Syrian rebels detonate bomb next to school in Damascus

cyberhog

More than 50 were killed and 200 wounded in a car bombing in the centre of Syria's embattled capital Damascus in one of the worst attacks in the capital since the start of the civil war.

...opposition activists said most of the victims were civilians, including children.

"There are children among the casualties and injuries as the bomb hit near Ibn Al-Atheer school, and at a time students were leaving school," an activist who was nearby, Iman Al-Huda, told The Daily Telegraph.

The attack, bore the hallmarks of the jihadist rebel group Jabhat al-Nusra...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9886495/Damascus-bomb-one-of-deadliest-of-Syrian-civil-war.html

Such a vile attack!

Obama and his cohorts should be horribly ashamed of themselves. Their support for the rebels has prolonged the conflict and provided the conditions for terrorism to flourish. But I don't expect they feel any shame at all. They only thing they care about is regime change.

E.S.T.

How come you didn't quote this part of the article?

There was no immediate claim of responsibility for Thursday's attack, but Jabhat al-Nusra, which America has proscribed as a terrorist group for its alleged ties to al-Qaeda in Iraq, has admitted to at least seven similar bombings this month alone in the city. The Syrian foreign ministry blamed the bombing on "terrorist" groups linked to al-Qaeda, "that receive financial and logistic help from abroad".

What rocket scientist decided to keep a school open next to the headquarters of the regime?

cyberhog

E.S.T. wrote: »

How come you didn't quote this part of the article?

Not sure what the point of your question is?

E.S.T.

cyberhog wrote: »

Not sure what the point of your question is?

You are using this attack to bash the US even though the article you quoted points out that it was carried out by a group that is not supported by the US and who the US designated a terrorist group a few weeks ago.

the_syco

cyberhog wrote: »

Not sure what the point of your question is?

You're trying to make it out that America is responsible...

The attack, which bore the hallmarks of the jihadist rebel group Jabhat al-Nusra, further highlighted the divide in the opposition.

...and not the jihadst rebel group.

cyberhog

E.S.T. wrote: »

You are using this attack to bash the US even though the article you quoted points out that it was carried out by a group that is not supported by the US and who the US designated a terrorist group a few weeks ago.

When the West meddles in other countries affairs it can't then turn around and claim it bears no responsibility for the carnage that ensues.

The uprising would have been over very quickly if Obama and his allies had not given support to the rebels. That support has exacerbated the fighting and the resulting instability has created opportunities for terrorists to wreak havoc.

E.S.T. wrote: »

What rocket scientist decided to keep a school open next to the headquarters of the regime?

I am more interested to know why you are having a dig at the authorities but not condemning the terrorists? It seems to me you are just using this attack to bash the authorities.

ressem

When the West meddles in other countries affairs it can't then turn around and claim it bears no responsibility for the carnage that ensues.

Specifically who has meddled in what way that has been strongly linked to causing what carnage?
Your statement is so vague that you could substitute "the Red Cross/Red Crescent" for "the West".

"The West" or the USA?
If you mean the US then the acknowledged support is...
a) supplying encrypted radios. (presumably traceable)
b) diplomatic recognition.
c) humanitarian.
d) permission for the "Free Syrian Army" to carry out financial transactions.

The Guardian says that the white house has blocked the supply of lethal munitions, as they've learned that it'll come back to bite them.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/08/pentagon-supported-plan-syrian-rebels

Saudi Arabia and Turkey are supplying weaponry and military training. Do we know whether they are supporting the same factions within the rebels or opposing factions?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/01/us-usa-syria-obama-order-idUSBRE8701OK20120801

Jaafa

The US has blocked a security council statement condemning the attack. Its clear who they support.

ressem

Jaafa wrote: »

The US has blocked a security council statement condemning the attack. Its clear who they support.

The US stated perspective is that they wanted to add a bit criticizing the Syrian government to the Russian draft statement. Russia refused.
Diplomats playing their bloody point-scoring games.

http://un-report.blogspot.ie/2013/02/russian-draft-statement-on-terrorist.html wrote:

The members of the Security Council condemned in the strongest terms the terrorist attack that occurred in downtown Damascus, Syria on 21 February, 2013, in close proximity to diplomatic missions, causing scores of deaths and injuries. They expressed their deep sympathy and sincere condolences to the victims of these heinous acts and to their families, and to the people of Syria.

The members of the Security Council reaffirmed that terrorism in all its forms and manifestations constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security, and that any acts of terrorism are criminal and unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation, wherever, whenever and by whomsoever committed.

The members of the Security Council reiterated their determination to combat all forms of terrorism, in accordance with its responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations.

The members of the Security Council reminded States that they must ensure that measures taken to combat terrorism comply with all their obligations under international law, in particular international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law.

JustinDee

cyberhog wrote: »

When the West meddles in other countries affairs it can't then turn around and claim it bears no responsibility for the carnage that ensues

*Sigh* The West (ie. where you're from) is not the only outside influence in Syria. Or does Soviet then Russian and Iranian "meddling" not count in your monocular and cherry-picked view?

cyberhog

JustinDee wrote: »

*Sigh* The West (ie. where you're from) is not the only outside influence in Syria. Or does Soviet then Russian and Iranian "meddling" not count in your monocular and cherry-picked view?

*Sigh* I think you need to learn the meaning of the word before you try to use it.

med·dle [med-l]
verb (used without object), med·dled, med·dling.
to involve oneself in a matter without right or invitation; interfere officiously and unwantedly:

Russia and Iran are Syria's allies, their involvement is welcome and appreciated by Syria. The West did not receive Syria's approval to get involved in the conflict, therefore, by definition, Obama and his cohorts are meddling in Syria's affairs.

JustinDee

cyberhog wrote: »

*Sigh* I think you need to learn the meaning of the word before you try to use it.

Russia and Iran are Syria's allies, their involvement is welcome and appreciated by Syria. The West did not receive Syria's approval to get involved in the conflict, therefore, by definition, Obama and his cohorts are meddling in Syria's affairs.

I know what the word means. I'm just not applying it subjectively in a pro-agendaic diatribe which via its repetition comes across as childish, myopic and utterly I'll-informed.

How many coups, sabotage, attacks and assassinations have Syria been involved in around the region over the years? Who do you bloody well think supported them?

cyberhog

JustinDee wrote: »

I know what the word means.

You clearly don't. You believe Russia and Iran are meddling in Syria when in fact they are helping their ally defend itself from Western backed foreign militants, terrorists, and local thugs.

JustinDee wrote: »

How many coups, sabotage, attacks and assassinations have Syria been involved in around the region over the years? Who do you bloody well think supported them?

What is so strange about that? You know full well both sides use proxies.

JustinDee wrote: »

The Middle East has been Western Allies v USSR/Russia & China since the early-1940s right up to today.

JustinDee wrote: »

The Middle East is still a cold war theatre and has been since 1942.

Jaafa

ressem wrote: »

The US stated perspective is that they wanted to add a bit criticizing the Syrian government to the Russian draft statement. Russia refused.
Diplomats playing their bloody point-scoring games.

I see nothing wrong with that draft statement. It doesn't name either the rebels or the government, but condemns all forms of terrorism. Why did the US insist they have to add in a part specially singling out the government?

ressem

Why did the US insist they have to add in a part specially singling out the government?

The government and Russia / RT News have been applying the term terrorist to all rebel groups.
So by accepting the statement as it stands a UN statement would be spun by the Syrian government for political purposes. So the US thinks that it's in their interest to weaken the statement by including atrocities by the government forces.

Interview of Brahimi by RT.

http://rt.com/op-edge/syria-assad-un-brahimi-262/ wrote:

RT: Why do you think the Syrian uprising has such a strong terrorist element to it?

LB: You see, this is again – what is it that you call terrorist? Very often a lot of people call terrorist what others call liberation movement. And I think in Syria we have something similar. There are definitely acts of horrible violence – unacceptable violence – that is done by both sides. But to say that the struggle is between the government and terrorist is a little bit pushing it too far.

RT: Sure. The UN commission believes that jihadist terror brigades operating in Syria – Jabhat al-Nusra, Fatah al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham – are backed from abroad.

LB: A lot of people are backed from abroad that doesn’t necessary make them terrorists. The Jabhat al-Nusra is considered a terrorist organization by a lot of people, including a lot of Syrians. But it doesn’t mean that everybody is a terrorist in Syria.

The OP wants to push responsibility on the white house for a heinous act. Those reported as responsible are more likely to have Saudi support.

It's a civil war with all the neighbours rowing in an attempt to strengthen or weaken the six or seven subgroups. History suggests that the Kurds are going to get attacked by just about everyone again unless someone meddles.

cyberhog

ressem wrote: »

The OP wants to push responsibility on the white house for a heinous act. Those reported as responsible are more likely to have Saudi support.

Obama has given the Saudis his blessing to supply the rebels, just as he did in Libya.

As the nyt put it "Relying on surrogates allows the United States to keep its fingerprints off operations" (or so they think)

The nyt went on to say that arms shipments to Libyan rebels from Obama's gulf allies "strengthened militant groups in Libya, allowing them to become a destabilizing force" and the resulting instability created an impetus to terrorism.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&

So Obama isn't fooling anyone by delegating the weapons transfers to his gulf allies. It just demonstrates what a pathetic weasel he is.

cyberhog

It is now being reported that heavy weapons are pouring into Syria from Obama's gulf allies. The Western media claims the new armaments will "counter the growing influence of Islamist extremist groups in the north of Syria by boosting more moderate groups fighting in the south"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/in-syria-new-influx-of-weapons-to-rebels-tilts-the-battle-against-assad/2013/02/23/a6bf2bc0-7dfb-11e2-9073-e9dda4ac6a66_story.html

That of course is utter nonsense.

The terrorists will once again benefit from Western approved arms shipments because the leader of Syria's opposition coalition has made it quite clear that he considers Jabhat al-Nusra to be a legitimate part of the opposition.

"The decision to consider a party that is fighting the regime as a terrorist party needs to be reviewed," Mouaz Alkhatib told a "Friends of Syria" meeting in Morocco, where Western and Arab states granted full recognition to the coalition seeking to oust President Bashar al-Assad.

"We might disagree with some parties and their ideas and their political and ideological vision. But we affirm that all the guns of the rebels are aimed at overthrowing the tyrannical criminal regime."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/12/syria-crisis-alkhatib-idUSL5E8NC7Z320121212

So Obama is effectively arming terrorists with heavy weaponry which they will then use to slaughter even more innocent civilians.

At this stage I can no longer find nice diplomatic words to describe the evil wickedness of the Western-Arab-Israeli alliance. They have sunk so low in the scale of life they have become satanic in nature. Well at least we can take consolation in knowing that they will one day have to face their maker.

ressem

cyberhog wrote: »

Obama has given the Saudis his blessing to supply the rebels, just as he did in Libya.

As the nyt put it "Relying on surrogates allows the United States to keep its fingerprints off operations" (or so they think)

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&

So Obama isn't fooling anyone by delegating the weapons transfers to his gulf allies. It just demonstrates what a pathetic weasel he is.

An odd article. It starts off saying that the Obama administration gave it's blessing to the arms shipments. It goes on to say that they didn't initially try to block them.

The article then outlines where an american arms dealers tried to sell to Libya. But their license was refused.
So they sold to Qatar from where they were sold on to anyone and everyone.

Corruption, incompetence and blase disregard to deaths caused by everyone involved is my reading of it.

JustinDee

cyberhog wrote: »

You clearly don't. You believe Russia and Iran are meddling in Syria when in fact they are helping their ally defend itself from Western backed foreign militants, terrorists, and local thugs.



What is so strange about that? You know full well both sides use proxies

You still don't see the pro-agendaic subjectivity in your replies. Syria's interference in other neighbouring countries is sponsored. There is no difference with what goes on now in Syria and what they themselves have effected outside their own borders.

Cork boy 55

The situation on the various fronts is becoming increasingly desperate for regime
Its is quite possible a false flag attack by the 50 year democidal manical military-police state that "runs" Syria.
How the hell did a big bomb like this get through all the checkpoints of Damascus?
The Syrian regime has a long history of using car bombs both foreign and domestic overt and covert They have a reputation for it
Even since the beginning of this conflict we have seen car bombs go off behind rebel lines and in the Lebanon targeting anti-Syrian figures like Wissam al-Hassan see link
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/lebanon/9620544/Beirut-car-bomb-Lebanese-police-intelligence-chief-reported-dead.html
State terrorism prefers the massacre by car bomb because it promotes panic and impulsive reactions and drives people into the states arms for "security" at this
critcal moment in battle for Aleppo city airport.
Nobody claims responsibility AFAIK
opposition activist are blaming the regime.

Some opposition activists claimed that to get through government checkpoints to the city centre the bombers must have been backed by the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.
Musab Abu Qatada, head of the rebel Damascus Military Council, said: "The bombing in Al-Mazraa was committed by the regime to cover its crimes, to provide a justification that his crimes are a response to the 'terrorists and extremists'. But the truth is that there is no terrorist or extremist except this criminal regime."

Jonny7

JustinDee wrote: »

You still don't see the pro-agendaic subjectivity in your replies. Syria's interference in other neighbouring countries is sponsored. There is no difference with what goes on now in Syria and what they themselves have effected outside their own borders.

This is not an intended debate on Syria, anymore than OP's posts two years ago were a debate on Libya. It's partisan polemic and it will keep coming.

cyberhog

As I expected, heavy weaponry has reached the north of Syria where Al-Nusra and other extremist groups are situated.

The video below shows a helicopter being shot down near Aleppo yesterday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cadzeH1Jlzg

Another video showing rebels in the North with SA-24 MANPADS

http://the-trigger.tumblr.com/post/43888322344/in-this-video-posted-online-on-february-22-2013

It's only a matter of time now until the terrorists get their hands on some of these Western approved heavy weapons but the rebel supporters will just shrug their shoulders and carry on attacking those of us who challenge the Assad evil rebels good narrative.

Black Swan

MOD COMMENT:
This thread has experienced way below standards posting by a few members, several of whom have had yellow and red cards issued as a result. Our charter does not allow posters to get "too personal" with each other, or abusive. Please challenge the post, not the poster per charter.

This thread is temporarily closed pending further review.