Syria - What should we do if anything?

[ProfTournesol 956]

From the very beginning of their history?

As terrorist as Chechen are.

[fleepee 10]

I didn't read all posts, but...

I hope I won't be misunderstood, I'm not really able to express clearly these kind of ideas in english...

Things are not that simple; from black to white, there are a lot of nuances of grey...

Terrorist are generally called so by occupying or illegitimate army forces...

It's not the only example, but french partisans were "brave freedom fighters" in WW2, except for german forces and the collaborationnist french government, who called them "terrorists", so...

Names depend on which side you're with.

Only actions can bu juged: there are of course blind useless terrorist actions, but I respect the bravery of under-armed civilians acting to defend their homeland against powerfull forces, and try to understand their actions: it's not nothing to decide to risk your life (and eventually those of your beloved and relatives because of repression) to regain freedom...

I despise actions against innocent civillians, no matter how terrorists, I should better call them criminals, justify them!

What would I have done in WW2 in occupied europe?

What would I have done if I was born in (north) vietnam in the 40-50's?

What would I have done if I was an algerian in the 50's?

What would I do if I was chechen, tibetan, etc...?

And you, what would you do?

Comfortabilly watch others dying for you or fight and risk to be tortured, to die for all the people to be free?

[spooky lynx 73]

As terrorist as Chechen are.

Chechens were separatists and hardcore nationalists at first. And only after 1996 they started to use terror methods such as massive hostage taking in hospitals and bombing the houses. Before the raid of Shamil 'Gynecologist' Basaev they weren't called terrorists even by those who hate them. Rebels, bandits, hitmans, boeviki, dukhi and whatever else but not terrorists.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Chechens were separatists and hardcore nationalists at first. And only after 1996 they started to use terror methods such as massive hostage taking in hospitals and bombing the houses. Before the raid of Shamil 'Gynecologist' Basaev they weren't called terrorists even by those who hate them. Rebels, bandits, hitmans, boeviki, dukhi and whatever else but not terrorists.

Then we agree. Those movements became terrorist ones after a while. And i fully agree with Fleepee.

[dysta 10]

I didn't read all posts, but...

I hope I won't be misunderstood, I'm not really able to express clearly these kind of ideas in english...

Things are not that simple; from black to white, there are a lot of nuances of grey...

Terrorist are generally called so by occupying or illegitimate army forces...

It's not the only example, but french partisans were "brave freedom fighters" in WW2, except for german forces and the collaborationnist french government, who called them "terrorists", so...

Names depend on which side you're with.

Only actions can bu juged: there are of course blind useless terrorist actions, but I respect the bravery of under-armed civilians acting to defend their homeland against powerfull forces, and try to understand their actions: it's not nothing to decide to risk your life (and eventually those of your beloved and relatives because of repression) to regain freedom...

I despise actions against innocent civillians, no matter how terrorists, I should better call them criminals, justify them!

What would I have done in WW2 in occupied europe?

What would I have done if I was born in (north) vietnam in the 40-50's?

What would I have done if I was an algerian in the 50's?

What would I do if I was chechen, tibetan, etc...?

And you, what would you do?

Comfortabilly watch others dying for you or fight and risk to be tortured, to die for all the people to be free?

I don't think they're making any choice at all, because most of them didn't even have a choice.

What makes them no choice is their own will to keep against what they rejects for their own idealism. If it didn't ends, you could expect it will only a torment for humanity in both sides.

[maturin 12]

ETA were not Muslims, but... You know the end.

When did ETA ever get any love from the Western media? If you're talking about their bombings during the Franco regime, it was the Spaniards that loved them for that.

[someguywho 12]

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

[batto 17]

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, especially as a means of coercion. In the international community, however, terrorism has no universally agreed, legally binding, criminal law definition.

First part of first sentence is terrorism as I understand it. By this definition they are terrorist no matter on which side you stand. Killing civilians and using the victims for anti-Assad propaganda has nothing to do with fighting for freedom.

Some news: https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2012/06/08/world/europe/ap-eu-britain-syria-journalist.html?_r=1

Edited June 13, 2012 by batto

[nettrucker 142]

First part of first sentence is terrorism as I understand it. By this definition they are terrorist no matter on which side you stand. Killing civilians and using the victims for anti-Assad propaganda has nothing to do with fighting for freedom.

It has to do with regime change though. That's what they're up to. Nato is desperately searching for an excuse to intervene. The USA has done it inumeral times since after WWII. So I'm not wondering at all. People love being brainwashed by mainstream media.

I agree in any case with your statement it has nothing to do with fighting for freedom it has to do with favouring interest of the World elite.

Edited June 12, 2012 by nettrucker

[mrcash2009 0]

This current crusade is simply to remove all sovereignty from any remaining states and to convert to a democracy, which in turn is papal rule which in turn leads back to Rome, hence crusade.

What we get to see is the demonise stage show with destabilisation and smoke and mirrors (the terror card) for finger pointing and feel safer as it progresses, fun times, well .. not really.

Edited June 13, 2012 by mrcash2009

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

This current crusade is simply to remove all sovereignty from any remaining states and to convert to a democracy, which in turn is papal rule which in turn leads back to Rome, hence crusade.

So you're against a Unified Global Civilisation built on trade, not religious superstitions, which had been dividing Mankind for Eons?

Here's a Russian propaganda vid, dated April 17, 2012,

Display of confiscated weapons from the Free Syrian Army

wYbxyEOzzBk

This clown talks about origins of specific weapon systems, the abundance of SATNAV communication systems present in FSA and so forth. I hope, the C.I.A. will provide even more weapons to the fighters, but more crucially -- up-to-date intel on enemy movements. Perhaps, they could divert a few personnel (non-agent) assets to the cause from around the region as well.

This is all we can do at this point.

[GRS 10]

So you're against a Unified Global Civilisation built on trade, not religious superstitions, which had been dividing Mankind for Eons?

I sure as hell am.

[-Snafu- 78]

With the current economic crisis, over a decade of war and current cutbacks there does not exist either the will or resources to "intervene" (whatever one means by that) and this is not taking into consideration the different geographical and political situation of Syria to that of Libya. The US military is scaling down and re-orienting itself to the Pacific region as its primary focus. The British military is about to go through another round of cuts that will effect all branches. The capabilities of the British military are less now compared to a year ago. I assume the French military is also going through cuts.

I miss the days when this place was not filled with conspiracy theorists and you could actually learn something.

Edited June 13, 2012 by Snafu

[batto 17]

I miss the days when this place was not filled with conspiracy theorists and you could actually learn something.

1. What conspiracy theories?
   
2. Do you really believe that current hype about Syria has anything to do with freedom for Syria?
   

I'm selfish rotten westerner used to my current lifestyle and I'm scared of anything that could change it. If the plan of western world elites is to have some advantage over other powers in future then... well, the world is f*cked up, it's better to enjoy it alive as much as possible. I'll live with boold on my hands for supporing it. What disturbs is how are western media lying and manipulating people. Majority of western people will live with honor for supporting it.

[-Snafu- 78]

What conspiracy theories?

They are throughout the thread - "media brainwashing you", "planned for years", "CIA", "world elite" and so on.

Do you really believe that current hype about Syria has anything to do with freedom for Syria?

My point is unrelated to the one you are making here. I was responding to claims that there's a desire to intervene which clashes with what's happening at the moment. Thus a military intervention by NATO is unlikely given the current circumstances:

- Cutbacks in military spending in the nations of NATO that can project power overseas

- The seriousness of the economic crisis has made it priority

- Little support for another war after over a decade of it in the Middle East and Afghanistan

- Re-focus of reduced US military and political assets to the Pacific region

[Baff1 0]

Stop the flow of arms to the rebels.

[batto 17]

They are throughout the thread - "media brainwashing you", "planned for years", "CIA", "world elite" and so on.

"media brainwashing you" - unfortunately truth

"planned for years" - my hypothesis

"CIA" - organization that helped regime change in Iran

"world elite" - politicians

Where are conspiracy theories?

NATO intervention is indeed very unlikely. Pro-west regime change is the goal IMO. Or it's something else... I don't know. Why else would we care?

[-Snafu- 78]

"media brainwashing you" - unfortunately truth

"planned for years" - my hypothesis

"CIA" - organization that helped regime change in Iran

"world elite" - politicians

Where are conspiracy theories?

You argue we are being brainwashed by the media, there's a world elite, things are planned for years and an obligatory mention of the CIA.

First of all you don't provide any evidence for your claims whatsoever.

Secondly, it's all very grandiose and all very simple with the media and "world elite" planning and running things for years, in secret, towards some sort of common goal. Needless to say it's a completely unrealistic and organisationally and logistically impossible.

Basic conspiracy theory stuff.

Edited June 13, 2012 by Snafu

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

stuff.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_United_States_foreign_regime_change_actions

Its primary role is in doing what it currently does best and I support them in their cause.

I sure as hell am.

What will it take to make you abandon your irrational nationalism and artificial national borders?

Would a few nuclear mushrooms outside your home window suffice? Incidentally, protectionism in this WORLD (financial) crisis will spell World War III. C'est la vie

Edited June 13, 2012 by Iroquois Pliskin

[batto 17]

You argue we are being brainwashed by the media, there's a world elite, things are planned for years and an obligatory mention of the CIA.

I don't argue. These words just seems too offend so much that you immediately call conspiracy theory anything that contains them.

First of all you don't provide any evidence for your claims whatsoever.

Go few pages back and try to read carefully again, maybe you'll find some links... Then please tell me your opinion. I'll PM you more if you're interested.

Secondly, it's all very grandiose and all very simple with the media and "world elite" planning and running things for years, in secret, towards some sort of common goal. Needless to say it's a completely unrealistic and organisationally and logistically impossible.

CIA helped to change or cripple governments in Latin America during cold war. It's what they do. Word elite is those who has power; politicians and other people with big influence (Rupert Murdoch for example). They don't have to share exact same goal, they can co-operate. And yes, these things are done in secret. Only idiots would do it in public.

Edited June 13, 2012 by batto

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

U.S. says Russian attack helicopters on way to Syria

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/12/u-s-says-russian-attack-helicopters-on-way-to-syria/

At a Washington think tank on Tuesday, Clinton said, "We are concerned about the latest information we have that there are attack helicopters on the way from Russia to Syria, which will escalate the conflict quite dramatically."

Clinton said the United States has repeatedly asked Russia to stop arms shipments to President Bashar al-Assad's regime, but Russia has said anything it is sending is not being used against the public unrest. "That's patently untrue," Clinton said before making the accusation about the helicopter shipments.

Clinton's comments were made at the Brookings Institution, where she was speaking alongside Israeli President Shimon Peres.

Associated Press link,

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_US_SYRIA?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-06-12-13-03-34

I hope the Fellas counter it with MANPADs at least, if we can't get a no-fly zone established due to Russia threatening nuclear war over Syria.

Addendum: Exclusive: Syria prints new money as deficit grows: bankers

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/13/us-syria-economy-money-idUSBRE85C0CL20120613?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FtopNews+%28News+%2F+US+%2F+Top+News%29

(Reuters) - Syria has released new cash into circulation to finance its fiscal deficit, flirting with inflation after violence and sanctions wiped out revenues and led to a severe economic contraction, bankers in Damascus say.

Interesting to note that Iran had been cut off from the international SWIFT banking system some months ago, while I have no information in this regard about Syria.

Edited June 13, 2012 by Iroquois Pliskin

[spooky lynx 73]

- Cutbacks in military spending in the nations of NATO that can project power overseas

- The seriousness of the economic crisis has made it priority

- Little support for another war after over a decade of it in the Middle East and Afghanistan

- Re-focus of reduced US military and political assets to the Pacific region

-Syria isn't far from main NATO bases. I shouldn't say it would be expensive to move some assets to Turkey and maybe Jordan. Also it won't take much time to move some naval assets through the Mediterrian sea.

-One of the solutions of the crisis is some little war. Just like WW2 for USA.

-I hadn't seen little support for the operation against Libya. On the countrary, even here I've seen plenty of people that wanted their countries to bomb Qaddafi. It fully depends on the media campaign. Even now I don't see lack of OEF support.

-US military won't be fully refocused. And it will have a potential force capable to participate in a war against any Middle-Eastern country. Even with all that cutbacks and relocations it's easy to form a joint NATO force that will outnumber any Middle-Eastern air force.

[vilas 477]

yea, west people are fed with propaganda about "freedom" (this freedom has few different meanings depending who is talking about "freedom", especially when it is "freedom to be homeless, unemployed and freedom to be bought as half-slave by international corporation"),

if you want people to live better , if you want people live in peace, there is a solution:

- bomb centrals of international banks corporations, bomb IMF, bomb Bilderberg group meeting, bomb those greed who never have enough and always want more money, although they have cars, helicopters, jets, few houses, holidays anywhere... while others cannot afford cancer treatment which is cheaper than limousine of director in bank ,

you will have peace and happy people across the world , you will not have any crisis, we would not have to pay taxes to support rich banksters, poor people in some forgotten parts of world would not starve from wars ,

victims in Syria ? do you know how many people across the world comited suicide because of economical reasons from crysis ?

Edited June 14, 2012 by vilas

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

yea, west people are fed with propaganda about "freedom" (this freedom has few different meanings depending who is talking about "freedom", especially when it is "freedom to be homeless, unemployed and freedom to be bought as half-slave by international corporation"),

if you want people to live better , if you want people live in peace, there is a solution:

- bomb centrals of international banks corporations, bomb IMF, bomb Bilderberg group meeting, bomb those greed who never have enough and always want more money, although they have cars, helicopters, jets, few houses, holidays anywhere... while others cannot afford cancer treatment which is cheaper than limousine of director in bank ,

you will have peace and happy people across the world , you will not have any crisis, we would not have to pay taxes to support rich banksters, poor people in some forgotten parts of world would not starve from wars ,

victims in Syria ? do you know how many people across the world comited suicide because of economical reasons from crysis ?

Still clinging to your communist ways, eh, Vilas? Those multi-national corporations is what giving the whole globe employment, without them you'd be growing potatoes in some rural shack.

What is being done in Syria is U.S. enforcing Freedom of the Seas concept, which also applies to Iran, meaning: You don't fuck with our commerce lines. If the market priced oil at $85 a barrel and Iran won't sell it to international markets due to their religious convictions, extremism, superstitions, or tariffs, then U.S. Navy will be seen in the vicinity of the Persian Gulf very soon.

[-Snafu- 78]

CIA helped to change or cripple governments in Latin America during cold war. It's what they do. Word elite is those who has power; politicians and other people with big influence (Rupert Murdoch for example). They don't have to share exact same goal, they can co-operate. And yes, these things are done in secret. Only idiots would do it in public.

Proof of it happening in the past is not proof of it happening now. I'm not saying there's no intelligence service involvement, when something big happens in the world you want more intelligence on it and then may decide to aid clandestinely or not. Things are usually complex than "CIA", like the case with South Vietnam, where RVNAF generals were already planning a coup and the US government let it happen. That's just an example, I don't want to get dragged into a debate about Diem and the coup generals.

-Syria isn't far from main NATO bases. I shouldn't say it would be expensive to move some assets to Turkey and maybe Jordan. Also it won't take much time to move some naval assets through the Mediterrian sea.

Which bases? Germany? UK forces are in the process of leaving and US forces are reducing their presence. Turkey may veto use of its bases. More fighting means more refugees coming into the country.

-One of the solutions of the crisis is some little war. Just like WW2 for USA.

WW2 was not a little war! It was "total war", mobilisation of industry, a massive military build-up and intense fighting all over the world for years. Plus, the economic crash was already subsiding by the time it started.

-I hadn't seen little support for the operation against Libya. On the countrary, even here I've seen plenty of people that wanted their countries to bomb Qaddafi. It fully depends on the media campaign. Even now I don't see lack of OEF support.

Support is hard to quantify. Iraq became deeply unpopular, OEF is different as it was the result of attacks on American soil while Iraq was not and was thus more controversial. Support for Libya was never clear here and probably not in the US either.

-US military won't be fully refocused. And it will have a potential force capable to participate in a war against any Middle-Eastern country. Even with all that cutbacks and relocations it's easy to form a joint NATO force that will outnumber any Middle-Eastern air force.

The US still retains a significant capability even with reductions to pre-OEF levels but UK and France don't. UK troop numbers will fall below 100,000. In France the elections were decided by the economy and their military is going to leave Afghanistan earlier than planned IIRC. I don't think Obama wants to intervene unilaterally, if he wants to at all. Plus, the situation in Syria is more complex than it was in Libya.