Here we go again USA vs Syria

[Chucaro]

United States is preparing for potential military action on Syria (http://www.abc.net.au/news/#state=tas)

Now we have to see what Russia have to say about intervention :(
They have said: Russia calls on Syria to cooperate with UN over chemical weapons probe (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-23/russia-urges-syria-to-cooperate-on-un-chemical-weapons-probe/4909446)

[Ralph1Malph]

Actually Chukka, I agree with you this time!:D
We should just embargo and stop all travel to/from - virtually isolate the state of Syria and let them have at it!
I am sure that the good folk of Syria would prefer to sort out their own country, free from meddling nations. They will eventually sort it out and re-join the world.:ohyes:[tonguewink]

Ralph

[Chucaro]

Actually Chukka, I agree with you this time!:D
We should just embargo and stop all travel to/from - virtually isolate the state of Syria and let them have at it!
I am sure that the good folk of Syria would prefer to sort out their own country, free from meddling nations. They will eventually sort it out and re-join the world.:ohyes:[tonguewink]

Ralph

Ralph, if one day I manage to cool down my blood before I hit the keyboard we will agree in 90% and the other 10% will be because my spanglish :D

I do not know if I am sarcastic but it come to my attention that just when we are going to finish the conflict in the other patch and the soldiers will come back home these bastards (AKA politicians) are looking for a way to maintain occupied their soldiers and feed some money to the arm dealers.

[manic]

The syrian revolution was conceived and has since been sponsored, armed and guided by foreign operatives.

Once the country has been sufficiently weakened, the operatives will trigger a red line clause that paves the way for the USA to save the day.

This news bulletin has been brought to you from the 'Pessimists Bureau of most Probable Reality'.

Have a nice day.

[Hall]

Could not agree more manic. The Yanks go back over a hundred years when it comes to manipulating the situation in foreign country's. Syria needs to be weakened a fair bit more militarily though before it would be a walk over.
Cheers Hall

[Bigbjorn]

An excuse to maintain an American army in the oil fields.

Assad is the best of a bad bunch. With whom would you replace him? He is educated, (an engineer), western orientated, against Islamic fundamentalism, recognises and protects his Christian minority whose women are not required to wear the tent or bag over their heads. Over 1,000,000 Syrian Christians have fled into Lebanon from rebel held areas.

[Ferret]

.. He is educated, (an engineer)...

Ophthalmologist actually, but who's counting.

If use of chemical weapons is said to be a red line then why would govt. forces use them on opposition forces when UN inspectors are in town and just down the road?

Chemical weapons probably have been used in this case but by which side and for what reasons. As always in these dirty games the truth is not easy to get at.

Best to stay on sidelines on this one.

[wrinklearthur]

Chemical weapons probably have been used in this case but by which side and for what reasons. As always in these dirty games the truth is not easy to get at.
X2


[/QUOTE]Best to stay on sidelines on this one.[/QUOTE]


Hear hear!

[carjunkieanon]

Picturing my kids wrapped up like these kids... or like the kids in picture 13

Horrific images were taken this week of an alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria. Rows of bodies, including many children, fill rooms and streets in the eastern suburbs of Damascus, and Syrian activists are reporting hundreds of people killed. The Syrian government denies the use of chemical weapons, and an investigation continues. The civil war persists as forces continued fighting and droves fled the country. (WARNING: Images are graphic)( 25 photos total)

Assault in Syria - The Big Picture - Boston.com (http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2013/08/assault_in_syria.html)

[Chucaro]

I guess that this is one of the organizations that are going to report the truth without any political interests.

Medecins Sans Frontieres says 3,600 people flooded hospitals, and 355 died, after suspected chemical attack in Damascus. (http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/08/201382417141280856.html)

[wrinklearthur]

I hope that the perpetrators of this heinous crime are sort out quickly and brought to justice.
Until the UN inspectors have done their job, we can not point the finger at anyone, we must wait.
.

[richard4u2]

on the ABC news they make a foot note at the end of the vision that it was made by a local movie maker so is the vision real or not

[bob10]

Will they, or won't they, it would be a very tricky operation, with the potential for failure high, Bob . From NBC News





Updated
14
hours
ago
U.S. military options in Syria: A briefing

NBC's Richard Engel reports from the Turkish border that Syrians believe that if the U.S. does not respond with military force to what they believe are chemical attacks against citizens, it will only encourage Bashar al-Assad to strike again.

By Jim Miklaszewski, Courtney Kube and Erin McClam, NBC News
The crisis in Syria deepened Monday as U.N. weapons inspectors, allowed to access the area where an alleged chemical attack occurred last week, were fired on by snipers. As the situation deteriorates, military intervention becomes less of an “if” and more of a “when” — and that task would probably fall to the United States.
U.S. military action through the United Nations seems a dead end because Russia has veto power in the U.N. Security Council, and Russia is supporting the government of the Syrian president, Bashar Assad.
That means the United States would have to work through NATO — probably with enough support from the Arab League to give the West diplomatic cover — or go it almost entirely alone, if it decides to take military action to stop Assad from using chemical weapons.
Advertise (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31066137/media-kit/) | AdChoices (http://g.msn.com/AIPRIV/en-us)









intervening in Syria is not as simple as ordering tidy American airstrikes.
Moves made
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/08/162.jpgReuters / Abo Alnour Alhaji
U.N. chemical weapons experts visit a Syrian hospital where people are treated after an apparent gas attack.


The United States has four destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean, close to Syria. But the U.S. Navy maintains a steady presence in the Mediterranean, so the temporary increase appears to be more for saber-rattling than a tactical step to ready for an attack.
American destroyers can already launch attacks against Syrian targets from much farther west in the Mediterranean. And there has been no sign that the United States is moving any additional assets that would suggest imminent action from those ships.
How to strike
An airstrike from the United States intended to hobble Syria’s storage or delivery of chemical weapons is more complicated than flying a couple of jets. It takes backup — search-and-rescue teams, MedEvac equipment, refueling aircraft.
So far, there is no sign that any of those reinforcements are moving.
In addition, Syria has relatively strong air defenses — much stronger than Libya had during its standoff with the West two years ago — and conventional bombing would run the risk that the Syrian regime could shoot down a manned American plane.
Still, if the United States elected to use bombers, it could fly B-2 stealth planes, perhaps from Whiteman Air Force Base, in Missouri. B-2 bombers are skilled at evading powerful anti-aircraft defenses.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/08/163.jpgAFP - Getty Images file
A 2009 photo shows Egyptian children standing on a pier in the port town of Ismalia as the U.S. guided-missile destroyer USS Mahan travels the Suez from the Red Sea toward the Mediterranean. The US Sixth Fleet, with responsibility in the Mediterranean, has decided to keep the USS Mahan in the region.


But any American strike against Syria would probably take a different form — cruise missile strikes launched from the Mediterranean, not flying American aircraft directly into Syrian airspace.
American drone strikes might also be an option. But while the United States has plenty of drones in the broader Middle East, few armed drones are believed to be near Syria at the moment. American drone activity remains focused on Yemen, Pakistan and the Horn of Africa.
So the most likely American option is cruise missile strikes from what are known as TLAMs — Tomahawk land attack missiles, fired from destroyers or submarines. They have small engines and are extremely accurate.
Even with cruise missiles, it’s not as easy as bombing a Syrian factory that makes chemical weapons. It doesn’t take a four-star general to figure out why firing a missile into a giant chemical-weapons stockpile is a dangerous idea.
Any American attack would probably come at night. The reason for that is simple: It lowers the chance that innocent people will be hurt. Fewer people are out on the streets near the target, and fewer drivers are on the road.
Best target
The best American option would probably be to go after the mechanisms Syria uses to deploy its chemical weapons — delivery systems and command-and-control structures.
Even then, Assad knows better than to put chemical weapons stockpiles and delivery systems in the middle of nowhere. He probably has positioned them in strategically tricky places, like close to schools and towns.
That way, an enemy strike would run the risk of harming huge numbers of Syrian civilians, even children, and acts as a deterrent for enemies of the Syrian government

[Hall]

On the ABC news tonight. England has indicated it would react in a military way with or with out UN approval as in go it alone. Russia has in a very blunt diplomatic way said any strike on Syria with out UN approval would have serious consequences. So the plot thickens.
Cheers Hall

[101RRS]

Ok - 1500 people get killed in a gas attack - that is very bad but our self appointed world police want to launch attacks that will cause civilian collateral damage most likely in the many thousands. What am I missing here.

Given the US track record I would believe the regime in Syria over the USA any time and I do not believe the regimes of either side.

[THE BOOGER]

,The small scale use of a chemical weapon just dos not make sense if it was the govt, why when they know what the west will do but if you wanted to get the west involved then it makes sense. I wonder if the UN inspectors can say if it was something cooked up in a garage or not, they big question is who did it:(

[Chucaro]

Interesting how England think in getting involved in the dispute.
Just wonder if it is because the UK government it is not popular and looking for a distraction :angel:
The "Iron Lady" have done it before with good results and the problem in the last few weeks with Spain when cold. Just a thought.........

[Pickles2]

I see a bit of "anti-U.S." sentiment here,.....well I ain't one of that crew. I have a lot of time for the Yanks.
Having said that, I've read in the Press for the last few days that "Countries" are looking for the U.S. to do something/intervene.
I really don't have a problem with that, as long as they don't do it ON THEIR OWN. If "intervention" is the right thing, surely others will support the U.S., & get involved.
A Russia/U.S./U.K./ & what about China... JOINT effort is what is required to stop this carnage.
So whilst I certainly ain't "anti-U.S.", I don't think they should go it alone.
But don't talk to me about the U.N.....absolutely bloody useless.....the world will come to an end before they do anything.
Cheers, Pickles.

[juddy]

what can the Uk do?

A few subs with Tomahawks. but not alot more. I am sure SF are on the ground as always, but thats about it....

[incisor]

surprised the usa give a toss myself...

no one appreciates their efforts and no one rushes in to help them when they themselves have problems..

to me is another chance for the islamic reactionaries to feed fodder to up and coming religious terrorists.

let russia sort it by selling assad another billion dollars worth of arms so he can clean up his own people...

how do you tell who is telling the truth?

can they tell where the chemicals came from by testing the victims blood samples they have taken...

let em fight it out amongst themselves, the west gets no thanks just more hatred...

[juddy]

Plus Russia are not going to upset Syria.

[akula]

I see a bit of "anti-U.S." sentiment here,.....well I ain't one of that crew. I have a lot of time for the Yanks.
Having said that, I've read in the Press for the last few days that "Countries" are looking for the U.S. to do something/intervene.
I really don't have a problem with that, as long as they don't do it ON THEIR OWN. If "intervention" is the right thing, surely others will support the U.S., & get involved.
A Russia/U.S./U.K./ & what about China... JOINT effort is what is required to stop this carnage.
So whilst I certainly ain't "anti-U.S.", I don't think they should go it alone.
But don't talk to me about the U.N.....absolutely bloody useless.....the world will come to an end before they do anything.
Cheers, Pickles.



As an American by birth I'd say it is high time people saw through the nonsense presented by complicit western media and see American (or their derivative U.K) interventions for what they are; crass imperialism draped in the fiction of democracy and legitimacy.

[Vanguard]

It's easy to keep sitting on our hands and "let them sort it out", but I think that is the wrong thing to do. I cannot believe the EU, US and Asia did nothing in Dafur and have let Syria destroy itself for the past two odd years. I also think North Korea requires intervention. Unfortunately it always seems to fall back on the US, and they are criticized when they do nothing and criticized when hey intervene. The EU intervened in Libya and in he past in he former Yugoslavia, but in general, mainland Europe are typically useless at offering assistance... Perhaps the Dutch and French are exempt from that judgement because they ofen do lend a hand.

War is expensive. I can understand if countries look for an economic benefit or offset to getting involved... Syria has little benefit to the US and EU getting involved, which is why it has been left to canibalise itself.

The UN is a complete farce. Russia and China should not be on the security council as they veto everything and are completely obstructionist and devoid of any feeling of obligation to preventing humanitarian crises.

[wrinklearthur]

I often wondered where the weapons of mass destruction were hidden after they were spirited out of Iraq hidden inside the tanks of those trucks carrying oil out into Syria.

So was this explosion of nerve gas the result of a unlucky direct hit, on one of the deposit's of those WMD?
.

[Eevo]

It's easy to keep sitting on our hands and "let them sort it out", but I think that is the wrong thing to do.

its their problem, not ours. what right do we have to get involved in someone else's affairs?

[bob10]

The safest option for the West is to supply arms to the rebels. Whether that's the best option.......... Here's what the locals think, Bob

Assaf Aboud BBC Arabic, Damascus

A good number of Syrians, in particular those supporting the regime, believe the visit of the UN chemical weapons investigation team is nothing but a move to justify a military attack on Syria. The opposition, however, thinks that these visits will lead to some evidence being unearthed, proving that chemical weapons have been used against civilians by the Syrian regime.

Above all, fear and discomfort are palpable among those living in the capital. People are haunted by the possibility of a Western military strike on Syria, discussion of which is dominating the headlines of satellite channels.

"I don't want Syria to become another Iraq... Enough bloodshed," cried one Syrian woman.

"We, and thousands like us across Syria, will face any country that tries to attack us," threatened a young man, pointing at his weapon, which he uses to protect his neighbourhood. "These are Syria's problems and it is up to us, Syrians, to solve them."

[richard4u2]

why should Australians die helping them turn Syria into an Islamic country run under sharia law

[Ferret]

The safest option for the West is to supply arms to the rebels...

But which rebels?

This is not a case a two distinct sides fighting a civil war. There are many sides here, all for their own reasons. If / when the current side in power (Assad) is finally destroyed (by intervention or otherwise) the remaining sides will simply continue fighting among themselves for that power.

It has been shown the US, UK, France and all their western allies can not deliver government (peace, prosperity, stability etc.) by imposing it from above when a significant fraction of the population do not necessarily agree with their vision of how their world should work.

Having said that, there are a host of other state players here - Iran, Russia, Saudi etc. all trying to impose their visions of how the world in Syria should work also.

Then there are the non state actors, Hezbolla, Al Quada etc. all with ambitions to have a say about how the world should work.

Mix it all with the strong ethnic, sectarian, and tribal loyalties which exist in that part of the world and you have a problem for which there would seem to be no solution in the foreseeable future.

The place is a mess. Intervening will only leave a mess.

[Chucaro]

The safest option for the West is to supply arms to the rebels. Whether that's the best option.......... Here's what the locals think, Bob
................................

Send arms to different tribes is not going to be a solution, these arms will be used against civilians now in Syria and the next on the list will be Jordan :(

[bob10]

Send arms to different tribes is not going to be a solution, these arms will be used against civilians now in Syria and the next on the list will be Jordan :(

A real can of worms, mate. The Taliban were very grateful for the US weapons sent to the Afgans in their fight with Russia. From NBC News;

Updated
6
hours
ago
Ripple effect: How the US move on Syria could reverberate around the world

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/08/127.jpgUS Navy via Reuters file
The guided-missile destroyer USS Ramage is one of four U.S. destroyers currently deployed in the Mediterranean Sea equipped with long-range Tomahawk missles that could potentially be used to strike Syria, according to officials.


By Erin McClam, Staff Writer, NBC News
The decision the United States is about to make on Syria — how and where to punish President Bashar Assad for using poison gas on his own people — will touch just about every important piece on the geopolitical board.
China, Israel, Iran, Hezbollah, al Qaeda. Even North Korea, half a world away and always eager to make trouble, tried to export gas masks to Syria — believed to be for government forces — before they were seized in Turkey along with arms and ammunition, a Japanese newspaper reported Tuesday.
And of course Russia, whose relationship with the United States has not exactly been warm lately.
Here’s a glance at the potential global ripple effect if, as expected, the American military sends cruise missiles into Syria in coming days



CHINA
China and Russia both hold veto power in the United Nations Security Council and would block American efforts to work through the U.N. to punish Assad. That’s one reason everyone expects the United States to act mostly on its own.
For China, the issue is sovereignty: The Chinese don’t like countries getting into each other’s business because they don’t want anyone in theirs, said Kenneth Pollack, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Saban Center for Middle East Policy.
China picked at a particularly sore wound on Tuesday — reminding the United States, through a commentary in the government-run Xinhua news service, that it invaded Iraq 10 years ago on the pretext of banned weapons that were never found.
“The recent flurry of consultations between Washington and its allies indicates that they have put the arrow on the bowstring and would shoot even without a U.N. mandate,” Xinhua said. “That would be irresponsible and dangerous.”
RUSSIA
Here the language was a little more pointed. A Russian deputy prime minister said Tuesday that Western countries were behaving in the Islamic world like a “monkey with a grenade,” according to the al Arabiya news channel.
It doesn’t take a long memory to recall that relations between Washington and Moscow are chilly, most recently because of Russia’s decision to grant National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden a year’s asylum.
Remember the famously awkward press conference earlier this year between a slouching President Vladimir Putin and a stiff President Barack Obama? The topic that day was how to come together to stop the bloodshed in Syria.
The Russians care about clout — being a major player on the world stage, Pollack said. And the U.S. insistence early in the Syrian crisis that Russia was vital to the process only elevated their stature, he said.
“Before the Syria crisis, Russia had no say in the Middle East,” Pollack said. “They had nothing going. The Obama administration kept saying we can’t do anything in Syria without the Russians. Which I don’t think was ever true. That made Russia important.”
THE ARAB LEAGUE
The Arab League, an association of 22 countries, said Tuesday that the Syrian regime is responsible for the gas attack last week, and demanded that “all the perpetrators of this heinous crime be presented for international trials.”
The league suggested that the U.N. Security Council members should get over their differences and find a solution — unlikely to say the least. Still, the league’s support offers some diplomatic cover for the West to hammer Assad.
The backdrop here is centuries old. The Arab League is dominated by countries with Sunni Muslim leaders. (Iraq is more mixed, and pointedly withheld support for parts of what the league said Tuesday.) Assad is backed by Shiites.
And when the Sunni countries worry about divisions with the Shiites, what they’re mostly worried about is one country.
IRAN
Assad, two years into a civil war with the rebels, depends heavily on Iran and on the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah.
The Syria-Iran alliance presents a big problem for the United States: Too heavy a strike against Assad could embolden Iran to come to the rescue and take action against U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf. Or unleash Hezbollah against Western targets.
“That’s the reason why our military professionals have been so reluctant to get involved,” Jeremy Bash, who was chief of staff to former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, said on the MSNBC program “Andrea Mitchell Reports.

That’s why the Obama administration believes that, even if it doesn’t end the Syrian civil war, “We can punish, deter and degrade, and that is an important military objective.”
AL QAEDA
On the other hand, if the United States launches a purely symbolic attack against Assad, hitting non-critical targets as a warning rather than those that might actually disable the regime, opposition fighters could be demoralized.
That would leave them more likely to turn to extremist Islamist groups, and specifically al Qaeda, for support. Assad has upbraided the West for supporting al Qaeda militants on the loosely organized rebel side.
ISRAEL
Israel doesn’t want to see chemical warfare spread any further than it already has. If unconventional warfare becomes commonplace in Syria, it’s more likely to spread to international terrorist groups.
“They don’t want to see large-scale CW,” Pollack said, using the abbreviation for chemical weapons. “It’s going to end badly for Israel.”
Israel, which has its hands full trying to beat back Iran’s nuclear ambition, is depending on the Americans not just to deal with Assad but to send a message to Tehran, he said.
Otherwise, “You are going to get spillover, refugees, terrorism. A greater risk that one side is going to drag the Israelis in,” Pollack said. “The longer the war goes on, the worse it’s going to be for Israel.”

[Offender90]

The "incident" involving chemical weapons mirrors a pattern of earlier atrocities alegedly committed by "Syrian forces" which I speculate were manufactured by the rebels (possibly under external guidance) for Western media consumption.

I've detailed my thoughts on some of the previous atrocities in a Soapbox post - see here - http://www.aulro.com/afvb/cantina/153927-syria-whats-really-going-2.html

One thing I have to reiterate, nomatter how ruthless you think Syrian government may be, they are not stupid. With the benefit of seeing how a number of recent pretexts for war are manufactured (in Bosnia, Yugoslavia & Iraq just to name a few) they would have to be retarded to order such an attack.

Syria brings the US one step closer to Iran, and that's always been their long term goal. You only have to listen to the US state Department rhetoric on Iran to see what's going on.

My $0.02.

[roverv8]

Syria brings the US one step closer to Iran, and that's always been their long term goal.I smell a rat, but that doesn't mean that the Assad regime is innocent in this..
Are they playing a part/role??
They say there is no evidence it was us, instead of co-operating to show the world it wasn't them, & waited 5 days after the event,
I suspect the U.S/West has been lured "hook line & sinker" into the situation (chemical weapons used) crossing the "red line"
Now the haters of the USA & West will have in their small minds "Justification" to hate /attack/fight/terrorize the West & create a major conflict

[sashadidi]

Local arabs like the saudi's and such like should deal with it if
anyone is going to....

[Chucaro]

I do not like it at all, Putin is not push over :(
It looks like that he would like that USA respect the future resolution of the UN Security Council were Putin will veto any intervention in the dispute.

Russia sends warships to Mediterranean as Syria tensions escalate (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-29/russia-sends-in-warships-as-syria-tensions-escalate/4923506)

[incisor]

good, the bloods on his hands and the russians don't have a social conscience to battle so all posts are winners for the ring stealing superhero.

good time for the west to stand down and leave it in their capable hands till it all goes to **** big time further down the road...

funnily enough the russians are still having issues with their islamic friends in surrounding states... maybe he wants to ship them all to syria ;)

[Offender90]

I smell a rat, but that doesn't mean that the Assad regime is innocent in this..
Are they playing a part/role??
They say there is no evidence it was us, instead of co-operating to show the world it wasn't them, & waited 5 days after the event,
I suspect the U.S/West has been lured "hook line & sinker" into the situation (chemical weapons used) crossing the "red line"
Now the haters of the USA & West will have in their small minds "Justification" to hate /attack/fight/terrorize the West & create a major conflict

Innocence is a relative concept - Strategically, the US cannot allow a functioning democracy to flourish on the Arab peninsula (or in any other corner of their empire for that matter). This is because in any democratic society, people will elect a government that will best look after their own interests (somewhat akin to introduction of the mining tax for example). This would be in direct conflict with US interests in the area (or anywhere else within their empire for that matter), which in this instance is syphoning off mineral wealth from the peninsula.

What they really need in these areas is a dictator subservient to their interests, so they can go on with the business of extracting in peace (think Saddam prior to ~1990, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt or The Shah of Iran prior to 1979). I would say that the Syrian "regime" was one of the better towards its people in the region, certainly better than say Bahrain or Saudi Arabia.

Anyone notice how Syria has a "regime" while Iraq and Egypt have "governments"?

As for your suggestion of cooperating to show the world it wasn't them, it's a noble idea, but it doesn't work in practice. Back to the recent examples of Bosnia, Yugoslavia or Iraq.

In 1993, the Bosnian Serb government cooperated with the Western media to show them they weren't "all bad". They guided them through a Serb controlled area, including a school which was used as an emergency shelter for refugees displaced by the war. The school had a small utility shed on the grounds which was fenced off by a fence with a couple of strands of barbed wire on the top. An ITN camera crew found a guy with a birth defect (skinny chest, exposed ribcage), put him topless in front of the fence and photographed him from inside, making it look reminiscent of WW II concentration camps. This made front page news of just about every western newspaper and set off outrage around the world that eventually paved the way for an intervention. Unfortunately for ITN a local film crew captured the whole thing on tape.
A quick search turns up a summary on Youtube if you're interested Serbian Concentration Camp fabrication - YouTube

In Yugoslavia, the international community put together a "Kosovo Verification Mission" taskforce to monitor peace, a short time later it produced footage of a massacre of Albanian civilians in a place called Racak, Kosovo. This was also shown to be a fabrication, but by then it was too late. Once again, there was public outrage, followed by NATO's 3 month bombing campaign. I remember at the time thinking the taskforce was headed by a senior US diplomat (William Walker) whose previous diplomatic posts in places such as El Salvador, Bolivia, Panama and Honduras happened to coincide with formations of death squads, government overthrows, assassinations of political figures, and in Honduras, organising guerrillas fighting the Nicaraguan government at the time... can someone say CIA....

Anyway, you get the idea, you're probably familiar with Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector who publically contradicted Bush / Blair claims of WMD's in Iraq... even this fell on deaf ears.

With this in mind, if you were the Syrian government, what would you do? Not an easy question, is it?

The better question is, who takes control of Syria if Assad goes?

Surprisingly interesting commentry along similar lines here - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10271248/The-rush-to-judgment-on-Syria-is-a-catastrophic-and-deadly-error.html

[mikehzz]

.....
The UN is a complete farce. Russia and China should not be on the security council as they veto everything and are completely obstructionist and devoid of any feeling of obligation to preventing humanitarian crises.

I say the UN isn't a farce and the correct action to take is to leave it up to them. The UN was against the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions from the start. The UN. weapons inspectors refuted Bush's claims, yet good people were duped by bad people into regretable actions. If the UN says intervention is required, then our forces can be committed with a clear conscience. The US and UK made the UN appear a farce by ignoring it but the UN will outlast both of them because it is the logical future. People tend to call anyone who doesn't agree with them obstructionist. There are a lot of people in a lot of places saying "please, stop saving me" to cowboys who have gone in guns blazing.

[101RRS]

The US gets on its high horse about the actions of others but has the US ever been held to account for its invasion of Iraq - no - might is right in this world. How many war crimes trials been held against those who have been on the allied/winning side - none.

Americans was the rest of the world to mimic their sick society but the world refuses to hold the US to account for their actions but happily holds regimes to account who the US dislikes.

In addition to the gas attack in Syria, there was a phosphorus attack which has got the US all upset yet when Israel used phosphorus weapons in Gaza a few years ago, other than saying bad boy nothing was done to sanction Israel.

And the US wonders why no one believes its statements and comes across as not being sincere and hypocritical in its actions.

The US would be better expending its energies in reforming the UN Security council to change the veto system so that no one country can veto a resolution - also would help if the US started paying its way in the UN - it never pays its full contributions to the UN.

Garry

[BMKal]

The US gets on its high horse about the actions of others but has the US ever been held to account for its invasion of Iraq - no - might is right in this world. How many war crimes trials been held against those who have been on the allied/winning side - none.

Americans was the rest of the world to mimic their sick society but the world refuses to hold the US to account for their actions but happily holds regimes to account who the US dislikes.

In addition to the gas attack in Syria, there was a phosphorus attack which has got the US all upset yet when Israel used phosphorus weapons in Gaza a few years ago, other than saying bad boy nothing was done to sanction Israel.

And the US wonders why no one believes its statements and comes across as not being sincere and hypocritical in its actions.

The US would be better expending its energies in reforming the UN Security council to change the veto system so that no one country can veto a resolution - also would help if the US started paying its way in the UN - it never pays its full contributions to the UN.

Garry

So just how much do you think that they SHOULD be paying. ;)

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/46/5t6l.jpg/)

[101RRS]

So just how much do you think that they SHOULD be paying. ;)

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/1617/5t6l.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/46/5t6l.jpg/)

It should be 25%.

The US have been in arrears for years.

Since 1985 the U.S. Congress has refused to authorize payment of the U.S. dues, in order to force UN compliance with U.S. wishes, as well as a reduction in the U.S. assessment.

After prolonged negotiations, the U.S. and the UN negotiated an agreement whereby the United States would pay a large part of the money it owes, and in exchange the UN would reduce the assessment rate ceiling from 25% to 22%.

Even with the above agreement in place the US short changed the UN and U.S. arrears to the UN currently total over $1.3 billion.

Typical USA - don't like the UN policies so don't pay.

Garry

[BMKal]

It should be 25%.

The US have been in arrears for years.

Since 1985 the U.S. Congress has refused to authorize payment of the U.S. dues, in order to force UN compliance with U.S. wishes, as well as a reduction in the U.S. assessment.

After prolonged negotiations, the U.S. and the UN negotiated an agreement whereby the United States would pay a large part of the money it owes, and in exchange the UN would reduce the assessment rate ceiling from 25% to 22%.

Even with the above agreement in place the US short changed the UN and U.S. arrears to the UN currently total over $1.3 billion.

Typical USA - don't like the UN policies so don't pay.

Garry

So you reckon it's reasonable that one country (doesn't matter who it is) should be expected to cover 25% of the cost, and no other country in the world pays an amount anywhere near approaching this contribution.

Sounds like a pretty one sided view of the world to me.

Have to agree with you though that their time would be better spent doing something about the farcical situation now where one country can "veto" a majority decision taken by the other members. Until they do somthing about this, the organization will continue to be seen by most as a farcical toothless tiger.

[101RRS]

It doesn't matter what I believe - the formula for calculating contributions is determined by the UN and signed off by members. I assume it is based primarily on GDP so the 25% the US is required to pay is proportionally the same as a much smaller country paying say .5%.

I am sure if it was any other country they would have been expelled for not paying their contributions and trying to bully the UN.

[akula]

good, the bloods on his hands and the russians don't have a social conscience to battle so all posts are winners for the ring stealing superhero.

good time for the west to stand down and leave it in their capable hands till it all goes to **** big time further down the road...

funnily enough the russians are still having issues with their islamic friends in surrounding states... maybe he wants to ship them all to syria ;)

Yeah, those previous western interventions - ostensibly as a result of their "social conscience" have been so successful so far - in terms of civilians killed no-one holds a candle to the U.S.

[bob10]

Yeah, those previous western interventions - ostensibly as a result of their "social conscience" have been so successful so far - in terms of civilians killed no-one holds a candle to the U.S.

Try the leaders of the British Empire during the "glory" days. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Except, now it doesn't take 3 to 6 months for news to travel. And the whole World is connected, doesn't say much for the Nations of the World to allow this to go on. The UN is a paper Tiger, all it can do is give a limp wristed bitch slap & have another conference. And Russia? the USA are amateurs in the civilian killing World compared to them. And that is the worry. In Foreign Affairs, the USA Politicians are indeed amateurs, usually taking the big stick approach, instead of the softly, softly , behind the scenes, negotiated one. Still, that doesn't fit with the American ego, or their image of themselves as the super heroes of the " free World" . I remember some years ago people would say " God was on our side during the War, he gave us the Atom bomb to defeat the Japs. " Then some one would answer " He must have a wicked sense of humour, He gave it to the Yanks " :angel: Bob

[Chucaro]

It is not a surprise to me that all South and Central America are against USA intervention in the middle east.
They know what it is loosing more than 60000 lives during operation Condor with the the direct intervention of USA providing "technical support" ( expert in torture personal) plus military aid.
Why was good for them to inflict so much pain and suffer in their own back yard and is not good in the Middle East? It is Israel and South Arabia that are behind this or the arm dealers?
I do not trust the USA and their agenda.
They are about to finish one conflict and start another. When Syria is finished then it will be Jordan. :mad:
I do not support Russia and China but at the very least they do not intervene in countries that acting in internal problems in the same way that they have acted in internal conflicts in their own countries.

Also to me killing civilians by both sides in Syria it is a repulsive and cowardly behavior.

[Hall]

Who are the Russians trying to kid? On the news tonight. Russia moving ships to of the coast of Syria for support of Assad. They will be able to give early warning of any attacks. One ship is a cruise missile ship and the other is a anti sub ship. Russia's response to this move was it is only a routine deployment. So if the shooting does start and Russia does provide logistical support for Assad does that make Russia a target? What if Russia does more than logistical support?
Cheers Hall

[Chucaro]

Who are the Russians trying to kid? On the news tonight. Russia moving ships to of the coast of Syria for support of Assad. They will be able to give early warning of any attacks. One ship is a cruise missile ship and the other is a anti sub ship. Russia's response to this move was it is only a routine deployment. So if the shooting does start and Russia does provide logistical support for Assad does that make Russia a target? What if Russia does more than logistical support?
Cheers Hall

That it is the reason why I a concern about the situation :(
Russia a target? well mate that will be the end and I do not think that USA, England or France are going to shoot a Russian ship or sub.

[frantic]

Looking at the figures bmkal and garrcol are discussing there is a solution to the veto and voting methods. Instead of certain members having votes and veto powers run it like a company so you need 50.1% to pass a motion ,you could set the bar higher for certain things like military intervention . The u.s has 22%(that's the level it pays) of the vote so would need another 28.1 to pass its motions. This would get everyone who wants a say paying on time as "no vote on a credit note". :D
I am a interested as to why we are paying more than South Korea and close to Russia, along with no mention of several other European nations. Austria ,Sweden, Norway,Netherlands most of whom I would have thought to have higher GDP than Australia?

[Offender90]

Looking at the figures bmkal and garrcol are discussing there is a solution to the veto and voting methods. Instead of certain members having votes and veto powers run it like a company so you need 50.1% to pass a motion ,you could set the bar higher for certain things like military intervention . The u.s has 22%(that's the level it pays) of the vote so would need another 28.1 to pass its motions. This would get everyone who wants a say paying on time as "no vote on a credit note". :D
I am a interested as to why we are paying more than South Korea and close to Russia, along with no mention of several other European nations. Austria ,Sweden, Norway,Netherlands most of whom I would have thought to have higher GDP than Australia?

Great, that's just what we need - a military equivalent of the World Trade Organisation!

No thanks! :wasntme:

[Chucaro]

IMO the way to go is to have a group of 20 for security and trade and in this group including countries of all continents.
We do not want 2 or 3 countries dictate war & "peace" or fair trade.
Even as it is now 6 countries to dictate what should be done it is a joke.

[bob10]

I wonder if they are related to the Judean suicide squad, of Monty Python fame? Bob

16
hours
ago
Syrian Electronic Army seen as 'nuisance,' not a serious cyberthreat

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/08/25.jpgTwitter.com
The Syrian Electronic Army claims credit via Twitter for cyberattacks on the New York Times and Huffington Post websites Tuesday.


By Robert Windrem, Investigative Reporter, NBC News

The Syrian Electronic Army, the hacking group that claims it shut down Twitter, the Huffington Post and The New York Times three days ago, is threatening in an interview to launch additional cyberattacks on U.S. government agencies if the Obama administration launches a military strike against Syria.


But despite these and other high-profile attacks, the U.S. government isn't too concerned with the threat by the group, which reportedly is run by a group of 20-something Syrian computer students. While the SEA may continue to inconvenience Internet users, U.S. officials say, it doesn't have the capacity to cause the type of serious damage that cyberforces in countries like China and Russia are believed to be capable of inflicting.

"The Syrian Electronic Army is a murky, underground group that has made a name for itself by plastering pro-regime propaganda across some of the Internet's most-trafficked sites," said a U.S. official, speaking on background. "It's clearly a nuisance, but its tactics aren't all that sophisticated."
The SEA — which is believed to operate with the assent of Bashar al-Assad's government, if not its direct support — issued its threat against the U.S. government in an interview published Tuesday by nowthisnews.com (http://www.nowthisnews.com/news/interview-hackers-syrian-electronic-army/?autoplay=true), which said it conducted the question-and-answer session via email.
The SEA had been involved in a number of high-profile cyberattacks even before this week, claiming to have hacked the websites or Twitter accounts of The Associated Press, The Washington Post, NPR, CBS, Reuters, Al Jazeera and others. The most high-profile hack was of AP in April, when it gained access to the news service's Twitter account and falsely reported that there had been an explosion at the White House.
But cybersecurity experts say the technology used in those attacks isn't very sophisticated. Most of its attacks, including the one on the Times, have used fairly rudimentary "spearphishing" tactics, which involve concocting virus-laden emails to trick unsuspecting users into handing over their online credentials, permitting wider attacks.
"There is nothing sophisticated about spearphishing," said Roger Cressey, a former White House cybersecurity official and now an NBC News consultant. "It is a technique used by a range of actors, from state actors all the way down to activist groups. The fact that it works is a flaw in security training and awareness."
Bottom line, say the experts, there are no reports of the SEA's destroying anything. At worst, it has managed only to temporarily deface some websites — including some run by Syrian insurgents — with pro-regime propaganda.
There are connections between the Syrian government and the SEA, but experts say it's unclear whether the two work directly together.
The U.S. official who briefed NBC News said the hacking group appears to set its own targets.
"While the regime probably welcomes its efforts, Damascus isn't necessarily calling the shots," said the official.
Helmi Noman, a senior researcher at the University of Toronto who has tracked the SEA virtually from its first posts in 2011, said Internet registration records show the group was set up by the Syrian Computer Society, whose former presidents include Assad, Syria's president, and his late brother Bassel. But he has been unable to find proof that Syrian security services are behind the attacks.


"Although there are some intriguing connections between the Syrian government and the groups involved in these attacks, we could not find credible evidence that links the two directly beyond the tacit support that would be required for such a group to operate on Syrian networks," he said.
Noman wrote in 2011 (http://www.infowar-monitor.net/2011/05/7349/) that the SEA's website was set up on May 5 of that year and that the group first identified itself as "a group of young people who love their country and have decided to fight back electronically against those who have attacked Syrian websites and those who are hostile to Syria." Its "about" statement initially stated that it wasn't "an official entity," but that reference was later removed, Noman wrote.
The group's debut coincided with the first protests against the Assad regime in Deraa, which brought the Arab Spring to Syria.
Noman also notes that the same week, the Syrian government newspaper al-Wehda identified and praised the leaders of the SEA (http://thawra.alwehda.gov.sy/_print_veiw.asp?FileName=18216445320110516105347). It called Hatem Deb, described elsewhere as a teenager, as a "founding member." Another student, Ali Farha, was later mentioned in another Syrian publication as the "manager" of the SEA website.
Later, Noman told NBC News, Syrian media stopped associating names with the group.
"Apparently, they did this for fear for legal consequences and repercussions, given that the SEA activities shifted to more questionable attacks," he said. "The Syrian government itself stopped hosting the SEA website in June 2013, apparently for the same reason. I think that is why the SEA moved to servers based in Russia then."
Now, he said, the clearest indication that the Syrian Electronic Army continues to enjoy the support of the Assad regime is the fact that it continues to distribute its cyber-graffiti.
It is "close enough to the Syrian regime to be able to operate freely in a country with a regime that is known for its restrictive legal and technical measures," he said.

[bob10]

The BBC's thoughts, Bob
More from Mark (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/correspondents/markmardell)

Follow Mark on Twitter (http://twitter.com/BBCMarkMardell)

Obama faces difficult timing over Syria strike



Latest (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23908808)
Damascus on edge (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23904122)
Analysis (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23909192)
What we know (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23908846)
Arsenal (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-23866840)
Q&A (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23876085)


Comments (231) (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23909192#dna-comments)

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/08/23.jpg Americans are taking a long holiday for Labor Day - an awkward time to launch a military strike

More from Mark (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/correspondents/markmardell/)


Meeting the enemy (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22958321)
G8 leaders 'close' to Syria deal (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22947256)
Syria overshadows G8 summit (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22928017)
Obama's half-hearted shift (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22900710)


The US Secretary of State, John Kerry, did far more than just set out the intelligence against Syria. But he did do that.

Although there is now more detail than we had before about the attack, there is no damning proof.

Indeed, perhaps for understandable reasons, there is no proof at all - only assertions that we must take on trust. As Mr Kerry himself suggested, after Iraq trust is in short supply.

He did far more than set out a moral case for military action. What he did was make it impossible for President Barack Obama to back away from it. He said if the US didn't act, history would judge them harshly.

If they turned a blind eye, it would embolden dictators in Iran and North Korea and leave the US without credibility in the world.

Mr Obama has made similar points himself. It is not the first time Kerry has made the case. But these were the strongest words yet.

When Mr Obama spoke he sounded pretty downbeat by comparison, although he too pointed firmly towards some form of action.

But he was keen to stress that any action would be limited, unlike Afghanistan or Iraq, and would not involve boots on the ground. There are increasing mutterings from Congress, asking him how certain he is of that.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/08/24.jpg If a strike doesn't come in the next few days, it may have to wait for next weekend or beyond.

The president said he had made no decision. It is not clear when he will.

Mr Kerry suggested there would be a "conversation" with the American people before action.

There's not much time to talk and, in the next few days, many Americans will be hanging metaphorical "gone fishin'" signs on their front doors. This is Labor Day weekend - a big holiday in the States - and perhaps not the ideal time for a conversation about war.

Perhaps the president hopes a lot of people aren't paying much attention. But if action doesn't come in the next few days, it may have to wait for next weekend or beyond. The president goes to Sweden on Tuesday, then on to the G20 in Russia.

There is no iron law saying the president can't order military action while abroad. But it would be odd.

To do it while he's in Russia would be downright weird and highly provocative. He could cancel the trip but the White House says his plans are still in place.

After his Secretary of State has ramped up the rhetoric about the historic, momentous importance of sending a signal, leaving it a week might be too long.

So, many people think there will be action on the weekend or Monday.

But frankly it's a guess. With this decision even the timing is awkward for the president.

[bob10]

Interesting report from the BBC, Bob [ click on what we know]


Middle East

Syria 21 August attack: Frank Gardner on what we know


Latest (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23916752)
Full text (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23918149)
Analysis (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23918088)
Damascus on edge (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23904122)
What we know (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23908846)
Arsenal (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-23866840)
Q&A (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23876085)

31 August 2013 Last updated at 00:13 GMT Help (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/help-21352667)
As governments wrestle with how to respond to Syria's alleged use of chemical weapons against its own people, the debate continues over exactly what happened and who was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Syrians in the early hours of 21 August.
The West says the regime used nerve gas, Syria says it was the rebels, and Russia says there is no proof either way.
The BBC's security correspondent, Frank Gardner, has been examining the evidence and has compiled this special report on what happened that morning.
This report contains some graphic images that you may find distressing.

[Chucaro]

It appears that the outcome of the UN inspection will be not ready "presto" going by what the team have to say:

Fully assessing the evidence collected by UN weapons inspectors investigating last week's alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria could take up to three weeks, the organisation in charge of the investigation said. (http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/08/201383022471103335.html)

[Disco Muppet]

I'd rather wait three weeks than they rush and stuff it up.
Interesting to see Obama is going to put it to Congress, perhaps they want to make sure they have a real 'legitimate' reason for going in as opposed to when we went in to Iraq

[Pickles2]

Interesting comment by Tony Abbott, that has been roundly criticized by Labor, but with which I agree 100%...He said "Well, it's the baddies against the baddies, isn't it"?
Cheers, Pickles.

[roverv8]

I'd rather wait three weeks than they rush and stuff it up.
Interesting to see Obama is going to put it to Congress, perhaps they want to make sure they have a real 'legitimate' reason for going in as opposed to when we went in to Iraq


For sure! After Iraq They need 1000% evidence who let these chemical weapons go which i believe they cannot provide
I also think Obama has realized they can't just launch a few missiles, bugger off and that will be it.
Syria will respond & There will be way more than just Syria to deal with, it will turn into a major conflict.

[101RRS]

Have you noticed that the US only has a go at countries that realistically have little chance of retaliating to what is an act of war. A bit like the school yard bully.

As I have said before maybe the US should expend more effort to reforming the UN so that these type of decisions can actually be made by the UN.

[Mick_Marsh]

Have you noticed that the US only has a go at countries that realistically have little chance of retaliating to what is an act of war. A bit like the school yard bully.

As I have said before maybe the US should expend more effort to reforming the UN so that these type of decisions can actually be made by the UN.
Maybe the US should pay the money they owe the UN.
U.N. official: U.S. is $1.2 billion in arrears at U.N. | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/10/14/us-un-usa-idUSTRE69D67220101014)

Peacekeeping costs money. After the war, they'll need peacekeepers.

[2stroke]

Interesting comment by Tony Abbott, that has been roundly criticized by Labor, but with which I agree 100%...He said "Well, it's the baddies against the baddies, isn't it"?
Cheers, Pickles.
Simplistic but true I guess. When GW Bush was US president we had a lot of similar comments that the media called "Bushisms". "Abbotisms" will be a great thing for comedians and cartoonists after September 7. ;)

[Eevo]

Have you noticed that the US only has a go at countries that realistically have little chance of retaliating to what is an act of war. A bit like the school yard bully.


not really, USA challenged the USSR for 45 years and was a very large chance of retaliation.

[Disco Muppet]

not really, USA challenged the USSR for 45 years and was a very large chance of retaliation.

Yes but with the USA/USSR situation, there was the overhanging notion of MAD, which probably made people think a bit harder about pushing the button so to speak.

[Eevo]

Yes but with the USA/USSR situation, there was the overhanging notion of MAD, which probably made people think a bit harder about pushing the button so to speak.

yeah. whats your point.
USA was quite happy to bully a country of equal military force.

[Disco Muppet]

yeah. whats your point.
USA was quite happy to bully a country of equal military force.

My point is Gary mentioned realistic chance of retaliation.
Both the Soviet Union and the US knew that if either of them pushed to far it would bring on a nuclear apocalypse basically, as such, while they were both perfectly happy to get the other worked up, they knew that there was only so far you could push.
Have to accept the cold war for what it was, a very fine dance on the edge of a bottomless chasm. For each move, there was a countermove. Up to the dancers to make sure they didn't earn themselves a shove into the chasm.
They both got very good at figuring out how far they could push.
Remove WMDs from the equation and you get a very different story, you take away the "if I fall you're going down with me" type mentality, where there can be a winner and a loser so to speak. There could have been no real "winner" in USSR v USA, unless one side decided to go for a pre-emptive strike of incredible ferocity, in which case you're not fighting, you're committing genocide.

[Eevo]

My point is Gary mentioned realistic chance of retaliation.
Both the Soviet Union and the US knew that if either of them pushed to far it would bring on a nuclear apocalypse basically, as such, while they were both perfectly happy to get the other worked up, they knew that there was only so far you could push.
Have to accept the cold war for what it was, a very fine dance on the edge of a bottomless chasm. For each move, there was a countermove. Up to the dancers to make sure they didn't earn themselves a shove into the chasm.
They both got very good at figuring out how far they could push.
Remove WMDs from the equation and you get a very different story, you take away the "if I fall you're going down with me" type mentality, where there can be a winner and a loser so to speak. There could have been no real "winner" in USSR v USA, unless one side decided to go for a pre-emptive strike of incredible ferocity, in which case you're not fighting, you're committing genocide.

so its not bullying when its dancing?

[Disco Muppet]

so its not bullying when its dancing?

Bullying implies it's one dominating or over-ruling the other completely. USA pushes USSR, USSR pushes USA.
As opposed to USA pushes Syria, Syria falls over.

[101RRS]

not really, USA challenged the USSR for 45 years and was a very large chance of retaliation.

Never attacked them directly.

[Chucaro]

Never attacked them directly.
Not also that never attacked China after the massacre at the square and still not sure what to do with North Korea
Is a school bully who pick on the small countries like Cuba...then again finished with a black eye :D

[Chucaro]

Looks like that USA, France, other big countries and the arm dealers will have problems with this news :angel:

Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack (http://www.infowars.com/rebels-admit-responsibility-for-chemical-weapons-attack/)

Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta have admitted to Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak that they were responsible for last week’s chemical weapons incident which western powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, revealing that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia.
“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,”

[wrinklearthur]

"One Swallow does not make a spring", to base a judgment on only one article is very risky, so where are the other sources telling the same tale?

I still believe that we should let the UN inspectors complete their task before taking action.

It could well be found out that this instance was a double cross that has blown up in the face of the perpetrators .
.

[Chucaro]

Based in what we know about the history of the conflict in Irak and why USA justifying the invasion to remove Sadam it is enough for me to believe more what the ladies at the local hairdressing saloon have to say than what the USA "intelligence services" report.
So far I support Putin's view, give us the proof......

[Offender90]

Based in what we know about the history of the conflict in Irak and why USA justifying the invasion to remove Sadam it is enough for me to believe more what the ladies at the local hairdressing saloon have to say than what the USA "intelligence services" report.
So far I support Putin's view, give us the proof......

You and me both. The other story sounds somewhat plausible at least. The official line that Assad is responsible makes zero sense. To paraphrase Putin, 'you don't use chemical weapons when you have opponents on the run, especially when a team of UN weapons inspectors is in town'. The rebels on the other hand, cornered in a number of key positions are screaming for external intervention.

So yeah, give us proof, and not only that chemical weapons were used, but who they were used by. Unfortunately, the UN is only tasked with determining IF chemical weapons were used, which seems quite likely, not by WHOM, which is the question that really matters.

I'm very sceptical of the US "a line in the sand" response just as I am of it's purported morality because...

- The US didn't have a problem providing expertise to build chemical plants for Saddam in the 80's,
- Didn't have a problem supplying Saddam intelligence when he was gassing Iranian positions
- Was happy to turn a blind eye when Saddam was gassing the Kurds by the thousands (you may have heard of Saddam's cousin, 'Chemical Ali').

What's a few hundred thousand Kurdish deaths between allies? The only conclusion I can make is they only seem to care when it furthers their interests. But that was then, and this is now, right?

Unfortunately, evidence seems to point to the contrary. The people running the show in both Bush Administrations appear to be have considerable influence in Obama's administration. I found it curious that Obama (a Democrat) had a Republican Secretary of Defense (Chuck Hagel). On the surface, the appointment is not out of the blue - he seems to have almost Democrat views and is very critical of Bush junior's policies. This is where it gets interesting. The key people supporting his nomination are those whose policies he has publically criticised, including:
1. Brent Scowcroft (National Security Advisor to Bush Senior and Chairman of the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board to Bush Junior)
2. Robert Gates (Bush Senior's CIA Director and Junior's Secretary of Defense)
3. Colin Powell (Bush Senior's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Junior's Secretary of State)

Why? - Only logical conclusion is that despite the rhetoric, he best represents their interests (which I've touched on in another topic - bottom two thirds f of this post http://www.aulro.com/afvb/1274350-post28.html, but that is a topic for another thread). Almost everyone in the Bush administration who occupied positions of influence on foreign policy issues also had strong ties to the energy (oil and gas) sector. Chuck Hagel is unsurprisingly no exception, and is serving on Chevron's board of directors.

[Eevo]

- The US didn't have a problem providing expertise to build chemical plants for Saddam in the 80's,
- Didn't have a problem supplying Saddam intelligence when he was gassing Iranian positions
- Was happy to turn a blind eye when Saddam was gassing the Kurds by the thousands (you may have heard of Saddam's cousin, 'Chemical Ali').


all those things were 20-30 years ago.

governments change.

[Chucaro]

all those things were 20-30 years ago.

governments change.

Ideology and soberbia do not and is well established in the powerful groups behind the political parties AKA in Australia as faceless ;)
As we post here about USA and their attitude the Brazilian government has called the USA ambassador to explain why USA government gave orders to spy on the private and mobile phones of the president.
Also they have done the same with the Mexican president.

[manic]

all those things were 20-30 years ago.

governments change.


all those things were 20-30 years ago.

governments change.

The beauty of the current democratic systems is the illusion of elected policy. Rotate the figure heads enough and they dodge trial, diffuse tensions. The people in government change but institutional agendas can be maintained. Atrocities can be committed and there is no dictator to lynch, we are expected to blame ourselves as electioneers. Genius power play.

Another example of a confused democracy is illustrated by terrorists who claim to attack a democratic population because they are ultimately responsible for military actions in the middle east. Either the terrorists are naive or they aim to make the American people question their actual role and influence over government decision making - who is actually responsible?

Perhaps then, the biggest threat to 'democratic' government institutions is the full fruition of democratic ideals. But fortunately for them we are a world cuisine eating, suburban oasis living, holiday making, happy thrill seeking bunch of self interested people who would much rather not be disturbed.

Hang on we are talking Syria here.... Im'a soap box wafflin again.

[Offender90]

all those things were 20-30 years ago.

governments change.

And the more they change the more they stay the same => What Manic said!


The beauty of the current democratic systems is the illusion of elected policy. Rotate the figure heads enough and they dodge trial, diffuse tensions. The people in government change but institutional agendas can be maintained. Atrocities can be committed and there is no dictator to lynch, we are expected to blame ourselves as electioneers. Genius power play.



i.e. Nomatter who gets elected, the same group of people occupy key positions of power and influence over foreign policy.




But that was then, and this is now, right?

Unfortunately, evidence seems to point to the contrary. The people running the show in both Bush Administrations appear to be have considerable influence in Obama's administration. I found it curious that Obama (a Democrat) had a Republican Secretary of Defense (Chuck Hagel). On the surface, the appointment is not out of the blue - he seems to have almost Democrat views and is very critical of Bush junior's policies. This is where it gets interesting. The key people supporting his nomination are those whose policies he has publically criticised, including:
1. Brent Scowcroft (National Security Advisor to Bush Senior and Chairman of the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board to Bush Junior)
2. Robert Gates (Bush Senior's CIA Director and Junior's Secretary of Defense)
3. Colin Powell (Bush Senior's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Junior's Secretary of State)

[Chucaro]

Russia Detects Two missile Launches in Mediterranean (http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=108876&frid=22&seccatid=45&cid=22&fromval=1)

Russia on Tuesday announced that its missile early warning system had detected the launch of two missiles from the central part of the Mediterranean Sea fired towards the Sea's eastern coastline.

The launches took place at 10:16 am Moscow time (0616 GMT) and were detected by the early warning system in Armavir in southern Russia, the defense ministry said in a statement quoted by Russian news agencies.

It said Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu had already reported to President Vladimir Putin about the event, which comes amid growing expectations of Western military action in Syria.

[Offender90]

Russia Detects Two missile Launches in Mediterranean (http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=108876&frid=22&seccatid=45&cid=22&fromval=1)

Russia on Tuesday announced that its missile early warning system had detected the launch of two missiles from the central part of the Mediterranean Sea fired towards the Sea's eastern coastline.

The launches took place at 10:16 am Moscow time (0616 GMT) and were detected by the early warning system in Armavir in southern Russia, the defense ministry said in a statement quoted by Russian news agencies.

It said Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu had already reported to President Vladimir Putin about the event, which comes amid growing expectations of Western military action in Syria.

Apparently Israel was 'testing' a missile in a joint US / Israel exercise.

Israel was testing a missile, not the waters - Diplomacy and Defense Israel News Broadcast | Haaretz (http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-and-defense/1.545250)

What they were really testing is anyone's guess.
- Testing Syrian radar capabilities?
- Russian radar capabilities?
- Checking if Russians are providing intelligence to Syrians?
- Testing Russia's response to the launches?
- Testing the purpose of Russian ships in the Mediterranean?

Who knows - a bit like the Russian launch of a Topol ICBM over Syria and Israel last year - who knows what the purpose that test was.

‘UFO’ over Middle East reportedly a Russian missile test (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/ufo-over-middle-east-reportedly-russian-missile-test-165058627.html)

[Disco Muppet]

Nothing like a "practice missile launch" to get the other players to show their hand ;)

[bob10]

Al Jazeera's report, Bob [ click on " middle East"]

Middle East (http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/) Israel confirms missile test


Defence ministry confirms joint exercise with US of anti-ballistic missile system in Mediterranean.


Last Modified: 03 Sep 2013 22:23



Israel fired a missile in the Mediterranean to test a new defence system - but did not inform anyone beforehand.
The Tuesday morning launch - a joint exercise with the United States - was first reported by Russia, which said two "objects" following a ballistic trajectory had been fired from the Mediterranean.
Israel's Defence Ministry later said that it, along with a team of United States military advisers, had carried out a test-launch of a Sparrow missile.
The Sparrow, which simulates the long-range missiles of Syria and Iran, is used for target practice by Israel's US-backed anti-missile system, Arrow.
The test comes as the West debates whether to launch military strikes against the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad following its alleged use of chemical weapons last month.
"Israel routinely fires missiles or drones off its shores to test its own ballistic defence capabilities," a US official said in Washington.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the anti-missile system was a national "wall of iron". "These things give us the power to protect ourselves, and anyone who considers harming us would do best not to," he said in a speech.
Arrow designer Uzi Rabin said tests of the anti-missile system are planned "long, long in advance" and generally go unnoticed. "What apparently made the difference today is the high state of tension over Syria and Russia's unusual vigilance," he told Reuters.
Al Jazeera's Paul Brennan, reporting from Jerusalem on Tuesday, said it was "highly unusual that Israel should be involved in this joint exercise, as it could draw Israel into the conflict," he said

[Chucaro]

It is interesting, when Nth Korea send a missile to the sky all the hell break loose but when the Israelis send one is all well.........

[Disco Muppet]

It is interesting, when Nth Korea send a missile to the sky all the hell break loose but when the Israelis send one is all well.........

Israelis are seen as a much more stable player than NK...
You also had NK threatening everyone under the sun in the lead up to said missile launch...

[Chucaro]

Israelis are seen as a much more stable player than NK...
You also had NK threatening everyone under the sun in the lead up to said missile launch...
Oh yes, since the establishment of Israel there have been a lots of stability in the middle east and Israel always comply with the UN resolutions :p
Do not forget that no country is allowed to inspect Israel to see if the have nuclear bombs but it is expected that Iran and North Korea comply with that.
There will be no stability until all the countries are treated equally and the ones that refuse to comply with the UN resolutions are the worse for peace.

[Disco Muppet]

Oh yes, since the establishment of Israel there have been a lots of stability in the middle east and Israel always comply with the UN resolutions :p
Do not forget that no country is allowed to inspect Israel to see if the have nuclear bombs but it is expected that Iran and North Korea comply with that.
There will be no stability until all the countries are treated equally and the ones that refuse to comply with the UN resolutions are the worse for peace.

Ahh, but Israel doesn't run around threatening to nuke the United States now does it? ;)
It's all about perceived threat.

[Ferret]

Or Japan. Or South Korea.

When Israel starts to use the same language as North Korea then I might agree they should start to be seen as equal threats.

[Chucaro]

The arrogance of John McCain who was the potential president of USA is a typical example of the present and pass governments of USA :mad:
During the debate in the senate about the possible intervention of USA in Syria this low life was playing poker in his smart phone.
Is so careless about the implications of the vote and possible thousands of life lost that he tweeted page:
Scandal! Caught playing iPhone game at 3+ hour Senate hearing – worst of all I lost!
— John McCain (@SenJohnMcCain) September 3, 2013

Yes, we are numbers for them :mad:

[wrinklearthur]

The arrogance of John McCain who was the potential president of USA is a typical example of the present and pass governments of USA :mad:
During the debate in the senate about the possible intervention of USA in Syria this low life was playing poker in his smart phone.
Is so careless about the implications of the vote and possible thousands of life lost that he tweeted page:
Scandal! Caught playing iPhone game at 3+ hour Senate hearing – worst of all I lost!
— John McCain (@SenJohnMcCain) September 3, 2013

Yes, we are numbers for them :mad:

"The pubic get the government they deserve" and I don't think John McCain is worried, after all there is safety in numbers. ;)
.

[bob10]

It is interesting, when Nth Korea send a missile to the sky all the hell break loose but when the Israelis send one is all well.........

I think the difference is, if you believe them, Israel fired a sparrow missile to simulate an incoming missile from their neighbours in order to test their defensive missile system. NK fired a ballistic missile to test their offensive missile system. It seems like posturing , all part of the game. Bob

[THE BOOGER]

Actually I think both the US and Israel launched missles 1 each the US launched the sparrow to test the Israeli Arrow system. Don't think the US will complain about themselves or the Israelis in this case but timing is everything :)

[Chucaro]

US president makes case for strikes against regime targets, as Putin says Russia "will help" Assad if action launched. (http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2013/09/20139615186635326.html)

What will be the implications?
Are USA and USSR prepared to "lock horns" ?
Absolutely madness :mad:

[mikehzz]

The most likely long term outcome of the US poking Islamic countries with a stick is that terrorists will sneak a few nukes into prominent US cities and set them off. It's only a matter of time and already been forseen by Hollywood. Russia wouldn't be dumb enough to start a war with the US over another country. They also wouldn't want to be a target for terrorists either, so they posture against intervention. US arrogance in continually bypassing the UN will be its downfall. I fear for their weapons manufacturing industry then. They hit a real slump when the cold war fizzled but rebounded nicely with some manufactured opportunities in Iraq and Afghanistan. It was a good business to be able to sell weapons to Saddam in the 80's and 90's and then sell the next batch of weapons to bomb the crap out of him to get them back...all in the name of justice. Some people really know how to make a buck.

[THE BOOGER]

I think most of the noise coming from Russia is just that noise, they have no love for Islamic extremists any more than the west look at Chechnya etc but don't want to be seen siding with the US either:)

[Disco Muppet]

I think most of the noise coming from Russia is just that noise, they have no love for Islamic extremists any more than the west look at Chechnya etc but don't want to be seen siding with the US either:)

True, but Syria buys arms from the Russians, and LOTS of them at that.
It's also one of their few remaining "allies" and I'm sure they'd like to keep it that way.

[Chucaro]

I guess that the position of Putin is that not one know who if any is going to run Syria if the actual leader goes.
Look what happens in Irak, it is hell and more people died now that when Saddam was in power.
IMO it is better to have the devil that you know than 3 or more that you do not know.
Is any body things that if the rebels win they are going to be peaceful and friends with USA?

[bob10]

The most sensible solution so far, Bob

Syria welcomes proposal to surrender weapons (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-09/syria-welcomes-proposal-to-surrender-chemical-weapons/4946928)

[wrinklearthur]

But, will the rebels do the same?

Ref; Syria welcomes Russian proposal to surrender chemical weapons as Assad warns US over strikes - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-09/syria-welcomes-proposal-to-surrender-chemical-weapons/4946928#Assad)


"His government also welcomed an unexpected proposal, set out by Russia's foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, for Syria to place its weapons under international supervision and have them destroyed."


"The Russians made the idea public after US secretary of state John Kerry made an off-the-cuff comment at a press conference, suggesting that Mr Assad could avoid a strike by giving up his chemical weapons in a week,"

It reads a lot different if this is added.

"-------- something he believed would not and could not happen."
.

[bob10]

But, will the rebels do the same?

Ref; Syria welcomes Russian proposal to surrender chemical weapons as Assad warns US over strikes - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-09/syria-welcomes-proposal-to-surrender-chemical-weapons/4946928#Assad)





It reads a lot different if this is added.

.

It's called diplomacy, Arthur. And do we know who the Rebels are anymore?, Bob

Syrian opposition
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/09/1189.jpgMolhem Barakat / Reuters
Free Syrian Army fighters search bags belonging to civilians who are attempting to enter Turkey at the Bab Al-Salam border crossing September 9, 2013.


By Richard Engel, Chief Foreign Correspondent, NBC News
News Analysis
NORTHERN SYRIA and ANTAKYA, TURKEY -- There was another checkpoint up ahead, so we slowed down, but didn’t stop. It’s better to keep moving at rebel checkpoints now. Don’t make too much eye contact, and move on.
We were in a convoy of pickups with commanders from the Free Syrian Army, top guys, but they didn’t have much juice anymore.
A year or two ago, the FSA ran all the checkpoints. They ran the revolution. With their fatigues, Winston cigarettes and patriotic songs blaring on their car radios, they were the rebels of Rebelstan and the people loved them.
Farmers stopped them on the road to push baskets of figs snapped right from the trees into their cars. The FSA didn’t need bases because families opened their homes for fighters to bed down for the night.


But it got all messed up. The extremists started coming about a year ago.
Saudi teenagers looking to shoot someone with their new guns. Iraqis showing off how much they knew about fighting from years blowing up American Humvees. Tunisians and Libyans unsatisfied with their own revolutions and hungering for more. Al Qaeda put out the call to go Syria and it was answered.
Syrian opposition activists say a school was attacked Monday with a substance they compared to Napalm, saying the only injuries recorded were burns across 50 to 80 percent of victims' bodies. NBC's Richard Engel reports. Footage Courtesy BBC Panorama.

The men at the checkpoint waved us through.
“Who are these people?” I asked the commander in my pickup.
“I don’t know. Nusra maybe,” he said.
The al-Nusra Front used to be the worst, the hardest of the hardcore Islamists, earning a spot on the State Department’s list of terrorist groups. But now, Nusra has been surpassed by newer, more bloodthirsty gangs. The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (also known as ISIS) is more radical than Nusra. So are the Mohajeroun, "the migrants."
On a spectrum of dark knights, Nusra has become a charcoal to the Mohajeroun’s raven black. The Nusra at least tried to play nice, handing out bread, picking up garbage and playing for hearts and minds. The Islamic State and Mohajeroun don’t bother. You either listen to them, live by their unbending interpretations of seventh century Islamic justice or they whip you and kill you and forget about you.
“They have no friends,” said a friend of mine who was kidnapped by the Islamic State and sentenced to death after a five minute Islamic "trial." He managed to slip away by the silver of his tongue.
The Islamic State whipped a young groom and his father last May in the town of Saraqib. A video shows men giving the groom 40 lashes with a length of rope and his father 50 lashes, for marrying a divorced women without waiting three months, as defined by Islamic law. Other radicals killed a boy in Aleppo in July for making an off-handed comment about the Muslim Prophet Muhammad, considering it blasphemy. In Raqqda last May, extremists carried out a public execution of three men (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ruif3tp3iZc)they accused of being regime loyalists. They sat the men on the ground, hands bound behind their backs, read the verdict on a bullhorn, and shot each one with a pistol to the back of the head.
We’d only been driving for a few minutes since we’d gotten through the last checkpoint. The new one up ahead didn’t look promising. All black flags. Five men with AK-47s. No smiles.
I slouched in my seat. I knew it didn’t make me harder to see, but I couldn’t help it. I would have crawled into the glove compartment if I could have.
Slideshow: Syria uprising (http://slideshow.nbcnews.com/id/51242858/displaymode/1247/?wbSlideShowId=51242858&wbSection=news&wbSlideShowTeaseId=48245095)


https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/09/1190.jpg (http://slideshow.nbcnews.com/id/51242858/displaymode/1247/?wbSlideShowId=51242858&wbSection=news&wbSlideShowTeaseId=48245095)Alice Martins / AFP - Getty Images
A look back at the conflict that has overtaken the country.

Launch slideshow (http://slideshow.nbcnews.com/id/51242858/displaymode/1247/?wbSlideShowId=51242858&wbSection=news&wbSlideShowTeaseId=48245095)



The men at this checkpoint were wearing Pakistani-style pajama suits. They were playing dress up jihadi. War can be fun for certain people. It’s a magnet for sadists, losers and angry dreamers. You get to travel and carry a gun and stop cars and kill people if you want to and tell them what to do and watch them cower in front of you.


It beats working in a grocery store in Benghazi or Karachi, simmering all day as you watch Muslims being killed on TV. In Syria, you can play al Qaeda superhero, a Muslim Ironman flying in to rescue Syrians from Bashar Assad’s Alawite death machine. Maybe you can even make money from kidnappings, or die and win a trip on the express elevator to heaven.
The men in pajamas waved us through the checkpoint, but there were more checkpoints to come. During the recent hour drive from Aleppo to the Turkish border, our convoy passed through nearly a dozen. Only two were run by the Free Syrian Army. The rest belonged to Nusra, the Islamic State, the Mohajeroun, or were run by men unknown to the FSA commander with us.
He told me his men had stopped traveling alone. Even the original rebels weren't safe from the whims of the Islamic extremists.
So who exactly would the United States be helping if it bombed Syria? We don’t really know. Neither do many Syrians.
In some ways Washington would be providing air support for al Qaeda-backed fighters. The extremists would benefit from the U.S. military intervention and try make advances. But attacking Assad’s regime would also help the FSA and its moderate leader General Salim Idris, a U.S. ally.
What about doing nothing? That's also has costs. Ignoring the crisis has only made Syria the mess it is now.

[Pickles2]

bob10...Very interesting post mate, VERY interesting.
So, what do you say SHOULD happen, what do you think WILL happen.
If the "World" stays out,...will Assad stay "In"?
Cheers, Pickles.

[bob10]

bob10...Very interesting post mate, VERY interesting.
So, what do you say SHOULD happen, what do you think WILL happen.
If the "World" stays out,...will Assad stay "In"?
Cheers, Pickles.

Let Russia handle the Syrian Gov., , form a coalition to oversee the collection of chemical weapons, [ getting the mix of countries right would be crucial], Get the UN to declare a neutral zone , on the border with Turkey, Syrian rebel fighters & refugees to muster there. All minority groups out, only Syrian opposition stay. A UN resolution to force both parties to the negotiating table. A security council resolution to form a balanced and highly capable task force , Russian led, with Arab League involvement , and Turkish/ NATO troops, ready to intervene if the neutral zone is compromised. US observers only, no US boots on the ground.

As for Assad, this is a Syrian problem, they must be forced to negotiate a solution. Whatever happens Russia has to be onside, but Assad has to know the "World" will not tolerate the fighting any more. The Muslim world must be assured this is not a vendetta against them. But, most of all, every rabid minority group of jihadists/ ratbags must be sent on their way, and the only country who can make that happen is Iran. What we desperately need now is some old fashioned diplomacy, to knit it all together. Dare I say, the Poms have a reputation at being good at this sort of thing. Keep the USA out, you may get Iran in. If Iran thinks they can score points over the US, it might just work. The US has to pull their heads in, cop it sweet, and show the World they have learned the hard lessons of Iraq & Afganistan..........Simple, really.


What will happen? it would be easier to muster cats than predict that. Bob

[Pickles2]

I agree with all of that, except, I do not believe that the U.S. needs to cop anything sweet.
The U.S. does a lot of good in the World, but the Press only focus on the bad stuff, and yes, for sure, there is some of that....but geez, I'm glad they're on our side. I remember several years ago, when there was a MASSIVE Tsunami or whatever that caused huge damage to India. The U.S., I think it was under George Bush's direction, sent the whole U.S. 7th Fleet there. The U.S. contribution to that disaster was awesome...made any other country's aid at the time insignificant....but who thinks about that now?
I totally agree, the U.S. should not try to "dominate", but they should be allowed to have some "involvement", be part of it, if that is what it takes, & if it helps to gravitate to some peace in that area.
All Countries involved, including the U.S., should be entitled to assure themselves that ALL Chemical weapons are gone.
Cheers, Pickles.

[101RRS]

Pickles - I don't disagree with you but who appointed the USA as the world's policeman, particularly as it has demonstrated that it functions for its own interests and not necessarily those of other countries. With the USA the cure is more often worse than the ailment.

We do not support vigilantes in modern society and the same applies on the world stage - if the USA was a small country doing the same as it does now, its leaders would have been in the war crimes tribunal - remember any unprovoked attack on another country without UN sanction is against International Law - but it seems this does not apply to the US.

This is a rogue country (yes in a good way for us) that needs to be brought back within the world rules. The one saving aspect of them is that they think they are doing good - just think what it would be like if they turned bad.

Garry

[Chucaro]

.................................................. .........
All Countries involved, including the U.S., should be entitled
Cheers, Pickles.

I will go further and say all the countries that do not have chemical weapons
should be entitled to assure themselves that ALL Chemical weapons are gone including the ones that have USA.

USA it is acting as a dogooder which interferes with the sovereign of other countries.

[Pickles2]

Chucaro....Mate, you obviously have a problem with the U.S.A.?...I haven't heard you say one word of good about them?(totally your right of course)
I try to have a balanced approach, I know what they do....and for sure....I know what they don't do.
I ain't saying they have to be "The World's Policemen", & I ain't saying they're perfect, but in view of some of the radical stuff going on in the World today, I'm glad they're there...and I'm glad they're on "our" side,...VERY glad.
Cheers, Pickles.

[THE BOOGER]

Pickles - I don't disagree with you but who appointed the USA as the world's policeman, particularly as it has demonstrated that it functions for its own interests and not necessarily those of other countries. With the USA the cure is more often worse than the ailment.

We do not support vigilantes in modern society and the same applies on the world stage - if the USA was a small country doing the same as it does now, its leaders would have been in the war crimes tribunal - remember any unprovoked attack on another country without UN sanction is against International Law - but it seems this does not apply to the US.

This is a rogue country (yes in a good way for us) that needs to be brought back within the world rules. The one saving aspect of them is that they think they are doing good - just think what it would be like if they turned bad.

Garry

Gary I understand if you take the US troops out then some people/countries will be easier to deal with but without US troops & equipment what is nato or the UN able to do they provide most of the troops for both organisations:(

[bob10]

Gary I understand if you take the US troops out then some people/countries will be easier to deal with but without US troops & equipment what is nato or the UN able to do they provide most of the troops for both organisations:(

A viable force could be brought together without US direct involvement at the coal face. If rogue elements of Assads army decide to go it alone , the US could do what it does best, provide air cover for the " Task Force ". I think it is critical the US demonstrates new Maturity on the international scene, and shows that it is capable of diplomatic work of the highest level before going in boots & all, unlike Iraq, & Afganistan. They might actually gain some respect from the moderates in the region, and the radicals might be put back in their rat holes. [ I know, tell him he's dreamin. ] I also think Assads government may not be in full control of elements of the Army, and those elements I would regard as dangerous as the jihadists/ratbags on the rebels side. Let's face it, someone did something terrible to those civilians, the priority should be getting stability back to Syria, and then finding out who & what, and national egos and chest pumping " oorahing! " should have nothing to do with it. Bob

[Pickles2]

G'Day Bob, Yeah...No worries with any of that.
The main thing is that it gets "sorted"......properly.....Assad does what He's told.....with no, "ifs or buts", & no "favourable treatment" of Assad by the Russians.
I just have this feeling that Assad may be, "the best of a bad bunch", so with some "sorting, he may just be, the best bet.
It's a bit like Tony said "It's the baddies against the baddies"?!
Cheers, Pickles.

[Chucaro]

Chucaro....Mate, you obviously have a problem with the U.S.A.?...I haven't heard you say one word of good about them?(totally your right of course)
I try to have a balanced approach, I know what they do....and for sure....I know what they don't do.
I ain't saying they have to be "The World's Policemen", & I ain't saying they're perfect, but in view of some of the radical stuff going on in the World today, I'm glad they're there...and I'm glad they're on "our" side,...VERY glad.
Cheers, Pickles.

Why do you think that USA and other countries have to have the right to have nuclear and chemical weapons and the others no?
My opinion about USA governments (not the American people)it is based in what happen in South America and it is indefensible by USA.
And by the way still happens as we write in this thread spying on many countries and even on the presidents private home phones.

[Pickles2]

Why do you think that USA and other countries have to have the right to have nuclear and chemical weapons and the others no?
My opinion about USA governments (not the American people)it is based in what happen in South America and it is indefensible by USA.
And by the way still happens as we write in this thread spying on many countries and even on the presidents private home phones.
South America?...Yes I've heard about that, but I ain't no expert, so I'm not denying anything, & even if I did know much, you'd probably be right!
I'm VERY glad, that if anyone has to have them(Nuclear Weapons), then the U.S. has got 'em....and I'd like to point out that the U.S. has not used them,..yeah I know, except in WW11 against Japan, where at least 100,000 lives were saved, including many Aussie soldiers who would have died in the fighting......and the U.S. were not the instigators of that conflict.
Other Countries? Do you think Iran should have them?....As the world centre of Terrorism...where do you think that would end up?
Spying....I would suggest to you that EVERY Country is involved in that to some degree.....it's only that the U.S. has some fairly sophisticated equipment.
As I've said, they are not perfect, no Country is, but where I probably differ from you, is that I would say that the U.S. have done a lot more good, than bad, in the World.
I disagree with you 100% that they are a "Rogue Country", but yes I do agree with you, that I would not like to be around if they turned bad, because that would mean that they would not be on "our" side, well "My" side anyway.
Cheers, Pickles.

[Disco Muppet]

If you honestly think that the U.S is the international good guy well then......
....I disagree. Not going to start slinging names :p
Yes, the U.S has done plenty of good in the world. They've also done an incredible amount that's counter productive.
The argument that "everyone spies but the U.S has more specialised equipment" doesn't hold water IMHO, that's like saying Everyone's doing it so I might as well do it the best. Not good enough.
The U.S is your best buddy, as long as they get something out of it.
Ever seen Team America? Sure it's a giant **** take but there are some scary elements of truth in it.
Just remember that the Pax Americana won't be on top forever, if it still is.

[Pickles2]

If you honestly think that the U.S is the international good guy well then......
....I disagree. Not going to start slinging names :p
Yes, the U.S has done plenty of good in the world. They've also done an incredible amount that's counter productive.
The argument that "everyone spies but the U.S has more specialised equipment" doesn't hold water IMHO, that's like saying Everyone's doing it so I might as well do it the best. Not good enough.
The U.S is your best buddy, as long as they get something out of it.
Ever seen Team America? Sure it's a giant **** take but there are some scary elements of truth in it.
Just remember that the Pax Americana won't be on top forever, if it still is.
No worries.
I do NOT think they're "The International Good Guys", BUT neither do I think they're "The International Bad Guys".....as some like to see them portrayed.
"Specialised Equipment"...no, I don't think that is a reason for spying, but hey, if ya gonna do it, ya might as well be the best....How hard do you think Russia, China, North Korea etc etc etc, try to spy on the U.S?!! It goes on...it's always gone on, and it (spying) always will.
Best Buddy?..Very true, but many Countries are guilty of that, certainly not just the U.S.
Don't get the wrong idea, I ain't no member of "Team America" (I like that one!), I simply like a balanced view.
Cheers, Pickles.

[Chucaro]

to
No worries.
I do NOT think they're "The International Good Guys", BUT neither do I think they're "The International Bad Guys".....as some like to see them portrayed.
.................................................. .......................................
Cheers, Pickles.

Just in case that there can be the remote possibility that you are referring my views :D I would like to point out that I said quote "I will go further and say all the countries that do not have chemical weapons
should be entitled to assure themselves that ALL Chemical weapons are gone including the ones that have USA.
You see, we not dot want another "Rumsfeld" selling chemical weapons to any country in the same way that we do not want China and Russia to sell them as well as they have done it before.
I think that including all the countries is a very balanced view ;)

[Pickles2]

to

Just in case that there can be the remote possibility that you are referring my views :D I would like to point out that I said quote "I will go further and say all the countries that do not have chemical weapons
should be entitled to assure themselves that ALL Chemical weapons are gone including the ones that have USA.
You see, we not dot want another "Rumsfeld" selling chemical weapons to any country in the same way that we do not want China and Russia to sell them as well as they have done it before.
I think that including all the countries is a very balanced view ;)
I agree with you there.
But I have question for you, & maybe other members may like to chime in.
Are you saying that the U.S. has sold chemical weapons? If so, what were they, & to whom were they sold?
Cheers, Pickles.

[akula]

Here's an interesting article from the Guardian showing the less commonly expressed views about the U.S.A, their wars and their rather flexible ethics.

Obama's rogue state tramples over every law it demands others uphold | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/09/obama-rogue-state-tramples-every-law?)

[bob10]

G'Day Bob, Yeah...No worries with any of that.
The main thing is that it gets "sorted"......properly.....Assad does what He's told.....with no, "ifs or buts", & no "favourable treatment" of Assad by the Russians.
I just have this feeling that Assad may be, "the best of a bad bunch", so with some "sorting, he may just be, the best bet.
It's a bit like Tony said "It's the baddies against the baddies"?!
Cheers, Pickles.

First of all, who set you up as whether their should be " worries" about what I say? And Assad is going to be "told ' by whom? Assad the best of a bad bunch? you sound like a channel 9 news clip. Bob

[Pickles2]

First of all, who set you up as whether their should be " worries" about what I say? And Assad is going to be "told ' by whom? Assad the best of a bad bunch? you sound like a channel 9 news clip. Bob
Hey, settle down, NO-ONE "SET ME UP" to say ANYTHING about you...right or wrong..I'm simply saying "I" (ME) have no worries....OK...I'm simply speaking for myself & saying that I agree with you.
"Assad is going to be told"?..He will be "told" by whoever heads up this "mission" to rid him of his Chemical Weapons.
"Assad is the best of a bad bunch"....yep,....I think he could be...I mean, if he goes, then who takes over.....from what I read in your post which you may remember I said was VERY interesting, I read that there are all sorts of bad guys amongst the "Rebels", who sound like they could be worse than Assad. I was not aware of this before.
"Channel 9 News Clip"?....Don't know what to make of that one.....I'm simply stating my opinion, which is simply MY opinion, which I certainly do NOT expect everyone to agree with.
Cheers, Pickles.

[bob10]

Hey, settle down, NO-ONE "SET ME UP" to say ANYTHING about you...right or wrong..I'm simply saying "I" (ME) have no worries....OK...I'm simply speaking for myself & saying that I agree with you.
"Assad is going to be told"?..He will be "told" by whoever heads up this "mission" to rid him of his Chemical Weapons.
"Assad is the best of a bad bunch"....yep,....I think he could be...I mean, if he goes, then who takes over.....from what I read in your post which you may remember I said was VERY interesting, I read that there are all sorts of bad guys amongst the "Rebels", who sound like they could be worse than Assad. I was not aware of this before.
Cheers, Pickles.

Got ya! :D

[Chucaro]

I agree with you there.
But I have question for you, & maybe other members may like to chime in.
Are you saying that the U.S. has sold chemical weapons? If so, what were they, & to whom were they sold?
Cheers, Pickles.

I guess that here are some references for you. do a bit of research ;)

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/dec/31/iraq.politics
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2002-09-30-iraq-ushelp_x.htm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-153210/Rumsfeld-helped-Iraq-chemical-weapons.html
http://truth-out.org/news/item/18710-the-us-has-no-credibility-dealing-with-chemical-weapons
United States support for Iraq during the Iran–Iraq war - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2247256.stm

[Pickles2]

I've looked at them.
None of them say that the "US SOLD CHEMICAL WEAPONS".
What they do say is that the US may have turned a blind eye to some countries who may have been making these weapons.
I'm not saying the U.S. is without blame, or without guilt. What I'm saying is that they've also done a lot of good in the world too....
On balance, I say the U.S. done a LOT more good than bad.
Cheers, Pickles.

[Chucaro]

Please do a research before doubt what it is public ....
US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld helped Saddam Hussein build up his arsenal of deadly chemical and biological weapons, it was revealed last night.

As an envoy from President Reagan 19 years ago, he had a secret meeting with the Iraqi dictator and arranged enormous military assistance for his war with Iran.

The CIA had already warned that Iraq was using chemical weapons almost daily. But Mr Rumsfeld, at the time a successful executive in the pharmaceutical industry, still made it possible for Saddam to buy supplies from American firms.

They included viruses such as anthrax and bubonic plague, according to the Washington Post.

The extraordinary details have come to light because thousands of State Department documents dealing with the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war have just been declassified and released under the Freedom of Information Act.

On November 1, 1983, a full month before Mr Rumsfeld's visit to Baghdad, Secretary of State George Shultz was officially informed that the CIA had discovered Iraqi troops were resorting to 'almost daily use of chemical weapons' against the Iranians.

Nevertheless, Mr Rumsfeld arranged for the Iraqis to receive billions of pounds in loans to buy weapons and CIA Director William Casey used a Chilean front company to supply Iraq with cluster bombs.

SOURCE (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-153210/Rumsfeld-helped-Iraq-chemical-weapons.html)

Yes, USA used his "good friend" Augusto Pinochet the dictator put by them in Chile :mad:
That good doing by USA cost more than 60000 lives.
Do you like to read a bit more about the "goods"done by them?
Then again better no, the pain to remember all it is to close to my chest, I live it up to you to do the research .........

[THE BOOGER]

Arthur I would take that article with a very big grain of salt it talks of blair being the current prime minister of Britain despite being dated sept11 2013. I think its way out of date. Looks and reads as if some one just picked bits of news from other places and put them together also it says chemical weapons then talks about anthrax and bubonic plague with are biological weapons:)

[Pickles2]

Please do a research before doubt what it is public ....
US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld helped Saddam Hussein build up his arsenal of deadly chemical and biological weapons, it was revealed last night.

As an envoy from President Reagan 19 years ago, he had a secret meeting with the Iraqi dictator and arranged enormous military assistance for his war with Iran.

The CIA had already warned that Iraq was using chemical weapons almost daily. But Mr Rumsfeld, at the time a successful executive in the pharmaceutical industry, still made it possible for Saddam to buy supplies from American firms.

They included viruses such as anthrax and bubonic plague, according to the Washington Post.

The extraordinary details have come to light because thousands of State Department documents dealing with the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war have just been declassified and released under the Freedom of Information Act.

On November 1, 1983, a full month before Mr Rumsfeld's visit to Baghdad, Secretary of State George Shultz was officially informed that the CIA had discovered Iraqi troops were resorting to 'almost daily use of chemical weapons' against the Iranians.

Nevertheless, Mr Rumsfeld arranged for the Iraqis to receive billions of pounds in loans to buy weapons and CIA Director William Casey used a Chilean front company to supply Iraq with cluster bombs.

SOURCE (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-153210/Rumsfeld-helped-Iraq-chemical-weapons.html)

Yes, USA used his "good friend" Augusto Pinochet the dictator put by them in Chile :mad:
That good doing by USA cost more than 60000 lives.
Do you like to read a bit more about the "goods"done by them?
Then again better no, the pain to remember all it is to close to my chest, I live it up to you to do the research .........
Could it be that you've had some "personal" experience with the Pinochet "regime", because I guess if you had, then that might not be good.
Cheers, Pickles.

[Chucaro]

Arthur I would take that article with a very big grain of salt it talks of blair being the current prime minister of Britain despite being dated sept11 2013. I think its way out of date. Looks and reads as if some one just picked bits of news from other places and put them together also it says chemical weapons then talks about anthrax and bubonic plague with are biological weapons:)

Copy of some of the CIA docs about nerve gas are HERE (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secret_cia_files_prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he _gassed_iran?page=0,3)

[Chucaro]

Could it be that you've had some "personal" experience with the Pinochet "regime", because I guess if you had, then that might not be good.
Cheers, Pickles.

Not with him, friends and relatives yes , I come for the River Plate area were we suffered even more.
There sill bodies on the bottom of the River Plate..........

[Pickles2]

Not with him, friends and relatives yes , I come for the River Plate area were we suffered even more.
There sill bodies on the bottom of the River Plate..........
Have I spoken to you before? I think I may have.
I think I've spoken to you about "The Battle Of The River Plate", involving the German Pocket Battleship, "Admiral Graf Spee" during WW11. The person I spoke to said he could remember his Father talking about it. Maybe it was on a Pentax forum?
Anyway, I'm sorry to hear of your "involvement".
Cheers, Pickles.

[THE BOOGER]

Chucaro I believe that Iraq used chemical weapons I have some good friends who are Chaldean Catholics they tell me what he did to them and their families but that doesn't tell me where the weapons came from. Saddam Hussein got his weapons from France, and Russia predominantly so I would look there first but you never know you could be right. Those other doc you link to don't say where the weapons came from but do say they were used and that he would use them again I would say almost every int agency at that time would have said the same thing:)

[bob10]

Some interesting news here, check out " War crimes on both sides", and " destroying Syrias chemical arms " . I was wondering what the UN was doing, they have been quietly beavering away below the radar. Bob. From the BBC



Russia 'hands Syria plans to US'https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/09/1126.jpg (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24053918)


Russia has handed over to the US its plans to make safe Syria's chemical weapons, sources say, after President Obama put military strikes on hold.


Clashes in Christian town (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24051440)
War crimes on both sides - UN (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24045680)
Destroying Syria's chemical arms (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24048338)
Analysis: Russia - a step ahead (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24045650)
Views from US and Damascus (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24047740)
Syria crisis: Damascus diaries (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24044464)

[Pickles2]

G'Day Bob.
Well, I reckon the good thing about these latest developments is there is at least some talking going on amongst the major powers.
However, I note that the Russians have said that "any declaration blaming the Syrians would be unacceptable"?
Cheers, Pickles.

[Chucaro]

Have I spoken to you before? I think I may have.
I think I've spoken to you about "The Battle Of The River Plate", involving the German Pocket Battleship, "Admiral Graf Spee" during WW11. The person I spoke to said he could remember his Father talking about it. Maybe it was on a Pentax forum?
Anyway, I'm sorry to hear of your "involvement".
Cheers, Pickles.

I remember seen the to of the mast of the Graf Spee and the entrance of the Montevideo's port form my parents apartment.
Pickles, the end of the 60's to the beginning of the 80's was a very dark period for Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay and Bolivia to name some.
Our blood boils and our hearth is in pain when people say something nice about the criminals of Henry Kissinger, Nixon, Ford, Regan, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing (french president back then) among others.
On 16 February 2007, a request for the extradition of Kissinger was filed at the Supreme Court of Uruguay. USA still protect him. International crime and killing of ex presidents and members of parliament of South America appears that it is OK for USA.
The day that they are accountable for their crimes and at very least say sorry and remove the names of the criminals as heroes then it will help to heal profound wounds in the Latin American people.
There are not excuses for committing or support this crimes to humanity.

[VladTepes]

http://cdn.meme.li/i/6a2u2.jpg

http://www.tsr1.com/pictures/41e7637e7b6a9f27a98b84d3a185c7c0.jpg

[bob10]

deleted

(it was a quote of a pic I should not have posted - Vlad.)

[Ferret]

Putin's open letter to America published in the New York Times yesterday.

What Putin Has to Say to Americans About Syria (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-russia-on-syria.html?_r=0)

Seems to be more sensible than what some others are saying.

[bob10]

Putin should cement his reputation in international politics by this one quote, bob

No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorization.

[sashadidi]

Putin's open letter to America published in the New York Times yesterday.

What Putin Has to Say to Americans About Syria (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-russia-on-syria.html?_r=0)

Seems to be more sensible than what some others are saying.

Most of what he says is true, or sounds true which is the art of diplomacy, but still he's is stretching it a bit .

Sadly he is not squeaky clean either re the international international law either,Russia has passed a law that allows the President to strike at "terrorists" where ever they might be, thus authorising the violation of other nations' sovereignty as he did for example when he had a chechen leader murdered by the FSB in the Qatar in 1994 and then pressured the country to release the FSB agents.
Some of the foreign fighters in Syria are chechens while they are busy there they cannot cause grief on russias southern borders so it s a win for russia's security as well


He mentions Afghanistan ironically it was an operation Russia supported both politically and practically at the time so a a bit cheeky then to try and use that to sway the American public.

Also, he completely ignores the part of Russia facilitating escalation of the conflict to begin with by backing Assad when his forces indiscriminately opened fire on and killed peaceful protesters against his clan's decades old dictatorial regime.
These actions have led to Syrians taking up arms against him which led to the chaos that enabled Islamists, often foreigners, to move in.

Had the Russians reigned in their friends in Syria earlier, this might not have happened????
Now, with over 100,000 deaths later and with a largely Islamised opposition, he uses the large amounts of deaths and the Islamist rebels as an excuse to stay out.

Quite a cynical approach and he is no better than any other country else in his apparent caring attitude.

Only the civilians suffer as I know from my refugee camp days in Africa and all nations could be helping with refugees which is still way cheaper than a war.

[101RRS]

deleted

(it was a quote of a pic I should not have posted - Vlad.)

I saw it before it was removed - was good for a giggle on a thread that is getting a bit serious.

Mother in law jokes are always good.

Garry

[Ferret]

He mentions Afghanistan ironically it was an operation Russia supported both politically and practically at the time so a a bit cheeky then to try and use that to sway the American public.

Yes, I know. Every body ignores what is inconvenient to them. When it's pointed out they did or said the same thing in the past they always use the excuse 'that was completely different circumstances'. That's politics, sadly it's demonstrated on TV almost every night.

[Disco Muppet]

It's slightly disheartening when Putin is providing one of the more balanced and apparently level headed points of view.

[Pickles2]

sashadidi describes Putin's "message" very well.....and the message is a good one.
However, Putin is a hypocrite.
That message talks about many "wrongs"....but the truth is... he himself has been involved in many of them, & plenty more. ....and he has people arrested in Russia, if he doesn't like what they say.
He is ex KGB, he promotes himself in "stunts", which have been proven to be staged, to make himself look like Superman.....and I do not trust him.
Nevertheless, in this instance, the message is a good one, & if it helps to save lives/further conflict, that has to be good.
Cheers, Pickles.

[Chucaro]

Pickles, I agree with you 100% one side have the CIA and the other the KGB.
I hope that this conflict will not have an outcome similar to Vietnam for the benefit of arm dealers.
In the way the Putin is talking it is heading like the old times when Kennedy was in one side and Khrushchev in the other :(

[Pickles2]

Pickles, I agree with you 100% one side have the CIA and the other the KGB.
I hope that this conflict will not have an outcome similar to Vietnam for the benefit of arm dealers.
In the way the Putin is talking it is heading like the old times when Kennedy was in one side and Khrushchev in the other :(
Mate, You must be nearly as old as me.
Yeah, I remember Kennedy & Khrushchev. I also remember there was another Russian guy around at the time...I think his name was Bulganin or something like that....we used to call 'em (Bulganin & Khrushchev) "Bulge & Crush (Khrusch)"!!
Cheers, Pickles.

[Chucaro]

Mate, You must be nearly as old as me.
Yeah, I remember Kennedy & Khrushchev. I also remember there was another Russian guy around at the time...I think his name was Bulganin or something like that....we used to call 'em (Bulganin & Khrushchev) "Bulge & Crush (Khrusch)"!!
Cheers, Pickles.

You may be thinking about Alexei Nikolayevich Kosygin, he not was in good terms with Brezhnev.
Bugger!!! I am getting old, I remember when I went to see Che in Montevideo and also remember Fidel when in 1959 visited Uruguay.

[sashadidi]

sashadidi describes Putin's "message" very well.....and the message is a good one.
However, Putin is a hypocrite.
That message talks about many "wrongs"....but the truth is... he himself has been involved in many of them, & plenty more. ....and he has people arrested in Russia, if he doesn't like what they say.
He is ex KGB, he promotes himself in "stunts", which have been proven to be staged, to make himself look like Superman.....and I do not trust him.
Nevertheless, in this instance, the message is a good one, & if it helps to save lives/further conflict, that has to be good.
Cheers, Pickles.
Pickles, it looks a good message on paper but its best described as Machiavellianism, remember sadly Putin is only on the side of Russia in this conflict not the Syrians people and if he cared about people and NOT about getting one over on the "others" he would not support Assad etc by say not give them banking facilities in russia or supply anti aircraft missiles etc. But it may bit him on the bottom eventually if the "rebels" did win.
Also he may have a bit of a problem in that Assad may not "obey" him (remember staying in power is everything to most dictators) and surrender all the chemical weapons he has which will embarrass Putin . it s a game that may be out of everyone's ability to influence now......

[bob10]

What a can of worms. Seriously, Assad may have to be supported in the short term to stop this turning into WW111, Bob

9 September 2013




Hidden struggle among Syria's rebels

By Muhammad Ali BBC Arabic, documentary producer
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/09/1059.jpg

I first met Abu Somer during the early days of the battle of Aleppo in August 2012. Now he commands a Syrian rebel brigade laying siege to a military base near Saraqeb, about 50km (30 miles) to the south-west.

Why did he leave Syria's second city while its destiny still lay in the balance? He is silent for a moment. Then he mutters: "Some Islamic brigades wanted to assassinate me."

Ten months ago, when Abu Somer was among secular fighters confronting government forces on Aleppo's Salah al-Din front, there was no Islamist involvement in the action.

The majority of fighters wanted to overthrow the regime of President Bashar al-Assad and create a secular country in which the power to decide who governs rested in the ballot box.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/09/1060.jpg In this graffiti, "Down with Sharia court" has been crossed out and rewritten as "Yes to Sharia court"

But that changed and, after what he says were three assassination attempts against him, Abu Somer decided to leave to avoid infighting that would benefit the Assad regime.

He says he tried many times to contact the Islamist brigades to protest, but the answer always came back: "It is the shabiha [pro-government militiamen] trying to kill you, not us."

The potential for violent struggle between Syria's opposition factions was always there, but none of the rebels expected it to play out before President Assad was removed from power.
Sharia courts
On my last tour of rebel-held areas in northern Syria, the streets looked very different.

The black-and-white banners representing Islamist factions are now prevalent in most areas, instead of the green flag of the revolution.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/09/1061.jpg Nusra Front in Saraqeb, checking its fighters at the entrance of the town

Abu Qudama, a Jordanian member of the al-Qaeda-backed al-Nusra Front, commands the Security Brigade in Saraqeb, a collection of Islamist fighters from different factions that enforces rulings of the town Sharia court.

He says the people of Saraqeb supported Islamic rule and demanded his faction's intervention to administer civilian life.

One of the signs of the rising influence of Islamism is the Sharia court. In Saraqeb, the Sharia judge presides in the court, first over a car crash and later over an accusation of assault against another al-Nusra Front commander.

Outside the court, a civilian called Samir has come with a group of supporters to complain about a public flogging administered to his neighbour.

The man had been convicted for allowing his daughter to remarry before her period of enforced isolation had elapsed. For this he was flogged and is now too ashamed to show himself in public.

Samir rallies the crowd, demanding to know who gave legitimacy to foreigners to rule the country and asking whether they would leave after the war ended.

He says he is a Muslim but argues that Syria cannot be governed in accordance with the views of a single sect.

"When you build your house you cannot just stack bricks on top of each other - the different sects and ethnic groups are the cement that holds our country together," he says.

On the walls around us, there are slogans like "Down with the Sharia court in Saraqeb", "Who installed you as ruler upon us?" and "Where were the Islamists when the secularists started the revolution?"

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/09/1062.jpg Graffiti which reads: "Because it is a revolution so it is for all, freedom, dignity, equality"

It is reminiscent of the graffiti that used to appear secretly when Mr Assad's forces still controlled towns like this.

Like under the previous regime, popular demonstrations are banned in Saraqeb, although the security brigade says this is to protect civilians from the regular shelling of the town by government forces.
Islamic caliphate
Tensions between different factions were also on show when I sat with some fighters who had just stormed a loyalist checkpoint in a rare joint operation.

During a conversation about their vision of a future Syria, Abu Dujanah, an Iraqi-American who had recently joined the al-Nusra Front, expressed anger to hear fellow Sunnis talk about a parliamentary democracy with legislative elections.

For him this was the chance to establish an Islamic caliphate envisioned by the Prophet Muhammad in Greater Syria,

Would he return to the US if the regime fell? He answered no, he would continue his jihad until the "liberation of Palestine" from the Israelis.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2013/09/1063.jpg Sharia courts, such as this one in Saraqeb, are becoming more widespread

Another fighter, Abu Youssef, joined us saying he was a US citizen who had come from Qusair, which was retaken by government forces early in June.

He blamed the defeat on fighters who kept themselves remote from religion and God, and he especially condemned members of al-Farouq brigades who spent the day fighting and the night watching TV and singing.

"When you come back you don't feel you are on the battlefield, you feel like you are in a party," he said.

If the future of the struggle between the Syrian regime and opposition groups seems bleak, these scenes show the other hidden struggle between armed opposition groups with different agendas for the future state.

Since the BBC Arabic documentary The Battle for Syria's Courts was broadcast, Abu Qudama issued a statement saying he and al-Nusra will no longer run the courts. The Sharia courts however, are still functioning and are run by other members of the Security Committee.

[Chucaro]

News from "the other side of the coin"
Absolutely madness on both sides :(

Russia proves use of chemical weapons by Syrian rebels (http://english.pravda.ru/news/russia/11-09-2013/125627-russia_syria_chemical_weapons-0/)

How can Syra, Iran and Hezbollah respond to USA? (http://english.pravda.ru/world/asia/11-09-2013/125620-syria_iran_hezbollah-0/)

China trying on Syria's skin (http://english.pravda.ru/world/asia/10-09-2013/125609-china_syria-0/)

[Pickles2]

I'm reading this thread, but I ain't contributing as much as I possibly could, because,.......I simply don't know the answer.
Cheers, Pickles.

[Chucaro]

I'm reading this thread, but I ain't contributing as much as I possibly could, because,.......I simply don't know the answer.
Cheers, Pickles.

Pickles I am like you and so far there are 3 solutions put by people with reasonable influence, Obama, Putin and Pope Francis.
I am not religious person but approve the Pope suggestion before the other two :)

[Offender90]

Pickles, it looks a good message on paper but its best described as Machiavellianism, remember sadly Putin is only on the side of Russia in this conflict not the Syrians people and if he cared about people and NOT about getting one over on the "others" he would not support Assad etc by say not give them banking facilities in russia or supply anti aircraft missiles etc. But it may bit him on the bottom eventually if the "rebels" did win.
Also he may have a bit of a problem in that Assad may not "obey" him (remember staying in power is everything to most dictators) and surrender all the chemical weapons he has which will embarrass Putin . it s a game that may be out of everyone's ability to influence now......

I'm sorry mate, I don't follow?

Is Putin a supporter of Assad? - Yes

Is he motivated by Russia's best interest? - Yes

Would it be the best outcome for Syria if Assad stayed? - A year ago, yes.

The best outcome for the people now it to separate Syria into two separate countries. I say that only because there's now too much bad blood between the two sides, and by now everyone has been forced to take a side. If it wasn't for the Western backed support to overthrow the government in the first place, Syria would not have "exploded" the way it did.

The outcome in Syria also impacts the future of international politics. A bit late for Russia to make a stand now, but IMHO, it's the right thing to do (regardless of the motives) and is better late than never. Would you prefer a single country to bully the rest of the world into submission. For that's exactly how the US has been behaving of late.

And just remember, it's not just Russia pushing against military intervention. Most of the world appears to be against it.

[roverv8]

The best outcome for the people now it to separate Syria into two separate countries. I say that only because there's now too much bad blood between the two sides, and by now everyone has been forced to take a side.Sounds good, but it would simply create a North vs South Korea scenario, with one wanting control of the other = war
Who is going to draw borders = thats our land, **** off it's ours= war
Heaven forbid if the USA suggested this to the UN or anyone else, they would be accused of trying to reshape the Middle East...

Think we are forgetting this "USA/Syria" situation is over the fact that on at least 3 occasions in Syria alone, people have been killed on mass with chemical weapons....
Now I am not saying the USA should go & flatten half of Syria, but the military pressure they have placed on Assad appears to be fruitful.
Problem is, it's likely a number of those Chemical weapons were moved over to Syria when Iraq (Saddam) knew the he was going to be invaded.
Assad says he will give up his Chemical weapons with the threat of USA force removed.
Problem is no-one knows the amount of chemical weapons he has especially if there is a number moved from Iraq in earlier days with no records..
also he wants 30 days before giving up any info on them, why 30 days??
My guess is to once again ship/hide some & declare the rest, just as Saddam did
After declaring and giving up his stock pile, another chemical attack happens, but Assad says He gave them up to the UN, so it wasn't me.
There is no question of a chemical attack, only who launched it??
It seems removing Assad is no option either, there is no-one person who is backed by a majority to replace him & it will end up with the different factions fighting over control = more war.
Better the devil you know??
Seems a no win situation, buggered if I know, doesn't seem to be an answer :confused:
P.S
The USA are worried where & who has those chemical weapons, if Israel were to be attacked militarily, the USA may need to have boots on the ground & they don't want their military personal exposed/killed on mass by Chemical weapons

[Pickles2]

roverV8. There have been some very good opinions (not necessarily all the same....but hey, who knows the solution?) made in this thread, yours is another one...Good post.
Cheers, Pickles.

[Offender90]

Think we are forgetting this "USA/Syria" situation is over the fact that on at least 3 occasions in Syria alone, people have been killed on mass with chemical weapons....

Yes, and if you believe that Assad's side was responsible for the chemical attacks, I can see your point of view. That's a story I have trouble swallowing tho. I've been following the development of the Syrian conflict with some interest. A number of smaller atrocities that have reportedly been committed by Assad's forces couldn't have been timed better to help the "rebels" cause. Now - Assad miscalculates and screws up the timing on one to go against him, I can buy that. But to continually shoot himself in the foot - I call that a setup. See posts 11 & 12 on the thread linked below,

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/cantina/15...y-going-2.html,

as well as posts 22, 25, 33, 34 and 41 on the following pages for a brief overview of the escalation of atrocities and incidents supporting external intervention.


The USA are worried where & who has those chemical weapons, if Israel were to be attacked militarily, the USA may need to have boots on the ground & they don't want their military personal exposed/killed on mass by Chemical weapons

cough, cough... bull**** , I believe it's a pretense to justify an invasion/intervention to remove Assad with force (considering other options outlined here (http://www.aulro.com/afvb/1795891-post44.html)failed) and install their own puppet.

As for the solution, if the 'rebels' weren't supported with weapons from Qatar and Saudi Arabia and intelligence & military training from the US, the situation would never have degraded to where it is, making it possible for everyone to live together in Syria. If you talked to people from Syria a few years ago, you'd find that Assad's government was pretty good by Middle Eastern standards and was most certainly much better than any government that is likely to take over. Nomatter what the solution, the Syrian people are going to be worse off.

Splitting the country into two is by no means a great solution, but IMHO is one of the best for the people of Syria. It's not likely to happen any time soon because the US is worried who would take control of the Sunni region (they've been having trouble appointing a suitable "leader" within the opposition for some time).

The situation challenges the notion that the US is good and Russia is bad, and may be hard for some people to accept. In reality neither is particularly good, both countries are doing what's in their best interests. That's understandable. In this instance however, it's in Russia's best interest to maintain the status quo through finding a peaceful solution, making it "the good guy". The US on the other hand wants to see a change in government, and the only way to achieve that is through conflict, making it the bad guy.

[Chucaro]

IMHO the main concern is that USA it is going to make the some mistake when helped Bin Laden.
People that are old enough to remember what happens during the 70's when Russia was the biggest threat to America and radical Islam was not as a concern of the USA .
The Americans began funding and training Islamic militants AKA the mujahideen would rebel the Russians out of Afghanistan and later become the Taliban, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.
To top up the big mistake then come the "smart president" Regan and under him funding of the mujahideen increased significantly and CIA Paramilitary Officers played a big role in training, arming and sometimes even leading mujahideen forces.
The "ethical" CIA provided funds to Gulbuddin Hekmatyar a mujahideen leader and alleged heroin dealer who worked closely with Bin Laden.
The rest it is history and well known to the young generation.
Are USA and their friends going to make the same mistake?
Apparently yes :(

[Ferret]

The Americans began funding and training Islamic militants AKA the mujahideen would rebel the Russians out of Afghanistan and later become the Taliban, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Muslim Brotherhood has been around ~ 1930s. Came out of Egypt, not Afghanistan.

[Chucaro]

The Muslim Brotherhood has been around ~ 1930s. Came out of Egypt, not Afghanistan.

Yes youare correct, I have expressed myself wrong. I should have said the involvement of the Brotherhood in Afghanistan (http://www.cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=93DUSHANBE1266) :)

[sashadidi]

I'm reading this thread, but I ain't contributing as much as I possibly could, because,.......I simply don't know the answer.
Cheers, Pickles.

Nor do I, all I was trying to point out was that everyone seems think to perhaps that Putin is suddenly acting as honest broker with that letter, he is not or he would have used his good offices a year or more ago. Its very complicated and the actual Syrian people are not high on his list either. Russia also has a military-industrial complex which need markets and Syria is one of them, russia is coming second in some weapons sales figures so it appears: List of countries by arms exports - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I read russian newspapers, blogs etc and even my wifes relatives are in the russian military and tell us interesting information as well.
Its just a really sad situation and there are other situations out there as well....
Having worked in refugee camps in Sudan and Chad among others has made me a cynic....

[Pickles2]

Putin?...I agree.
Cheers, Pickles.