What does the US have to gain from "taking control" of Syria?
Well...there is some oil there but not as much as some other places. I think it has more to do with the military/industrial side than it does any resources there for the taking. Every bomb that gets dropped is a bomb that will be bought again. Every bullet fired, every tank destroyed, etc. And then when the country is completely ruined some politically-connected contractors will come in and "rebuild" while others provide "security."
$$$
Oh trust me, I understand, but that seems that would apply more to Russia here since we aren't on the ground and only fired a few rockets... Russia is the one on the ground... this isn't shock & awe and nation building... from what I recall this is exactly why under the Obama administration we resisted taking any further action
It's a huge interest for Russia - geographic strategy to expansion. Putin is still a Soviet Union guy remember. What my2hands says is true, but I've been under the impression that the most important thing is to just try and keep it out of total Russian control.... But that is now confusing, given Trump's schizophrenic attitude about Russia.
Russia would not be in Syria if not for the US. The US is the one supplying arms to ISIS and Jihadist groups. They are the ones destabilizing the country - not Russia. It's the same playbook as Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. Remember - still no WMDs. All those countries are overrun by Jihadist groups that are supported by Western Interests. Russia is not an imperialistic nation - they aren't run by Corporations looking for resources from other countries. Sure, Russia needs trading partners and there is economic benefit by having good relations but they aren't arming extremists groups to destabilize a country.
I agree Russia would not be in Syria if not for the US, because Russia wants to protect the region from the west and to keep NATO away, and I think that if expansion is what it takes to do that, that's what Putin would do, should circumstances call for it ...... I have no clue if they're arming extremists to destabilize countries. How do you know they're not?
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
What does the US have to gain from "taking control" of Syria?
Well...there is some oil there but not as much as some other places. I think it has more to do with the military/industrial side than it does any resources there for the taking. Every bomb that gets dropped is a bomb that will be bought again. Every bullet fired, every tank destroyed, etc. And then when the country is completely ruined some politically-connected contractors will come in and "rebuild" while others provide "security."
$$$
Oh trust me, I understand, but that seems that would apply more to Russia here since we aren't on the ground and only fired a few rockets... Russia is the one on the ground... this isn't shock & awe and nation building... from what I recall this is exactly why under the Obama administration we resisted taking any further action
It's a huge interest for Russia - geographic strategy to expansion. Putin is still a Soviet Union guy remember. What my2hands says is true, but I've been under the impression that the most important thing is to just try and keep it out of total Russian control.... But that is now confusing, given Trump's schizophrenic attitude about Russia.
Russia would not be in Syria if not for the US. The US is the one supplying arms to ISIS and Jihadist groups. They are the ones destabilizing the country - not Russia. It's the same playbook as Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. Remember - still no WMDs. All those countries are overrun by Jihadist groups that are supported by Western Interests. Russia is not an imperialistic nation - they aren't run by Corporations looking for resources from other countries. Sure, Russia needs trading partners and there is economic benefit by having good relations but they aren't arming extremists groups to destabilize a country.
I agree Russia would not be in Syria if not for the US, because Russia wants to protect the region from the west and to keep NATO away, and I think that if expansion is what it takes to do that, that's what Putin would do, should circumstances call for it ...... I have no clue if they're arming extremists to destabilize countries. How do you know they're not?
Because they aren't run by Corporations that rely on access to foreign resources. I will admit that Syria is critical to Russia in terms of pipelines and access but they don't have a military industrial complex and war profiteering isn't a big driver of the economy.
What does the US have to gain from "taking control" of Syria?
Well...there is some oil there but not as much as some other places. I think it has more to do with the military/industrial side than it does any resources there for the taking. Every bomb that gets dropped is a bomb that will be bought again. Every bullet fired, every tank destroyed, etc. And then when the country is completely ruined some politically-connected contractors will come in and "rebuild" while others provide "security."
$$$
Oh trust me, I understand, but that seems that would apply more to Russia here since we aren't on the ground and only fired a few rockets... Russia is the one on the ground... this isn't shock & awe and nation building... from what I recall this is exactly why under the Obama administration we resisted taking any further action
It's a huge interest for Russia - geographic strategy to expansion. Putin is still a Soviet Union guy remember. What my2hands says is true, but I've been under the impression that the most important thing is to just try and keep it out of total Russian control.... But that is now confusing, given Trump's schizophrenic attitude about Russia.
Russia would not be in Syria if not for the US. The US is the one supplying arms to ISIS and Jihadist groups. They are the ones destabilizing the country - not Russia. It's the same playbook as Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. Remember - still no WMDs. All those countries are overrun by Jihadist groups that are supported by Western Interests. Russia is not an imperialistic nation - they aren't run by Corporations looking for resources from other countries. Sure, Russia needs trading partners and there is economic benefit by having good relations but they aren't arming extremists groups to destabilize a country.
No, Russia is run by 10-14 oligarchs who own 90% of the nation’s wealth and are approved by Putin, who had the populist opposition candidate thrown in jail prior to the election. That’s a regime we should all get behind. Putin’s not imperial? Ha!
Peter Ford (former British ambassador to Syria) again exposes BBC lies, and lies in general, about alleged CW attacks.
Note at around 3:00 into the interview, the BBC deflection of Ford's logical points about why there was no CW attack on Douma.
BBC: "Let's first of all start with this chemical attack do you think President Assad is behind it is responsible for this?"
Ford: "No, I don't because the evidence is extremely thin, thin-to-vanishing. All the sources of information about this attack come from the side of the militant Islamist armed groups. Without exception. All the information. There is not one single source of independent information on what actually happened in Douma, and there is every reason to believe that the Islamists have mounted a fake attack in order to stampede the West."
BBC: "When you say 'fake attack', what do you mean?"
Ford: "There was no chemical attack. The images are probably faked. The important thing is to get the international inspectors into Douma--and they are in Damascus now they're on their way--the important things is to get the inspectors in to verify what I've just said."
BBC: "The World Health Organization doesn't believe these images were faked."
Ford: "The WHO has repeated claims, claims made by the same sources that produced the videos--that is by the Islamic militants, not by any independent observers. This is a crucial detail there's absolutely no impartial evidence.
The BBC itself--and I remind you--saying that the images in the video are unverified. Is that not correct?"
...Ford: "If you actually look at the report by the UN inspectors from the attack one year ago, you will see troubling facts, such as that some of the alleged victims were presenting to the hospital one hour before the Syrian plane had even left the ground."
BBC: "Okay, let's move on from whether this is fact or not. Let's say evidence has been found to prove that President Assad was behind this attack..."
...Ford: "We all know the president says things, and his generals--who know what they're talking about--say something else. General Mattis, who does know probably what he's talking about, says the the assessment is continuing that can only mean that the evidence with not yet in."
Ford: "...The idea that we could be going into such a dangerous conflict on the basis of contested images and reports from jihadi sources such as the White Helmets--the so-called first responders--who are Islamist militants who helped in beheadings and amputation with hands and feet, and it's on the testimony of such first responders and so-called monitors that this country might be on the point of making another grave mistake.
And let me remind you, please, about Iraq when we were so confident--were we not--all the intelligence...You remember Colin Powell? Please, let's not have another case of being taken to war on a false perspectives."
Right?! Putin is an old school true believer in the Soviet/KGB context, and there nothing on the up and up going on politically or economically in Russia. Corporations aren't the only evil in this world.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
And trust me, I'm no apologist for Americam foreign policy and am well aware of our wrongdoings... I personally think Bush & Cheney should have been tried as war criminals... I also understand false flag attacks are very real and do happen... and that there are evil fucks in the world...
But to paint Assad as a great man and some savior of the people seems pretty far out to me... free healthcare and education dont mean shit... Cuba, Venezuela, Cambodia, Soviet Union, even Nazi Germany provided those things I believe... I'm a big fan of universal healthcare and education, but it's far from proof that a leader is moral or great in any way
If America wanted in the door all the way, we would have done it after the famous red line crossing under Obama... unless Obama was as great a leader as I suspect and realized the trap being laid by the "deep state" and resisted
Also, why would we ever leave Iraq & Afghanistan if the goal was regional hegemony at all costs? A false flag attack or two would have easily kept forces there forever... or again, maybe Obama was that great of a leader?
Dude ... read the stuff I posted. Assad has strong support. It's a misinformation campaign so that the general public will be ok bombing these places. This guy drives his own car around the city and walks around in public. Brutal dictators don't do that. Ken Roth of Human Rights Watch is a constant purveyor of lies - he was caught posting pictures of Gaza and claiming they were assad's barrel bombs. HE did that twice!! Please read the blog post I posted above - Assad has overwhelming support.
Obama knew the information coming out of Syria was a lie and that is why he didn't engage.
For whoever asked why Syria - there are pipelines and then the military position as it relates to proximity to Iran.
Bad leaders have enjoyed strong support in the past, and currently (speaking as an American that witnessed the reelection of W and the election of Trump)... Putin has an 80% approval rating... you keep saying he drives around and walks in public, that proves nothing... where do you get that info? You hanging at the coffee shop in Damascus? lol... maybe what you read about support and driving around is planted propaganda? that works both ways you know?
All the other atrocities, invading cities, and targeting citizens have all been false flag events?
Assad is really the good guy just fighting evil terrorists??? That's what your selling
Read the blog post on page 2 from the Anglican Priest - he toured all of Syria invited from other Religous leaders. Please note that he met with religious leaders of all faiths while in Syria not just Christians. They also met with political opposition leaders as well. Please read it. It will take you 20 mins at most.
And trust me, I'm no apologist for Americam foreign policy and am well aware of our wrongdoings... I personally think Bush & Cheney should have been tried as war criminals... I also understand false flag attacks are very real and do happen... and that there are evil fucks in the world...
But to paint Assad as a great man and some savior of the people seems pretty far out to me... free healthcare and education dont mean shit... Cuba, Venezuela, Cambodia, Soviet Union, even Nazi Germany provided those things I believe... I'm a big fan of universal healthcare and education, but it's far from proof that a leader is moral or great in any way
If America wanted in the door all the way, we would have done it after the famous red line crossing under Obama... unless Obama was as great a leader as I suspect and realized the trap being laid by the "deep state" and resisted
Also, why would we ever leave Iraq & Afghanistan if the goal was regional hegemony at all costs? A false flag attack or two would have easily kept forces there forever... or again, maybe Obama was that great of a leader?
For whoever asked why Syria - there are pipelines and then the military position as it relates to proximity to Iran.
Military position on Iran? We already had that with Iraq & Afghanistan, they are surrounded... Syria is an ally of Iran, but not a physical neighbor...
The West may have long laid plans to wipe the slate clean in the Middle East... who knows... wouldn't shock me... but I dont see the value in Syria... but I would think if America wanted Assad out, that shit would have happened 5 years ago... we dont fuck around when it comes to removing leaders we no longer find useful... ask Saddam
How about the Arab spring? You say he is popular... I remember massive anti government protests in Syria demanding democratic reforms... were those all US funded terrorists from outside the country? and of course, Assad cracked down because he saw it spinning out of control, and he also saw a host of other regional leaders get chased out of power during the uprisings... he ordered troops on the ground to crack down... shit got ugly... large numbers of the military defected and took the other side... 7-8 years later here we are.... or is all of that just a made up fairy tale? Your info sure seems to be biased and ignores the actual events that took place
The whole world isn't a large conspiracy theory and the USA doesn't have a monopoly on evil... this coming from a guy who openly acknowledges most of my countries fucked up shit
If Syria, Russia and Iran are not responsible for the alleged poison gas attack, why not invite and give safe passage to UN chemical weapons inspectors and unfettered access to the sites and victims?
They have. The Syrian ambassador at the UN asked for the OPCW to come right away. The
You gotta ask yourself seriously why would Syria want to gas their own people!?? They are fighting terrorists. Also, why is it that every time Trump or America says they are pulling out of Syria - there is an alleged chemical attack. Please note - all the previous attacks have been debunked many times over. The only consequence of gassing their own people is international involvement. It makes no sense whatsoever!
That’s not the reporting I’ve read. The Syrians and Russians won’t allow independent media or chemical weapons inspectors into the affected area.
They blocked the latest US resolution because the US put in a rider that they were allowed to use Deadly Force in Syria. Something they let slide in Libya and they weren't gonna let happen again. When I get home - I will post the video of the Syrian ambassador asking for the OPCW to do the job.
And trust me, I'm no apologist for Americam foreign policy and am well aware of our wrongdoings... I personally think Bush & Cheney should have been tried as war criminals... I also understand false flag attacks are very real and do happen... and that there are evil fucks in the world...
But to paint Assad as a great man and some savior of the people seems pretty far out to me... free healthcare and education dont mean shit... Cuba, Venezuela, Cambodia, Soviet Union, even Nazi Germany provided those things I believe... I'm a big fan of universal healthcare and education, but it's far from proof that a leader is moral or great in any way
If America wanted in the door all the way, we would have done it after the famous red line crossing under Obama... unless Obama was as great a leader as I suspect and realized the trap being laid by the "deep state" and resisted
Also, why would we ever leave Iraq & Afghanistan if the goal was regional hegemony at all costs? A false flag attack or two would have easily kept forces there forever... or again, maybe Obama was that great of a leader?
Dude ... read the stuff I posted. Assad has strong support. It's a misinformation campaign so that the general public will be ok bombing these places. This guy drives his own car around the city and walks around in public. Brutal dictators don't do that. Ken Roth of Human Rights Watch is a constant purveyor of lies - he was caught posting pictures of Gaza and claiming they were assad's barrel bombs. HE did that twice!! Please read the blog post I posted above - Assad has overwhelming support.
Obama knew the information coming out of Syria was a lie and that is why he didn't engage.
For whoever asked why Syria - there are pipelines and then the military position as it relates to proximity to Iran.
Bad leaders have enjoyed strong support in the past, and currently (speaking as an American that witnessed the reelection of W and the election of Trump)... Putin has an 80% approval rating... you keep saying he drives around and walks in public, that proves nothing... where do you get that info? You hanging at the coffee shop in Damascus? lol... maybe what you read about support and driving around is planted propaganda? that works both ways you know?
All the other atrocities, invading cities, and targeting citizens have all been false flag events?
Assad is really the good guy just fighting evil terrorists??? That's what your selling
Who do you think he's fighting? There are no such thing as moderate rebels. You look at any area liberated by the Syrian Army - you will see the markings of extremist groups. Look at Trump's latest tweet on Syria about how they are helping fight terrorists in Syria. This is not a civil war - this is a war against illegal occupation by extremists. The same ones that have taken over parts of IRaq, Libya and AFghanistan. These places haven't been liberated from dictators - they've been left abandoned and infiltrated by Jihadists and having those countries fend for themselves.
Also, is the irony of having Guatanamo Bay and rendition and torture programs not evident to people who claim Assad is some murderous dictator? There is only one country that rules in terms of violence - the same country that uses nuclear weapons.
Peter Ford (former British ambassador to Syria) again exposes BBC lies, and lies in general, about alleged CW attacks.
Note at around 3:00 into the interview, the BBC deflection of Ford's logical points about why there was no CW attack on Douma.
BBC: "Let's first of all start with this chemical attack do you think President Assad is behind it is responsible for this?"
Ford: "No, I don't because the evidence is extremely thin, thin-to-vanishing. All the sources of information about this attack come from the side of the militant Islamist armed groups. Without exception. All the information. There is not one single source of independent information on what actually happened in Douma, and there is every reason to believe that the Islamists have mounted a fake attack in order to stampede the West."
BBC: "When you say 'fake attack', what do you mean?"
Ford: "There was no chemical attack. The images are probably faked. The important thing is to get the international inspectors into Douma--and they are in Damascus now they're on their way--the important things is to get the inspectors in to verify what I've just said."
BBC: "The World Health Organization doesn't believe these images were faked."
Ford: "The WHO has repeated claims, claims made by the same sources that produced the videos--that is by the Islamic militants, not by any independent observers. This is a crucial detail there's absolutely no impartial evidence.
The BBC itself--and I remind you--saying that the images in the video are unverified. Is that not correct?"
...Ford: "If you actually look at the report by the UN inspectors from the attack one year ago, you will see troubling facts, such as that some of the alleged victims were presenting to the hospital one hour before the Syrian plane had even left the ground."
BBC: "Okay, let's move on from whether this is fact or not. Let's say evidence has been found to prove that President Assad was behind this attack..."
...Ford: "We all know the president says things, and his generals--who know what they're talking about--say something else. General Mattis, who does know probably what he's talking about, says the the assessment is continuing that can only mean that the evidence with not yet in."
Ford: "...The idea that we could be going into such a dangerous conflict on the basis of contested images and reports from jihadi sources such as the White Helmets--the so-called first responders--who are Islamist militants who helped in beheadings and amputation with hands and feet, and it's on the testimony of such first responders and so-called monitors that this country might be on the point of making another grave mistake.
And let me remind you, please, about Iraq when we were so confident--were we not--all the intelligence...You remember Colin Powell? Please, let's not have another case of being taken to war on a false perspectives."
I notice he said "probably" fake. Not fake. Not "confirmed" fake. "Probably." Seems he doesn't even know with certainty whether the images were faked. Also, @polaris_x you said that the inspectors weren't allowed in and yet your source is claiming that they're there, in Damascus waiting to go to Douma. Why is Assad holding them back?
I, for one, with a whole lot of other Americans, didn't believe the WMD line of reasoning from the war criminals Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld for one minute. What is happening in Syria is happening for one reason and one reason only, Israel, who by the way was found to be buying ISIS oil and has a very strategic interest in the Golan Heights. If the US wants to mess with Iran, we don't need Syria to do it. For the record, US Middle East policy has been misguided for a very long time and continues to be so. Sect politics is very nasty and Assad is gullty of playing them. He has no choice.
And trust me, I'm no apologist for Americam foreign policy and am well aware of our wrongdoings... I personally think Bush & Cheney should have been tried as war criminals... I also understand false flag attacks are very real and do happen... and that there are evil fucks in the world...
But to paint Assad as a great man and some savior of the people seems pretty far out to me... free healthcare and education dont mean shit... Cuba, Venezuela, Cambodia, Soviet Union, even Nazi Germany provided those things I believe... I'm a big fan of universal healthcare and education, but it's far from proof that a leader is moral or great in any way
If America wanted in the door all the way, we would have done it after the famous red line crossing under Obama... unless Obama was as great a leader as I suspect and realized the trap being laid by the "deep state" and resisted
Also, why would we ever leave Iraq & Afghanistan if the goal was regional hegemony at all costs? A false flag attack or two would have easily kept forces there forever... or again, maybe Obama was that great of a leader?
Dude ... read the stuff I posted. Assad has strong support. It's a misinformation campaign so that the general public will be ok bombing these places. This guy drives his own car around the city and walks around in public. Brutal dictators don't do that. Ken Roth of Human Rights Watch is a constant purveyor of lies - he was caught posting pictures of Gaza and claiming they were assad's barrel bombs. HE did that twice!! Please read the blog post I posted above - Assad has overwhelming support.
Obama knew the information coming out of Syria was a lie and that is why he didn't engage.
For whoever asked why Syria - there are pipelines and then the military position as it relates to proximity to Iran.
Bad leaders have enjoyed strong support in the past, and currently (speaking as an American that witnessed the reelection of W and the election of Trump)... Putin has an 80% approval rating... you keep saying he drives around and walks in public, that proves nothing... where do you get that info? You hanging at the coffee shop in Damascus? lol... maybe what you read about support and driving around is planted propaganda? that works both ways you know?
All the other atrocities, invading cities, and targeting citizens have all been false flag events?
Assad is really the good guy just fighting evil terrorists??? That's what your selling
Who do you think he's fighting? There are no such thing as moderate rebels. You look at any area liberated by the Syrian Army - you will see the markings of extremist groups. Look at Trump's latest tweet on Syria about how they are helping fight terrorists in Syria. This is not a civil war - this is a war against illegal occupation by extremists. The same ones that have taken over parts of IRaq, Libya and AFghanistan. These places haven't been liberated from dictators - they've been left abandoned and infiltrated by Jihadists and having those countries fend for themselves.
So all of those people protesting in Syria during the Arab spring were jihadists and bad guys? That's why Assad ordered a military crackdown?
Is that why the UN implicated him in numerous war crimes? Same as the referral to the ICC for war crimes? Amnesty international is full of shit? Mass scale arrests... torture... targeted mass killings of civilians in populated areas... shoot to kill orders... demolition of opposition neighborhoods... systematic killing of 11, 000 detainees...... all made up by multiple nuetral organizations???? The list goes on and on and on
The atrocities committed by this piece of shit go well beyond a chemical attack... but America is the bad guy here? I'm calling bullshit. Total bullshit. You need to check who you're supporting. You are talking up Assad like he's the greatest thing since sliced bread and the entire world has it wrong. I think you have some bullshit info my friend, you're way off
And trust me, I'm no apologist for Americam foreign policy and am well aware of our wrongdoings... I personally think Bush & Cheney should have been tried as war criminals... I also understand false flag attacks are very real and do happen... and that there are evil fucks in the world...
But to paint Assad as a great man and some savior of the people seems pretty far out to me... free healthcare and education dont mean shit... Cuba, Venezuela, Cambodia, Soviet Union, even Nazi Germany provided those things I believe... I'm a big fan of universal healthcare and education, but it's far from proof that a leader is moral or great in any way
If America wanted in the door all the way, we would have done it after the famous red line crossing under Obama... unless Obama was as great a leader as I suspect and realized the trap being laid by the "deep state" and resisted
Also, why would we ever leave Iraq & Afghanistan if the goal was regional hegemony at all costs? A false flag attack or two would have easily kept forces there forever... or again, maybe Obama was that great of a leader?
For whoever asked why Syria - there are pipelines and then the military position as it relates to proximity to Iran.
Military position on Iran? We already had that with Iraq & Afghanistan, they are surrounded... Syria is an ally of Iran, but not a physical neighbor...
The West may have long laid plans to wipe the slate clean in the Middle East... who knows... wouldn't shock me... but I dont see the value in Syria... but I would think if America wanted Assad out, that shit would have happened 5 years ago... we dont fuck around when it comes to removing leaders we no longer find useful... ask Saddam
How about the Arab spring? You say he is popular... I remember massive anti government protests in Syria demanding democratic reforms... were those all US funded terrorists from outside the country? and of course, Assad cracked down because he saw it spinning out of control, and he also saw a host of other regional leaders get chased out of power during the uprisings... he ordered troops on the ground to crack down... shit got ugly... large numbers of the military defected and took the other side... 7-8 years later here we are.... or is all of that just a made up fairy tale? Your info sure seems to be biased and ignores the actual events that took place
The whole world isn't a large conspiracy theory and the USA doesn't have a monopoly on evil... this coming from a guy who openly acknowledges most of my countries fucked up shit
Show me the video of massive anti-gov't protests in Syria. Please - read the blog post.
Conspiracy theory!?? We don't need to resort to that do we? Just have an objective conversation about this. No need to try and play that lame game.
I keep asking people why Assad would gas his own people when the result is this foreign intervention!??? It makes no sense. And the fact that they keep doing this right after the US says they are withdrawing. Add on top of this the fact his presidency is under fire and the only logical thing is that this is fabricated.
Also, is the irony of having Guatanamo Bay and rendition and torture programs not evident to people who claim Assad is some murderous dictator? There is only one country that rules in terms of violence - the same country that uses nuclear weapons.
Guantanamo, black sites, torture, and Japan has zero to do with this. I'm 100% aware and opposed to all.of the above. But, that's a totally different conversation. Has nothing to do with Syria. And certainly doesn't justify your bizzaro world view that Assad is the good guy in all of this... it just doesn't stand up to the facts, at all...
What does the US have to gain from "taking control" of Syria?
Well...there is some oil there but not as much as some other places. I think it has more to do with the military/industrial side than it does any resources there for the taking. Every bomb that gets dropped is a bomb that will be bought again. Every bullet fired, every tank destroyed, etc. And then when the country is completely ruined some politically-connected contractors will come in and "rebuild" while others provide "security."
$$$
Oh trust me, I understand, but that seems that would apply more to Russia here since we aren't on the ground and only fired a few rockets... Russia is the one on the ground... this isn't shock & awe and nation building... from what I recall this is exactly why under the Obama administration we resisted taking any further action
It's a huge interest for Russia - geographic strategy to expansion. Putin is still a Soviet Union guy remember. What my2hands says is true, but I've been under the impression that the most important thing is to just try and keep it out of total Russian control.... But that is now confusing, given Trump's schizophrenic attitude about Russia.
Russia would not be in Syria if not for the US. The US is the one supplying arms to ISIS and Jihadist groups. They are the ones destabilizing the country - not Russia. It's the same playbook as Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. Remember - still no WMDs. All those countries are overrun by Jihadist groups that are supported by Western Interests. Russia is not an imperialistic nation - they aren't run by Corporations looking for resources from other countries. Sure, Russia needs trading partners and there is economic benefit by having good relations but they aren't arming extremists groups to destabilize a country.
No, Russia is run by 10-14 oligarchs who own 90% of the nation’s wealth and are approved by Putin, who had the populist opposition candidate thrown in jail prior to the election. That’s a regime we should all get behind. Putin’s not imperial? Ha!
No one is saying Russia is perfect. But give me the Russian equivalents of Haliburton. Who sells the most arms in the world?
And trust me, I'm no apologist for Americam foreign policy and am well aware of our wrongdoings... I personally think Bush & Cheney should have been tried as war criminals... I also understand false flag attacks are very real and do happen... and that there are evil fucks in the world...
But to paint Assad as a great man and some savior of the people seems pretty far out to me... free healthcare and education dont mean shit... Cuba, Venezuela, Cambodia, Soviet Union, even Nazi Germany provided those things I believe... I'm a big fan of universal healthcare and education, but it's far from proof that a leader is moral or great in any way
If America wanted in the door all the way, we would have done it after the famous red line crossing under Obama... unless Obama was as great a leader as I suspect and realized the trap being laid by the "deep state" and resisted
Also, why would we ever leave Iraq & Afghanistan if the goal was regional hegemony at all costs? A false flag attack or two would have easily kept forces there forever... or again, maybe Obama was that great of a leader?
For whoever asked why Syria - there are pipelines and then the military position as it relates to proximity to Iran.
Military position on Iran? We already had that with Iraq & Afghanistan, they are surrounded... Syria is an ally of Iran, but not a physical neighbor...
The West may have long laid plans to wipe the slate clean in the Middle East... who knows... wouldn't shock me... but I dont see the value in Syria... but I would think if America wanted Assad out, that shit would have happened 5 years ago... we dont fuck around when it comes to removing leaders we no longer find useful... ask Saddam
How about the Arab spring? You say he is popular... I remember massive anti government protests in Syria demanding democratic reforms... were those all US funded terrorists from outside the country? and of course, Assad cracked down because he saw it spinning out of control, and he also saw a host of other regional leaders get chased out of power during the uprisings... he ordered troops on the ground to crack down... shit got ugly... large numbers of the military defected and took the other side... 7-8 years later here we are.... or is all of that just a made up fairy tale? Your info sure seems to be biased and ignores the actual events that took place
The whole world isn't a large conspiracy theory and the USA doesn't have a monopoly on evil... this coming from a guy who openly acknowledges most of my countries fucked up shit
I keep asking people why Assad would gas his own people when the result is this foreign intervention!??? It makes no sense. And the fact that they keep doing this right after the US says they are withdrawing. Add on top of this the fact his presidency is under fire and the only logical thing is that this is fabricated.
Simple... US signals we have no interest in Syria, basically saying we dont give a shot what you do, and Assad is emboldened to push the envelope... makes sense to me... That's not complicated...
Why are you focused on this chemical attack when there are 7 years of documented war crimes?
What does the US have to gain from "taking control" of Syria?
Well...there is some oil there but not as much as some other places. I think it has more to do with the military/industrial side than it does any resources there for the taking. Every bomb that gets dropped is a bomb that will be bought again. Every bullet fired, every tank destroyed, etc. And then when the country is completely ruined some politically-connected contractors will come in and "rebuild" while others provide "security."
$$$
Oh trust me, I understand, but that seems that would apply more to Russia here since we aren't on the ground and only fired a few rockets... Russia is the one on the ground... this isn't shock & awe and nation building... from what I recall this is exactly why under the Obama administration we resisted taking any further action
It's a huge interest for Russia - geographic strategy to expansion. Putin is still a Soviet Union guy remember. What my2hands says is true, but I've been under the impression that the most important thing is to just try and keep it out of total Russian control.... But that is now confusing, given Trump's schizophrenic attitude about Russia.
Russia would not be in Syria if not for the US. The US is the one supplying arms to ISIS and Jihadist groups. They are the ones destabilizing the country - not Russia. It's the same playbook as Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. Remember - still no WMDs. All those countries are overrun by Jihadist groups that are supported by Western Interests. Russia is not an imperialistic nation - they aren't run by Corporations looking for resources from other countries. Sure, Russia needs trading partners and there is economic benefit by having good relations but they aren't arming extremists groups to destabilize a country.
No, Russia is run by 10-14 oligarchs who own 90% of the nation’s wealth and are approved by Putin, who had the populist opposition candidate thrown in jail prior to the election. That’s a regime we should all get behind. Putin’s not imperial? Ha!
No one is saying Russia is perfect. But give me the Russian equivalents of Haliburton. Who sells the most arms in the world?
What does the US have to gain from "taking control" of Syria?
Well...there is some oil there but not as much as some other places. I think it has more to do with the military/industrial side than it does any resources there for the taking. Every bomb that gets dropped is a bomb that will be bought again. Every bullet fired, every tank destroyed, etc. And then when the country is completely ruined some politically-connected contractors will come in and "rebuild" while others provide "security."
$$$
Oh trust me, I understand, but that seems that would apply more to Russia here since we aren't on the ground and only fired a few rockets... Russia is the one on the ground... this isn't shock & awe and nation building... from what I recall this is exactly why under the Obama administration we resisted taking any further action
It's a huge interest for Russia - geographic strategy to expansion. Putin is still a Soviet Union guy remember. What my2hands says is true, but I've been under the impression that the most important thing is to just try and keep it out of total Russian control.... But that is now confusing, given Trump's schizophrenic attitude about Russia.
Russia would not be in Syria if not for the US. The US is the one supplying arms to ISIS and Jihadist groups. They are the ones destabilizing the country - not Russia. It's the same playbook as Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. Remember - still no WMDs. All those countries are overrun by Jihadist groups that are supported by Western Interests. Russia is not an imperialistic nation - they aren't run by Corporations looking for resources from other countries. Sure, Russia needs trading partners and there is economic benefit by having good relations but they aren't arming extremists groups to destabilize a country.
No, Russia is run by 10-14 oligarchs who own 90% of the nation’s wealth and are approved by Putin, who had the populist opposition candidate thrown in jail prior to the election. That’s a regime we should all get behind. Putin’s not imperial? Ha!
No one is saying Russia is perfect. But give me the Russian equivalents of Haliburton. Who sells the most arms in the world?
What does the US have to gain from "taking control" of Syria?
Well...there is some oil there but not as much as some other places. I think it has more to do with the military/industrial side than it does any resources there for the taking. Every bomb that gets dropped is a bomb that will be bought again. Every bullet fired, every tank destroyed, etc. And then when the country is completely ruined some politically-connected contractors will come in and "rebuild" while others provide "security."
$$$
Oh trust me, I understand, but that seems that would apply more to Russia here since we aren't on the ground and only fired a few rockets... Russia is the one on the ground... this isn't shock & awe and nation building... from what I recall this is exactly why under the Obama administration we resisted taking any further action
It's a huge interest for Russia - geographic strategy to expansion. Putin is still a Soviet Union guy remember. What my2hands says is true, but I've been under the impression that the most important thing is to just try and keep it out of total Russian control.... But that is now confusing, given Trump's schizophrenic attitude about Russia.
Russia would not be in Syria if not for the US. The US is the one supplying arms to ISIS and Jihadist groups. They are the ones destabilizing the country - not Russia. It's the same playbook as Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. Remember - still no WMDs. All those countries are overrun by Jihadist groups that are supported by Western Interests. Russia is not an imperialistic nation - they aren't run by Corporations looking for resources from other countries. Sure, Russia needs trading partners and there is economic benefit by having good relations but they aren't arming extremists groups to destabilize a country.
No, Russia is run by 10-14 oligarchs who own 90% of the nation’s wealth and are approved by Putin, who had the populist opposition candidate thrown in jail prior to the election. That’s a regime we should all get behind. Putin’s not imperial? Ha!
No one is saying Russia is perfect. But give me the Russian equivalents of Haliburton. Who sells the most arms in the world?
Seems Russia is giving the US a run for the money... and based on those numbers, its safe to assume the Russian economy is much more reliant on arms sales for success... in GDP it's not even close, Russia would have a HUGE edge in arms as a % of GDP
And trust me, I'm no apologist for Americam foreign policy and am well aware of our wrongdoings... I personally think Bush & Cheney should have been tried as war criminals... I also understand false flag attacks are very real and do happen... and that there are evil fucks in the world...
But to paint Assad as a great man and some savior of the people seems pretty far out to me... free healthcare and education dont mean shit... Cuba, Venezuela, Cambodia, Soviet Union, even Nazi Germany provided those things I believe... I'm a big fan of universal healthcare and education, but it's far from proof that a leader is moral or great in any way
If America wanted in the door all the way, we would have done it after the famous red line crossing under Obama... unless Obama was as great a leader as I suspect and realized the trap being laid by the "deep state" and resisted
Also, why would we ever leave Iraq & Afghanistan if the goal was regional hegemony at all costs? A false flag attack or two would have easily kept forces there forever... or again, maybe Obama was that great of a leader?
For whoever asked why Syria - there are pipelines and then the military position as it relates to proximity to Iran.
Military position on Iran? We already had that with Iraq & Afghanistan, they are surrounded... Syria is an ally of Iran, but not a physical neighbor...
The West may have long laid plans to wipe the slate clean in the Middle East... who knows... wouldn't shock me... but I dont see the value in Syria... but I would think if America wanted Assad out, that shit would have happened 5 years ago... we dont fuck around when it comes to removing leaders we no longer find useful... ask Saddam
How about the Arab spring? You say he is popular... I remember massive anti government protests in Syria demanding democratic reforms... were those all US funded terrorists from outside the country? and of course, Assad cracked down because he saw it spinning out of control, and he also saw a host of other regional leaders get chased out of power during the uprisings... he ordered troops on the ground to crack down... shit got ugly... large numbers of the military defected and took the other side... 7-8 years later here we are.... or is all of that just a made up fairy tale? Your info sure seems to be biased and ignores the actual events that took place
The whole world isn't a large conspiracy theory and the USA doesn't have a monopoly on evil... this coming from a guy who openly acknowledges most of my countries fucked up shit
Show me the video of massive anti-gov't protests in Syria.
I just googled "Syrian Protests" and literally got thousands of links showing, documenting, and discussing large scale protests with countless pictures and I'm sure videos... plenty of articles and reporting on the brutal crackdown as well... pick any of the thousands... I dont need to read a blog post... the evidence is totally overwhelming that goes against your Assad is the good guy theory
What does the US have to gain from "taking control" of Syria?
Well...there is some oil there but not as much as some other places. I think it has more to do with the military/industrial side than it does any resources there for the taking. Every bomb that gets dropped is a bomb that will be bought again. Every bullet fired, every tank destroyed, etc. And then when the country is completely ruined some politically-connected contractors will come in and "rebuild" while others provide "security."
$$$
Oh trust me, I understand, but that seems that would apply more to Russia here since we aren't on the ground and only fired a few rockets... Russia is the one on the ground... this isn't shock & awe and nation building... from what I recall this is exactly why under the Obama administration we resisted taking any further action
It's a huge interest for Russia - geographic strategy to expansion. Putin is still a Soviet Union guy remember. What my2hands says is true, but I've been under the impression that the most important thing is to just try and keep it out of total Russian control.... But that is now confusing, given Trump's schizophrenic attitude about Russia.
Russia would not be in Syria if not for the US. The US is the one supplying arms to ISIS and Jihadist groups. They are the ones destabilizing the country - not Russia. It's the same playbook as Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. Remember - still no WMDs. All those countries are overrun by Jihadist groups that are supported by Western Interests. Russia is not an imperialistic nation - they aren't run by Corporations looking for resources from other countries. Sure, Russia needs trading partners and there is economic benefit by having good relations but they aren't arming extremists groups to destabilize a country.
No, Russia is run by 10-14 oligarchs who own 90% of the nation’s wealth and are approved by Putin, who had the populist opposition candidate thrown in jail prior to the election. That’s a regime we should all get behind. Putin’s not imperial? Ha!
No one is saying Russia is perfect. But give me the Russian equivalents of Haliburton. Who sells the most arms in the world?
Yeah the argument that ASSAD or PUTIN are good guys i ain't buying or Orange Bafoon too all three of these dispicable human beings should be on a rocket to mars with no return fuel ....
Yeah the argument that ASSAD or PUTIN are good guys i ain't buying or Orange Bafoon too all three of these dispicable human beings should be on a rocket to mars with no return fuel ....
Yeah the argument that ASSAD or PUTIN are good guys i ain't buying or Orange Bafoon too all three of these dispicable human beings should be on a rocket to mars with no return fuel ....
Why sully Mars? What did it ever do to you?
Yeah really, not Mars - They're sending the first colonists there in only 13 years. Better send them to Uranus instead.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Yeah the argument that ASSAD or PUTIN are good guys i ain't buying or Orange Bafoon too all three of these dispicable human beings should be on a rocket to mars with no return fuel ....
Why sully Mars? What did it ever do to you?
Yeah really, not Mars - They're sending the first colonists there in only 13 years. Better send them to Uranus instead.
Comments
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
From Eva Karene Barlett's fb page:
Peter Ford (former British ambassador to Syria) again exposes BBC lies, and lies in general, about alleged CW attacks.
Note at around 3:00 into the interview, the BBC deflection of Ford's logical points about why there was no CW attack on Douma.
BBC: "Let's first of all start with this chemical attack do you think President Assad is behind it is responsible for this?"
Ford: "No, I don't because the evidence is extremely thin, thin-to-vanishing. All the sources of information about this attack come from the side of the militant Islamist armed groups. Without exception. All the information. There is not one single source of independent information on what actually happened in Douma, and there is every reason to believe that the Islamists have mounted a fake attack in order to stampede the West."
BBC: "When you say 'fake attack', what do you mean?"
Ford: "There was no chemical attack. The images are probably faked. The important thing is to get the international inspectors into Douma--and they are in Damascus now they're on their way--the important things is to get the inspectors in to verify what I've just said."
BBC: "The World Health Organization doesn't believe these
images were faked."
Ford: "The WHO has repeated claims, claims made by the same sources that produced the videos--that is by the Islamic militants, not by any independent observers. This is a crucial
detail there's absolutely no impartial evidence.
The BBC itself--and I remind you--saying that the images in the video are unverified. Is that not correct?"
...Ford: "If you actually look at the report by the UN inspectors from the attack one year ago, you will see troubling facts, such as that some of the alleged victims were presenting to the hospital one hour before the Syrian plane had even left the ground."
BBC: "Okay, let's move on from whether this is fact or not. Let's say evidence has been found to prove that President Assad was behind this attack..."
...Ford: "We all know the president says things, and his generals--who know what they're talking about--say something else. General Mattis, who does know probably what he's talking about, says the the assessment is continuing that can only mean that the evidence with not yet in."
Ford: "...The idea that we could be going into such a dangerous conflict on the basis of contested images and reports from jihadi sources such as the White Helmets--the so-called first responders--who are Islamist militants who helped in beheadings and amputation with hands and feet, and it's on the testimony of such first responders and so-called monitors that this country might be on the point of making another grave mistake.
And let me remind you, please, about Iraq when we were so confident--were we not--all the intelligence...You remember Colin Powell? Please, let's not have another case of being taken to war on a false perspectives."
The West may have long laid plans to wipe the slate clean in the Middle East... who knows... wouldn't shock me... but I dont see the value in Syria... but I would think if America wanted Assad out, that shit would have happened 5 years ago... we dont fuck around when it comes to removing leaders we no longer find useful... ask Saddam
How about the Arab spring? You say he is popular... I remember massive anti government protests in Syria demanding democratic reforms... were those all US funded terrorists from outside the country? and of course, Assad cracked down because he saw it spinning out of control, and he also saw a host of other regional leaders get chased out of power during the uprisings... he ordered troops on the ground to crack down... shit got ugly... large numbers of the military defected and took the other side... 7-8 years later here we are.... or is all of that just a made up fairy tale? Your info sure seems to be biased and ignores the actual events that took place
The whole world isn't a large conspiracy theory and the USA doesn't have a monopoly on evil... this coming from a guy who openly acknowledges most of my countries fucked up shit
I, for one, with a whole lot of other Americans, didn't believe the WMD line of reasoning from the war criminals Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld for one minute. What is happening in Syria is happening for one reason and one reason only, Israel, who by the way was found to be buying ISIS oil and has a very strategic interest in the Golan Heights. If the US wants to mess with Iran, we don't need Syria to do it. For the record, US Middle East policy has been misguided for a very long time and continues to be so. Sect politics is very nasty and Assad is gullty of playing them. He has no choice.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Is that why the UN implicated him in numerous war crimes? Same as the referral to the ICC for war crimes? Amnesty international is full of shit? Mass scale arrests... torture... targeted mass killings of civilians in populated areas... shoot to kill orders... demolition of opposition neighborhoods... systematic killing of 11, 000 detainees...... all made up by multiple nuetral organizations???? The list goes on and on and on
The atrocities committed by this piece of shit go well beyond a chemical attack... but America is the bad guy here? I'm calling bullshit. Total bullshit. You need to check who you're supporting. You are talking up Assad like he's the greatest thing since sliced bread and the entire world has it wrong. I think you have some bullshit info my friend, you're way off
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_violations_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Show me the video of massive anti-gov't protests in Syria. Please - read the blog post.
Conspiracy theory!?? We don't need to resort to that do we? Just have an objective conversation about this. No need to try and play that lame game.
I keep asking people why Assad would gas his own people when the result is this foreign intervention!??? It makes no sense. And the fact that they keep doing this right after the US says they are withdrawing. Add on top of this the fact his presidency is under fire and the only logical thing is that this is fabricated.
Why are you focused on this chemical attack when there are 7 years of documented war crimes?
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2017/02/10-countries-export-major-weapons-170220170539801.html
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I'm supposed to believe Assad and Putin are the good guys in the world
LOL
You act like the Arab Spring didn't happen?
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/russian-billboard-features-trump-and-putin/
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/12/601783524/douma-is-now-controlled-by-syrias-government-russia-says
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©