The Middle East Crisis

[LongHorn]

True.The situation in Bahrain where unarmed proteaterd are being killed is not being highligted in the media just because Bahrain is a west friendly nation.

That is because the scale is much less in Bahrain than in Syria

 

[saeedhk]

^I know but still.Absolutely no coverage.

 

[MR__KHAN__JI]

Re: Syrian Civil War

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...Russia-secret-oil-deal-if-it-drops-Syria.html

 

[MR__KHAN__JI]

Re: Syrian Civil War

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ow-hes-fighting-on-alqaidas-side-8786680.html

 

[Asif khan]

Re: Syrian Civil War

So chemical weapons were used. Has the West even bothered to ask WHO used them? It appears they are set for another fraudulent war.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[bin_pendi_ka_lota]

Iraq War set a dangerous precedent. UN resolution isnt needed anymore to declare a country or leader rogue or declare a war.
We should disband UN and starte preparing for World War III

 

[James]

You kinda wish you could just turn back the clock to 1919 and avoid the bloodshed that would follow for the next century. Ultimately these Middle Eastern countries were created artificially, with no real rhyme or reason and we see these Arab states as melting pots of different sects and ethnicities, exploding today before our eyes.

As mentioned earlier in the thread, Assad's biggest mistake was overreacting to those high school student protests, after that the conflict snowballed out of control and the opposition became hijacked by some unsavoury elements.

Russia and China's stance is more pragmatic than merely commercial interests, even Lord Owen, former UK Foreign Secretary agrees with their stance somewhat. What they're saying is that they don't want to see Assad remain in power in the long-term but they want at least a transition period until democratic elections are held so that instability is avoided and that intervention on behalf of the rebels could empower the likes of the Al Nusra Front even more.

The Russians are also still unhappy over the way the Libyan intervention took place.

Even General Dempsey is saying that there is not a single leader amongst the Syrian opposition who could realistically take over from Assad right now. A lawless Syria post-Assad would be a hotbed of terrorism that would be impossible to contain.

Russia don't want a Chechnya in Syria, home to their only Mediterranean port of Tartus. With NATO withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2014, and with militants roaming freely across the Middle East now, armed by the Gulf states, they IMO see a northward drift of militancy that will explode in their laps. China also are facing their issues with militancy themselves.

The Russian FM is saying that western military intervention without a UN mandate would be illegal.

Whatever happens in terms of a western military strike though, certainly this conflict has been a throwback to the Cold War days with the west and Russia once again at loggerheads.

Super post, only bit I would change is at the start. 1919 to 1913 and then you do have a hundred years. We didn't need WW1 either.

 

[waqar goraya]

Why would Assad use chemical weapons to attract world criticism at this stage? Can he gain even slender of advantage by using these weapons?

I also read somewhere that civilians were targeted in the attack?

 

[saeedhk]

^This.I have been saying this forever.He would never use chemical weapons because he knows that the west is only using for an excuse to attack Syria and he does not want to provide the excuse.Also,the people that were killed were civilians and not foreign terrorists.

 

[James]

I think it's an Al-Qaeda troll job. Baiting the West with stolen nerve gas.

 

[Bashira_taeli]

A Syrian Sunni lady talk about whats going on her country

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/L8p6GPtubYs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[bin_pendi_ka_lota]

I think it's an Al-Qaeda troll job. Baiting the West with stolen nerve gas.

This theory is reserved for post Syria demolition.

 

[Robert]

So chemical weapons were used. Has the West even bothered to ask WHO used them?

Yes, the UN weapons inspectors went to check.

 

[Bashira_taeli]

To me it sounds like a propaganda. How can these animals ever get to step on an airline, which took them thousands of miles away? Despite the belief, If there is any actuality of it, I would be prompted to believe that these mercenaries have gone to Syria after taking command from the same people who are behind the sectarian violence, directing them in Pakistan.

What makes you think these guys cant board planes?

Both CNN and BBC have carried out reports about taliban fighters going to Syria from Pakistan.

Pakistan Taliban arrive in Syria, and more are to come, CNN told

...The commander of the Pakistan Taliban, Abdul Rashid Abbasi, has told CNN that the first batch of fighters has arrived in Syria and established a command and control center to launch operational activities alongside Syrian rebel fighters. Abbasi, a close associate of Pakistan Taliban head Hakeemullah Mehsud, told CNN that 120 fighters are already in Syria.
The Taliban commander went on to say that another batch of fighters made up of 150 men will arrive in Syria this week....

CNN is unable to independently confirm that members of the Pakistan Taliban are inside Syria. CNN journalists have previously been inside Syria and seen foreign fighters participate in the country's civil war, which sprang from unrest sparked in the spring of 2011.

Abbasi said the fighters were sent after the Pakistan Taliban received a request from the al Qaeda operational commander in Syria, Abu Omar Baghdadi. ...
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/15/world/taliban-joining-syrian-fighters

Pakistan Taliban 'sets up a base in Syria'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23285245

There are confirmed reports of US and British nationals going there for Jihad. Someof them have also been killed.

Now it seems that Boko Haram fighters have also joined there AlQaeeda comrades in Syria.

 

[Bashira_taeli]

Yes, the UN weapons inspectors went to check.

It was never in the UN mandate to check WHO carried out the attacks.

 

[Robert]

It was never in the UN mandate to check WHO carried out the attacks.

Bit pointless going, then.

 

[Markhor]

So chemical weapons were used. Has the West even bothered to ask WHO used them? It appears they are set for another fraudulent war.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

How can the inspectors tell though ? Sarin gas dissipates within 30 minutes so no concrete evidence can be found.

Prime Minister David Cameron has recalled Parliament and there will be a vote on military action tomorrow. UK public opinion is mainly against military action from all the polling done.

Some have queried whether intervention would be legal, quite rightly so what with the shadows of Iraq still lurking, but it'll come under 'responsibility to protect' or R2P, which is a vague framework that came out of the Kosovo and Rwanda conflicts.

 

[Energetic]

War on Islam. Obviously this was set-up by the evil American government. This will be one step close to their main goal Iran and then Pakistan. Just a real real shame where we number 1.5 billion almost 60 Muslim countries and yet we cannot defend ourselves.

 

[majiz]

http://web.archive.org/web/20130130...chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html


http://in.news.yahoo.com/us-backed-plan-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-syria-045648224.html


http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013...-chemical-weapons-only-if-they-were-used.html


http://www.globalresearch.ca/russia...ack-was-planned-provocation-by-rebels/5346604

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...es-Syrian-rebels-of-chemical-weapons-use.html

 

[saeedhk]

Saudi Arabia had sent 1200 death row inmates to fight in Syria.

 

[waqar goraya]

How can the inspectors tell though ? Sarin gas dissipates within 30 minutes so no concrete evidence can be found.

Prime Minister David Cameron has recalled Parliament and there will be a vote on military action tomorrow. UK public opinion is mainly against military action from all the polling done.

Some have queried whether intervention would be legal, quite rightly so what with the shadows of Iraq still lurking, but it'll come under 'responsibility to protect' or R2P, which is a vague framework that came out of the Kosovo and Rwanda conflicts.

Have you read it. ? "Every thing is fair in war and love" comes true here !

CIA files prove America helped Saddam as he gassed Iran

The US government may be considering military action in response to chemical strikes near Damascus. But a generation ago, America’s military and intelligence communities knew about and did nothing to stop a series of nerve gas attacks far more devastating than anything Syria has seen, Foreign Policy has learned.

In 1988, during the waning days of Iraq’s war with Iran, the United States learned through satellite imagery that Iran was about to gain a major strategic advantage by exploiting a hole in Iraqi defences. US intelligence officials conveyed the location of the Iranian troops to Iraq, fully aware that Saddam Hussein’s military would attack with chemical weapons, including sarin, a lethal nerve agent.The Iraqis used mustard gas and sarin prior to four major offensives in early 1988 that relied on US satellite imagery, maps and other intelligence. These attacks helped to tilt the war in Iraq’s favour and bring Iran to the negotiating table, and they ensured that the Reagan administration’s long-standing policy of securing an Iraqi victory would succeed. But they were also the last in a series of chemical strikes stretching back several years that the Reagan administration knew about and didn’t disclose.

US officials have long denied acquiescing to Iraqi chemical attacks, insisting that Saddam’s government never announced he was going to use the weapons. But retired Air Force Col. Rick Francona, who was a military attaché in Baghdad during the 1988 strikes, paints a different picture.

“The Iraqis never told us that they intended to use nerve gas. They didn’t have to. We already knew,” he told Foreign Policy.

According to recently declassified CIA documents and interviews with former intelligence officials like Francona, the US had firm evidence of Iraqi chemical attacks beginning in 1983. At the time, Iran was publicly alleging that illegal chemical attacks were carried out on its forces, and was building a case to present to the United Nations. But it lacked the evidence implicating Iraq

In contrast to today’s wrenching debate over whether the United States should intervene to stop alleged chemical weapons attacks by the Syrian government, the United States applied a cold calculus three decades ago to Saddam Hussein’s widespread use of chemical weapons against his enemies and his own people.

The Reagan administration decided that it was better to let the attacks continue if they might turn the tide of the war. And even if they were discovered, the CIA wagered that international outrage and condemnation would be muted.

It has been previously reported that the United States provided tactical intelligence to Iraq at the same time that officials suspected Saddam would use chemical weapons. But the CIA documents, which sat almost entirely unnoticed in a trove of declassified material at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland, combined with exclusive interviews with former intelligence officials, reveal new details about the depth of the knowledge United States possessed of how and when Iraq employed the deadly agents. They show that senior US officials were being regularly informed about the scale of the nerve gas attacks.

Francona, an experienced Middle East hand and Arabic linguist who served in the National Security Agency and the Defence Intelligence Agency, said he first became aware of Iraq’s use of chemical weapons against Iran in 1984, while serving as air attaché in Amman, Jordan. The information he saw clearly showed that the Iraqis had used Tabun nerve agent (also known as “GA”) against Iranian forces in southern Iraq.

But it was the express policy of Reagan to ensure an Iraqi victory in the war, whatever the cost.

In March 1984, the CIA reported that Iraq had “begun using nerve agents on the Al Basrah front and likely will be able to employ it in militarily significant quantities by late this fall”.

The initial wave of Iraqi attacks, in 1983, used mustard agent.

Hard evidence of the Iraqi chemical attacks came to light in 1984. But that did little to deter Saddam from using the lethal agents, including in strikes against his own people.

The Defence Department had proposed an intelligence-sharing programme with the Iraqis in 1986. But according to Francona, it was nixed because the CIA and the State Department viewed Saddam Hussein as “anathema” and his officials as “thugs”.

IRAQIS UNDER PRESSURE: The situation changed in 1987. CIA reconnaissance satellites picked up clear indications that the Iranians were concentrating large numbers of troops and equipment east of the city of Basrah, according to Francona, who was then serving with the Defence Intelligence Agency. What concerned DIA analysts the most was that the satellite imagery showed that the Iranians had discovered a gaping hole in the Iraqi lines southeast of Basrah. The seam had opened up at the junction between a corps deployed east of the city and another deployed to the southeast, in and around the hotly contested Fao Peninsula.

The satellites detected Iranian engineering and bridging units being secretly moved to deployment areas opposite the gap in the Iraqi lines, indicating that this was going to be where the main force of the annual Iranian spring offensive was going to fall, Francona said.

In late 1987, the DIA analysts in Francona’s shop in Washington wrote a Top Secret Codeword report partially entitled “At The Gates of Basrah”, warning that the Iranian 1988 spring offensive was going to be bigger than all previous spring offensives, and this offensive stood a very good chance of breaking through the Iraqi lines and capturing Basrah.

The report warned that if Basrah fell, the Iraqi military would collapse and Iran would win the war.

President Reagan read the report and, according to Francona, wrote a note in the margin addressed to Secretary of Defence Frank Carlucci: “An Iranian victory is unacceptable.”

The sarin attacks then followed. CIA analysts could not precisely determine the Iranian casualty figures because they lacked access to Iranian officials and documents. But the agency gauged the number of dead as somewhere between “hundreds” and “thousands” in each of the four cases where chemical weapons were used prior to a military offensive.

By 1988, US intelligence was flowing freely to Saddam’s military. That March, Iraq launched a nerve gas attack on the Kurdish village of Halabja in northern Iraq.

A month later, the Iraqis used aerial bombs and artillery shells filled with sarin against Iranian troop concentrations on the Fao Peninsula southeast of Basrah, helping the Iraqi forces win a major victory and recapture the entire peninsula. The success of the Fao Peninsula offensive also prevented the Iranians from launching their much-anticipated offensive to capture Basrah. According to Francona, Washington was very pleased with the result because the Iranians never got a chance to launch their offensive.

In the ensuing months, Francona reported, the Iraqis used sarin in massive quantities three more times in conjunction with massed artillery fire and smoke to disguise the use of nerve agents. Each offensive was hugely successful, in large part because of the increasingly sophisticated use of mass quantities of nerve agents.

The last of these attacks, called the Blessed Ramazan Offensive, was launched by the Iraqis in April 1988 and involved the largest use of sarin nerve agent employed by the Iraqis to date. For a quarter century, no chemical attack came close to the scale of Saddam’s unconventional assaults. Until, perhaps, the strikes last week outside of Damascus.

http://dawn.com/news/1038806/cia-files-prove-america-helped-saddam-as-he-gassed-iran

 

[Asif khan]

Re: Syrian Civil War

Yes, the UN weapons inspectors went to check.

Have the UN inspectors disclosed WHO used them? For all we know it could be the rebels or other external forces who perhaps stand more to gain from a western intervention.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Asif khan]

Re: Syrian Civil War

How can the inspectors tell though ? Sarin gas dissipates within 30 minutes so no concrete evidence can be found.

Prime Minister David Cameron has recalled Parliament and there will be a vote on military action tomorrow. UK public opinion is mainly against military action from all the polling done.

Some have queried whether intervention would be legal, quite rightly so what with the shadows of Iraq still lurking, but it'll come under 'responsibility to protect' or R2P, which is a vague framework that came out of the Kosovo and Rwanda conflicts.

Pretty pointless if all they were after was a pretext. Oh well perhaps Mr.Cameron is now a strong contender foe the next Nobel peace award.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[saeedhk]

It is all propaganda to attack Syria.

 

[bin_pendi_ka_lota]

Bit pointless going, then.

You have to ascertain if crime was committed? This is how far French UK and US are ahead of UN/reality.

 

[James]

The UN is so useless.

 

[Pakz]

Thanks for the compliments and yes its mainly Iran - the West and their allies such as Saudi Arabia/Turkey/Qatar and the other Gulf states want to remove Iran's number one ally in the region which is the Assad regime.

Saudis and the Gulf states also see Iran as a threat.

What started as an internal Syrian dispute has descended into a regional proxy war between the west, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states on one side and Iran, Syria, Russia and China on the other.

Thankfully we're not - plus we have enough conflicts as it is !



These western air strikes could tilt the war in the rebels' favour but its a stalemate right now and its difficult to say.

After the Arab Spring, the new democracies have been unable to unite and stabilise the country. Egypt has suffered from a power struggle between the civilian government led by the Muslim Brotherhood and the military who have deposed the MB from office. Tunisia's Islamist government has faced protests and the Syrian conflict pretty much began in 2011 when the Arab Spring started. Libya is also unstable with different warring factions opposing each other. Iraq is still in a sectarian civil war.

There is the "Muslim ummah" for you in 2013 !

The whole region is in flux right now and one can only hope the bloodshed ends.

Thanks for the Information. All these 'Islamic countries' seem to be the least united out of all the countries going through corruption. Do you think Morsi's dismissal was justified or a corruption lead process? It's strange how it started in Tunisia and then set off and was thought to be the changing point in all the arab countries, well it seems like it's just as worst.

As for the 'Muslim Ummah'... It's mostly due to each and every Muslim dividing into groups, having no intention to discuss, and build no sort 'Islamic political system' if you would agree with that? Is it a period to try another apporoach? I think it's a problem between muslims collectively and individually. Even in the more developed countries where Muslims live, you see a lot of struggles without muslim communities, as people of the society and cultural indifference's. The quest for true liberty it is at the end of the day, now how you find that as a individual and/or as a collective society is up to reflecting on a broader scale rather than just letting it be...

 

[saeedhk]

They are saying that the strikes are intended to punish Assad not force regime change.

 

[saeedhk]

Thanks for the Information. All these 'Islamic countries' seem to be the least united out of all the countries going through corruption. Do you think Morsi's dismissal was justified or a corruption lead process? It's strange how it started in Tunisia and then set off and was thought to be the changing point in all the arab countries, well it seems like it's just as worst.

As for the 'Muslim Ummah'... It's mostly due to each and every Muslim dividing into groups, having no intention to discuss, and build no sort 'Islamic political system' if you would agree with that? Is it a period to try another apporoach? I think it's a problem between muslims collectively and individually. Even in the more developed countries where Muslims live, you see a lot of struggles without muslim communities, as people of the society and cultural indifference's. The quest for true liberty it is at the end of the day, now how you find that as a individual and/or as a collective society is up to reflecting on a broader scale rather than just letting it be...

The US and Saudi Arabia were behind Morsi's ouster.Saudi Arabia reportedly payed $1 billion to then army to stage the coup.

 

[oyei]

Well this was predicted by many after 2001 incident, and I apologize for calling them conspiracy crazy out of this world nuts. But, if those who predicted this thn Syria is not the end game, we will see more lives loss in future.

 

[Bashira_taeli]

So it seems that the "evidence" based on which US will launch missiles on Syria came from Israel.

Israeli intelligence seen as central to US case against Syria

While Israel will almost certainly take no direct part in a military strike, Israeli intelligence information is widely believed to have played a central role in enabling the US’s adamant conviction that Assad’s regime fired chemical weapons at civilians outside Damascus last Wednesday, killing hundreds of people and wounding over a thousand, according to Syrian rebel groups.

A large delegation of senior Israeli security officials is currently in Washington holding talks with top administration officials led by US National Security Adviser Susan Rice.

In Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held his second meeting in two days with his security cabinet to discuss the Syria crisis on Tuesday afternoon.

“The State of Israel is ready for any scenario,” Netanyahu said after the meeting. “We are not part of the civil war in Syria but if we identify any attempt whatsoever to harm us, we will respond and we will respond in strength.”

Prior to the session, called to discuss the implications for Israel of a possible strike, a top Israeli minister said it would be inconceivable for the international community to allow President Bashar Assad’s regime to continue killing children with chemical weapons.

Naftali Bennett, the minister of economics who sits on the security cabinet, issued what amounted to a demand for military intervention against Assad. “It cannot be that less than 100 kilometers from Israel, children are being gassed to death and we let the world remain silent and ignore it,” Bennett said.

The Israeli team in Washington, headed by Netanyahu’s outgoing National Security Adviser Yaakov Amidror, also includes senior Defense Ministry official Maj.-Gen. (Res) Amos Gilad, the head of the IDF’s Planning Directorate Nimrod Sheffer, and the head of the IDF’s Military Intelligence Research Branch Gen. Itai Brun. It was Brun, the IDF’s top intelligence analyst, who in April shocked the international community by declaring that the army was quite certain that Assad had used chemical weapons against rebel forces in Syria in March.

This time, too, Israeli military intelligence has reportedly played a key role in providing evidence of Assad’s chemical weapons use. On Friday, Israel’s Channel 2 reported that the weapons were fired by the 155th Brigade of the 4th Armored Division of the Syrian Army, a division under the command of the Syrian president’s brother, Maher Assad. The nerve gas shells were fired from a military base in a mountain range to the west of Damascus, the TV report said.

The report did not state the source of its information. But subsequently, Germany’s Focus magazine reported that an IDF intelligence unit was listening in on senior Syrian officials when they discussed the chemical attack. According to the Focus report Saturday, a squad specializing in wire-tapping within the IDF’s prestigious 8200 intelligence unit intercepted a conversation between high-ranking regime officials regarding the use of chemical agents at the time of the attack. The report, which cited an ex-Mossad official who insisted on remaining anonymous, said the intercepted conversation proved that Assad’s regime was responsible for the use of nonconventional weapons.

Giora Inbar, the former head of the IDF’s liaison unit in southern Lebanon, said Tuesday that Israeli military intelligence made a priority of intelligence-gathering in Syria, was very well-informed, and was widely trusted. The United States was “aware of” Israel’s intelligence on the doings of the Syrian regime, he said in a Channel 2 interview, “and relies upon it.”

The New York Times on Tuesday quoted an Israeli official who suggested that the planner of the chemical rocket attack did not intend to inflict such high casualties.

“It’s quite likely that there was kind of an operational mistake here,” the official was quoted as saying. “I don’t think they wanted to kill so many people, especially so many children. Maybe they were trying to hit one place or to get one effect and they got a much greater effect than they thought.”

In his speech Monday, portending US-led military intervention and excoriating Assad’s regime for its “inexcusable” chemical strike, Secretary of State John Kerry stated flatly that “chemical weapons were used in Syria” and indicated that the US had received “additional information about this attack, and that information is being compiled and reviewed together with our partners.”

A statement issued by the White House Monday noted that the Israeli team in Washington also discussed Iran and other regional issues with their American counterparts, and that the meeting was part of a series of regular discussions within the framework of the good relations between the two countries.

A senior Syrian official on Monday issued a first direct warning that if attacked, his country would retaliate against Israel. Khalaf Muftah, a senior Baath Party official who used to serve as Syria’s assistant information minister, said in a radio interview that Damascus would consider Israel “behind the [Western] aggression and [it] will therefore come under fire.”

“We have strategic weapons and we’re capable of responding,” he said. “Normally the strategic weapons are aimed at Israel.”

His words were echoed by Iranian officials, who on Monday shrugged off the threat of a US attack on its close ally Syria, but said that if such a strike were to take place, Israel would suffer.

“[The Americans] are incapable of starting a new war in the region, because of their lacking economic capabilities and their lack of morale,” said Mohammad Reza Naqdi, the commander of the Republican Guards’ elite Basij force.

“No military attack will be waged against Syria,” said Hossein Sheikholeslam, a member of Iran’s Islamic Consultative Assembly. “Yet, if such an incident takes place, which is impossible, the Zionist regime will be the first victim of a military attack on Syria.”

Israeli military officials have indicated they believe it unlikely that Syria would target Israel if the US or others intervened, because an Israeli response could bring down the Assad regime, but Israel has reportedly been taking security precautions just in case.

“There would no logic in Assad attacking Israel,” said Inbar on Tuesday. “But remember, we live in a jungle.”

http://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-intelligence-seen-as-central-to-us-case-against-syria/

 

[Robert]

You have to ascertain if crime was committed? This is how far French UK and US are ahead of UN/reality.

Strange comment.... Yes, of course they should ascertain that before deciding to open fire.

Anyway Cameron will address the Commons tomorrow and will have some persuading to do before the MPs vote for strikes, I think.

 

[James]

Kerry is trying to get Russia on-side.

 

[wasim-fan]

Well this was predicted by many after 2001 incident, and I apologize for calling them conspiracy crazy out of this world nuts. But, if those who predicted this thn Syria is not the end game, we will see more lives loss in future.

Good Lord. Brainwashing most be working at some level.

 

[bin_pendi_ka_lota]

Strange comment.... Yes, of course they should ascertain that before deciding to open fire.

Anyway Cameron will address the Commons tomorrow and will have some persuading to do before the MPs vote for strikes, I think.

They have allready ascertained that... I know Iran is a competitor to Saud/Qatar dictators and they are ready to fund Tomhawks but I am worried about Chinese position in all this. Its not just Russian but their interest too. And they can fund Russians. We dont want a UN where two players will start Vetoing any resolution US UK France proposes.

UN can not be undermined by powerful nations. It has been so far successful to avoid a full scale war.

 

[DRS]

What makes you think these guys cant board planes?

Both CNN and BBC have carried out reports about Taliban fighters going to Syria from Pakistan.





There are confirmed reports of US and British nationals going there for Jihad. Someof them have also been killed.

Now it seems that Boko Haram fighters have also joined there AlQaeeda comrades in Syria.

I am confounded to be honest, as the last time these people boarded a plane, a catastrophe occurred in America and claimed numerous lives. Interestingly, It were american who were funding the same jingonist in Afghanistan fighting the Soviets preceding the attacks on two towers which subsequently turned them into terrorist. How are americans justifying attacking key Military installations in the name of Punishing syria for their Chemical attack which is definitely going to help FSA which does includes the same animals they are fighting against in Afghanistan?

Regarding boarding the plane, I am immensely curious which airport do they use, more specifically the airline and Assad while knowing that these mercenaries are being transported, doesn't shots down those planes.

 

[oyei]

I am confounded to be honest, as the last time these people boarded a plane, a catastrophe occurred in America and claimed numerous lives. Interestingly, It were american who were funding the same jingonist in Afghanistan fighting the Soviets preceding the attacks on two towers which subsequently turned them into terrorist. How are americans justifying attacking key Military installations in the name of Punishing syria for their Chemical attack which is definitely going to help FSA which does includes the same animals they are fighting against in Afghanistan?

Regarding boarding the plane, I am immensely curious which airport do they use, more specifically the airline and Assad while knowing that these mercenaries are being transported, doesn't shots down those planes.

It was a special flight and everyone had first class seat with first class meal.

 

[saeedhk]

I am confounded to be honest, as the last time these people boarded a plane, a catastrophe occurred in America and claimed numerous lives. Interestingly, It were american who were funding the same jingonist in Afghanistan fighting the Soviets preceding the attacks on two towers which subsequently turned them into terrorist. How are americans justifying attacking key Military installations in the name of Punishing syria for their Chemical attack which is definitely going to help FSA which does includes the same animals they are fighting against in Afghanistan?

Regarding boarding the plane, I am immensely curious which airport do they use, more specifically the airline and Assad while knowing that these mercenaries are being transported, doesn't shots down those planes.

Good post.The rebels are the same people(AL Qaeda) that the west is bombing in Somalia,Mali,Afghanistan and Yemen.When it fits their agenda,they are freedom fighters else they are terrorists.Pathetic.

 

[Robert]

Good post.The rebels are the same people(AL Qaeda) that the west is bombing in Somalia,Mali,Afghanistan and Yemen.When it fits their agenda,they are freedom fighters else they are terrorists.Pathetic.

For one thing, I think you've made a big oversimplification regarding the makeup of "the rebels", if the previous posts are much to go on.

For another, NATO will not want any Syrian WMD to fall into Islamist hands.

 

[Saeed]

What makes you think these guys cant board planes?

Both CNN and BBC have carried out reports about taliban fighters going to Syria from Pakistan.





There are confirmed reports of US and British nationals going there for Jihad. Someof them have also been killed.

Now it seems that Boko Haram fighters have also joined there AlQaeeda comrades in Syria.

CNN is propaganda machine.

 

[Saeed]

War on Islam. Obviously this was set-up by the evil American government. This will be one step close to their main goal Iran and then Pakistan. Just a real real shame where we number 1.5 billion almost 60 Muslim countries and yet we cannot defend ourselves.

60 Muslim countries can't defend themselves because they are not islamic government,they are muslim government.

 

[DRS]

.

 

[Sjaloha]

.

This is one guy who makes too much sense.

 

[pakistanalltheway]

Syria: Phone Calls 'Prove' Regime Behind Attack
The US is certain an alleged poison gas attack in Syria was carried out by the regime of President Bashar al Assad after listening to intercepted telephone calls, according to reports.

US intelligence services overheard panicked conversations in which a Syrian defence official demanded an explanation for the attack from a leader of a chemical weapons unit, according to the Foreign Policy website.

The phone calls, as well as photo evidence and local accounts, are reportedly part of the portfolio of evidence the US is preparing before proceeding with a response - possibly a military strike - in the coming days.

But the intercept raises questions about the nature of last Wednesday's attack in the capital Damascus that is believed to have killed hundreds of people, including civilians.

If a Syrian defence official was questioning the chemical weapons unit about the assault, it raises the possibility that it was a rogue event.

Or was it cleared at the highest levels, without the say-so from mid-level defence officials?

"It's unclear where control lies," one US intelligence official told Foreign Policy.

"Is there just some sort of general blessing to use these things? Or are there explicit orders for each attack?"

The Syrian regime has denied carrying out the attack, saying it was actually the rebels who were behind it with the aim of portraying the Assad government in a bad light.

US officials are mulling what type of military strike in Syria might deter future chemical weapons attacks and are trying to assess how President Assad would respond, two officials said.

The Obama administration has insisted the Syrian government must be punished for its alleged use of toxic gas on civilians last week but said regime change was not on the agenda.

US intelligence agencies are preparing a report laying out the evidence against Mr Assad's government on chemical weapons.

The classified version would be sent to key members of Congress, and a declassified version would be released publicly.

However, the White House says it was already convinced and was planning a possible military response and is seeking support from international partners including Britain and France.

The five permanent members of the UN Security Council - the UK, US, China, France and Russia - have discussed a British draft resolution that would allow military action in Syria.

But the resolution has stalled due to Russian "intransigence," the US said.

Meanwhile, a UK parliament vote on Thursday will not authorise direct military involvement in Syria as the British government indicated there would be fresh efforts to achieve the UN resolution.

Any direct action by UK forces will require a further vote in the House of Commons once the UN has considered a report from weapons inspectors investigating the Damascus attack.

British Prime Minister David Cameron insists any use of force would only be a response to the use of banned chemical weapons and would be legal and proportionate.

http://news.sky.com/story/1134277/syria-phone-calls-prove-regime-behind-attack

Propaganda at its best . The US is itching to do something but not so to remove Assad just to show Iran it means business .

 

[OZGOD]

Here's a letter from Republican Ted Poe, published on Fox News. This is a good example of the general feeling I get about the case for military action in the US - nobody wants it. Not even Republicans (except John McCain obviously).

If Obama plans to strike Syria, he must first ask Congress for the green light


By Rep. Ted Poe
Published August 28, 2013
FoxNews.com

The U.S. appears to be preparing for yet another war. Secretary of State John Kerry delivered the prelude for the president’s newest war earlier this week.

In his speech, Kerry described the brutal actions of the Assad Regime against the Syrian people. Indeed, these actions are horrific. Americans are compassionate; our hearts ache for the Syrian people. But Secretary Kerry's performance, his decision to beat the war drums, has left Americans with more questions than answers.

What is our imminent national security threat that would give us cause to attack Syria? There is none. If the administration has evidence to the contrary, it should present it to Congress and let us take a vote.




The Obama White House should not be firing missiles into Syria and launching America into another war without Congressional approval.


Who are our "allies"?

There are two main "groups" of actors in Syria. On one side we have "the rebels" trying to oust Assad from power.

But who are they?

We know the most powerful among them is Al Nusra, an affiliate of Al Qaeda. So is America now joining forces with Al Qaeda? (Last I heard we were at war with Al Qaeda) Also on “the rebels” side are Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and numerous rebel factions from patriots to criminals to terrorists and outside mercenaries.

The roots of the Syrian civil war are based on a religious conflict that dates back to the year 630. Militants on both sides are killing each other in the name of religion, and the people of Syria are caught in the middle.

Lining up on side of the Assad regime are the nations of Russia and Iran, including its proxy terrorist group Hezbollah, who have vowed to stand by their ally. What do all three of these nations have in common? They hate America.

What is our plan of action? Earlier this summer, the administration wanted to arm the rebels in Syria with weapons. Now, months later, the conflict has escalated even further and more people have died.

Since the first planned failed, the White House is moving to its next plan--direct U.S. military intervention. Fire some missiles at Syria and send America to war.

Here we go again.

What will be the consequences of this war? More people will die. American troops will also be in danger. Unlike the Libyans, Syrian forces actually have the ability to retaliate against us.

Hasn’t the president learned from Libya that there are long term, serious consequences for getting the U.S. involved in someone else’s war?

While our weapons systems are second to none, unlike Qaddafi's guerrilla armies, Assad possesses the capability to strike back with advanced anti-ship missiles, potentially leading to U.S. military casualties.

Once the U.S. strikes, there is no telling how Assad, a dictator who has already shown a willingness to murder thousands of his own people, or his backer Iran will respond.

Iran will not let Assad go down without a fight. This will be the beginning of an escalated crisis in Syria at the very least....or it could be Act I of a much larger war with Iran.

Syria's other ally, Russia, said that U.S. military intervention would be catastrophic. There will be consequences for the United States if it gets directly involved in this war that will extend far beyond the borders of Syria.

Congress, not unelected members of the administration, should fully consider them before we proceed with military action.

What is the legal authority of the president to go to war? According to a former professor of constitutional law: “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."

I could not have said it better myself. That sentence was uttered by candidate Barack Obama in 2007.

By his own logic, it would be illegal for him to take the United States to war without the approval of Congress because there is no imminent threat to our nation.

Military intervention in Syria would be a violation of the War Powers Resolution. According to the Constitution, it is Congress, and Congress alone, that has the power to declare war. James Madison said, ‘‘The Constitution supposes what history of all governments demonstrates, that the executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it.” Madison was right on the money.

Assad may have crossed the administration's redline, but he is a dictator. President Obama is not.

This is a democracy where the Constitution is paramount -- no president is above the law. The law of the land requires that the Executive and Legislative Branches make this decision together.

After all, Congress represents the will of the people. And according to a Reuters poll taken days ago, only 25% of Americans support military action in Syria. Support from one quarter of the population hardly provides the president with a mandate to unilaterally lead our nation into yet another war.

The White House should not be firing missiles into another country and launching America into another war without Congressional approval.

Mr. President, you must call Congress back from recess immediately to take a vote on a military strike on Syria. Assad may have crossed a red line but that does not give you the authority to redline the Constitution.



Republican Ted Poe represents Texas' Second District in the U.S. House of Representatives. He is a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee and serves as chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Non-proliferation and Trade.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013...t-ask-congress-for-green-light/#ixzz2dIyu8Zcz

 

[majiz]

Yes, of course they should ascertain that before deciding to open fire.

.

they're going to find assad responsible, if they havn't already, but why would anyone believe anything they say.

and they're going to attack syria, i guarantee it, and it will be propaganda fueled madness.

 

[OZGOD]

Looks like the Tomahawks aren't going to hit Syria this week after all. Poms are getting cold feet and so are a lot of American politicians. I think they may be having second thoughts serving as Al-Qaeda's air force in the civil war.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/world/middleeast/syria.html?hp

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/28/syria-crisis-un-strike-sanction-civilians

 

[majiz]

Looks like the Tomahawks aren't going to hit Syria this week after all. Poms are getting cold feet and so are a lot of American politicians. I think they may be having second thoughts serving as Al-Qaeda's air force in the civil war.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/world/middleeast/syria.html?hp

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/28/syria-crisis-un-strike-sanction-civilians

they're still definitely going to attack. if they don't, well i'd be damned. i swear i'll stop posting here forever.

 

[KingKhanWC]

KKWC don't necessarily think Russia is a friend of the Muslim world. The only reason they are supporting Assad is because they see the Syrian opposition as Islamist-dominated and Moscow would much rather see secular authoritarian governments as opposed to democratically elected Islamist governments.

Here is an article explaining Russia's stance by a Russian director of research Ruslan Pukhov.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/07/opinion/why-russia-supports-syria.html?_r=0

It talks about not overstating Russia's support for Assad:





This sums up Russia's position in all of this.



Western hypocrisy is very clear to see but it doesn't make Russia's motives any better.

Russia is not an ally of the Zionist Nato group who will pursue their paranoid vision of protecting Israel regardless of the costs. Russia is also part of an alliance, the SCO which includes China which was developed for various reasons but is definitely orgainsed to combat Nato and western interference against territories close to their borders. Of course Russia will think carefully before using their nuclear deterrent but Syria is on the road to Iran and that;s where Russia will retaliate. If Syria is taken over like Libya the relationship between the US and Russia will hit an all time low, cold war days again.

I don't think it's even possible to say Russia's motives in the region are not better, it's not Russia who has been terrorising numerous countries in the middle east and Asia because they don't have a fanatic agenda, the Zionist Jews and Christians who want to bring about the end of the world and the arrival of their Messiah. Russia on the other hand is an orthodox Christian nation whose ideological views are totally different. There is a lot more to this than just big powers playing for their interests.

 

[KingKhanWC]

There's a difference between symmetrical and assymetric combat though. In a conventional war such as would happen with an initial invasion (which I repeat will never happen, ask anyone living here in the US if they think that the American public would accept that in any form and the answer will be NO) the US military would blow Syria and probably most other non-great power militaries away. It's what happens AFTER that that the US and any other conventional military in any country would struggle with - fighting against suicide bombers, IEDs, people in a jeep with a rocket launcher, etc.

It would not be a conventional war because Syria will not be attacked by the army but the air force and the navy will be mostly doing cowardly strikes from fighter jets and warships. It cannot be a conventional war because it's already a asymmetric war with the western nations backing terrorist mercenaries aka Al-Ciada.

What will happen with be standoff cruise missile strikes, Predator attacks, and funding opposition groups to destabilize things (something all powers have been doing since the time of the Romans and probably before them). Someone else will be doing the bleeding and dying however.

Until it's Iran's time when the whole region will be on fire with oil prices rising so much crippling the western economies ,this is when you will see the citizens of the aggressor nations feeling the outcomes of war. I live in the west too but the citizens here deserve war hardship for their weakness to combat their governments state terrorism on a massive global scale.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Looks like the Tomahawks aren't going to hit Syria this week after all. Poms are getting cold feet and so are a lot of American politicians. I think they may be having second thoughts serving as Al-Qaeda's air force in the civil war.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/world/middleeast/syria.html?hp

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/28/syria-crisis-un-strike-sanction-civilians

I think it's an Al-Qaeda troll job. Baiting the West with stolen nerve gas.

No disrespect guys but I would have thought by now everyone would know those you call Al-Qaeda are controlled by the western governments mostly the CIA. Ten years ago when people said Al-Ciada is just a made up group of western mercenaries doing their bidding and recruiting some brainwashed individuals this was laughed off as a conspiracy theory. Today the US and UK openly confirm they are giving weapons and funding these terrorists who they have supposedly bombed around the world for over a decade. I know it may be hard to accept but it's time you just accepted the fact the west is in coalition with Al-Qaeda even if you cannot accept the truth Al-Qaeda was their illegitimate birth and 911 was an inside job.

Chemical weapons were given to the paid mercenaries aka terrorists aka Al-Qaeda to attack Syrians as a justification for attack. Your tax money along with mine has funded this henious attack and hundreds of suicide bombings in Syria over the last two years.

 

[Kianig89]

Read in a couple of papers that if West are to attack Syria then Russia ready to attack on Saudi Arabia and Russian President has issued an urgent action memorandum. Well i hope some sense prevails in these leaders as on both sides the loss will be of Muslims

http://www.syrianews.cc/saudi-army-alert-assad-syria/
http://jang.com.pk/jang/aug2013-daily/29-08-2013/main.htm

 

[Saeed]

I hope russia leave medina and mecca alone or the might attract lot of attention if situation do get that far.

 

[saeedhk]

For one thing, I think you've made a big oversimplification regarding the makeup of "the rebels", if the previous posts are much to go on.

For another, NATO will not want any Syrian WMD to fall into Islamist hands.

Well,that is not an oversimplification.Most of the rebels are members of Al-Qaeda or other terrorist groups e.g,Al Nusra.If they were not militants,they would not be beheading Christians priests and bombing churches and killing other innocent civilians.

 

[Robert]

Looks like the MPs are resisting Cameron's calls for air and sea strikes.

A lot of them want to see a UN Resolution first, to make such an action legal.

 

[Poison]

Lol there is a lot of chest-thumping but I am very doubtful anything is going to happen. Another war would be entirely catastrophic for the US economy; and with nothing really to gain from Syria besides a foothold in the Medditeranean, I don't see any international war materialising.

 

[Sjaloha]

First of all, Obama Administration is not going to repeat what its’ predecessors had done in the past. And that would be to start another war in the Middle East which has nothing to do with the United States. The only time US would be getting into this war is if there is enough domestic or international pressure on the US to play the leadership role or if a country like Syria is violating UN charter. It seems like, at least based on the news report, Syria has crossed the red line.

Attacking Syria is not the problem. The real issue is to meet the objectives as a result of this strike, which I think is still not clear. Perhaps one goal could be to bring Syrian Regime to the negotiation table, but then there is a divided opposition which itself needs time to bring all stakeholders on board. Additionally, the presence of foreign fighters, especially the opposition, are a matter of concern for western countries.

In conclusion, US is not going to rush to strike targets in Syria, instead it is going to pressurize Syria diplomatically or may send more ammunition to members of FSA.

 

[Yossarian]

It's amazing. The Saudi's, American's, Israeli's, Al Qaeda all joining hands and working together to oust the the Assad regime.

Their motives:

The Saudi's - Installing a regime that the Saudi's could control and that will not be allied with Iran.

The Israeli's - An opportunity to destabilise Syria so that there is perpetual conflict inside syria and thus weakening a potential enemy who had started demanding the return of the Golan Heights.

The American's - Please both the Israeli and Saudi's. Pull the strings of the Saudi's to control the other Arab regimes, including Egypt. Also an opportunity to remove theRussians from the only Arab regime that is freindly towards the Russians, and prevent the Russians from hsving any military bases anywhere in the Mediterranean (the Russains currently have a military base in Syria, the only Russian base outside the former Soviet Union).

Al Qaeda - need anyone ask?

I would'nt be surprised if many of these 'violations' by the Assad regime are not false flag operations by the Saudi's, Israeli's and American's.

 

[nish_mate]

Looks like the MPs are resisting Cameron's calls for air and sea strikes.

A lot of them want to see a UN Resolution first, to make such an action legal.

Can Britain afford to pay for those strikes and the money spent on them be better off maybe spending on the NHS/Public Services??

 

[Yossarian]

Read in a couple of papers that if West are to attack Syria then Russia ready to attack on Saudi Arabia and Russian President has issued an urgent action memorandum. Well i hope some sense prevails in these leaders as on both sides the loss will be of Muslims

Sure, and the Pope is an Al Qaeda installed imam in disguise.

 

[Robert]

Can Britain afford to pay for those strikes and the money spent on them be better off maybe spending on the NHS/Public Services??

Good question. We are £1T in debt!

I shall be writing to my MP asking her not to support these strikes, unless a UN Resolution goes through.

 

[nish_mate]

Good question. We are £1T in debt!

I shall be writing to my MP asking her not to support these strikes, unless a UN Resolution goes through.

Agree, even with UN resolution on, Britain would do well to keep its involvement to the minimum- in these tight times does make sense to spend your pounds wisely- especially in the areas where Britain's not going to be having any direct threats.

 

[Yossarian]

Agree, even with UN resolution on, Britain would do well to keep its involvement to the minimum- in these tight times does make sense to spend your pounds wisely- especially in the areas where Britain's not going to be having any direct threats.

For every missile fired and every bomb dropped, a replacement has to be purchased from the defence contractors. And who do you think are the major shareholders of these defence contractors? And how many ex-politicians and ex-govt ministers do you think end up in senior positions or on the boards of companies who benefitted from actions or legislation that these ex-politicians were involved in when they were in govt?

 

[nish_mate]

For every missile fired and every bomb dropped, a replacement has to be purchased from the defence contractors. And who do you think are the major shareholders of these defence contractors? And how many ex-politicians and ex-govt ministers do you think end up in senior positions or on the boards of companies who benefitted from actions or legislation that these ex-politicians were involved in when they were in govt?

The problem my friend is that there is no money floating around to buy those replacements! So even if these honchos wanted to do it- they cant afford it- atleast the Brits!!!

 

[MR__KHAN__JI]

Re: Syrian Civil War

It's amazing. The Saudi's, American's, Israeli's, Al Qaeda all joining hands and working together to oust the the Assad regime.

Their motives:

The Saudi's - Installing a regime that the Saudi's could control and that will not be allied with Iran.

The Israeli's - An opportunity to destabilise Syria so that there is perpetual conflict inside syria and thus weakening a potential enemy who had started demanding the return of the Golan Heights.

The American's - Please both the Israeli and Saudi's. Pull the strings of the Saudi's to control the other Arab regimes, including Egypt. Also an opportunity to remove theRussians from the only Arab regime that is freindly towards the Russians, and prevent the Russians from hsving any military bases anywhere in the Mediterranean (the Russains currently have a military base in Syria, the only Russian base outside the former Soviet Union).

Al Qaeda - need anyone ask?

I would'nt be surprised if many of these 'violations' by the Assad regime are not false flag operations by the Saudi's, Israeli's and American's.

You missed one of the more important motoves....

The destruction of Hezbollah.

Without the Syrian link to Iran it will be rendered impotent.

Israel exacting revenge for the lost battle a few years ago.

 

[bin_pendi_ka_lota]

Read in a couple of papers that if West are to attack Syria then Russia ready to attack on Saudi Arabia and Russian President has issued an urgent action memorandum. Well i hope some sense prevails in these leaders as on both sides the loss will be of Muslims

http://www.syrianews.cc/saudi-army-alert-assad-syria/
http://jang.com.pk/jang/aug2013-daily/29-08-2013/main.htm

) Their could be more to this then just rumour. Everyone changed its position within a matter of two hours. And yesterday,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...Russia-secret-oil-deal-if-it-drops-Syria.html

Saudis offer Russia secret oil deal if it drops Syria
Saudi Arabia has secretly offered Russia a sweeping deal to control the global oil market and safeguard Russia’s gas contracts, if the Kremlin backs away from the Assad regime in Syria.

 

[LongHorn]

This is how some Muslims outraged at the chemical attacks are acting :

Q: So what it the proof Assad used the weapons
A: Proof? Everyone knows he did it

Q: How can everyone know he did it?
A: Because he is evil

Q: But could it not have been someone else as the rebels benefit from it while the regime does not
A: You are sympathizing with a vile Rafidah, Nusayri Pagan Shia and you will go to Hell just like him

 

[DRS]

Read in a couple of papers that if West are to attack Syria then Russia ready to attack on Saudi Arabia and Russian President has issued an urgent action memorandum. Well i hope some sense prevails in these leaders as on both sides the loss will be of Muslims

http://www.syrianews.cc/saudi-army-alert-assad-syria/
http://jang.com.pk/jang/aug2013-daily/29-08-2013/main.htm

That's simply a hoax news, Irresponsible journalism at its best you can say. I also happened to hear about this article in the morning though when got to know about its source,"Jang", I deduced that it was published to merely sell news. Jang is rapidly becoming an inauthentic newspaper in Pakistan, at least for me. Besides, If you somehow still believe this story to be true, Refer to the map and Russian's Army bases outside Russia.

 

[Yossarian]

The problem my friend is that there is no money floating around to buy those replacements! So even if these honchos wanted to do it- they cant afford it- atleast the Brits!!!

Live in the real world my friend. A significant part of the economies of countries like the UK and USA is based around the defence industry and all the contractors and sub-contractors that are dependent upon it.

Put it this way. If, for example, an arms manufacturing plant shuts down due to insuffiecient orders, most of the employee's, ranging from those working on the production line, to the back office, to the canteen employees, to the office cleaners,.. all lose their jobs. And similar for all the contractors and sub-contractors supplying the component parts and other services. It's a ripple down effect. And many end up on the dole, where the govt. instead of receiving taxes from them are having to pay out unemployment benefits instead.

Conversely, if there is conflict, even a small conflict, every country and their auntie wants to stock up with the latest military gizmo's, the demand goes up, the production increases and the shareholders make big profits. And these conflicts have the added value of being a testing ground and marketing displays, for these new military gadgets.

The Defence industries need a series of conflicts taking place all the time, otherwise no one will buy their toys.

 

[nish_mate]

Live in the real world my friend. A significant part of the economies of countries like the UK and USA is based around the defence industry and all the contractors and sub-contractors that are dependent upon it.

Put it this way. If, for example, an arms manufacturing plant shuts down due to insuffiecient orders, most of the employee's, ranging from those working on the production line, to the back office, to the canteen employees, to the office cleaners,.. all lose their jobs. And similar for all the contractors and sub-contractors supplying the component parts and other services. It's a ripple down effect. And many end up on the dole, where the govt. instead of receiving taxes from them are having to pay out unemployment benefits instead.

Conversely, if there is conflict, even a small conflict, every country and their auntie wants to stock up with the latest military gizmo's, the demand goes up, the production increases and the shareholders make big profits. And these conflicts have the added value of being a testing ground and marketing displays, for these new military gadgets.

The Defence industries need a series of conflicts taking place all the time, otherwise no one will buy their toys.

Talking about the UK and UK only as I am the taxpayer of that nation- do you have any stats to back up the claim that "a significant part of the economy" is fuelled by defence industry? What do you claim to be a significant part?

I for one would be very much interested in reading those, for having an interest in the economics, I would have thought that the UK economy is fuelled by:

* Financial Services
* North Sea
* SME's (Small Medium Enterprises)
*Services Industry (product design/innovation/e commerce etc)

The only major arms productions units in the UK one would have thought would be around the BAE factories based in the Hampshire area. Rest the UK doesnt even have the funds to upgrade/renew the Tridents, remap of the Army roles and mass redundancies in the defence sector and gradual outsourcing of it to G4S.

In your hypothetical case of the Arms Factory you would find that none of the manufacturing is actually carried out in the UK (predominantly) and the production lines is doing is an automated kit consolidator, your back office would be IT monkeys from India, the service ladies in the canteen be Indian aunties along with the Carribean and the cleaners would be from Nigeria and the stockroom be folks from Poles- all on minimum wages and a pittance of them legally entitled to dole.

Next is the fact that you are arguing that Big B rule the government- which I am not disagreeing with.

But what I am stating is that there is no money in the British Treasury Coffers to support any offensive and especially when public cuts are being made and any politico who decides to vote for these attacks can wave his/her seat goodbye.

Its all good being the worlds policeman when you can afford it, but when you cant better sit at home and not be a "chaudhary"

Offcourse Britain can still enter into the conflict if it has a stockpile of old munitions sitting around from the gulf wars that it needs to shift around or get rid of.

 

[Bashira_taeli]

It's amazing. The Saudi's, American's, Israeli's, Al Qaeda all joining hands and working together to oust the the Assad regime.

Their motives:

The Saudi's - Installing a regime that the Saudi's could control and that will not be allied with Iran.

The Israeli's - An opportunity to destabilise Syria so that there is perpetual conflict inside syria and thus weakening a potential enemy who had started demanding the return of the Golan Heights.

The American's - Please both the Israeli and Saudi's. Pull the strings of the Saudi's to control the other Arab regimes, including Egypt. Also an opportunity to remove theRussians from the only Arab regime that is freindly towards the Russians, and prevent the Russians from hsving any military bases anywhere in the Mediterranean (the Russains currently have a military base in Syria, the only Russian base outside the former Soviet Union).

Al Qaeda - need anyone ask?

I would'nt be surprised if many of these 'violations' by the Assad regime are not false flag operations by the Saudi's, Israeli's and American's.

Good post.

In addition to what Khan Ji pointed out, you may have missed the biggest motivation for this war. The proposed Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline. This pipleline could have been the world largest, and was to provide Iran direct access to Europe.

A centerpiece of this strategy is the Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline deal signed last month. Intended to provide Iran with a new delivery route to the Mediterranean coast, giving it renewed access to the Eurasian landmass and markets, the pipeline is obviously a blow to US-Israeli attempts to strangle the regime in Iran economically. Syria, being the critical linchpin in this deal, figures significantly in the Iranian strategy to survive the sanctions, thereby necessitating Iranian involvement in the conflict if only to provide the critical support Assad needs to maintain control of the security of the country.

When one looks at the players involved in the war in Syria, it becomes clear that the Sunni monarchies – Saudi Arabia and Qatar primarily – have committed to the war in order to ensure their own continued hegemony, especially in terms of energy production. Qatar, being one of the world’s wealthiest gas exporters, views the growing relationship between Iran and Syria, especially the gas pipeline deal, as an existential threat to their own standing. The Saudis, long since mortal enemies and rivals of the Shia Iranians, also have come to view Syria as merely a battleground in the larger proxy war with Iran.

http://rt.com/op-edge/us-war-iran-begins-syria-096/

 

[Cracket]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/29/us-syria-crisis-russia-navy-idUSBRE97S0AK20130829

At least Putin is finally doing something more than just writing angry letters about it. Hopefully this makes Nato think twice but I don't think it will stop them.

 

[Yossarian]

Talking about the UK and UK only as I am the taxpayer of that nation- do you have any stats to back up the claim that "a significant part of the economy" is fuelled by defence industry? What do you claim to be a significant part?

Depending upon which figures one looks at, there are between 100,000 to 300,000 people working in defence related industries.

But how important is the defence industry to Britain really? The assertion that it supports "300,000 jobs", repeated like a mantra in recent years by Cameron, trade unions with defence members and the industry itself, is less conclusive than it appears. It is 1% of the UK workforce. According to the government-run UK Trade & Investment (UKTI), almost twice as many Britons work in food and drink manufacturing. And according to Ian Prichard of CAAT, the 300,000 figure is an exaggeration: "It includes all the ancillary services connected with defence, such as the people looking after the [ministry of] defence estates. The actual defence industry workforce is, maximum, 215,000, and could well be 30,000 or 40,000 less." In 2003, Tony Blair told a prime ministerial press conference: "There are roughly 100,000 jobs in this country that depend on defence or associated industries."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/18/britains-arms-trade-making-killing

Britain remains the fourth-biggest military spender in the world, but the very scale of that spending – currently £34bn a year – makes it a tempting target for Whitehall economisers.

Weapons exports totaled $73 billion in 2012, up from $57 billion four years earlier. Total worldwide defense spending in 2012 was $1.6 trillion

http://economy.money.cnn.com/2013/06/27/weapons-exports/

.

The industry remains important by global standards. After the US, the world's biggest defence exporter in 2011, with a 35% market share, Britain came second, with a 15% share, narrowly ahead of Russia and France, according to UKTI
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/18/britains-arms-trade-making-killing

And showing how good some of these gadgets are, especially when pitted against Syria's Russian supplied defence systems, makes a fantastic opportunity to display them in action when searching for new potential buyers.

 

[saeedhk]

It's amazing. The Saudi's, American's, Israeli's, Al Qaeda all joining hands and working together to oust the the Assad regime.

Their motives:

The Saudi's - Installing a regime that the Saudi's could control and that will not be allied with Iran.

The Israeli's - An opportunity to destabilise Syria so that there is perpetual conflict inside syria and thus weakening a potential enemy who had started demanding the return of the Golan Heights.

The American's - Please both the Israeli and Saudi's. Pull the strings of the Saudi's to control the other Arab regimes, including Egypt. Also an opportunity to remove theRussians from the only Arab regime that is freindly towards the Russians, and prevent the Russians from hsving any military bases anywhere in the Mediterranean (the Russains currently have a military base in Syria, the only Russian base outside the former Soviet Union).

Al Qaeda - need anyone ask?

I would'nt be surprised if many of these 'violations' by the Assad regime are not false flag operations by the Saudi's, Israeli's and American's.

Good post.Also,they want to weaken Hezbollah.

It would be brainless for Assad to use CW as he knows that the world is only looking for an excuse to invade Syria which he does not want to provide.I highly doubt the government used CW.It should be the work of the foreign militants.

 

[bin_pendi_ka_lota]

That's simply a hoax news, Irresponsible journalism at its best you can say. I also happened to hear about this article in the morning though when got to know about its source,"Jang", I deduced that it was published to merely sell news. Jang is rapidly becoming an inauthentic newspaper in Pakistan, at least for me. Besides, If you somehow still believe this story to be true, Refer to the map and Russian's Army bases outside Russia.

http://news.sky.com/story/1134531/syria-russia-sending-warships-to-the-med
Russia is sending warships, Minimum they will do is Refill Assads depleted Arsenal as soon as American strikes end...

 

[majiz]

First of all, Obama Administration is not going to repeat what its’ predecessors had done in the past.

obama is a huge neocon and 'intervening' in middle east countries is these people's favorite pass time , there'll attack syria now and there's plenty more of it to come. just think about what blair said, he's still up for it.

 

[Markhor]

David Cameron has said this is not like Iraq about a thousand times in this special parliamentary debate on Syria.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23877247

You can watch it live. Labour will oppose the government motion on intervention as it stands, they are saying they want to wait until the UN reports back. Also there is significant backbench government rebellion so passage of this vote to strike Syria is not guaranteed.

 

[Markhor]

Jack Straw and Tessa Jowell - two Labour cabinet ministers getting up and the gist of what they're saying is they regretted their stance on Iraq in 2003, and are revising their views on Syria as a result.

Bit for late for that.

 

[Markhor]

Cameron said earlier that they are "not 100%" that Assad used chemical weapons ! Nor are they publishing the intelligence reports.

 

[Markhor]

Gerald Kaufman - ''I saw the effect of Israel use white phosphorus in Gaza, but they get away with it because they are considered to be on the same side of civilised opinion. There is selectivity all the way through. I do not trust Western opinion on what happens in the Middle East and North Africa''.

Gotta love Kaufman for speaking the truth.