Syria - What should we do if anything?

[gammadust 12]

^^ Low jab...

Nato expansion to former Warsaw Pact countries and others of former soviet influence is a given, there is no point in denying it, so much so that even a certain promise is considered a mere misinterpretation of diplomatic words. Refusing to recognize the pressure such enlargement exerts over these countries and Russia it self is [out qualifiers here], we're not talking about a food chain, these are military bases.

[sudayev 27]

Well played by Russia, damn well played :) Now Syria agreed to Russian resolution securing themselves from American invasion.

[mistyronin 1181]

Nato expansion to former Warsaw Pact countries and others of former soviet influence is a given, there is no point in denying it, so much so that even a certain promise is considered a mere misinterpretation of diplomatic words. Refusing to recognize the pressure such enlargement exerts over these countries and Russia it self is [out qualifiers here], we're not talking about a food chain, these are military bases.

I agree with you, NATO has expanded through former Warsaw Pacts, and will probably continue in long term. My point wide explained in my previous posts, is that right now IMHO the first point of the US agenda is to take out Iran and reduce its influence in the region. As I said you only have to watch the today's session in the US Senate about Syria, they directly said it ( I guess in the Senate's website you can find the full video, I couldn't find it ).

Edited September 10, 2013 by MistyRonin

[gammadust 12]

France insists on drafting the admitedly unproven "conjecture" into prospective peace efforts of the UN. How dum can Fabius-the-truth-is-cruel get?

Russia Says UN Resolution Proposal 'Unacceptable'

MOSCOW, Sept 10 (Reuters) - Russia told France on Tuesday that a proposal to adopt a U.N. Security Council resolution holding the Syrian government responsible for the possible use of chemical weapons was unacceptable.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told his French counterpart that Moscow would propose a U.N. draft declaration supporting its initiative to put Syria's chemical weapons under international control, the Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

[ProfTournesol 956]

UN published a report about war crimes on both sides : http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=45817&Cr=syria&Cr1=#.UjCnF9BOKzk

[mistyronin 1181]

Putin open letter to americans in the NY Times.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

Yeah, the US don't have any intention to attack Iran, that's why during the last 20 years they have been installing this bases encircling it:

Is that map up to date ? Most of those temporary US postings are closed, some haven't had a permanent US military presence since the early 1990's? As for the US installing them, the bases were already there, they signed agreements with the host nations for joint use. Old Iranian propaganda that was debunked years ago - check the list of current US military installations and you will see how wrong it is......

[mistyronin 1181]

Is that map up to date ? Most of those temporary US postings are closed, some haven't had a permanent US military presence since the early 1990's? As for the US installing them, the bases were already there, they signed agreements with the host nations for joint use. Old Iranian propaganda that was debunked years ago - check the list of current US military installations and you will see how wrong it is......

I have to say, that I can't provide you with today's information, it's beyond my possibilities.

But here you have a report from DoD from 2009 with a list which it includes most of the US bases in USA and in the globe. You will be able to confirm at least a gross majority of the ones in that map, with detailed information about each one.

To me the fact that the US may not have permanent presence in some of that bases doesn't mean that they are not able to use them in the case of a possible confrontation.

[scrim 1]

Out right stupid logic. It's nothing short of "they didn't do it, but they can, so they're guilty". By that logic one could just as easily say that Russia is encircling the USA because they could have a "permanent presence... in the case of a possible confrontation".

[gammadust 12]

^^

"but they can, so they're guilty" - I hear the same about Assad's alleged usage of chemical weapons.

"they didn't do it, but they can" - except that in the last ~10 years, Nato/US let itself involve in armed conflicts in at least 1 relevant instance near russian borders and 2 more in it's broader area of influence.

"[Russia's] permanent presence... in the case of a possible confrontation [against the US]". - except that one needs to really search deep to find one such example, not even a low plural of examples to one even think of applying the word "encirclement" which is the main point of contention here.

Of course it is stupid to think of it... but it appears to me that you're trying to make look as even, circumstances which clearly are not with your "It's nothing short of...".

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

I have to say, that I can't provide you with today's information, it's beyond my possibilities.

But here you have a report from DoD from 2009 with a list which it includes most of the US bases in USA and in the globe. You will be able to confirm at least a gross majority of the ones in that map, with detailed information about each one.

Well it's possible if you search for it:

Department of Defense Base Structure Report Fiscal Year 2012 Baseline

http://www.oea.gov/news/department-of-defense-and-federal-agency-documents/department-of-defense-base-structure-report-fiscal-year-2012-baseline

They hadn't left Iraq in 2009 - all those were closed down and handed over. There are no bases in Saudi Arabia, Yemen or Pakistan. Many of the others are single buildings either owned or leased. It simply isn't true. It's another Iranian propaganda myth that many came to believe.

Edited September 13, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[scrim 1]

^^

"but they can, so they're guilty" - I hear the same about Assad's alleged usage of chemical weapons.

"they didn't do it, but they can" - except that in the last ~10 years, Nato/US let itself involve in armed conflicts in at least 1 relevant instance near russian borders and 2 more in it's broader area of influence.

"[Russia's] permanent presence... in the case of a possible confrontation [against the US]". - except that one needs to really search deep to find one such example, not even a low plural of examples to one even think of applying the word "encirclement" which is the main point of contention here.

Of course it is stupid to think of it... but it appears to me that you're trying to make look as even, circumstances which clearly are not with your "It's nothing short of...".

1, Uh, yeah, I'm very much in doubt Assad used chemical weapons. The weird thing called reading what I've written would've meant you'd known that instead of making a straw-man argument.

2, And where would that be? Georgia hardly counts.

3, Yet again, you could've gone ahead and actually read what I wrote. I made out a potential scenario, in the case of a potential conflict to display just how bad of an argument "they could, so they're guilty" is.

[gammadust 12]

^^ my appologies if i mistakenly interpreted the purpose of your post as an ad absurdum comparison with the factual US'/Nato's encirclement of Russia (and it's sphere of influence).

[suprememodder 11]

Well it's possible if you search for it:

Department of Defense Base Structure Report Fiscal Year 2012 Baseline

http://www.oea.gov/news/department-of-defense-and-federal-agency-documents/department-of-defense-base-structure-report-fiscal-year-2012-baseline

They hadn't left Iraq in 2009 - all those were closed down and handed over. There are no bases in Saudi Arabia, Yemen or Pakistan. Many of the others are single buildings either owned or leased. It simply isn't true. It's another Iranian propaganda myth that many came to believe.

its origin is actually not iranian propaganda, but liberal propaganda invented inside our own university systems.

[jefferspang 2]

Italian journalist who was kidnapped by rebels calls Syria hell and says rebels (FSA linked - Faroug Brigade) are power hungry Islamists

Interesting extracts from the article

.....152 days of imprisonment followed, in small dark rooms where I battled against time and fear and endless humiliations; against hunger and against the absence of pity. Where I endured two mock executions and the silence of God, my family and the outside world.....

... On leaving the city, we were stopped by two pick-up trucks full of masked men. They made us get out, took us to a house and beat us up, claiming to be police officers working for the regime. In the following days [i and a fellow hostage, Belgian teacher Pierre Piccinin da Prata] discovered that they were fervent Islamists who prayed five times a day to their God in solemn tones. On the Friday, they listened to the sermon of a preacher urging jihad against Bashar al-Assad. The decisive proof came when we were bombarded from the air. It was clear we were being held by rebel forces.....

Pierre Piccinin da Prata, the Belgian teacher that was travelling with Quirico, claims that he overhead a Skype conversation between 3 Rebels (one of which was the Syrian Liberation Army's General) that implies the Rebels were responsible for the Chemical attacks on the Damascus Suburbs.

fkc2ZtPvc8o

BBC - Syria hostage Domenico Quirico 'treated like animal'

US News - Freed Hostages Reveal Information on Chemical Attacks

Reuters - Italian journalist freed after being kidnapped in Syria

edit - Relatively new piece of news here, I'm sure more media outlet will put their view on this soon...

Edited September 15, 2013 by JeffersPang

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/11/teacher-and-journalist-held-hostage-in-syria-claim-they-overheard-explosive-skype-conversation-about-chemical-attack-during-captivity/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=Share%20Buttons

The pair were released on Sunday night and have now said that they heard a conversation between their captors in English on Skype in which they allegedly revealed that rebels launched the attack to prompt Western forces to intervene.

Amazing bit of luck there, captors speaking in english on Skype, thank goodness we learned all this just before the UN report is released. Now we can treat it with the scepticism it deserves. :rolleyes:

Edited September 15, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[mrcash2009 0]

Ah yes the UN report, that will be one way only so it doesn't even matter if this were true or not anyway. Id hazard a guess that militant leaders could release a video and supply signed documents confirming this all to be true and it would be B.S if not touched my mainstream, pre UN doc would be timed well, post UN doc would be too late and not worth the attention, or even more well timed if you think about it :)

EDIT:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24102723

Obama says Iran nuclear row 'larger' than Syria crisis

Edited September 15, 2013 by mrcash2009
added article 225

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

Ah yes the UN report, that will be one way only so it doesn't even matter if this were true or not anyway.

So all the investigators and scientists at the UN are in on the conspiracy too?

[mrcash2009 0]

So all the investigators and scientists at the UN are in on the conspiracy too?

I dont know, are they? Who said that was the case, I was just saying that no matter what information comes on the contrary it wont be taken any further so to be honest why not just attack them, its getting boring now, then everyone who sides with it can enjoy the unfolding outcome :)

Edited September 16, 2013 by mrcash2009
typo

[mrcash2009 0]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24113553

The UN has confirmed "unequivocally and objectively" that chemical weapons have been used in Syria.

A UN report says sarin gas was used in a rocket attack in the Syrian capital, Damascus, last month, although it has not attributed blame.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10311007/Syria-nearly-half-rebel-fighters-are-jihadists-or-hardline-Islamists-says-IHS-Janes-report.html

Syria: nearly half rebel fighters are jihadists or hardline Islamists, says IHS Jane's report

Nearly half the rebel fighters in Syria are now aligned to jihadist or hardline Islamist groups according to a new analysis of factions in the country's civil war.

Edited September 16, 2013 by mrcash2009
xtra article 225

[ProfTournesol 956]

Yep, about UN report, in French we say "breaching opened doors".

Edited September 16, 2013 by ProfTournesol

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

Read it, wasn't really much additional to what we have discussed in this thread apart from confirming the sample test results - Sarin - and the types of munitions used, certainly the IRAM used by Assad's forces and the large scale and coordination of the attack from 2 or more government held areas is the best indictment. The trajectories indicate the rockets were fired from different places, large number of victims in different areas indicates many salvoes. The investigator's mandate is limited to investigating the facts, not assigning blame. Even if they know who conducted the attack they would not include it in the report.

U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power provided some details.

"We have associated one type of munition cited in the UN report - 122 mm rockets - with previous regime attacks," she said. "We have reviewed thousands of open source videos related to the current conflict in Syria and have not observed the opposition manufacturing or using this style of rocket."

British U.N. Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant said the rocket samples examined had a payload of 350 liters (92 gallons), which was 35 times the amount used in the Tokyo subway attack in 1995.

"Mr Sellstrom confirmed that the quality of the sarin was superior both to that used in the Tokyo subway but also to that used by Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war,"

Paulo Pinheiro, the chairman of the UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria said the commission believed both President Assad's government and the rebels were responsible for war crimes, but that the regime alone had perpetrated crimes against humanity.

Documents all in 1 place here for those wanting the info:

http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2013/08/world/syria-documents/index.html

Edited September 16, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[batto 17]

http://archiv.roumen.cz/a/war_in_syria.jpg (119 kB)

":D"

[mrcash2009 0]

Batto that cartoon just about sums it up :)

The investigator's mandate is limited to investigating the facts, not assigning blame. Even if they know who conducted the attack they would not include it in the report.

True its best to leave that to people never on the ground to think through. I thought "facts" were needed to make a case for who is "accountable for taking the action and pressing the button", I like how they hide behind "blame" as a way to sit on the diplomatic fence.

Paulo Pinheiro, the chairman of the UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria said the commission believed both President Assad's government and the rebels were responsible for war crimes, but that the regime alone had perpetrated crimes against humanity.

So they backed some arseholes that have now been linked to war crimes (no interest or issue then ... tumble weed & silence, skip that bit, even though that alone was justification for intervention in other situations), but "crimes against humanity" (some serious history lessons should be told on that phrase) were Assads crew alone, they "believe". Well ok then, lets lock & load gentlemen! Meanwhile for 2 years and now continue to back and support the war crime gang.

I like the way they then list the sarin use to all other sarin events just as a reminder, its been said elsewhere .. depleted uranium? Agent Orange? list goes on.

Seems to me its open season as long as you dont use anything naughty on the list, I cant see any "side" coming out of this untarnished.

Edited September 17, 2013 by mrcash2009
225

[scrim 1]

Another note regarding the Russian naval presence that I didn't think of when it was brought up: There is no way that the Russians will ever go to war for Syria. The only sane reason for the Russian government to send ships to the region is to provide a 3rd party, neutral early launch warning system, thereby rendering the launch of cruise missiles rather ineffective. The moment they'd be fired, the Syrians would be made aware of it, so knocking out their warning systems wouldn't help, and would enable them to intercept them if the Russians have sold them the means to do so.

They're there to make a small scale intervention impractical. If anyone thinks they're there to take an active part in hostilities, that person needs his head examined.

Edited September 23, 2013 by scrim