around now, he said.”
“We had people who supported Assad at the beginning. I mean a lot of people not sure which way to go. They actually are being turned off by the atrocities you outlined,” he added.
“And I would say that possibly the support for President Assad is stronger now than back in March, 2011.”
Syria Tribune editor-in-chief Ali Mohamad told RT:
“Every time (insurgents) call for foreign intervention they are just reassuring everybody that they cannot do anything on the ground.” They lost Damascus.” They’re being routed in Aleppo.
“If they claim they have popular support as they have been saying for 17 months why do they need foreign intervention?”
In late June, the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) issued a duplicitous Syria report. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay spurned her mandate.
Instead of responsibly “strengthening the promotion and protection of human rights,” she defiled them in deference to Western interests.
She pointed fingers the wrong way. She ignored Western-sponsored massacres and other atrocities. She blamed Assad, not foreign mercenaries. She shamelessly represents imperial interests. She and HRC lost credibility.
On August 9, UNC’s media center headlined “Syria: Severe internal displacement crisis due to disregard for human rights and humanitarian law – UN expert.”
According to London School of Economics law lecturer/UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons Chaloka Beyani:
“The intense fighting and use of heavy weaponry in densely populated areas are a major concern. More and more people are being forced daily to flee their homes as a result of escalating violence, and are seeking refuge in host families, schools and makeshift shelters.”
Beyani blamed Assad. He called on him and Syrian authorities to respect international law. He ignored reality on the ground.
Syria was invaded. Its army responsibly confronts militants. Beyani pointed fingers the wrong way. He ignored insurgent atrocities. His concern for human rights stopped short of blaming Western recruited death squads for violating them.
Like Pillay, he serves imperial interests. Both support state sponsored terrorism and genocide. Syria is being ravaged and destroyed. Confronting insurgents takes a toll. No end of conflict is imminent.
Imagine a nation left in ruins. Washington wants all independent ones devastated. Ordinary people suffer most. Many more will die before conflict ends. Perhaps Syria won’t be fit to live in when it does. Imperial policy demands it.0 -
Sam, we have spoken before on other threads and Ive found you to be a reasonable person even if we disagree but can you please drop the "CT" angle to your argument it doesnt do anything for it. Personally I never claimed that the CIA are responsible for the destabilisation of Syria. I posted a link of a US politician claiming that the US are directly and indirectly providing military assistance to the "rebels".
Who do you believe was the driving force behind the UNSC resolutions directed against Syria? It wasnt the Russians nor was it the Chinese perhaps the US? With hot head Hillary making such feverish declarations I think its a safe bet to assume that behind the scenes and indeed in the public eye the US are the driving force. Clinton said that "the Russians and Chinese need to pay a price for blocking progress" which is political speak as Im sure you can figure out yourself, you strike me as an intelligent person, "the Russians and Chinese need to pay a price for blocking our plan".
Would the UK Guardian be based in reality enough for you. Or do they belong in CT land too?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/02/obama-order-supporting-syria-rebels
The US at this stage may be stopping short of arming the rebels outright but if we are to believe reports of which there are many then the CIA are infact involved to some degree in Syria. Im a little confused to be honest are you saying that Im personally claiming that what is happening in Syria is a nefarious US plot or policy? I have never claimed that in any of my posts. If youre going to stand behind that statement you need to show where Ive said that. If I ask you to prove that I "have an axe" to grind do you think you could? I highly doubt it Im not sure how you can make such a statement.
You dont have to apologise but thanks for doing so. My politics are neither left middle or right and certainly not far left. I think the majority of ideologies have good points and bad points, apart from those far right racist parties and others of that ilk who are horrible that is, but I have no affiliation to any one on its own. Can you please stop labeling me as something, with no evidence that is based on assumption and way off the mark would be much appreciated.
I apologize, again, if my tone is over agressive but if thanking a post which is a news item about how the US is coluding with Al Qaeda is not at least hinting at a conspiratorial agenda, really what is? and from the world socialist news site no less! Im glad to see people who are so convinced of mainstream medias adherence to following American "propoganda" is so very careful in choosing scources without a political agenda of its own.
Whilst The Guardian is not in the business of fabricating news (unlike some other sites) it most definitly does have a strong political position. Its anti-American editorialising has been so strong journalists have left the newspaper citing it as a big reason.
The definition of a good scource for people here seems to be ones that confirm their own pre determinded position. That just means it has the same biases as you. Nothing more.
"Its a safe bet?" Wrong, it is not a safe bet to assume the US has more interest in this conflict than other countires in the region and Syria itself. In fact, its a pretty **** bet.
So whats this price do you think Clinton was hinting at for blocking the resolution?
Whether your aware of it or not, plenty of CTers have an axe to grind with regards to the US/Israel/The West. Indeed the POINT of most CTs posted here is to shift responsiblity for any number of events to one or the other.
What do you think the US SHOULD do given the situation? Why are sanctions not a legitimate response?
Further, given how few people seem to believe other nations should take little or no flack for doing the same, why should it not treat the regime as it is, an enemy, and give material support to the side most likely to be ameniable to their interests?
What, exactly, is your position? What do you think would have been a reasonble response from the Syrian people? What do you think a responsible international community would or should do?0 -
teddy_irish wrote: »Well i think you are too addicted to only one official source( don't even want to guess which one) so there it is: Hillary Clinton: US Losing Information War to Alternative Media
Just one good one is worth dozens of the indymedia tripe.teddy_irish wrote: »The US is losing the global information war, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared while appearing before a congressional committee to ask for extra funds to spread US propaganda through new media.
It certainly is losing. Given the enormous amount of disinformation propogated by dozens of sites and stations its not a surprise. It certainly doesnt mean you are now getting the unvarnished truth. Quiet the opposite, given the places and sites that are "winning".teddy_irish wrote: »Clinton was defending her department's budget in front of the House's Committee on Foreign Affairs on Wednesday. She said the US should step up its propaganda effort and get back "in the game" of doing "what we do best."
"During the Cold War we did a great job in getting America's message out. After the Berlin Wall fell we said, 'Okay, fine, enough of that, we are done,' and unfortunately we are paying a big price for it," she said. "Our private media cannot fill that gap."
"We are in an information war and we are losing that war. Al Jazeera is winning, the Chinese have opened a global multi-language television network, the Russians have opened up an English-language network. I've seen it in a few countries, and it is quite instructive," she stated.
Things have changed a lot since the days when Western media outlets, including BBC and CNN, had a monopoly on the coverage of world news. More and more viewers across the world tune into various foreign media to get a fresh take on events.
It is all in the numbers. For instance, RT's presence on YouTube is a real hit: almost 300 million views, when CNN International is struggling to reach 3 million.
RT's constantly growing audience is an indication that the days of media monopoly are over and that people are demanding more multi-polar thinking.
Best regads
RT's and co's success is much more an indication of the appetite for politicaly biased, uni-polar, partisan news scources than anything else. The vast majority of people seek a scource that parrot their opinion back to them, be it The Guardian for "socially progressive" left wing middle classes or FOX for right wing conservatives and Republicans.
That RT is doing far better than CNN merely means there are more people who love to hear about the "evils" of the West and CTs concerning them than people looking for more middle of the road jounalism. It certainly isnt people looking to challenge themselves by incorporating different views and opinions, by and large its the exact opposite. If people wanted merely to know "the truth" do you honestly think there first stop would be Russian state media.
Its incredibly ironic and depressing that those that would most trumpet doubt about "American propoganda" are the ones that seem to swallow whole the propoganda from Russian, Chinese, Iranian, Socialist groups etc etc etc.0 -
I apologize, again, if my tone is over agressive but if thanking a post which is a news item about how the US is coluding with Al Qaeda is not at least hinting at a conspiratorial agenda, really what is? and from the world socialist news site no less! Im glad to see people who are so convinced of mainstream medias adherence to following American "propoganda" is so very careful in choosing scources without a political agenda of its own.
Whilst The Guardian is not in the business of fabricating news (unlike some other sites) it most definitly does have a strong political position. Its anti-American editorialising has been so strong journalists have left the newspaper citing it as a big reason.
The definition of a good scource for people here seems to be ones that confirm their own pre determinded position. That just means it has the same biases as you. Nothing more.
I understand that what is happening in Syria is hard to understand and digest for the supporters, backers, defenders and apologists of US interventionist policy shrouded in the veil of "humanitarianism" throughout the middle east. Perhaps its a case of refusing to see whats infront of you. For more than a decade the mythical "war on terror" has been portrayed as the great threat of our time. Those crazy Jihadis want to kill us, destroy our way of life we must invade and fight them in their countries so they dont attack us here in the West etc,etc.. and what do we have now? collusion as you say is not a word I would use nor have used but the West is most certainly giving the same people they trumpeted as the "enemy" tacit support in what they are doing in Syria.
This is being reported by plenty of news sources yet all the defenders of US foreign policy can do is cry "conspiracy". How long more are you going to try cling to that card and play it when it cant be played. Here is a US source - no doubt they belong in the land of CT too. If it makes you feel better about the Western crusade that is middle east foreign policy keep believing its all one big conspiracy. Its getting old very fast.
http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_21286357/al-qaeda-organizing-cells-joining-rebels-syria-u"Its a safe bet?" Wrong, it is not a safe bet to assume the US has more interest in this conflict than other countires in the region and Syria itself. In fact, its a pretty **** bet.
So whats this price do you think Clinton was hinting at for blocking the resolution?
In fairyland the US have no other interest in Syria other than one of noble concern for the people of Syria and the inalienable right of freedom and democracy for all the peoples of the world.
Meanwhile back in the real world..
Thats a load of boll0x and the US and indeed the West see the toppling of Assad as a crucial maybe even decisive blow in some instances toward the Russian-Chinese-Iranian axis that is in his corner in that part of the world. Earthpolitics is what its about.
Honestly I have no idea what price Hothead Hillary was hinting at and to speculate would be futile. It could be anything from political to economic to military my answer is I dont know.Whether your aware of it or not, plenty of CTers have an axe to grind with regards to the US/Israel/The West. Indeed the POINT of most CTs posted here is to shift responsiblity for any number of events to one or the other.
Ok can you just stop with all that nonsense please just stop it.What do you think the US SHOULD do given the situation? Why are sanctions not a legitimate response?
Sanctions are legitimate. Sanctions with the threat of military action ( chapter 7 of the UNSC resolution that Clinton alluded too) are not. This was the main stumbling block for the Russians and the main reason why they used their veto. Instead of the US playing their zero sum politics is for simpletons game they should change tact and take a different approach. The first thing the US need to do is get the Russians onside. How not to do this is by attempting to bully them. How to do it is for Washington to get on the phone to Moscow and for the Americans to concede and admit that Syria falls under the Russian sphere of influence and not theirs. This a geopolitical reality and its why the Russians are having none of it. Getting Moscow onside is the first place to start - it took the West some 60 odd resolutions with regard to Bosnia before they figured this out last time. If the US make some concessions to the Russians well then they can ask for something in return, its diplomacy you see.Further, given how few people seem to believe other nations should take little or no flack for doing the same, why should it not treat the regime as it is, an enemy, and give material support to the side most likely to be ameniable to their interests?
Because it isnt just about "their" interests.What, exactly, is your position? What do you think would have been a reasonble response from the Syrian people? What do you think a responsible international community would or should do?
My position is that both sides involved in the Syria war need to come to a peaceful solution. And it includes Assad he represents one side of that civil war. The international community should change strategy from gunboat diplomacy to one of moderation and reason. From the beginning the international communities response to what is happening in Syria has been a cluster fook of monumental proportion be it by design, through arrogance or just plain stupidity. Dialogue and diplomacy is the way forward the opposite of this clearly hasnt worked0 -
-
It is again incredibly naive to believe Assad has any interest in negotiating a peaceful solution. The impasse is pretty clear and has been for at least the last year.
Assad won't step down, regardless if the FSA existed or not. He believes it's his role in life to remain as president of Syria and protect the Assad family's claim to the presidency as well as protecting the power and the privilige of the Alwite community. So he was never ever going to step down peacefully. He, his family and sect have way too much to lose from stepping down peacefully so was never going to happen.
And the FSA won't stop fighting until he steps down. And why should they? As long as Assad is alive he will continue to carry out massacres and shell towns and villages as he did today with devastating effect in Azaz, leading it seems to the death of four of the Lebonese hostages.
It's a complete waste of time negotiating with Assad for the reasons mentioned. So I wish people would stop with the nonsense about Assad and the FSA peacefully negotiating a settlement. It's never going to happen. Assad would have to recognise the legitimacy of the FSA first and its cause, and there's isn't a hope of him doing that.
As far as Assad is concerned, he's president for life and that's the end of it. And anyone who says otherwise he'll just kill. Thugs like Assad don't become nice guys overnight. They will always be thugs.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
teddy_irish wrote: »I would like to quote one more independent source: Veterans Today
War Without Mercy in Syria
by Stephen Lendman
If wars had labels, Syria’s conflict would be called Made in America.
Paul Wolfowitz and other Project for the New American Century (PNAC) ideologues planned it years ago. They also targeted half a dozen or more other countries.
PNAC’s Statement of Principles called for “shap(ing) a new century favorable to American principles and interests.” Doing so it said requires:
“increase(ing) defense spending significantly;”
“challeng(ing) regimes hostile to our interests and values;” and
“accept(ing) responsibility for American’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.”
PNAC effectively declared war. Independent nations were targeted. Implementing policy required a “catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”
False flags provide pretexts for militarism, wars, occupations, domestic repression, national security state extremism, and other policies antithetical to free and open societies. PNAC members got what they wanted.
They comprise a rogues gallery of hardcore neocon extremists. Charter members included Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, William Kristol, Jeb Bush, and others.
In 2009, PNAC reinvented itself as the Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI). Policies remain unchanged. Regime change in Syria is prioritized. Direct intervention is urged.
Obama is criticized for inaction. “What is clear,” it says, is that America “sent a horrible message to tyrants elsewhere about the (non-existent) costs of mass killings of innocents.”
FPI knows Washington bears full responsibility. It’s not enough. FPI wants full-scale war initiated.
September 11, 2001 was the Big Lie of our time. It was a classic false flag. It launched a decade of wars against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Palestine. Proxy wars rage in Syria, Somalia, Yemen, Bahrain, and elsewhere.
Full-scale ones are planned against Syria and Iran. The road to Tehran runs through Damascus. Western and/or regional intervention looks certain.
Proxies alone can’t match Syria’s superior military capability. Expect Libya 2.0 in some form. Initiating it could happen any time or might follow US November elections. Electoral priorities dictate policy.
On August 11, Reuters headlined “US, Turkey to study Syria no-fly zone,” saying:
Discussions were held about establishing it. No decision was made. During her Ankara visit, Hillary Clinton said further “analysis and operational planning” is needed.
No-fly zones assure war. Gaddafi’s air defenses and command and control capability were bombed after implementing one in Libya. Safe zones are ground based no-fly zones. They also assure war.
On August 12, Today’s Zaman headlined “Turkey signals to US, may go ahead ‘solo’ with safety zones in Syria,” saying:
Ankara “made it clear that it will go ahead with setting up ‘safety zone’ pockets inside Syrian territory to handle the mounting humanitarian crisis.”
Turkey calls it “a significant national security threat.” Ankara and Washington “will press for a UN Security Council resolution mandating the establishment of ‘protective enclaves’ within Syria so that potential refugees will be taken care of inside Syria.”
“This will be complemented by military measures that may include a no-fly zone and restriction of troop movements loyal to the embattled leader of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, in areas close to the border.”
Unnamed Turkish diplomats said “Ankara will go ahead with its own planning” if Russia and/or China veto a supportive resolution.
According to Moscow-based Institute of Strategic Assessments Adzhar Kurtov:
“An analogy with what happened in Libya is hard to ignore here, but the decision to establish a no-fly zone over Libya was made by the UN Security Council, which is still able to make balanced decisions.”
“However, the Americans may try to make it happen in circumvention of the Council, which will set the stage for a ground operation and we already see signs of this in the recent concentrations of armor and artillery along the country’s border with Turkey and Jordan.”
Meanwhile, new reports of insurgent atrocities surfaced. On August 13, Russia Today headlined “Syrian atrocity: Bodies of postal workers thrown from roof,” saying:
Amateur video footage showed it. Bodies were thrown from a post office rooftop. Other corpses were rolled down stairs. Responsibility points to Free Syrian Army (FSA) elements or supporters. They “intentionally target civil servants backing the regime.”
RT said 1.5 million public employees are vulnerable. “Doctors, teachers and municipal workers risk kidnappings or assassinations for simply doing their jobs.”
Dr. Ammar Safi told RT about documents confirming an FSA hit list. Scientists, physicians, and civil servants are targeted. His airline pilot brother Ammar was attacked en route home from the airport.
Other amateur video footage showed Assad loyalist mass executions in Aleppo. Bloodied men were forced to kneel and be machine gunned to death. Militants murdered Syrian state TV host Mohammed al-Saeed.
Pro-regime journalists are vulnerable. SANA state media said its reporter Ali Abbas was killed at home in Damascus. A bomb blast killed another journalist covering a story in a Damascus suburb.
On August 6, a state-run television and radio building was bombed. Foreign journalists use it for broadcasts. Three injuries were reported. Operations continued during the incident.
In late June, insurgents attacked the privately owned Al-Ikhbariaya TV station. It’s located 20 km south of Damascus. Gunmen raided the station. Seven employees were killed. Others were kidnapped.
Al-Ikhbariya’s compound sustained heavy damage. Nonetheless, broadcasts resumed shortly after the attack. Information Minister Omran al-Zoubi called it “a massacre against the freedom of the press.” Terrorists were responsible, he said.
UK journalist/broadcaster Neil Clark told RT that insurgent violence engenders more Assad support. If opposition elements thought Syrians backed them, “it is the other way around now, he said.”
“We had people who supported Assad at the beginning. I mean a lot of people not sure which way to go. They actually are being turned off by the atrocities you outlined,” he added.
“And I would say that possibly the support for President Assad is stronger now than back in March, 2011.”
Syria Tribune editor-in-chief Ali Mohamad told RT:
“Every time (insurgents) call for foreign intervention they are just reassuring everybody that they cannot do anything on the ground.” They lost Damascus.” They’re being routed in Aleppo.
“If they claim they have popular support as they have been saying for 17 months why do they need foreign intervention?”
In late June, the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) issued a duplicitous Syria report. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay spurned her mandate.
Instead of responsibly “strengthening the promotion and protection of human rights,” she defiled them in deference to Western interests.
She pointed fingers the wrong way. She ignored Western-sponsored massacres and other atrocities. She blamed Assad, not foreign mercenaries. She shamelessly represents imperial interests. She and HRC lost credibility.
On August 9, UNC’s media center headlined “Syria: Severe internal displacement crisis due to disregard for human rights and humanitarian law – UN expert.”
According to London School of Economics law lecturer/UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons Chaloka Beyani:
“The intense fighting and use of heavy weaponry in densely populated areas are a major concern. More and more people are being forced daily to flee their homes as a result of escalating violence, and are seeking refuge in host families, schools and makeshift shelters.”
Beyani blamed Assad. He called on him and Syrian authorities to respect international law. He ignored reality on the ground.
Syria was invaded. Its army responsibly confronts militants. Beyani pointed fingers the wrong way. He ignored insurgent atrocities. His concern for human rights stopped short of blaming Western recruited death squads for violating them.
Like Pillay, he serves imperial interests. Both support state sponsored terrorism and genocide. Syria is being ravaged and destroyed. Confronting insurgents takes a toll. No end of conflict is imminent.
Imagine a nation left in ruins. Washington wants all independent ones devastated. Ordinary people suffer most. Many more will die before conflict ends. Perhaps Syria won’t be fit to live in when it does. Imperial policy demands it.
1. You continue to peddle the lie that those thrown from the roof in Aleppo were postal workers when it has been stated time and time again that they were not postal workers but armed snipers.
2. You continue to use RT as your main source of news on Syria even though it is totally compromised in its coverage of Syria.
For these reasons it's very hard to take you seriously, since you continue to peddle mistruth after mistruth. Citing RT hinders your argument not helps it as does continuing to parrot the RT line that those were postal workers.
To me it seems you come on here, tell a big lie, and see who believes it.
If you want to criticize western foreign policy that's fair enough but why fabricate stories and lies to back it up such as the one about it being postal workers in Aleppo? It undermines your credibility.0 -
Its incredibly ironic and depressing that those that would most trumpet doubt about "American propoganda" are the ones that seem to swallow whole the propoganda from Russian, Chinese, Iranian, Socialist groups etc etc etc.Here here, well said.
Not really. You only think that because you're also an apologist for US foreign policy.
The irony is he does exactly the same thing as those he seeks to criticise for falling for propaganda. As he seems to believe in the fairy tale that the US are primarily concerned with being knights in shining armour, who seek to implement democracy and freedom for all wherever they're involved. it's incredibly bold notion to suggest that America has only an altruistic aim in seeing Syria's current regime fall, given their foreign policy history(which you and he are no doubt well aware of), yet this is what you both continually suggest with your posts in this thread.0 -
Its incredibly ironic and depressing that those that would most trumpet doubt about "American propoganda" are the ones that seem to swallow whole the propoganda from Russian, Chinese, Iranian, Socialist groups etc etc etc
And also there are those who would express doubt over "Russian/Chinese/Iranian propaganda" who would then swallow whole propaganda from the US/UK side.0 -
nacho libre wrote: »Not really. You only think that because you're also an apologist for US foreign policy.
The irony is he does exactly the same thing as those he seeks to criticise for falling for propaganda. As he seems to believe in the fairy tale that the US are primarily concerned with being knights in shining armour, who seek to implement democracy and freedom for all wherever they're involved. it's incredibly bold notion to suggest that America has only an altruistic aim in seeing Syria's current regime fall, given their foreign policy history(which you and he are no doubt well aware of), yet this is what you both continually suggest with your posts in this thread.
I am no more an apologist of US foreign policy than you and other posters who condemn the FSA are apologists for Assad.0 -
I am no more an apologist of US foreign policy than you and other posters who condemn the FSA are apologists for Assad.
Well, i can't speak for others, but the difference between you and I, is that i'm actually not an apologist for either. I understand why you make that accusation, though, as it deflects from your own untenable position of selectively condemning violence, depending of course on the actors involved. For instance if the US and its proxies are doing it there is a context, a greater good involved, where as you've likely no problem seeing the true amoral motives for Russia's direct or indirect involvement in conflicts. The truth is both countries couldn't give a damn about democracy and freedom in Syria, there primary concern is being one step ahead of the other in the fight for global strategic influence, that means having compliance regional players under their influence. This is why Russia is supposedly concerned about forced regime change in Syria. They fear a pro-west government being installed post Assad. Meanwhile America believes in a zero sum game- Assad's removal, whereby one less non- compliance actor on the road to Tehran is removed. Of course you'll persist with the canard that it's about a yearning desire on behalf of the US government for the oppressed people of Syria to be free, conveniently ignoring all the occasions America turned a blind eye to oppression and human right abuses when it was politically expedient for them to do so in pursuance of their geo-political aims.0 -
Could any of our fellow posters explain why when mentioning any of the following: US/Israel/The West - they get very agitated and personal? and I've noticed how they immediately pull out their 'golden' CT card and wave it about in a way to demean and belittle their fellow poster's intelligence and right to express a point.
We can assume that the majority of, or a good number of people around the world aren't that keen, supportive when it comes to foreign us policy - Why? being one; the way I see it - How can 'they' sell/market/promote democracy, freedom of speech and all other affiliated products if 'they' don't own any of them themselves?
back to topic...
Lebanon is being dragged into the conflict, the FSA kidnaps 11 Lebanese, and in return an influential lebanese family kidnaps members of FSA in Lebanon and a 'mysterious' turkish business man. 4 Gulf states calls their citizens to leave immediately for fear that they'll be targeted. What a lovely development for the region... it's looking bright!0 -
Link great article on the ME region addressing the current conflict in Syria and the raising tension between Iran and Israel - by Patrick Seale of the the GulfNews.
The Middle East is facing an acute danger of war, with unpredictable and potentially devastating consequences for countries and populations of the region. A ‘shadow war’ is already being waged — by Israel and the US — against Iran; by a coalition of countries against Syria; and by the great powers against each other. A mere spark could set this tinder alight.
Disastrous as it is, the Syrian civil war is only a sub-plot in a far wider contest. Whether President Bashar Al Assad remains temporarily at the head of the regime, or is persuaded to quit, is far from being the main issue. Those pressing for war do not care about who rules in Damascus. They simply want Syria enfeebled, preferably dismembered, and its allies crippled.0 -
Hopefully a couple of idiots with a primary purpose of making a sectarian war don't emerge. eg. Zarqawi like leaders and "Al-Qaida in Syria" organisations. Sadly, it is likely to happen. Zarqawi was not even from Iraq, and he didn't give a boll0x about the people there.
The question has to be asked: 'do the western leaders want this specific kind of situation?' Are they taking ANY measures to make sure it dosen't happen?
If we could stop this sh1t leaving Ireland again then we can say we have achieved something. We should have learned the lessons at the beginning of the Iraq conflict with the fighters and suicide bombers going from here. We should not underestimate the Libyan Irish that have left from here, and the ability of some of them in particular to gather many followers. Also the Shia communities may have a militant element going over, and also going to the escalating situation in Lebanon, which is joined with the Syrian conflict at the hip.0 -
Advertisement
-
Typical, Fisk is embedded with the Syrian army
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/robert-fisk-they-snipe-at-us-then-run-and-hide-in-sewers-8063515.html0 -
Typical, Fisk is embedded with the Syrian army
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/robert-fisk-they-snipe-at-us-then-run-and-hide-in-sewers-8063515.html
Fisk has been quite critical of the regime since the war started, this was probably the only way he would ever be allowed into the country. Legally at least.
On that basis I'd trust what he has to say in this article.0 -
Typical, Fisk is embedded with the Syrian army
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/robert-fisk-they-snipe-at-us-then-run-and-hide-in-sewers-8063515.html
Would you feel safe going into Aleppo with the rebels after what happened to Alex Thomson?0 -
Japanese reporter travelling with rebels is shot dead in Aleppo.CAIRO - A Japanese journalist has been shot dead at close range in a northern city of war-torn Syria, the Japanese Embassy in Turkey said Monday.
Mika Yamamoto (above), 45, of The Japan Press, an independent news agency, was killed in a gun battle at about 9 p.m. (2 a.m., Tuesday, Singapore) Monday in Aleppo, where government forces and rebels have been locked in intense fighting since late July.
She was traveling with the rebel Free Syrian Army, according to the Foreign Ministry's Japanese Nationals Overseas Safety Division and other sources.
...
Yamamoto was shot in the neck from close range while covering fighting in Aleppo's eastern Suleiman al-Halabi district, where the city's fiercest battles have been occurring.
...
"I saw a group of men wearing camouflage coming closer to us," Sato, who escaped unhurt, later told NTV. "Looking at their helmets, I thought they were government forces. I think I shouted to the others, 'Get out of here!'
"At that moment, they started firing at random," he added.
...
On Monday, rebel forces posted a video titled, "Japanese news reporter Mika...killed by Assad's shabihas" on YouTube. Shabihas are militia loyal to Syrian President Bashar Assad.
http://news.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/World/Story/A1Story20120822-366743.html
It's quite possible rebels set her up to be shot by Syrian Forces like they tried with Thomson.Alex Thomson: "I'm quite clear the rebels deliberately set us up to be shot by the Syrian army. Dead journos are bad for Damascus."0 -
-
http://wsws.org/articles/2012/sep2012/igna-s10.shtml
Much information concerning the dirty world of Imperialist intrigue has emerged.
For those who want to see it is patently clear that Islamic Fundamentalism and Us Imperialism are in fact allies - against socialist revolution.0 -
Advertisement
-
Thanks for the article, Mervyn. Those pseudo-left groups pose an insidious threat to the anti-war movement.When imperialist countries intervene in the affairs of oppressed countries, the justifications do not only emanate from the U.S. government and the corporate media. In each instance, various forces and individuals with liberal and progressive credentials succumb to the imperialist propaganda campaign and put forth pro-intervention arguments, albeit using progressive-sounding analyses and using liberal/left language.
Even if “progressive” arguments for intervention originate far away from the halls of power, and receive no wide audience among the ruling class, they nonetheless play an important role for the imperialist war drives. This is because such arguments address a specific audience: people with anti-war and progressive inclinations who are typically far less susceptible to run-of-the-mill Washington/Wall Street pro-war propaganda. By spreading confusion about the nature of the intervention, and the tasks of the progressive movement, those who would normally be the first responders in the anti-war movement are rendered inactive and passive. This is the value of this kind of propaganda for the ruling class.
http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/news/justifying-imperialist-interventionint.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=partial&utm_campaign=Liberation%20Newsletter0 -
Biggest arms shipment yet has just gone to Turkey from Libya. From there it will go to Syria.
The ultimate disgrace.
over 400 tons including SAM 7 anti-aircraft + rpgs
" Syrian rebels squabble over weapons as biggest shipload arrives from Libya." is the article in the Times.
Was looking at some of the Ummah brigade videos, with the Irish Libyans in it. The Irish fighters are mercenary Islamic fundamentalists, especially those at the top. Some are Salafists, an extremely dangerous form of Islam, that is causing the problem in Egypt. The Irish fighters are trying to soften us to their militant actions through the media, but their actions speak louder than their bullsh1t. Be under no illusions, they are troublemakers. The key ones will survive this conflict because they are very useful people in gathering a mass of supporters, contacts, etc.
Reading more into the conflict I discovered that the conflict is being disguised as a sectarian and religious war. It's actually a war being fueled by the Saudi regimes and Iran trying to hold sway of the region. They are paying people to go fight and cause mayhem. Sickening that Ireland had to be involved in this.0 -
Both the Pope and UN Secretary General have criticised countries who continue to supply arms to government forces and rebels in Syria.
The UN chief told the General Assembly "Those who provide arms to either side are only contributing to further misery - and the risk of unintended consequences as the fighting intensifies and spreads," he said."
http://news.yahoo.com/ban-tell-un-syria-aid-crisis-grave-deteriorating-171805601.html
The Pope has issued his strongest comments yet on the crisis, calling the import of arms to Syria a "grave sin""The import of weapons has to finally stop," Benedict, 85, told journalists on the plane. "Without the import of arms the war cannot continue. Instead of importing weapons, which is a grave sin, we have to import ideas of peace and creativity."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/14/pope-lebanon-idUSL5E8KEKRE20120914
It is my belief that all foreign powers meddling in Syria are nothing more than merchants of misery and no right thinking person should be supporting their activities.0 -
Biggest arms shipment yet has just gone to Turkey from Libya. From there it will go to Syria.
The ultimate disgrace.
over 400 tons including SAM 7 anti-aircraft + rpgs
" Syrian rebels squabble over weapons as biggest shipload arrives from Libya." is the article in the Times.
Was looking at some of the Ummah brigade videos, with the Irish Libyans in it. The Irish fighters are mercenary Islamic fundamentalists, especially those at the top. being disguised as a sectarian and religious war. It's actually a war being fueled by the Saudi regimes and Iran trying to hold sway of the region. They are paying people to go fight and cause mayhem. Sickening that Ireland had to be involved in this.
An interesting development indeed.
Quite bizzarre to see how the UN/NATO need to depose Gadaffi's regime has seen that country proceed rapidly through assisted revolution,new democratic dawn,new democratic regime and now to the status,once again,of an Arms exporter...that's impressive.Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.
Charles Mackay (1812-1889)
0 -
While the battle for Syria enrages with no clear end in sight, there appears to already be one winner from the conflict, America.
Should the opposition prevail, the result will be a Sunni led government that will be hostile to Iran and alligned to US allies in the region such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey. This would mean that Iran's growing influence in Iraq and its strong influence in Lebanon would be curtailed and this may allow the US to divert much needed resources elsewhere. With Syria no longer posing as a bulwark for Iran, America could reduce the resources it devotes to containing the Iranian sphere of influence in the region and allow the likes of Turkey to play a more prominent role.
Furthermore Russia's sphere of influence in the region would also be reduced and this could also mean the loss of the all important Tartus base for the Russian navy. Such an outcome would severely weaken the influence of two of the US's biggest competitors in the region, Iran and Russia, while simulatanously allowing the US to scale back on its deployments in the Middle East at a time when the US economy is struggling.
The quick removal of Assad is evidently the preferred option for American interests, however a prolonged civil war with Assad remaining in power still benefits American interests. First and foremost, Syria's power and influence will be all but extinguished as it fights to control a domestic insurgency whilst crippled with sanctions. Iran, itself struggling with economic sanctions, will find itself having to compete with the the oil rich Gulf states to ensure Assad remains in power and this will undoubtedly strain Iran. It seems unlikely that Iran could keep up with the spending power of the Gulf states in a prolonged conflict without vastly over exerting itself. At a time when there is considerable talk of an impending Israeli strike on Iran, Iran will have to devote a significant amount of resources to a conflict that, given the support enjoyed by the opposition, it is unlikely to win.
Although Russia may retain its influence in Syria, its usefulness will be curtailed by a weakened Syria regime that is desperately struggling to cling to power. Russia will continue to be marginalized by most of the international community for its role in supporting Assad and like Iran, will have to devote resources to a conflict that is unwinnable for Assad. Furthermore, as a consequence of supporting Assad, Russia may see funding increased for sunni insurgents in the Caucasus by the Gulf states.0 -
Advertisement
-
Not that I don't believe but have you got a source to back it up?Biggest arms shipment yet has just gone to Turkey from Libya. From there it will go to Syria.
The ultimate disgrace.
over 400 tons including SAM 7 anti-aircraft + rpgs
.
ok found it, original article from the times uk, can be viewed here:
http://www.syriaonline.sy/?f=Details&pageid=3618&catid=240 -
The world needs to surport Syria against the rebels.
if the rebels win this will turn the country into an Islamists state.
We will pay a heavy price for this.
Don't think Ireland will be excepted from this on going terror from the Islamists
Coming to a country near you.
Sooner than you think.0 -
Children of Syria badly traumatisedChildren from war-torn Syria are being badly traumatised from witnessing killings, torture and other atrocities in the country's conflict, a charity has warned.
Harrowing testimony collected from refugees in Save the Children projects reveals that youngsters have been the target of brutal attacks, seen the deaths of parents, siblings and other children, and have witnessed and experienced torture.
Speaking after returning from Jordan where he met refugee children, Justin Forsyth, Save the Children's chief executive, said: "No child should ever see the horrors being described on a daily basis to our staff on the ground; stories of torture, murder and terror.
Save the Children is on the ground on Syria's borders, providing emotional support to thousands of children who have fled to neighbouring countries, helping them recover from their experiences and rebuild their lives. The agency has launched an appeal to help fund its work in the region.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5gsKN16RpT-AGi_xQ-i_amLKUoylA?docId=N0373061348499458381A
Every single country that has sent either money or weapons to the warring parties in Syria has contributed to the traumatisation of Syria's children.0 -
...............
Was looking at some of the Ummah brigade videos, with the Irish Libyans in it. The Irish fighters are mercenary Islamic fundamentalists, especially those at the top. Some are Salafists, an extremely dangerous form of Islam, that is causing the problem in Egypt. .............
You've a source for all this?0 -
Syria vows to 'crush' rebels and restore stability."Our armed forces today are more resolved to restore security and stability to Syria and cut off the hand of whomever tries to harm it and eliminate the remnants of defeated terrorists wherever they are," Minister al-Freij reiterated.
Gen. Fahd Jassem al-Freij also added that the "Syrian army forces are determined to restore security, stability and trust and there will be no mercy on terrorists."
http://www.dp-news.com/en/detail.aspx?articleid=132455
Hopefully it won't be long before those Western backed terrorists are eliminated and Syria can find peace again.0 -
Syria vows to 'crush' rebels and restore stability.
http://www.dp-news.com/en/detail.aspx?articleid=132455
Hopefully it won't be long before those Western backed terrorists are eliminated and Syria can find peace again.
Not that you presume or assume or anything. Even if some of the rebels have received western backing, it doesn't mean that their raison d'etre is not internal greivances within syria.0 -
They are just angry tourists up until they are armed, so the western support of terror is important for the transformation.Not that you presume or assume or anything. Even if some of the rebels have received western backing, it doesn't mean that their raison d'etre is not internal greivances within syria.0 -
In Ireland, Yusuf Al-Qaradawi and the European Council for Fatwa and Research (Based in Ireland) want militancy against the Gaddafis and Assad, but on Bahrain his excuse is that it's unfortunately a sectarian war . Just a little selective perhaps? Forgive me if I'm wrong but isn't a sectarian war what they are working towards in Syria?
Of course it has nothing to do with the fact that he and the ECFR like so many other financed clerics are paid by Saudi Wahabbists. I wonder does he know any of the Irish Salafists gone to Syria? I bet he knows all too much about that . I bet he even hooked them up with a few well educated individuals from fine states such as Egypt, Yemen, Iraq etc. Probably made sure they have enough money to get by as well.
1 word is sufficient and vital to deal with the treacherous individuals of the ECFR: OUT.
ECFR is based in Dublin. Strong emphasis on Ummah. Ummah this, Ummah that. (it's all just a mask for Saudi agenda for Syria, Libya, Egypt, etc.) No wonder the Ummah brigade in Syria is led from Ireland.
Makes sense why BinLaden said Ireland was ready for Islam. Sure, his rich Wahhabi buddies were paying these rats.
This is not "coming to Ireland for a better life". This is behaving as Saudis political rats akin to what has happened in Egypt. No wonder the distrust between the Shia and certain Sunni branches (Salafists, Wahhabists) here. Saudi is the problem. No to the Mosque-IslamCulturalCenter for Dublin, and let's nip the immigration issue in the bud right now.0 -
interesting read:
The security services have identified a young British jihadi as the ringleader of about 50 Muslims who have gone to fight a holy war against President Assad in Syria.
The man, in his twenties and believed to be from a Bangladeshi family, is regarded as a high-ranking officer in an international group of terrorists devoted to the struggle.
Source: Times.co.uk0 -
The US is uncertain on the origin of the shells fired into Turkey.It is not clear who is shooting shells from Syria into Turkey, the commander of the U.S. Army Europe and Seventh Army, Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling has said...
"We are not sure if these shells are from the Syrian army, from rebels who want to get Turkey involved in the issue or from the PKK [Kurdish Workers’ Party],"
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/origin-of-syrian-shells-into-turkey-unclear-us-general-says.aspx?pageID=238&nID=33386&NewsCatID=359
The Syrian army have enough problems without drawing Turkey into the fight so it's most likely the rebels who are responsible for the shelling.
NATO's response to the shelling was interesting.The shelling of Turkey "constitutes a cause of greatest concern for, and is strongly condemned by, all allies", the Nato ambassadors said in a statement.
"The alliance continues to stand by Turkey and demands the immediate cessation of such aggressive acts against an ally, and urges the Syrian regime to put an end to flagrant violations of international law."
http://news.sky.com/story/992856/syria-shells-turkey-un-calls-for-calm
So the West is essentially urging Syria to stop the rebels from attacking their ally but at the same time the West continues to arm the rebels in their fight against Syria.
It's not hard to see why Putin blames the West for creating chaos in Syria.MOSCOW/ BEIRUT: Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday accused the West of pursuing policies that had destabilised states in the Arab world and now risked creating chaos in Syria.
“The most important thing is that our partners cannot stop themselves,” news agencies quoted Putin as saying at his local Moscow residence at a meeting with local residents of the Ryazan region in central Russia.
“They have already created a situation of chaos in many territories and are now continuing the same policy in other countries — including Syria,” said Putin.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-1-134566-Western-policies-encouraging-chaos-in-Syria-Putin0 -
Advertisement
Advertisement