Syria - What should we do if anything?

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

@oxmox - Western Journalists go to Syria all the time - they are just very careful about advertising their presence because Assad's militias kill any they find (long list here (some killed by rebels - most by Govt forces) - not complete as several westerners have been kidnapped by Assad militia and their location/state of health is unknown: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_during_the_Syrian_civil_war). So you hear about reports from "sources" not "our eyewitness reporter" because the reporter wants to keep his eyes safe and not have them gouged out which seems to be the signature punishment dished out by Assad's henchmen.

Looking through the zionist, NWO controlled western media (lol) you will see many recent eye witness video reports. One I remember recently showed very clearly Assad's helicopters dropping 45gal barrels filled with TNT on homes filled with refugees. So try the "people in London/New York are terribly uninformed by their western media" yet again, it never gets old.

[ProfTournesol 956]

The Assad regime and most of people with power in this country exist mainly of Alawites and not Shia, which got into power due colonial influence. Sunnis represent with almost 90% the majority of the muslims in the world. Of course not all opposition groups are Jihadists/Islamists, but they gain more influence. There are quarrels between the different opposition groups.

Allawites are Shias and are backed by Shias factions or countries in the whole area (Lebanon, Iran, Irak etc.).

[oxmox 73]

Allawites are Shias and are backed by Shias factions or countries in the whole area (Lebanon, Iran, Irak etc.).

Yes, you are right and I thought I will post more about it after I did re-check and read about it. Its said that Alawites are close to the Shia but it is controversial if they are actually real muslims. They are actually an esoteric sect who practice their religion quiete different in comparison to our view on Islam. Parts of the muslim dont accept them as true muslims. But religious shia leader in Iran did officially recognize them only some decades ago in the 70ies.

They celebrate certain christian festivals like christmas eve, easter,... they prey rather at home or outside instead of a mosque. They drink wine within their zeremonies, they eat during Ramadan and they dont follow the Sharia.

Its quiete interesting.

[Tyrsero 10]

I might be wrong, but through reading this topic, apparently both sides of the conflict are bad, because they kill civilians and journalists.

That might sound wrong, but if that's what happens in Syria, then why not just leave them sort this out? If they don't want any western countries to know that then we should leave them alone aswell.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

I might be wrong, but through reading this topic, apparently both sides of the conflict are bad, because they kill civilians and journalists.

That might sound wrong, but if that's what happens in Syria, then why not just leave them sort this out? If they don't want any western countries to know that then we should leave them alone aswell.

If this was to be left to the Syrians to sort out I would say fine, it's a civil war, an internal problem. However, from the start it's not been that simple. Iran and Russia propped up Assad, supplying weapons, intelligence and troops (Iranian) and prevented the UN from doing anything meaningful, the Turks & Arabian Arabs began supplying the rebels with all sorts of equipment and Sunni Jihadists soon followed from all over the world. The West decided to support the majority and give the rebels non-lethal & humanitarian aid, intelligence and support at the UN.

Look up Iranian flights carrying weapons / troops. Used to go over Turkey till they were intercepted, now fly over Iraq without inspection.

There are many fingers in the Syrian pie and it's probably gone too far for a cease fire or peace. Too much blood letting. The Iranians will not stop what they are doing so no one else will either. Where this ends up is anyone's guess - I predict regional war but who knows? No easy answers. It really isn't just a Syrian problem, it's part of a much wider conflict between Sunni and Shia factions who slaughter each other in many different countries, e.g. Iraq & Pakistan.

Edited May 11, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[oxmox 73]

It doesnt look much different from a different view. Arabic countries are supporting rebels with weapons, foreign fighters take part in the fights. The US/west are supporting discretional, training rebels, sending money, take part in decisions which of the rebels get the weapons or other goods.

btw...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/09/us-libya-arms-un-idUSBRE93814Y20130409

Its some kind of proxy war aswell, in general a quiete complicated conflict. Some countries of the west i.e. USA,Israel are very interested to weaken the Iran and therefore to crash the shia-axis. The power play between shias and sunnis are therefore acceptable and countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar or Turkey get their support. Russia has an important military harbour in Syria and already during the cold there was a cooperation with this country.

That might sound wrong, but if that's what happens in Syria, then why not just leave them sort this out? If they don't want any western countries to know that then we should leave them alone aswell.

Because, the whole middle/far east is an inferno where political, geopolitical and strategical interests play a role since more than hundred years, plus the situation of Israel.

Edited May 11, 2013 by oxmox

[ProfTournesol 956]

French ambassador infuriated by the unbelievable mess among Syrian opposition : http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2013/05/28/the-syrian-opposition-is-in-crisis-and-it%E2%80%99s-all-on-video/

[scrim 1]

Yeah, no bloody point supporting the rebels any more. Any dumbass who wants to send weapons there now wants to arm the people who butchered Drummer Rigby, there's simply nothing more to it at this point. Either we bomb all of them, or we bomb no one (for now at least). Maybe we should just sit back, see what happens, and when one side has won, then we go in and bomb them when they're the weakest. That way we only have to bomb one side, it'll be quick and simple, and after that we leave it to the UN to install a proper interim governement, because right now we can't bomb anyone without it leading to helping either a Assad regime, or an al Qaeda "let's express our gratitude Benghazi style, but all over Europe this time!" semi-human (at best) regime.

Suppose we could go ahead and intercept and shoot down all incoming air traffic over the country, should be fair since it'll hit the regime airforce, and decrease the amount of weapons sent in to the jihadi pigs. Who cares how many Syrians/Arabs/Muslims we piss off, it's not like it could get any worse at this point considering recent events from the religion of peace.

[NoRailgunner 0]

scrim your view is somewhat strange, bigot and not very well educated nor informed. Guess you one of those internet warriors who can't respect or tolerate others just because they don't fit into your simple world. Maybe for a start go back to the first days of this civil war, find the reason for it and continue to search for changes and developments, aswell who is behind certain groups and funding them for what kind of reasons. Or you may just continue to believe the (yellow) media/propaganda stories and their experts.... :rolleyes:

[scrim 1]

Suppose it's easier to cry "bigot!" than it is to actually make a point. The fact that the largest Syrian opposition group has officially sworn alligence to al Qeada really goes to show where this thing is headed. Why should I say "let's support a practically al Qaeda group with weapons, and bomb their enemies so they can get to power".

I'm not denying that the opposition groups were a force for good when this thing started, but now it's become obvious who will come to power if they do win. Nothing more than the same old story in that part of the world anymore, when the freedom fighter wins he'll set up his own regime and generally speaking act little better than the man he overthrew.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Hezbollah is massively supporting Assad regime : 3 to 4000 Hezbollah fighters fighting in Qsair - near Lebanon - against Syrian opposition. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22710915

[mrcash2009 0]

Not that I agree with much of your post Scrim you did actually hit on something I saw raised elsewhere which was an interesting paradox ref:

Yeah, no bloody point supporting the rebels any more. Any dumbass who wants to send weapons there now wants to arm the people who butchered Drummer Rigby,

And that was, if some "extremists" as they say hopped on a jet to play rebels for a few weeks, they would in fact technically be armed by the UK and elsewhere on there 'self deployment', on their return back to blighty they would be classed as terrorists and jailed, and that is really strange when you think about it. So far all I can see is the arming of rebels who do have links to "groups" and its at that stage this is very puzzling & worrying indeed, there is allot of ground-hog day with this situation.

I heard the recent news talking about unlikely to arm "any time soon" and such comments, but arming on the ground out of the media and being told any time soon I put in two different places. Also heard about russia's delivery of S-300 anti-aircraft missiles anti air kit.

Edited May 30, 2013 by mrcash2009

[katipo66 94]

Some good reporting on why Qusayr matters http://news.sky.com/story/1097300/syria-civil-war-why-battle-for-qusayr-matters

Assad seems confident of victory http://world.time.com/2013/05/30/assad-syria-will-respond-to-future-israeli-strike/

Edited May 31, 2013 by Katipo66

[Tonci87 163]

Arms are already shipped to the syrian rebels en masse. 3000 tonns of small arms, AT wepons and grenade launchers have reached the Syrian rebels until last December.

Those weapons were sold to Saudi Arabia by Croatia and the Saudis delivered them to the rebels.

I´m quite ashamed that my government gets involved in such a shady buisness. I have no doubt that they are doing that on the behalf of the US and other EU superpowers who don´t want to get their hands dirty...

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=31a_1362699220

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1f7_1365144157

http://www.jutarnji.hr/u-4-mjeseca-za-siriju-s--plesa--otislo-75-aviona-sa-3000-t-oruzja/1089573/

[ProfTournesol 956]

Thanks to the Hezbollah fighters, Qsair (Qusayr) has been (re) captured by Assad : http://edition.cnn.com/2013/06/05/world/meast/syria-civil-war/?hpt=hp_t2

Paris and London acknowledged the use of Sarin gas in Syria : http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/04/syria-nerve-agent-sarin-uk-france

[oxmox 73]

U.S. considers no-fly zone after Syria crosses nerve gas "red line"

"After months of deliberation, President Barack Obama's administration said on Thursday it would now arm rebels, having obtained proof the Syrian government used chemical weapons against fighters trying to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad.

Imposing a no-fly zone would require the United States to destroy Syria's sophisticated Russian-built air defenses, thrusting it into the war with the sort of action NATO used to help topple Muammar Gaddafi in Libya two years ago.

The use of chemical weapons provides a straightforward reason for Washington to intervene. Deputy National Security Adviser Rhodes said Washington now believed 100-150 people had been killed by government poison gas attacks on rebels.

Western powers have been reluctant in the past to arm the rebels, worried about the rising strength of Sunni Islamist insurgents among them who have pledged loyalty to al Qaeda. European countries like France say the best way to counter such Islamists is to provide more support for mainstream rebels."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/14/us-syria-crisis-idUSBRE95C16L20130614

This smells like Iraq´s WMD and the "no fly zone" in Libya.....

I still wonder, why should Assad use gas if he knows he would "cross a red line". For such a dangerous WMD weapon the death tolls are very low aswell.....

Lets see what evidence they will bring on the table. The politician MCCain said recently " U.S. credibility is on the line. Now is not the time to merely take the next incremental step. Now is the time for more decisive actions." Its probably rather the opposite if you follow the international press in the last ten years, the credibility of the U.S. is already at the bottom...

[ProfTournesol 956]

That red line is a joke IMO. 100 000 dead by conventional weapons against a few hundred killed by gas ?

[Dwarden 1125]

I find it it worrysome, considering there are proofs that even the rebels used nerve / chemical weapons stolen from captured storage areas ...

[dale0404 5]

That red line is a joke IMO. 100 000 dead by conventional weapons against a few hundred killed by gas ?

I don't think its a joke buddy. Using nerve / chemical weapons is one of the most inhumane ways to kill people imho. And that is not a personal attack towards your good self :)

[ProfTournesol 956]

I don't think its a joke buddy. Using nerve / chemical weapons is one of the most inhumane ways to kill people imho. And that is not a personal attack towards your good self :)

Yes i agree but doing nothing while 100 000 people are killed and finally thinking of doing something when some gas is used is just laughable.

But my main concern is where is Iran red line.

[nodunit 397]

So is it up to outsiders/possible interpretations of oppressors to step in and do the work? What would you have NATO...or to be more precise, the US do? Because you just know that if NATO is to be there then the US HAS to be there, at least early on.

Edited June 14, 2013 by NodUnit

[mrcash2009 0]

I don't think its a joke buddy. Using nerve / chemical weapons is one of the most inhumane ways to kill people imho. And that is not a personal attack towards your good self :)

You could also then highlight the mass use of depleted uranium in battlefields left in countries too, but that doesn't have such a shock factor as biological weapons used by locals. Ive seen the news with unconfirmed footage of use of the gas (words used on the news) but it doesn't personalty tell me anything as its not in context with anything. So as for the proof of this we have to take words for it, either way it doesn't bode well with any ripple effects.

This smells like Iraq´s WMD and the "no fly zone" in Libya.....

That has to be the worst unintentional pun to date ;) But I do agree on the mirroring.

[antoineflemming 14]

I find it it worrisome, considering there are proofs that even the rebels used nerve / chemical weapons stolen from captured storage areas ...

You want to know what should have happened, nearly 3 years ago? The UN, with Russia and China, should have grown a pair and put UN peace enforcers in Syria and should have put an end to this crap before it kicked off into a civil war. That's what should have happened, but everyone wanted to wait and see how genocide would play out. Because, unless anyone has forgotten, this whole debacle started off as a massacre by the Assad regime. Now it's a sectarian civil war between two opposing factions (rebels and Syrian Army) backed by opposing sectarian radical Islamist factions (Hezbollah, and all the other radical Sunni Islamists on the rebel side).

[scrim 1]

And Obama critisized Bush for things like starting wars, drones, grey area espionage, and for fabricating WMD evidence.

And this time the intelligence services are no more certain about it than they were when they were asked about WMDs in Iraq. And it still looks like it'll be used as an excuse to arm the opposition, which by now has turned into mostly jihadis who want the Western world no more good than the Assad regime. Seriously, I though Bush was out of line, but this guy...

[nodunit 397]

Of course he did, it's all about the positive PR.

And that is why you should never trust anything politician says until proven otherwise.

It's all about PR, one moment they say one thing and then the other the next...you should never be surprised about what they do or say.

WMD's or terminology are just buzz words, just look back to the Cold War.

"Pursuit to share freedom" , "influence of communism" or "aid our brothers and sisters overseas" (and no that isn't about the military service).

The only thing that has changed is how the reasons are presented, not about freedom or prosperity and more about "this is a potential threat" in which case hell..the globe is a potential threat to our "national security".

Edited June 15, 2013 by NodUnit