Syrian Conflict (2011-now)

SWlNE
SWlNE: Back on topic of Syria, I'm not finding the previous Syria related thread:


http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/10/us-mideast-crisis-syria-exclusive-idUSKCN0R91H720150910

Exclusive: Russian troops join combat in Syria - sources

A few extracts from the article:

The sources, speaking to Reuters on condition they not be identified, gave the most forthright account yet from the region of what the United States fears is a deepening Russian military role in Syria's civil war, though one of the Lebanese sources said the number of Russians involved so far was small.

Russia says the Syrian government must be incorporated into a shared global fight against Islamic State, the Islamist group that has taken over large parts of Syria and Iraq. The United States and Assad's regional foes see him as part of the problem.

"We would welcome constructive Russian contributions to the counter-ISIL effort, but we've been clear that it would be unconscionable for any party, including the Russians, to provide any support to the Assad regime," White House spokesman Eric Schultz said, using an acronym for Islamic State.

Reflecting Western concern, Germany's foreign minister warned Russia against increased military intervention, saying the Iran nuclear deal and new U.N. initiatives offered a starting point for a political solution to the conflict.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said reports of growing Russian military activity in Syria were a cause for concern, while France said it made finding a political solution to the crisis more complicated.

Washington has put pressure on countries nearby to deny their air space to Russian flights, a move Moscow denounced on Wednesday as "international boorishness".

Russia has set out the case for supporting Assad in the most forthright terms yet in the past few days, likening the Western approach to Syria to failures in Iraq and Libya.
2 years ago Report
4
SWlNE
SWlNE: Ah this is a strange world. Crazy how things have drastically changed.

The US will now be working with Russia and Iran in the Syrian conflict. Al-Assad 'could remain temporarily in power at the head of a transitional government'. - Who would've guessed this?
Russia looks stronger than the US now and will gain so much if things continue in their favour. Not only continued solid support in Syria but also on their image. No doubt this will help their stance on the Ukraine situation.

More to come.

http://webtv.un.org/watch/ban-ki-moon-un-secretary-general-general-debate-70th-session/4515083059001


(In my opinion, that says to me that Al-Assad will be given power of Syria and there will be a hurrah with a Syrian voting process, throw in some international observers. It will be here where he will win again. Legitimising his position as Syria's president.)
2 years ago Report
1
SWlNE
SWlNE:



Transcript:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/283010015/Vladimir-Putin-s-2015-Address-to-the-United-Nations
(Edited by SWlNE)
2 years ago Report
3
gronchbove
gronchbove: It is all about momentum.

Russia has called the Danglo bluff. The Danglos want to use Syrians as guinea pigs to increase their military for the "never-ending war on bad guys." This would be a cash cow for the US military.

But, the Syrians are seeing their nation destroyed. Syrians are not children. They are not toys for the military.

The insanity of the West is that they want to "decide what is good for Syria" without discussing this with Syrians. Russia is speaking common sense.

At least, the Soviets discussed issues with Cuba's Fidel Castro. They respected him.
2 years ago Report
2
SWlNE
SWlNE:
Listen to both sides and you'll see how they try to rationalise their position. Depending on who you support you'll see 'common sense' in their argument.

To me, Russia is no different than the Western group. They only have different tactics on getting what they want.

Russia is not speaking to the Syrians, only to the Syrian government. The West are not speaking to Syrians. The Syrian government are not speaking to the Syrians. All these so-call Syrian rebel groups are not speaking to the Syrians.

2 years ago Report
1
gronchbove
gronchbove: Yeah, I have to agree with you. The ideology seems to be the 1% elite can control the world.

But, right now, there are basically gun men "killing the Syrian indiscriminately." This is Fact 1. Fact 2 is the country is unliveable as seen by the refugee crisis, right? Fact 3 is tougher to prove, but I believe the Danglos are causing the chaos.

Given those facts, Russia has all the leverage. No real government can cause chaos. Remember, the Syrians allowed Russia to develop a naval base at Tartus years ago, so there is a relationship. Syria has not "voluntarily" created any agreement with the Western assassins destroying the nation.

If you were Syrian, wouldn't you want safety, security and stability?
2 years ago Report
0
SWlNE
SWlNE: Russia's actions will not guarantee safety, security and stability. They will still have to face Al-Assad. Don't forget the problems they had prior to the conflict. I acknowledge that the West interfered further and made matters worse but it was not all peachy.
The goals of Russia isn't to provide safety, security and stability.
What you point out is only that the Syrian government is Russia's ally. Yes, there is no argument there, they are allies.
2 years ago Report
0
SWlNE
SWlNE: Even the goal of the west wasn't and isn't to provide safety, security and stability for the Syrians.

Now it's a case of choosing the lessor of both evils. Russia is standing up as the one who will cause less damage. Best not to lord either side as saviours, they're just playing their parts.
2 years ago Report
1
gronchbove
gronchbove: You are spot on.

You know when I say this, I am being very cynical, but this is what I believe the Danglo goal is: Create chaos so the local population calls for help from the Danglo Army. It is like an arsonist selling fire insurance. These Danglos are evil.

Here is the thing about Russia. Like I said 1) they have already developed a relationship with Syria and 2) they need viable, working societies in the Middle East. They might build a pipeline.

Have you noticed the West has not invested any money in Syria?

Right?

Play West against East to maintain independence.
2 years ago Report
0
SWlNE
SWlNE: I'm looking forward to seeing the US-led coalition's and Russia's move when IS is out of the equation. What further role the US supported armed rebel groups will play in the end and al Assad's role as well.
2 years ago Report
1
gronchbove
gronchbove: Yeah, I have kept close track of this. Assad still controls the Eastern Mediterranean towns where like 70% of the population lives.

The opposition is hopelessly divided. The rebels did take over most of the oil fields, but oil fields are easy to bomb. They can't really be held against the Russians.

I believe the Russians will secure the oil fields and take a percentage of the productivity.

You know the US will be mad! All they care about is oil.

I know many in Syria still love Assad.
2 years ago Report
1
SWlNE
SWlNE:
Plus the Russian presence is on that side as well.
True, the opposition is divided up a lot and Russia-Syria are looking capable of clearing out the opposition. Looking at the time-frame the US-led coalition had and the one Russia is working with, shows that they're fixed and has more information/intelligence on the situation. At least that's one thing to credit the Russians on, they are ahead in their plan.
I was watching an interview with Putin awhile back, he doesn't support the armed rebels. Even the ones the US-led coalition are arming and supporting. And while he now openly agrees with the US-led coaltion that ISIS and al-Qaeda affiliates are a threat, I really think he's also against the other rebels as a whole too.
The argument he puts forward makes the US (and its allies) look as hypocrites (and they are), how can an armed group be supported to over throw a 'legitimate government'? Which country in the West will tolerate it to themselves? Versus creating dialogue as an opposition group.
I don't think the US can pose a reasonable rebuttal to his points.
(Edited by SWlNE)
2 years ago Report
1
gronchbove
gronchbove: Yes, Russians said 3 months.

You know, any serious man would look at the Danglo open-ended time frame and smell a rat! And what is their objective? None. Right?

I think a UN poll showed 96% supporting the Russian position and 4% supporting the US position.

Yes, Russia is serious.

Under international law, when you are in another nation, you must respect their laws. Russia is acting like an adult.

The US actions are 1) childish and 2) illegal.

I agree with you. US had 3 years, it has failed.

The ripple effect is that the entire US foreign policy will now be discredited.
2 years ago Report
1
SWlNE
SWlNE: You've read of Russia's 18 month plan for Syria? I read that they released it in the UN and some reviews on it but I am not finding a soft copy online.
(Edited by SWlNE)
1 year ago Report
1
gronchbove
gronchbove: I got this:

http://www.dw.com/en/russia-plans-for-new-syria-constitution-in-18-months/a-18843548

Russia plans for new Syrian constitution in 18 months.
1 year ago Report
0
SWlNE
SWlNE: Strange isn't it? The US supporting undemocratic removals of leaders and Russia calling for support to the democratic process.

Just shows that it's all a joke.
1 year ago Report
1
gronchbove
gronchbove: Yeah, Empires change. The Danglo empire is in the stage of "decline." It is all talk. Its only goals is to destroy well-functioning societies with its military because it cannot compete economically.

People are leaving the US for Russia.

I wrote a blog called Fallout 4: Calm Before the Storm.

You will see the Syrian soldiers freed by the Russians a couple of days ago.

The world is changing.
1 year ago Report
0
SWlNE
SWlNE: Yeah? Looks more as a rinse and repeat. No one wants to admit to their true agenda so the public will be told a 'holy' or 'good-will' reason. No one wants to say that Syria is a strategic military and economic position hence why we want Assad in power or out of power.
They'll say 'freedom and democracy' because that is palpable to the public and the public can accept that and put their support on that.
1 year ago Report
1
gronchbove
gronchbove: Yes. You ever see the movie 1984?
1 year ago Report
0
SWlNE
SWlNE: No, not yet.
1 year ago Report
0
gronchbove
gronchbove: The movie discussed "euphemisms" or "doublespeak" - just like what you said. Danglos call all their wars after Happy Good Names to hide their crimes.

Most people are shallow and don't get past the titles.

Look at Iraq. The US has basically been involved in genocide in Iraq for three decades.

In Syria, it has been 4 years of genocide.
1 year ago Report
0
SWlNE
SWlNE: I'll check it out.

1 year ago Report
0
gronchbove
gronchbove: It is a very good movie.

It is about tyranny, perpetual war and a life without color only to serve the government.
1 year ago Report
0
gronchbove
gronchbove: George Orwell is the author.





1 year ago Report
2
SWlNE
SWlNE: Looks interesting.

...for some reason, based on the summary, I think that the opposite works better in control of thoughts and ideas. The subtle propaganda vs the direct tyrant approach.
Advertisers use the subtle approach and it works. You have a brand and you create a archetype for it so that the customer feels attached and have an irrational loyalty towards it. Democracy allows for a stable level of control but if you have a Tyrant the thought is to go against the force so there is no 'loyalty' or 'true control' only fear towards the tyrant.

Have you read Edward Bernays' Propaganda?
1 year ago Report
1
gronchbove
gronchbove: The Danglos are involved in both soft and hard propaganda. The sheeple succumb to soft propaganda. Some are die hards.

See Jesus, Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.

Part of the Big Brother tyranny is to 1) collect evidence to falsely imprison you and 2) try to convince you that "Resistance if Futile" just like in the Vorg.

Democracy pretends you have power when you don't.

Sadly, I see the Danglo Capitalism is a soft tyranny compared to the Soviet Communism, which is more direct.

I might have heard of Bernhais.Tell me more.
1 year ago Report
0
Page: 12345678910 ... Last