REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Russia invades ...

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Wednesday, December 30, 2015 13:58
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 14601
PAGE 1 of 4

Friday, September 4, 2015 11:41 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Syria?

According to Zerohedge
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-31/russian-military-forces-arriv
e-syria-set-forward-operating-base-near-damascus


Which is according to Ynet (an Israeli paper)
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4696268,00.html

which according to the author is a VERY RELIABLE source, Russia has set up the equivalent of a FOB (forward operating base) in a Syrian-government-controlled airbase.

The Russians issued a carefully worded denial (at least, it sounded pretty carefully worded to me!) which ruled out soldiers and Russian airplanes, but didn't rule out technicians, intelligence officers, and trainers. Meanwhile the USA and European MSM stayed pretty quiet about the whole thing for four days. The thought of Russians in Syria is just now beginning to leak out now, coming into the holiday weekend.

Now, I'm certain that the USA and the EU know exactly who's where, just as they know exactly who shot down MH17 (but will never come forward with that data).

There were two possibilities to point to:

Israel was whining YET AGAIN about how it was being invaded, or was going to be invaded, or was going to be nuked, or whatever it needs to do to keep its paranoid fantasies/military readiness/Netanyahu government going, or

Western governments had their own reasons for keeping this dark, mainly that they want to fight ISIS/IS but can't be seen helping Assad.


So while all this was pretty dark in the western press, and has definitely NOT been the subject of official government press releases or news conferences, I wondered if - just like detente with Iran, this marked a turning point in Russia-USA relationships, and yet another break with the Saudis over ISIS/IS (and a deep underlying fracture with Israel, which has lived under Saudi tact protection for decades). Again, since everything is connected to everything, all of this has implications for oil and for the petrodollar, which the USA now seems not terribly committed to. The Saudis have cranked open the production spigot once again; I'm not sure if they're trying to drive Russia out of business or US shale oil or simply trying to maintain market share, but they are certainly driving the price of oil down!

So, assuming this is really happening:

Russia fighting ISIS/IS.

Good thing? Bad thing?

BTW- Whatever this is, it is NOT an invasion of Syria! I just used that title since other people are so free with the word "invasion" I thought I'd pique their interest.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 5, 2015 11:38 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Russia says Syria's Assad ready to share power

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/04/us-russia-forum-putin-extrem
ism-idUSKCN0R408L20150904



Quote:

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Friday that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is ready to hold snap parliamentary elections and could share power with a "healthy" opposition.

Russia, along with Iran, has been Assad's principle international ally in the war that has raged in Syria for four-and-a-half years and has claimed a quarter of a million lives.

Moscow has made clear it does not want to see Assad toppled and has seized on gains made by Islamic State in Syria and Iraq to urge his foreign foes, including the United States and Saudi Arabia, to work with Damascus to combat the common enemy.

"We really want to create some kind of an international coalition to fight terrorism and extremism," Putin told journalists on the sidelines of the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, saying he had spoken to U.S. President Barack Obama on the matter.

"We are also working with our partners in Syria. In general, the understanding is that this uniting of efforts in fighting terrorism should go in parallel to some political process in Syria itself," Putin said.



Meanwhile. in contrast, General "Has-Been" Petraeus and former CIA director thinks we should arm Al Qaida.

David Petraeus' bright idea: give terrorists weapons to beat terrorists
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/02/david-petraeus-br
ight-idea-give-terrorists-weapons-to-beat-isis



What is he, nuts???


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 5, 2015 11:59 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


What Putin and others have to say (maybe).

The MSM is staying far, far away from the story of Russian troops in Syria. Here is one interpretation

Quote:

Russia is providing “serious” training and logistical support to the Syrian army, Vladimir Putin has said, in the first public confirmation of the depth of Russia’s involvement in Syria's civil war.

Commenting on reports that Russian combat troops have been deployed to Syria, the Russian president said discussion of direct military intervention is “so far premature,” but did not rule out that such a step could be taken in future.

“To say we're ready to do this today - so far it's premature to talk about this. But we are already giving Syria quite serious help with equipment and training soldiers, with our weapons,” the state-owned RIA Novosti news agency quoted Mr Putin as saying when asked about Russian intervention in Syria during an economic forum in Vladivostok.

"We really want to create some kind of an international coalition to fight terrorism and extremism," Mr Putin said.

"To this end, we hold consultations with our American partners - I have personally spoken on the issue with US President Obama."



Help? Yes.
Troops? Nyet.

Quote:

Russia has repeatedly used its UN Security Council veto to support Bashar al-Assad throughout the four and a half year-long war, which is believed to have claimed some 250,000 lives. Russia has also been a long-term supplier of arms to the Syrian government, something it now justifies by the need to fight Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil).
Let's not forget the protective naval blockade that Russia set athwart USA plans to bomb Syria. That was an unmistakable show of force. Nobody had to read the tea leaves to figure out what was happening.

Quote:

Speculation is growing that Russia has significantly expanded its involvement in recent months, including with deliveries of advanced weaponry, a raft of spare parts for existing machines, and the deployment of increasing numbers of military advisers and instructors.

Last week Syrian state television released images showing an advanced Russian-built armoured personnel carrier, the BTR-82a, in combat. Videos have also appeared in which troops engaged in combat appear to shout instructions to one another in Russian.

Last week the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth cited western diplomatic sources

Such honest guys! I'm sure they can be believed!
Quote:

saying that Russia was on the verge of deploying “thousands” of troops to Syria to establish an airbase from which the Russian air force would fly combat sorties against Isis.

Russian analysts called the Yedioth report far-fetched, pointing to Russian wariness of repeating the American experience in Iraq and the current strain on the Russian military from a covert war in Ukraine.

By Russian analysts, they don't mean RUSSIAN analysts, they mean western analysts who at times bloviate about Russia.

Quote:

Most government-connected analysts have previously insisted that Russia’s support for Mr Assad is “strictly political”, and have dismissed reports of military involvement as “madness”.

“It is a canard. A deployment of that size would require approval from the Federation Council [Russia’s upper house of parliament],”

What size is that? Sounds like a dodge to me!

Quote:

said Yevgenny Buzhinsky, a retired Russian general who now heads the PIR analytical centre in Moscow. “As far as I am aware any advisers there do not engage in combat.”

But Mr Putin’s comments chime with experts who say the Russian government would be willing to supply substantial logistical support and advice even if it shies away from large-scale intervention.

“Such things are kept very secret, but there is definitely an adviser and instructor mission there, possibly numbering in the hundreds,” said Pavel Felgenhaeur, an independent commentator on Russian military affairs.

“It definitely includes technical advisers and engineers to maintain sophisticated military equipment, and marines to protect them. There is no way Assad’s jets could still be flying after four years of war without Russian technical assistance,” he said.

Mr Felgenhauer said it was “quite conceivable” that members of the advisory mission occasionally found themselves in combat or had even suffered casualties.

Yep.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11845635/Vladi
mir-Putin-confirms-Russian-military-involvement-in-Syrias-civil-war.html


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 6, 2015 11:39 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

The Internet is flooded with rumors about a Russian military intervention in Syria. It all began with an article by Thierry Meyssan in Voltaire Net and now this rumor made it to Zero Hedge. Finally, the Israeli website Ynet also joined the rumor mill. Here are the two main assertions made by these sources:

1) Russia has just created a Russo-Syrian Commission and has begun supplying weapons, sharing intelligence, and sending advisors. All of this is more or less coordinated with the White House.
2) Russia has begun its military intervention in Syria, deploying an aerial contingent to a permanent Syrian base, in order to launch attacks against ISIS and Islamist rebels; US stays silent.

What is interesting in these rumors is that they appear to come from two very different sources. Meyssan gets his information from Syrian sources while Ynet quotes “western diplomatic sources”.

Finally, I will readily admit that there could be a Russian rationale for an intervention in Syria: the Russian security establishment is united in the belief that the US plan is to eventually turn Daesh (aka ‘ISIS’) against Russia and this one of the reasons it is so important to assist the Syrians: it is better to fight Daesh in Syria than it is to fight it in southern Russia.

So the rumor about a Russian intervention is at least credible. And yet, I don’t buy it.

I will gladly admit that I cannot prove a negative and that I have absolutely no privileged access to any special Russian sources. All I can offer are my conjectures and nothing more, and there is a good chance that I might be wrong. But having said that, here is my personal reaction to this rumor.

First, I don’t believe that there is much public support in Russia for a foreign military intervention. It is one thing to be ready to defend your own country or your own citizens when the latter are directly attacked (as in 08.08.08) and quite another to intervene 1’200km away from your national border. And we are not talking about just anywhere 1’200km away from Russia, but very much inside US controlled territory: the US controls Turkey via NATO and the entire Middle-East (except for Iran) via CENTCOM.

Do you remember when the Russian paratroopers moved from Bosnia to Kosovo and took over the Pristina Airport? Russia was unable to resupply them because the US basically controlled the entire airspace between Russia and Serbia. The situation is similar today in the sense that the resupply and support of a Russian contingent in Syria would largely depend on the US goodwill. Yes, the Russian could also use their Navy to resupply and support any Russian contingent through the Mediterranean, but that could be very time consuming and difficult. I have said it many times on this blog: the Russian military is not designed to operate further than roughly 1’000km from the Russian border and a military intervention in Syria, while possible, would definitely stretch this self-imposed limit.

Second, while the first part of the rumor (sending advisors, sharing intelligence and supplying weapons) does not represent a major Russian commitment, the second part of the rumor would represent a major political and military commitment from Russia.

Russia still has a very painful and, I would say, even traumatic recollection of what a “limited military intervention” looks like. After all, this is exactly how the Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan was presented to the Russian public, as a “limited military intervention” to protect a friendly country from subversion, foreign intervention and destabilization. How is that different from what is happening today in Syria?

“Limited military intervention” have a strong tendency to lead to an open-ended escalation, and the Russians are quite aware of this. [AS THE USA AND SAUDIS SHOULD BE AWARE BY NOW!] I strongly believe that the Russian withdrawal from Georgia after 08.08.08 is largely explained by this awareness: the Russians could have easily invaded all of Georgia (the Georgian military had basically ceased to exist and there was nothing standing between Russian paratroopers and Tbilissi) in 24 hours or less, and yet they chose to stop and turn back. And when the Russians recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia they still withdrew most of their forces from these two republics and worked hard to put most of the responsibility for the defense of these two countries on the local people. The same approached was used in Chechnia were Russia has a powerful and capable Federal military contingent, but where 99% of the responsibility for security is placed on local, Chechen, forces.

In purely military terms, much of what these rumors claim make no sense to me. For example, Meyssan and Ynet both mention the deployment of MiG-31s to Syria. The problem with this is that the MiG-31 is a pure interceptor designed to protect a huge volume of Russian airspace from a US Air Force attack involving low flying cruise missiles and strategic bombers. As a counter-insurgency weapon the MiG-31 is simply useless. True, the six MiG-31s rumored to be sent to Syria would provide a formidable deterrent against any US, NATO, Turkish or Israeli aircraft entering the Syrian air space, but this is also why I would expect these countries to protest such a delivery with utmost outrage and determination rather than “more or less” coordinate it or “remain silent”. It would be much more logical to send SU-24s and SU-25s to Syria if the goal is to support Syrian army operations against Daesh. But these rumors do not mention these aircraft.

Finally, Ynet speaks of a major military operation. Here is a quite from the article:

“A Russian expeditionary force has already arrived in Syria and set up camp in an Assad-controlled airbase. The base is said to be in area surrounding Damascus, and will serve, for all intents and purposes, as a Russian forward operating base. In the coming weeks thousands of Russian military personnel are set to touch down in Syria, including advisors, instructors, logistics personnel, technical personnel, members of the aerial protection division, and the pilots who will operate the aircraft.”

A quick look at the recent news out of Syria will tell you that Daesh is already operating in the suburbs of Damascus. So where exactly would Russia deploy “thousands” of military personnel “in an area surrounding Damascus”? This makes no sense at all.

Ever since the crisis in Syria began I have been repeating that the Russians are not, repeat, not coming!! (see here, here and here) and, so far, the Russians never showed up. Of course, it is possible that this time around they might. Again, the first part of the rumor about sending advisors, sharing intelligence and delivering weapons makes more sense to me. But the notion of Russians flying MiG-31s out of Damascus to somehow change the course of the civil war makes no sense to me at all. Neither does the idea of “thousands” of Russians being deployed to Syria. In fact, last time I checked, the Russians were evacuating their citizen from this country, not sending more in.

Again, everything is possible and I cannot prove a negative. Maybe this time around the Kremlin decided that a major military effort against Daesh was needed. And maybe the US does not object to it. But the logical distance between “possible” and “likely” is a very long one and, at least at this point in time and with the information I have, I don’t see any reasons not to dismiss these rumors as wishful thinking.

The Saker



So, it seems as if Russia is willing to concede that they have intelligence officers, trainers, and weapons in Syria. The big rumor seemed to start when "an" advanced APC carrier was spotted and "two" voices speaking Russian were overheard. My guess is that a firefight broke out very near where the trainers/ coordinators were stationed and they got caught in a firefight. Unplanned, but shit happens.

However, as hubby predicted, the USA is wasting no time make a big deal out of this. He guesses that it will be used as an excuse to send in USA troops, or to bomb the snot out of Assad forces ... because it seems to me as if our military hasn't been given clear objectives ... are we targeting IS, or Assad? Or both, opportunistically?

Whatever it is, it has the Saudi signature on it. Just as the destruction of Yemen has ours.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 7, 2015 11:02 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


The gears of war are clanking in the USA, Britain, and France.

Quote:

BEIRUT (Reuters)
State news agency SANA said the foreign ministry had sent two letters to United Nations chiefs which objected to "brazen standpoints" taken by British officials, and accused Britain and France of a "colonialist" agenda.

On Saturday, finance minister George Osborne said Britain and Europe had to find a way to tackle the conflict in Syria, which has fueled Europe's biggest refugee crisis since World War Two, and described the government of President Bashar al-Assad as "evil."

"You've got to deal with the problem at source, which is this evil Assad regime and the ISIL (Islamic State) terrorists, and you need a comprehensive plan for a more stable, peaceful Syria," Osborne told Reuters in an interview.

The Sunday Times newspaper said British Prime Minister David Cameron wanted to hold a vote in parliament in early October to pave the way for air strikes against IS in Syria, joining an international coalition led by the United States which has been carrying out such strikes for the past year.


http://news.yahoo.com/syria-slams-british-meddling-intervention-signal
-140701535.html


Greece considers U.S. request to close airspace to Russian aid flights [to Syria]

Quote:

Greece received a request from the United States to deny Russia the use of Greek airspace for aid flights to Syria, a spokesman for the foreign ministry in Athens said on Monday. The spokesman said the request was being examined. Greece has sought to foster closer ties with Russia during the economic crisis that nearly forced it out of the euro zone.

Russian newswire RIA Novosti earlier said Greece had refused the U.S. request, citing a diplomatic source, adding that Russia was seeking permission to run the flights up to Sept. 24. The Russian foreign ministry was not immediately available for comment. Russia is a long-time ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, whose rule the United States and other western powers favor ending via a political transition.

The request from Washington comes after it expressed concerns to Moscow on Saturday about reports that Russia was moving toward a major military build-up in Syria widely seen as aimed at bolstering Assad.



http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/07/us-mideast-crisis-greece-rus
sia-idUSKCN0R714O20150907


The USA and its Western and Gulf State allies appear resolute in their quest to destroy yet another non-wahhabi state.


What seems to have lost traction in western press: Assad Ready to Share Power


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 12, 2015 11:45 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

On Thursday evening, we chronicled the latest in the drama that is Syria’s horrific civil war, noting that, according to an Israeli defense source, “hundreds” of Iran’s


Oh? Iran too?

Quote:

Revolutionary Guards are on the ground in Syria fighting alongside the Russians to support Bashar al-Assad’s depleted forces as they battle to regain control of the country.

If true, that would answer the following question which we’ve been asking for quite some time: will Iran remain on the sidelines and allow the Houthis to be routed in Yemen and Assad deposed in Syria, or will Tehran, like Moscow, finally decide that the time for rhetoric has come to an end?

The Saudis, lest anyone need reminding, are destroying the Houthis to expand the reach of their fundamentalist wahhabism. This has been their decades-long project. My god, they've made such a mess of their region!

Quote:

Reports of Iranian involvement come on the heels of rampant speculation about the scope of Russia’s military buildup near Latakia where US “intelligence” and a series of unnamed “Lebanese sources” claim Moscow is essentially preparing for a full-on push to rout any and all domestic opposition to the Assad regime.

And Saddam had WMD. I've never known USA intelligence to be honest. They will say whatever they think they need to say in order to get the effect they want. I'm trying to find more reliable sources.

Quote:

The question, of course, is what happens when foreign opposition to the Assad regime isn’t willing to accept the restoration of the strongman’s rule.
Because, of course, it's up to other nations to decide which leader that want in power, and to destroy the ones they don't like.

Quote:

Predictably, there’s been no shortage of back-and-forth banter between John Kerry and Sergei Lavrov over the past several days. Here's how Lavrov characterizes the exchange:

“Kerry was also pushing the very strange idea that supporting Bashar Assad in his anti-terror fight only strengthens the positions of ISIS, because the sponsors of ISIS would pump even more arms and money into it,” Lavrov said.

Considering that the USA partly armed ISIS, and that both the USA and Saudi Arabia have been shipping arms to Syrian jihadists to destroy Assad, maybe the best way towards peace is convince the Saudis to turn off the arms-tap?

Quote:

... “It's an absolutely upside-down logic and yet another attempt to appease those who use terrorists to fight dissenting regimes,” the Russian FM said, mentioning US attempts to cooperate with various extremist groups in Syria over the past few years.

“It's a colossal mistake that the US-led [anti-ISIS] coalition never considered interaction with Syria, not even information exchange,” Lavrov said. “I cannot comprehend this logic, or rather absolute lack of logic.”

“We help not only Syria, we also provide weapons to Iraq and other countries of the region that find themselves on the frontline with the terror threat. Equally for Iraq and other countries, we do so without any political preconditions,” Lavrov said.


And on Friday, Lavrov took it up a notch with a series of very serious-sounding (albeit hilariously overstated, we hope) soundbites delivered at a news conference in Russia. Here’s Reuters:

At a news conference, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Russia was sending equipment to help Assad fight Islamic State. Russian servicemen were in Syria, he said, primarily to help service that equipment and teach Syrian soldiers how to use it.

Russia was also conducting naval exercises in the eastern Mediterranean, he said, describing the drills as long-planned and staged in accordance with international law.

Lavrov blamed Washington for cutting off direct military-to-military communications between Russia and NATO over the Ukraine crisis, saying such contacts were "important for the avoidance of undesired, unintended incidents".

"We are always in favor of military people talking to each other in a professional way. They understand each other very well," Lavrov said. "If, as (U.S. Secretary of State) John Kerry has said many times, the United States wants those channels frozen, then be our guest."

Lavrov, international troll!

Quote:

Yes, "be our guest", which, unless something is lost in translation there (as it was when Hillary Clinton hilariously presented Lavrov with a giant red button that was supposed to say "reset" but actually said "overcharged" in 2009) sounds quite a bit like the Kremlin telling Washington that it's just fine with Russia if the West wants to risk getting into a scenario where Russian and US jets end up in an "accidental" dog fight in the skies above Syria.

We will now anxiously await Kerry's response which will almost certainly contain the words "very" and "concerned", which would be accurate as long as he's talking about Assad's fate and not the fate of ISIS.



---------

I have perhaps the benefit of knowing a Syrian Xtian, who still has family in Syria. When this whole thing started, I rather hesitantly asked if he was glad that people were agitating for democracy in Syria, and he looked vastly startled and somewhat offended that I should be so ignorant. In his mind, Assad (being a minority himself, and somewhat of a secularist) was a bulwark against Sunni oppression of ALL the minorities in Syria. The Syrian minorities were actually looking to Assad for protection.

A political solution is required. I don't know why the USA and it's toady allies think they have the right to destroy any leader they don't like.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 12, 2015 8:16 PM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

A political solution is required.

The Syrian rebels (non-ISIS) will never accept a political solution that does not involve Assad stepping aside. And the rebels will always have support from the countries in the region. Thus an obvious solution is for Assad, slaughterer of so many civilians, to step aside - but Russia and Iran are not willing to lose their man, so the war grinds on. The only positive is the Realpolitik of Russia and Iran getting dragged into the bloody mire that they have facilitated. Captured and IS-beheaded Russian soldiers would be a disaster for Vladimir Putin.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 13, 2015 11:46 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

The Syrian rebels (non-ISIS) will never accept a political solution that does not involve Assad stepping aside.


Well then, the non-IS Syrian rebels are jackasses and don't deserve our support. Because, as hard as it is (for you) to imagine, Assad represents a significant portion of the Syrian population - religious minorities and women - just as Yanukovich and Qaddafi did.

Those "non IS" rebels are - for the most - part dyed-in-the-wool Sunni religious nut-jobs who are one step away from Al Qaida/IS themselves. They want to turn Syria into a Sunni theocratic state, and that explains the ease with which they morph from one group to another. The number of "rebels" who are fighting for YOUR vision of western democracy and "freedom" is vanishingly small. You clearly don't understand the population that you're talking about, which is - amazingly!- not at all like the nice western "liberal" Atlantacists that you're used to.

So you can forget all of the nonsense that you might have heard about democracy and freedom - to them (and to our respective governments) those are just magic words which conjure up unthinking support for THEIR cause.

What is "our" cause?

Why does the USA want so very desperately to do away with Assad?? Why the fuck are we even in Syria???

Because Assad represents a barrier to a western-controlled Qatar-to-Mediterranean gas pipeline, which would destabilize Russia's gas supply to Europe. You might have noticed ... well, maybe not ... all of the wrestling going on with Russia's South Stream Pipeline, which would allow Russia to pipe gas into southern Europe while bypassing Ukraine? The EU has done it's very best to block the pipeline route, putting pressure on Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, and all potential pipeline routes, and changing the rules in the middle of the game to require that Gazprom divest itself of ownership and operation of th pipeline. Russia in turn has shifted its intended route from Bulgaria etc to Turkey, and from Turkey to maybe nowhere. Meanwhile, Russia and Germany are still jointly expanding the northern pipeline route, and (last I heard) Russia still intends to shut off those trans-Ukrainian pipelines in 2019. So, good luck with those winters, Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, and Spain!

This is all geopolitics, son. Please, eliminate the words "democracy", "freedom", "responsibility to protect", and "human rights" from your thought processes. Neither our government, not yours, care a shit about that.

Israel would also like to see Assad gone, because they hope to gain permanent and total control of the Golan Heights, which is a main source of water. Don't forget, it was a long-term drought in northeast Syria that set this off ... fighting over water will soon become more important to the people there than fighting over oil or gas routes.

Quote:

And the rebels will always have support from the countries in the region.
They have the support of the religious nut-jobs in Saudi Arabia, which has spread its sectarian poison everywhere, with the direct financial and military assistance of the USA, Britain, and France since the USA fostered the "mujahideen" in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Withdraw western assistance and see how far that goes.

Quote:

Assad, slaughterer of so many civilians
You DO realize that it was IS which used chemical weapons in Syria, right?

Quote:

Thus an obvious solution is for Assad, slaughterer of so many civilians, to step aside
Assad has already agreed to early parliamentarian-style elections. I'm not sure of the details, but I'm sure something can be worked out.

Whatever happens, I would NOT want to see a Sunni theocracy installed in Syria, it would be a disaster for most of the people there (at least 65%, if you include women).

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns. But by god, KPO keeps trying!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 13, 2015 12:28 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Psychopaths are running the world

Quote:

"All of these players, these politicians are nothing more than puppets, they don't serve the people there is no real democracy, they serve the rich and powerful who run the world and that would be the bankers who control the money supply. The bankers make huge amounts of money....wars are great for them and ultimately they control the politicians. Psychopaths are running the world."

Ken O’ Keefe is a former US Marine turned anti-war campaigner who appeared on a Press TV debate called Syria: War of Deception, and absolutely owned his opponent in such an awesome way that you’ll be cheering at his every comment.

Recorded in August 2013, this interview is now two years old, but in light of the current European refugee crisis it’s more relevant today than ever before. Passionate, articulate and knowledgeable about the subject matter, O’Keefe is the perfect guy to step up and tell these home truths- and boy, does he do a good job.

This guy nails so many crucial points about the Syria situation in one interview, he’ll have you jumping around and punching the ceiling.

“We have tortured and killed and maimed and raped around this planet; who in their right mind would consider the United States or the West in general to be in any position to punish anybody?” the veteran begins angrily, going on to outline the evidence for Syria being a false flag attack (Note: leaked emails showing how Assad was framed by the USA are detailed in this cached Daily Mail report from January 2013, which was published online briefly before being removed). http://web.archive.org/web/20130129213824/http://www.dailymail.co.uk/n
ews/article-2270219/U-S-planned-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html


He rightly points out that the USA dropped more bombs in Vietnam than during the whole of WW2 combined, that it regularly arms terrorists (but the mainstream press refer to them as ‘freedom fighters’ when it suits them) and the former marine also points out how the so-called ‘War on Terror’ is nothing more than a well-planned strategy to be in a “perpetual state of war to destabilize the region for the Greater Israel plan.”

“We don’t operate under international law; we have the law of the jungle in which the rich and powerful basically determine what goes and what doesn’t go.” O’Keefe shouts. He correctly points out that Bush and Blair would be “rotting in prison cells” if the law were administered equally to all, or even “executed if their own rules were applied to their own crimes“. He also acknowledges that these men are nothing more than puppets who “serve rich and powerful bankers who control the money supply.”

O’Keefe rants about the hypocrisy of the West, who are arming terrorist organizations in the name of ‘freedom’ for civilians in geo-politically strategic countries while turning a blind eye to vile human rights abuses in countries like Saudi Arabia. The only people who still fall for all this crap, O’Keefe passionately points out, are “bought-off prostitutes [our politicians] or the dumbest of the dumb.”



I agree with the sentiment, altho O'Keefe tends not to make best use of factual material.

However, just this past week, Wikileaks' Assange said that cables from US Ambassador to Syria showed that as far back as 2006, the USA was ALREADY planning to overthrow Assad.

Quote:

The United States had planned to topple the Syrian government long before conflict broke out in the country in 2011, says WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

Assange made the comments during an interview about his new book, the WikiLeaks Files. A chapter of the book refers to a cable from US Ambassador William Roebuck, who had been stationed in Damascus in 2006, about plans for overthrowing the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

“That plan was to use a number of different factors to create paranoia within the Syrian government; to push it to overreact, to make it fear there’s a coup,” RT quoted Assange on Wednesday.

He noted that the key components of the plan were fostering tensions between Shias and Sunnis, creating and promoting rumors and exaggerations “that are known to be false” against Iran with the help of Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

He emphasized that this particular cable was “quite concerning” as the US plans for the region were “all hanging out” in it. He added that in order to understand what is happening in and around Syria, regional alliances must be examined.

“Part of the problem in Syria is that you have a number of US allies surrounding it, principally Saudi and Qatar that are funneling in weapons. Turkey as well [is] a very serious actor. [They] each have their own hegemonic ambitions in the region. Israel also, no doubt, if Syria sufficiently destabilized, it might be in a position where it can keep the Golan Heights forever, or even advance that territory,” he said.



ALSO

Quote:

According to documents leaked by WikiLeaks, a secret treaty among Qatar, Turkey and Saudi Arabia shows they intended to overthrow the Syrian government. The revelation came from Julian Assange, the founder of the controversial website.

Assange claimed to a Russian TV channel Sunday that the secret deal had been signed by the Gulf nations in 2012. He added that Western powers like France, Britain and the United States were also involved in the secret agreement.

However, Assange said that U.S. allies in the Middle East acted in a more hostile manner. Saudi Arabia even acted against Washington’s instructions, Press TV reported.

The leaked documents are among hundreds of thousands of government papers that apparently revealed secret information about a number of key Middle Eastern powers, especially Saudi Arabia. The leaked documents also allegedly include internal communications among Saudi embassies around the world.

The political unrest in Syria has killed more than 230,000 people since 2011. The U.S. government and its allies have been aiding militant groups in Syria in its fight against government forces.

WikiLeaks also released documents claiming Riyadh had contacts with one of the most dangerous rivals of the United States in Afghanistan. Saudi Arabia has been a U.S. ally for years, but Washington has expressed concerns over allegations that Saudi donors sponsor the Afghan insurgency as well as other militant groups in the region, the Wall Street Journal reported.

According to other leaked documents, the Saudi ambassador in Pakistan had a meeting with Nasiruddin Haqqani in 2012. Haqqani is the main fundraiser for the Haqqani network, the extremist group that has been on the U.N. terrorism watch list since 2010.

Haqqani asked the Saudi ambassador to accommodate the medical treatment of his father, Jalaluddin Haqqani. Jalaluddin is the founder of the extremist organization. According to the leaked documents, the father has a Saudi passport.

WikiLeaks started leaking classified documents in June. It also obtained online communications between the foreign ministry in Riyadh and other countries. Most of the documents are written in Arabic.

In 2010, Assange published numerous classified U.S. military documents related to conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. The action infuriated U.S. authorities but gave Assange international prominence.


http://www.ibtimes.com/wikileaks-publishes-more-documents-revealing-sa
udi-connection-against-syria-united-1988251




--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 13, 2015 1:18 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


The "good news" just keeps rolling in. Obama fiddles with removing Assad (and playing footsie with Saudi Arabia) while Rome burns:

50 Defense Dept. Whistleblowers Slam "Stalinist" Pentagon Officials For Lying About ISIS

Quote:

Carey Wedler via TheAntiMedia.org,

The Pentagon has erupted in “revolt” amid claims from 50 intelligence analysts that senior defense officials manipulated intelligence reports to downplay the severity of the Islamic State’s increasing upper-hand in the Middle East. According to allegations made in an official complaint with the Department of Defense Inspector General, the officers in question doctored reports — among other things — in order to maintain the Pentagon and president’s narrative that the war against the Islamic State, as well as Al Qaeda in Syria, is succeeding. To the contrary, the dissenting analysts — now effectively whistleblowers — have repeatedly attempted to warn that the situation is far more dismal than what authorities are revealing to the public.

“The cancer was within the senior level of the intelligence command,” one defense official told the Daily Beast, which broke the story late Wednesday. Two senior analysts at CENTCOM — the U.S. military’s central command Middle East and Central Asia — filed the formal complaint with the Defense Department’s Inspector General in July (the analysts are formally employed by the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s dedicated spy wing).

Other analysts are willing to back up allegations with “concrete examples.” 11 of 50 intelligence analysts spoke anonymously with the Daily Beast, detailing various methods senior defense officials have used to downplay the terrorist groups’ influence and power. This is particularly concerning considering the story told to the public is already pitiful, portraying grave threats to the United States.

In some cases, analysts allege reports that portrayed the war in too negative a light were simply prevented from moving higher up the chain of command. In other cases, they were sent back down to analysts, prompting many to self-censor their reports out of fear of rejection or punitive action.

Most sordid, perhaps, are claims that senior officials blatantly altered reports ”…to be more in line with the Obama administration’s public contention that the fight against ISIS and al Qaeda is making progress.” Additionally, protesting officials told the Daily Beast that

“…in some cases key elements of intelligence reports were removed, resulting in a document that didn’t accurately capture the analysts’ conclusions.” They allege “…the reports, some of which were briefed to President Obama, portrayed the terror groups as weaker than the analysts believe they are. The reports were changed by CENTCOM higher-ups to adhere to the administration’s public line that the U.S. is winning the battle against ISIS and al Nusra, al Qaeda’s branch in Syria, the analysts claim.”

Many analysts said that because of these practices, they felt they could not provide an honest, unbiased analysis of the situation in Iraq and Syria — a task they were hired to perform. Others expressed this was because of the career ambitions of high-ranking officials who did not want negative reports about the conflict to compromise their chances of further advancement.

This leadership was also accused of creating an unsustainable work environment. “One person who knows the contents of the written complaint sent to the inspector general said it used the word ‘Stalinist’ to describe the tone set by officials overseeing CENTCOM’s analysis,” the Daily Beast reported (This should come as little surprise considering the free reign the United States military has enjoyed not only since 9/11, but throughout the 20th century. That officials are eager to bolster their own personal power seems inevitable within an institution that has projected the same megalomania around the world).

Two analysts who spoke to the Daily Beast said complaints about ignored and doctored reports warning of the grimness of the conflict had been expressed since last October. Some who complained were urged to retire from their positions while others agreed to leave. Because of the lack of response from superiors to these grievances, the two senior analysts filed the formal complaint with the Inspector General.

In response to the Daily Beast’s article, the Pentagon offered a tepid, generic response that appeared little more than a jumble of key terms intended to obfuscate the seriousness of the issue at hand.

“While we cannot comment on the specific investigation cited in the article, we can speak to the process. The Intelligence Community routinely provides a wide range of subjective assessments related to the current security environment. These products and the analysis that they present are absolutely vital to our efforts, particularly given the incredibly complex nature of the multi-front fights that are ongoing now in Iraq and Syria,” Air Force Colonel and CENTCOM spokesman Patrick Ryder said.



“Senior civilian and military leadership consider these assessments during planning and decision-making, along with information gained from various other sources, to include the insights provided by commanders on the ground and other key advisors, intelligence collection assets, and previous experience,” he added, failing to address the analysts’ concerns.

In light of these revelations, it is difficult to tell which is worse: that the Pentagon has monumentally failed in its exploits of the Middle East — creating an environment for ISIS and Al Qaeda to rise to power — or that its leaders willfully withhold information for the sake of self-preservation and misleading an already terrified public. Regardless, the sheer number of analysts willing to step forward simultaneously highlights the systemic decay of integrity and effectiveness within the agency tasked with protecting the public — and a small shred of hope for forcing a modicum of accountability.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-13/50-defense-dept-whistleblower
s-slam-stalinist-pentagon-officials-lying-about-isis


Link to the original Daily Beast report here:


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/26/spies-obama-s-brass-p
ressured-us-to-downplay-isis-threat.html


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 13, 2015 2:57 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Engineered Refugee Crisis to Justify “Safe Havens” in Syria
Tony Cartlucci (LD)

Quote:

While the Western media attempts to portray the sudden influx of refugees suddenly appearing out of no where at Europe’s gates, the reality is that for years they have been gathering in expansive, well-funded refugee camps in Turkey.
Image: Turkey has eagerly invited 2 million refugees into their country to stay at camps funded by upward to 6 billion USD, not out of altruism, but to use refugees together with the US, NATO, and the EU, as a geopolitical weapon.

In fact, Turkey has brought in over 2 million refugees with a suspiciously eager “open door” policy and has spent upward to 6 billion USD on building and maintaining these immense camps. They have done so as part of a long-standing strategy to justify creating “safe havens” in northern Syria – essentially NATO invading and occupying Syrian territory, protecting their terrorist proxies within Syria’s borders so that they can strike deeper toward Damascus and finally topple the government of President Bashar Al Assad.

US plans to carve out a “safe haven” or “buffer zone” in northern Syria stretch back as far as 2012 – before a real crisis even existed. In their “Middle East Memo #21,” “Assessing Options for Regime Change,” it was stated specifically (emphasis added):

An alternative is for diplomatic efforts to focus first on how to end the violence and how to gain humanitarian access, as is being done under Annan’s leadership. This may lead to the creation of safe-havens and humanitarian corridors, which would have to be backed by limited military power. This would, of course, fall short of U.S. goals for Syria and could preserve Asad in power. From that starting point, however, it is possible that a broad coalition with the appropriate international mandate could add further coercive action to its efforts.

Brookings would elaborate upon this criminal conspiracy in their more recent report titled, “Deconstructing Syria: Towards a regionalized strategy for a confederal country.” It states (emphasis added):

The idea would be to help moderate elements establish reliable safe zones within Syria once they were able. American, as well as Saudi and Turkish and British and Jordanian and other Arab forces would act in support, not only from the air but eventually on the ground via the presence of special forces as well. The approach would benefit from Syria’s open desert terrain which could allow creation of buffer zones that could be monitored for possible signs of enemy attack through a combination of technologies, patrols, and other methods that outside special forces could help Syrian local fighters set up.

Were Assad foolish enough to challenge these zones, even if he somehow forced the withdrawal of the outside special forces, he would be likely to lose his air power in ensuing retaliatory strikes by outside forces, depriving his military of one of its few advantages over ISIL. Thus, he would be unlikely to do this.


Unfortunately for US policymakers, little justification or public support underpins any of these plans to intervene more directly in Syria in pursuit of what is obviously regime change dressed up as anything but.

Bring in the Refugees

However, in hopes of solving this lack of public support, the West appears to have taken a huge number of refugees created by its years of war upon the Middle East and North Africa, and suddenly releasing them in a deluge upon Europe. The Western media itself implicates Turkey as the source of these refugees, and reports like that from the International New York Times’ Greek Kathimerini paper, in an article titled, “Refugee flow linked to Turkish policy shift,” claims (emphasis added):

A sharp increase in the influx of migrants and refugees, mostly from Syria, into Greece is due in part to a shift in Turkey’s geopolitical tactics, according to diplomatic sources.

These officials link the wave of migrants into the eastern Aegean to political pressures in neighboring Turkey, which is bracing for snap elections in November, and to a recent decision by Ankara to join the US in bombing Islamic State targets in Syria. The analyses of several officials indicate that the influx from neighboring Turkey is taking place as Turkish officials look the other way or actively promote the exodus.


This wasn’t done until after years of staged terror attacks across Europe, in attempts to ratchet up fear, xenophobia, racism, and Islamophobia. Every attack without exception involved patsies tracked by Western intelligence agencies in some cases for almost a decade. Many had traveled to and participated in NATO’s proxy war on Syria, Iraq, and Yemen before returning home to carry out predictable acts of violence.

In the case of the infamous “Charlie Hebo” massacre, French security agencies followed the gunmen for years- even arresting and imprisoning one briefly. This surveillance continued up to but not including the final six months needed for them to plan and carry out their final act of violence. When asked why French security agencies ended their surveillance of known terrorists, they cited a lack of funds.

With Europeans intentionally put into a state of fear at home and in hopes of eliciting support for wars abroad NATO appears to now be undulating Europe with a tidal wave or refugees intentionally accumulated and cared for in Turkey either to flood back into NATO-established safe zones in Syria or into Europe to extort from the public backing for further military aggression.

The Big Reveal

The Huffington Post’s article, “David Cameron Facing Pressure To Bomb Islamic State In Syria After Lord Carey Calls To Group To Be ‘Crushed‘,” in covering the political discourse in England provides us with the final reveal of what was really behind this sudden “crisis.”

It states (emphasis added):

David Cameron is facing growing pressure to extend RAF air strikes into Syria as the worsening conflict threatened to drive increasing numbers of desperate refugees to seek sanctuary in Europe.

Former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey became the latest senior figure to call for a renewed military effort to “crush” Islamic State (IS) in its Syrian heartlands.

He also backed calls for British military intervention to help create “safe enclaves” within the country where civilians would be protected [BY WHOM?] from attack by the warring parties in Syria’s bloody civil war.

His intervention came after Chancellor George Osborne acknowledged that a comprehensive plan was needed to tackle the refugee crisis “at source”.

Speaking to reporters at a meeting of G20 finance ministers in Turkey on Saturday, he said that meant dealing with the “evil” regime of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad as well as the militant jihadists of IS.


At the end of the day, the “refugee crisis” is yet another contrivance by the same special interests who first sought to intervene in Syria to back “freedom fighters,” then to stop the use of “WMDs,” and most recently to fight “ISIS.” Now with all three failing to justify what is otherwise naked military aggression openly pursuing regime change in Syria as a basis for wider confrontation with Iran, Russia, and even China, “refugees” are being used as human pawns to provoke fear and rage across Europe.



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 18, 2015 9:58 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Two items of interest ....

Russia Says It May Send Troops Into Combat In Syria As A Worried Netanyahu Heads To Moscow
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-18/russia-says-it-may-send-troop
s-combat-syria-worried-netanyahu-heads-moscow


Putin says there are 2500 Russian personnel in Syria, but he would send more, if Assad asks. Netanyahu is going to whine at Putin about Hezbollah. Likely, he won't get much of a sympathetic hearing about the dangers of supporting terrorists, since Israel provided medical assistance to ISIS (now "IS") fighters who fled over the border. At the same time, the USA deal with Iran just passed its last Republican challenge. It's now the law of the land. Netanyahu must be feeling a little cold and friendless about now...

Russia is also sending (more) advanced weapons systems to Assad, such as a (short-range) SA-22 anti-aircraft system. Since IS doesn't have planes, an anti-aircraft system can only be aimed at Israel, the USA, or other western powers who are threatening to fly aircraft over Syria. I think as long as the USA bombs targets that Russia is comfortable with (i.e IS bases) then all will be well. But should the USA start targeting Assad-friendly forces, the planes may get their asses shot off. Russia has no intention of allowing another Libya. They're going to save us from ourselves.

And then ...

"U.S. Begins Military Talks With Russia on Syria"
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/19/world/europe/us-to-begin-military-ta
lks-with-russia-on-syria.html

Russia has been calling for direct military communication since it was cut off (BY THE USA) a few months ago. Now, after months of "Assad must go" rhetoric, Kerry is seeking a "political solution". The reality is that with a crisis refugee situation swamping Europe - which is calling for an end to the war and a solution to IS, and with Russia willing to risk (maybe even eager to risk) "unfortunate incidents" with the USA in Syria, and the fact that the USA is widely seen as tolerating IS to do it's dirty work in getting rid of Assad (gee, why would anyone think THAT?), the military/political situation for the USA may have changed.

I sure hope so. It's time we stopped working with/ on behalf of takfiri (wahhabi) terrorists by destroying nations in the Middle East.






--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 19, 2015 7:24 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Russia has no intention of allowing another Libya. They're going to save us from ourselves.

Lol, yes, God forbid peaceful and stable Syria become another Libya...

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 19, 2015 8:33 AM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Quote:

Russia has no intention of allowing another Libya. They're going to save us from ourselves.

Lol, yes, God forbid peaceful and stable Syria become another Libya...

It's not personal. It's just war.



Or another Ukraine.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:53 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Another ZH article, pretty much says the same as my summary.

Clock Ticks On US Syria Strategy As Assad Pounds ISIS Targets, Russia Sends Fighter Jets
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-19/clock-ticks-us-syria-strategy
-assad-pounds-isis-targets-russia-sends-fighter-jets




--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns. gallery.jpg

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 20, 2015 1:35 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


From McClatchy, a more "credible" source ...


Quote:

WASHINGTON

The United States and Russia agreed Friday to consider potential areas of military cooperation in civil war-wracked Syria as a powerful al Qaida-allied rebel group vowed to “defeat” the expanding Russian military force that’s being deployed in northwestern Syria.

The agreement to hold military-to-military talks in parallel with diplomatic consultations was reached in a telephone conversation between Defense Secretary Ash Carter and his Russian counterpart, Sergei Shoygu, the first time they’ve spoken since Carter took his post seven months ago, a Pentagon statement said.

Thanks to the USA breaking off direct talks ...

Quote:

The U.S. government, including former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, President Obama and spokespeople for the State Department, has been saying that Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad's "days are numbered" since 2011. As many journalists have pointed out in State Department briefings, it's become a very long number.
Which is now extended indefinitely, seeing as Al Nusra/ ISIS/ AQIS and the other various terrorist organizations couldn't quite do the job for the USA!

Quote:

“The secretary and the minister talked about areas where the United States and Russia’s perspectives overlap and areas of divergence,” the statement said, adding that further talks on possible coordination would be held.

The discussions herald a significant shift in great power involvement in the four-year-old Syrian conflict and are the result of the new influence attained by Russian President Vladimir Putin through the buildup of Russian aircraft, tanks, artillery and troops near the Syrian port city of Latakia.

The buildup is Moscow’s first major military operation outside of the former Soviet Union


Wait. Wha...? You mean not Ukraine??

Quote:

since the 1979-89 occupation of Afghanistan. As such, it represents a dangerous gamble for Putin because his intervention to bolster embattled Syrian President Bashar Assad offers a powerful incentive to Syrian rebel groups to collaborate in attacking the growing Russian military presence.
The Russian Army decimated Chechen terrorists (which, according to some reports, were aided, trained, and abetted by Al Qaida, sent to Chechnya by Saudi Arabia with CIA blessings). The Russian army is feared by IS. The USA military? Not so much. According to the folks that I know, Russia could wipe out most of IS in a month, if it became an objective.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/national-securit
y/article35764446.html#storylink=cpy


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 20, 2015 10:15 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.




Polls Show Syrians Overwhelmingly Blame U.S. for ISIS


Quote:


82% agree “IS [Islamic State] is US and foreign made group.”
79% agree “Foreign fighters made war worse.”
70% agree “Oppose division of country.”
65% agree “Syrians can live together again.”
64% agree “Diplomatic solution possible.”
57% agree “Situation is worsening.”
51% agree “Political solution best answer.”
49% agree “Oppose US coalition air strikes.”
22% agree “IS is a positive influence.”
21% agree “Prefer life now than under Assad.”



http://off-guardian.org/2015/09/19/polls-show-syrians-overwhelmingly-b
lame-u-s-for-isis
/




--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 21, 2015 7:29 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


82% blame USA for IS
55% blame other Arab states for IS
39% blame Iran for IS
42% blame the Syrian regime for IS

It seems like Syrians don't really know who created IS and are just pointing the finger of blame in all directions. In addition, 'if in doubt blame the Great Satan', seems to be the order of the day here. No doubt this idea is pushed heavily by Syrian state propaganda just as it is in Russian propaganda, which Signy reads.


It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 21, 2015 12:01 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I don't suppose it would be too much to ask for links? Or are you jut pulling numbers out of your ass?

BTW, it is possible that more than one nation is responsible for IS. IF the USA hadn't invaded Iraq and disbanded the Sunni Army ... if Saudi Arabia hadn't built it's madrassas all over creation and fomented al Qaida (which is a well-known story) .... if Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the other gulf states hadn't raced pell-mell to arm jihadists throughout the ME in their burning desire to get rid of Iran's ally (Syria) ... and if the USA hadn't actively destroyed Libya and smiled benevolently over the intended destruction of Syria via destabilization by terrorists ... and funded and trained so-called "moderate opposition" in Jordan and Syria... then IS wouldn't have come about.

It's not like ONE nation or ONE event caused IS to come into being. There's shared responsibility here between the USA and its gulf state allies. It's perfectly realistic to point the finger in more than one direction, because there's more than one nation at fault.

Not that you would know anything about the real world!

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 22, 2015 6:22 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

I don't suppose it would be too much to ask for links? Or are you jut pulling numbers out of your ass?

Follow the link in your own article.

Quote:

BTW, it is possible that more than one nation is responsible for IS.

Yes but Syrians' views are still all over the place - 82% blame the USA and 42% blame Assad - that means at least 24% blame both. This is contradictory, and betrays deep, widespread bewilderment and confusion.

Not surprising considering Syrians have no access to evidence, only propaganda. Ignorant and propagandised - polling them for their thoughts on the matter is like polling Republicans on climate change. Or RT viewers on the Ukraine crisis.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 22, 2015 10:47 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 25, 2015 8:21 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

I'd be curious how they got responses from people living in ISIS controlled areas.
Yeah me too! Seen any pollsters in IS-controlled territory lately? I mean, ones who haven't been beheaded?

Quote:

Not surprising people living in gov controlled areas are more pro-asad.
Not surprisingly, pollsters are actually able to operate in Assad-controlled territories. That should tell you about the relative freedom under IS versus Assad. HINT: Assad is better. Unless you want to make the ridiculous argument that Assad is worse than IS. If so, I'd be very interested to hear your explanation of how that is so.


Quote:

"The Assad regime has perfected the role of being “at once an arsonist and a fireman,”
ASSAD is fomenting terrorism in his nation?? Terrorism which has taken the oil=producing regions of Syria, and threatened Damascus? REALLY??? What are you: nuts???

If we really want to find out how jihadists are managing to operate in Syria (and Iraq) how about if we follow the money?

The USA transshipped SAUDI and QATARI arms from Libya to jihadists in Syria
SAUDI ARABIA shipped arms and sent terrorists to Syria
The USA trained, armed, funded, and is providing satellite intel to "moderate" rebels (who turn out to be jihadists)
TURKEY laundered oil from IS-captured regions in Syria and Iraq, and allowed IS-bound recruits, arms, and money to flow across its border into Syria.
TURKEY is busy fighting one of the few effective anti-IS forces, the Kurds.
JORDAN provided training facilities for "moderate" rebels.


But, despite all of this, in your humble opinion, all of this near-death experience for Assad is ASSAD'S fault.
Wow.


I already wrote about what I learned from a Syrian Xtian. In his view, if Assad falls, you can expect a bloodbath. The "rebels" are hardcore fanatics who will kill Xtians, Allawites, Druze, Jews, and other minorities in Syria, and enslave women. (I wonder sometimes if you get your rock off on that thought: Enslaved women! Yum yum!)

So, you have a choice: Either Assad or IS. There are no other options. Which do you support? (If the USA-satellite photos just found in jihadist hands says anything, Obama supports IS and will continue to support IS, no matter what he says.)

Quote:

There are many "conclusions" one could draw from that polling - of course GSTRING and people of his ilk will look for the most flattering for the US (of all the data it's about the only one btw), all the while not realizing (or caring) how like blind stooges it makes them look.
Fixed it for you. YOU may not realize that Saudi Arabia has been using Muslim terrorists around the world, with the help and support of the USA ... but the rest of the world has figured it out by now. No, its not flattering, but it's the truth.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 25, 2015 11:11 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

ASSAD is fomenting terrorism in his nation??

No doubt about it that he did initially. To what extent he still continues to do so one can only speculate. Assad releasing the most radical jihadists from its jails straight into the ranks of IS, and then the unspoken but obvious alliance between regime forces and IS in 2012-13, where neither side attacked the other and both sides attacked the other Syrian rebels... all of this is telling enough.

But then also look at how the regime has benefited from the rise of IS. On the battlefield it is undoubtedly stronger than it was 2-3 years ago, thanks to Assad being able to concentrate his forces, and even drawing help from IS in pummelling the rebels. In terms of propaganda and diplomatic cover IS is a godsend for Assad - all the pro-Assad arguments which you are faithfully parroting rely on creating a false dichotomy between Assad and IS. And while IS steals all the headlines for its gruesome tactics, Assad's forces continue to quietly kill civilians in much higher numbers, with minimal condemnation around the world.

Quote:

Around the beginning of the Syrian uprising, in March 2011, Assad once again released jihadists from the country's prisons. Simultaneously, tens of thousands of Syrian students, liberal activists and human rights advocates began being arrested. Their fates were recently documented by Human Rights Watch, which alleges that many have been detained arbitrarily, tortured and subjected to unfair trials.

Already at the beginning of the uprising, Assad vilified his opponents as members of al-Qaida, which wasn't true at the time. Some critics of the regime now claim that by releasing the jihadists from prison, Assad's intention was to quickly radicalize the opposition, discrediting it in the process. If that was his aim, it has certainly been a success.


http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/former-prisoners-fight-in-sy
rian-insurgency-a-927158.html


Another good article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11051566/Ho
w-Assad-helped-the-rise-of-his-foe-Isil.html


It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 25, 2015 1:02 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

ASSAD is fomenting terrorism in his nation?? -SIGNY
No doubt about it that he did initially

No doubt Saddam had WMD, Libyan rebels were freedom fighters, and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt were pro-democracy.

NEXT?

Quote:

Around the beginning of the Syrian uprising, in March 2011, Assad once again released jihadists from the country's prisons. Simultaneously, tens of thousands of Syrian students, liberal activists and human rights advocates began being arrested. Their fates were recently documented by Human Rights Watch, which alleges that many have been detained arbitrarily, tortured and subjected to unfair trials.


As I said, I asked a Syrian that I knew AT THE VERY BEGINNING of this so-called rebellion what he thought. Hesitantly, I said something like "I suppose that you're glad that the people are demanding democracy?" and he looked STARTLED. It's been a long time since I saw anyone so instantaneously, reflexively shocked.

I had just violated a very, very basic Syrian Xtian understanding of what life was about in Syria. His look said "You, a supposedly informed leftist ... are so taken in by the narrative that these anti-Assad "rebels" are just freedom-seeking liberals?"

That's when he very patiently, and with great restraint, informed me about the situation in Syria: Anti-Assad forces were almost uniformly Sunni jihadists. Minorities in Syria- the Allawites, Druze, Xtians, and Jews - looked on Assad as a bulwark against potential genocide.

So, you can forget the narrative of the Arab Spring: In Libya, Egypt, and Syria the so-called "students, liberal activists and human rights advocates" were often, from the very beginning, wahabbi-based jihadists of various stripes.

Quote:

the unspoken but obvious alliance between regime forces and IS in 2012-13
There was no ISIS in 2012. What are you talking about? How can Assad have allied with something that didn't even exist?



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 25, 2015 1:17 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


GSTRING, the choice is between Assad and ISIS.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 26, 2015 12:03 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

GSTRING, the choice is between Assad and ISIS.- SIGNY

No it isn't - it's never as simple as that, not in the ME - or maybe you hadn't noticed any history?- GSTRING



And, what do you think the options are? Aside from ISIS and Assad, that is.



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 26, 2015 10:55 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Only an idiot thinks there are actual answers and solutions in the ME.


So, in your opinion there are no options, and nothing will help.

If that's the case, should the USA (or the EU, or perhaps anyone from outside of the region) be involved in any way? Should any foreign nation be involved in bombing/ invading/ creating no-fly zones/ sending arms and intel to/ any nation in the ME?



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 26, 2015 2:06 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


It's not a trick question, G. I'm simply asking you to expand on your assumption.


Meanwhile ...


Chinese Navy sets off for Syria
Quote:

According to the Russian Senator Igor Morozov, Beijing has taken decision to take part in combating IS and sent its vessels to the Syrian coast.

Igor Morozov, member of the Russian Federation Committee on International Affairs claimed about the beginning of the military operation by China against the IS terrorists. "It is known, that China has joined our military operation in Syria, the Chinese cruiser has already entered the Mediterranean, aircraft carrier follows it," Morozov said.

According to him, Iran may soon join the operation carried out by Russia against the IS terrorists, via Hezbollah. Thus, the Russian coalition in the region gains ground, and most reasonable step of the US would be to join it. Although the stance of Moscow and Washington on the ways of settlement of the Syrian conflict differs, nonetheless, low efficiency of the US coalition acts against terrorists is obvious. Islamists have just strengthened their positions.


http://english.pravda.ru/news/world/25-09-2015/132137-china-0/

If true, this represents a significant escalation by China.

I think that Russia and China analysts think that the USA is using jihadists of various persuasions to attack Russia and China at their "underbelly" ... Chechnya, Xinjiang, Azerbaijan etc. There are Uyghur (Chinese Muslims) jihadists active throughout Xinjiang, in fact Uyghurs terrorists were arrested for a bombing of Chinese cultural shrine in Thailand. Uyghur terrorists are also fighting in Syria. Looks like Russia, China(?), Iran, and Hezbollah have decided to face down the USA-Turkish-Saudi axis of terrorism.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 26, 2015 10:48 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Only an idiot thinks there are actual answers and solutions in the ME.- G


So, in your opinion there are no options, and nothing will help.

If that's the case, should the USA (or the EU, or perhaps anyone from outside of the region) be involved in any way? Should any foreign nation be involved in bombing/ invading/ creating no-fly zones/creating "safe zones"/sending arms and intel to any nation in the ME?



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 27, 2015 7:18 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Again, not a trick question, G.



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 27, 2015 7:58 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Again, not a trick question, G. _SIGNY
No, it's just a really, really dumb & obvious question


Which you have had a remarkably hard time answering, and STILL haven't answered. So maybe it's not so "obvious" after all!

Quote:

and you're following assumptions are sooooo naive it's hard to have a serious response. Would you even understand if I gave one?

I dunno. When you answer my question, maybe I can tell.

Quote:

Would you even care? No, you've shown little interest in understanding what other people have to offer.

And you've shown ZERO interest in what I've had to offer, and frankly, I've brought a lot more to the table. When I posted this very thread, you were convinced ( convinced, I tell you!) that it was a mere "distraction" from Ukraine! You were ready to ignore and dismiss it. If I hadn't brought it up, it would have taken you two weeks to realize that it was a significant event. And amazingly, that's about how long it took for you to figure it out. (The dates on the various threads prove my point.)

For comparison, in this thread http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=60015 you and your friends do EXACTLY what I predicted. Even my prediction didn't dissuade you from fulfilling your internally-driven mandate: you laughed like hyenas in a trash dump. But, did you bring one insight, one idea, one fact to the table?

No.

In two weeks you and your friends have failed to add one insight, one fact, one piece of relevant information. Failed.

Quote:

You've been ignoring my questions for over a year.

Liar.

Quote:

Go China!

Since you have done everything possible to ignore the very question that you, yourself posed on the topic of Syria - trailed every red herring and thrown every insult possible, I'm going to ask it again ...

IF THERE ARE "NO OPTIONS" IN SYRIA (OR THE MIDEAST IN GENERAL) ACCORDING TO YOU, WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE?

I put it in caps so maybe you'll answer the question this time. Don't forget, I'm just asking you a question based on your very own assumptions.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 27, 2015 9:06 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


G, I see you nipped in for a moment to post a distracting thread, and ducked out again. And once again failed to answer the question that you yourself posed: If there is "no" solution to the Mideast (according to you) should ANY non-Mideastern intervene in the form of invasions, bombing, no-fly zones, "safe" zones, etc?

I may seem harsh, but I credit you with good intentions. But you have one fatal flaw, which I've been trying to point out over and over (and over and over): You think that anything western politicians and media propose, by definition, is good and for your (our) benefit.

You have not applied the appropriate mistrust that's required to evaluate ALL politicians and media - western, eastern, middle, what-have-you.

MOST politicians, and NO media, are devoid of any moral sense whatsoever. If TPTB think there is money to be made in jihadism, they'll go wherever the money is. I hope you keep that in mind for the future.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 27, 2015 9:58 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Again, not a trick question, G. _SIGNY
No, it's just a really, really dumb & obvious question


Which you have had a remarkably hard time answering, and STILL haven't answered. So maybe it's not so "obvious" after all!

Quote:

and you're following assumptions are sooooo naive it's hard to have a serious response. Would you even understand if I gave one?

I dunno. When you answer my question, maybe I can tell.

Quote:

Would you even care? No, you've shown little interest in understanding what other people have to offer.

And you've shown ZERO interest in what I've had to offer, and frankly, I've brought a lot more to the table. When I posted this very thread, you were convinced ( convinced, I tell you!) that it was a mere "distraction" from Ukraine! You were ready to ignore and dismiss it. If I hadn't brought it up, it would have taken you two weeks to realize that it was a significant event. And amazingly, that's about how long it took for you to figure it out... about as long as the MSM harped on it, plus a couple of days of denial on admitting its significance. (The dates on the various threads prove my point.)

For comparison, in this thread http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=60015 you and your friends do EXACTLY what I predicted. Even my prediction didn't dissuade you from fulfilling your internally-driven mandate: you laughed like hyenas in a trash dump. But, did you bring one insight, one idea, one fact to the table?

No.

In two weeks you and your friends have failed to add one insight, one fact, one piece of relevant information. Failed.

Quote:

You've been ignoring my questions for over a year.

Liar.

Quote:

Go China!

Since you have done everything possible to ignore the very question that you, yourself posed on the topic of Syria - trailed every red herring and thrown every insult possible, I'm going to ask it again ...

IF THERE ARE "NO OPTIONS" IN SYRIA (OR THE MIDEAST IN GENERAL) ACCORDING TO YOU, WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE?

I put it in caps so maybe you'll answer the question this time. Don't forget, I'm just asking you a question based on your very own assumptions.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 27, 2015 12:26 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


And now for a different POV. (No representation is made of the author's accuracy)
Quote:

It must be said that with all the stories, rumours and misinformation that have been spread around throughout the “War On Syria”, Al-Manar has been a benchmark of credibility.

In order of reliability, there are four Arabic media outlets that have been reporting and “leaking” news. Al-Manar had been the most reliable, followed by the Lebanese daily Assafir, then the Lebanese online daily Al-Akhbar, and Al-Mayadin.

Al-Manar has broken many news, and in our role as pro-Syrian activists, Intibah (my wife) and myself have taken upon ourselves the task of translating some key Arabic reports and relevant articles for the English-speaking world.

One of those stories was about the “secret visit” of Bandar to Moscow and his attempts to both bribe and threaten President Putin. Our translation of the story was initially snubbed until it became widely accepted as public knowledge.

Another big story, perhaps the biggest of them all, was a translation of an Al-Manar/Al-Akhbar report that explained the events following the false flag chemical weapons attack that accused the Syrian Army of using chemical weapons in East Ghouta. ... The justification for intervention therefore had to be very substantial and convincing; a scenario worthy of a false flag, and that false flag was the East Ghouta chemical attack.

Let’s recap those nail-biting days of August 2013. A chemical attack on Syrian civilians was conjured up by Bandar with the help of Mossad. The Syrian Army was accused of the massacre. Photos of dead children were reminiscent of the chemical massacres of Saddam against the Kurds. The Western media news became fixated on the subject, replaying it repeatedly in order to generate a global wave of anti-Assad hostility. ... For the USA, it was THE big opportunity it had been waiting for, and for so long, in order to justify bombing the hell out of Damascus with or without a UNSC mandate. America was finally ready to blast Syria with an unprecedented ferocity that would reflect its hatred, anger and the impatience it exercised in the waiting process.

But again, this was not to happen.

After missing out on being able to bomb Syria in February 1991, in April 2003 (after the invasions of Iraq), and again in October 2011 and February 2012 (after the UNSC Russian/Chinese Vetoes), America was still unable to bomb Syria even after the whole Eastern Ghouta kerfuffle of August 2013.

In fact, in September 2013, America did attack Syria, but this attack ended as soon as it started. When Al-Manar/Al-Akhbar published the news and we translated it into English (1), it was widely discounted. It is still not taken very seriously by everyone, but all evidence on the ground and the changes in the stands of America and its European allies are all indicative that this story holds ground.

America fired two missiles at Syria over the Mediterranean. [This was when Russian ships were athwart the Syrian coast- SIGNY] They were spotted by Russia, and one missile was intercepted and destroyed, and the other was hacked into and diverted into the sea.

Russian diplomacy was quick to report the action of its military to the Americans in an attempt to keep this story hush hush, to prevent further escalation, and to avoid needless embarrassment. [To the USA- SIGNY] As an outcome, Russia brokered the Syrian chemical weapons disposal deal as a face-saver for America, so that America did not seem like it backed down about bombing Syria.

... What is ironic is that even some friends of Syria are unaware of the fact that America has actually been unable to bomb Syria for over two decades...

... No one is claiming that America is yet serious about fighting ISIS, and this has been said before and needs to be said again. The only effective way to fight ISIS militarily is to cut off its supply lines first, and then to work in conjunction with the Syrian Army.

... The Russian role has been extremely significant in avoiding an all-out American attack on Syria. But it has not been the sole factor.

The other perhaps most important factors that have protected Syria from American attacks are Hezbollah and ironically, Israel. The presence of Israel as a southern “neighbour” of both Syria and Lebanon has fortuitously turned, in this instance, into a blessing in disguise by virtue of reprisal-based deterrence.

The attrition guerrilla-style war that Hezbollah waged against Israel from 1982 leading up to the defeat of the latter and its retreat from Lebanon in 2000 has put Hezbollah in the rank of organizations with highly effective guerilla-style warfare, no more.

However, the ensuing 2006 July Israel-Hezbollah war lifted Hezbollah to a whole new echelon. Not only was Hezbollah able to defeat Israeli forces in ground battle, not only it sank a frigate, but its missiles were able to reach deep into Israel, leaving no corner within Israel safe.

The myth of the undefeatable Israeli army was finally and irreversibly broken. This has created a whole new balance of power in which Israel needs to think more than twice before it enters into any new military gamble that directly or indirectly involves Hezbollah.

Nearly a decade later, Hezbollah has a much larger missile arsenal in terms of count and lethality. Hezbollah now has drones, and guided smart bombs, and has proven their effectiveness in the battle of Qalamoun against ISIS. As a matter of fact, Hezbollah drones have been spotted as far as southern Israel.[In other words, they have crossed the entire length of Israel, north to south- SIGNY] Furthermore, in any upcoming confrontation with Hezbollah, Israel is fearful that underground tunnels will enable Hezbollah fighters to infiltrate into the Galilee.

America knows well that any serious attack on Damascus will automatically mean that Israel will be showered by hundreds and thousands of rockets, not only by Hezbollah, but also by the Syrian Army which has been sitting tight on its even larger arsenal of rockets. No place in Israel will be left safe.

Israeli ground to air anti-missile defences (ie Patriot Missiles and the like) will be rendered useless when confronting an endless barrage of rockets. The so-called “Iron Dome” shield was not even able to shield Israel from the limited number of rockets fired from just Gaza. In an all-out war with both Hezbollah and Syria, the anti-rocket defence systems will utterly fail.

So to complete a previously made statement, we must say that unless some serious changes take place, and unless America no longer cares about avoiding a confrontation with Russia, and unless it stops caring about protecting Israel, it will remain unable to bomb Syria.


http://thesaker.is/war-on-syria-not-quite-according-to-plan-part-3-a-u
sa-unable-to-bomb-syria
/

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 27, 2015 2:04 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


G, you ask stupid questions. I didn't want to bother answering them, but here are my answers:

Quote:

1. I wonder how free they feel about giving their honest opinion?

Actually, that's not a question, it's a statement. Putting a question mark at the end of statement doesn't make it a question. "I wonder what the whether is going to be like tomorrow" is not a question, it's a statement that I wonder about something. AM I supposed to answer your questions (to yourself) for you?

Quote:

2. I wonder if they feel it matters even having an opinion?
Ditto

Quote:

3. Or if having an opinion openly expressed is dangerous to them and their family?

Ditto

Quote:

YOU NOT ONLY DON'T ANSWER DIRECT QUESTIONS, YOU DON'T ANSWER THE SAME QUESTION MORE THAN ONCE.
If I DON'T answer "direct questions", then how can I possibly not answer them more than once? Doesn't that imply that I've answered them once already?

Quote:

4. SECOND ATTEMPT TO GET YOU TO ANSWER:
You also conveniently ignore the question of just how free people in Assad controlled areas feel about expressing themselves honestly. Maybe it's the "honest" part of that you have trouble with?

Not at all. That's my answer!

Quote:

5, 6. You asked one person? What if that person is the equivalent of a Syria's Auraptor?
It's more than you managed!

Quote:

7. Again, I think you only prove why your pov can't ever be trusted. Having said that, yes, without Assad there will be a vacuum and more deaths. Maybe that's why we haven't ever stepped over that line and wiped him out?
Despite the fact that the USA has reiterated over and over that "Assad must go"? Ginned up a chemical attack to provide the USA with the rationale to start bombing, and backed off only when Russian ships intervened?

Quote:

8. I’m not seeing one thing I've said that flatters the US - please clarify (or make something up).
I could point to the immediate statement above, which implies a heretofore unseen foreign policy wisdom.

Quote:

9. No it isn't - it's never as simple as that, not in the ME - or maybe you hadn't noticed any history?
I noticed history. That's my answer.

So, based on the history that YOU noticed, which leads you to conclude there are NO options in the Mideast, what is your proposal? What should happen next?

Quote:

YOU NOT ONLY DON'T ANSWER DIRECT QUESTIONS, YOU DON'T ANSWER THE SAME QUESTION MORE THAN ONCE.
I think I pointed out the logical flaw to that already, because
(1) If I answered a question once, why should I answer it again, and
(2) If I answered a question once, clearly I've answered it and can't be accused of not answering your questions. Maybe I'm being way too literal, but this sentence, which you capitalized and repeated more than once, clearly means something to you but makes no sense to me.

Quote:

10. SECOND ATTEMPT TO GET YOU TO ANSWER::
Also:

"I'm not seeing one thing I've said that flatters the US - please clarify (or make something up)."

I just responded to your statement, which BTW was not a question.

Quote:

I see you have chosen deflection from your worn out bag of tricks. Any little bit of truth or honesty hidden away in there?
Yep, there IS truth and honesty "in there"! That's my answer!

Quote:

As to your question, I did answer it, here it is again:
Only an idiot thinks there are actual answers and solutions in the ME. The political landscape shifts as much as the sands of the desert (omg what great metaphor). You're pretty much screwed whatever you do if you are there.

And so what is your suggestion?

Quote:

Maybe, as you have shown over and over, you just can't understand the answer?
If I assume what your answer is, you'll accuse me of putting words in your mouth. So instead of me ASSUMING that you think that ALL nations should step out of Syria ... and that includes the USA, UK, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, France, Russia, China, Iran, etc... why don't you just tell me that's what you mean? Unless, of course, that isn't what you mean, in which case you should clarify.

Quote:

So yeah, you just flat out suck.

Whatever.

BTW, to get back to your non-questions about opinion polls in Syria ... quite often they're conducted by credible international polling companies, like Reuters and Gallup. Now, I have no idea how the polls are conducted ... by phone? By mail? In-person? And I have no idea how the confidentiality of the polled person is assured, but pollsters usually check the accuracy of the answers by asking the same question with different wording in both positive and negative terms. Maybe you should check into the polling practices of the pollsters in Syria to find out how they work.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 27, 2015 2:28 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


And I point out again, neither you nor your friends have brought much insight or news to the discussion, and the one point that you HAVE made (there are no options in the mideast) is the one point you refuse to clarify. You've spent all of your time and capital letters reacting to my posts and attacking me directly.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 28, 2015 8:01 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


"You've spent all of your time and capital letters reacting to my posts and attacking me directly."

Well, at least G lost the capital letters.




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 29, 2015 5:53 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:


G, you ask stupid questions. I didn't want to bother answering them... - SIGNY

I say you don't answer my questions and you call me a liar. So I prove you wrong ten times in this thread alone - GSTRING


Liar.


Six of the "questions" weren't even questions, they were statements. In two of those (non-questions, repeated) you didn't even BOTHER to use a question mark:

(1)I wonder how does "...please clarify (or make something up" rates as a question?
Oh, BTW- According to you, I just asked you a question.

(2) Please clarify, or make something up!
That was another GSTRING-style "question", in case you hadn't noticed.


Three of those "questions" were of the "When did you stop beating your wife?" variety, which people around these parts used to be smart enough to realize were invalid.
Quote:

"Maybe it's the "honest" part you have trouble with?"
"maybe you hadn't noticed any history?"
"Any little bit of truth or honesty hidden away in there?"



(3) Say, GSTRING, do you have a problem asking honest questions?

Another "question" of th GSTRING variety.

So, out of those ten supposed questions, two of them were real questions (and one of them was actually TWO questions) but I wonder about that third question ... Saying "maybe" and then putting a question mark at the end, it's a little like "I wonder"...

(4) Maybe it could be interpreted as a statement?
Lookit that! Another GSTRING-style "question"!

There, four "questions", just like the ones you "asked". Now, please answer them.

BTW, I did ask you an honest, consequential, grammatically-correct question, which you still haven't answered. It's an important one too, and it simply follows on something you yourself said:

You said
Quote:

Only an idiot thinks there are actual answers and solutions in the ME.

My question to you ... and it was an honest, real question, with a question mark and everything ... was

Quote:

If that's the case, should the USA (or the EU, or perhaps anyone from outside of the region) be involved in any way? Should any foreign nation be involved in bombing/ invading/ creating no-fly zones/creating "safe zones"/sending arms and intel to any nation in the ME?


If you can manage to squeeze out an answer, it'll move the discussion forward. But you've been avoiding this train of thought like the plague and I'll bet you don't answer it this time either!


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 29, 2015 6:49 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Ghassan Kadi on Syria

http://thesaker.is/war-on-syria-not-quite-according-to-plan-part-1-the
-islamist-american-love-hate-quagmire-facts-and-myths
/
http://thesaker.is/war-on-syria-not-quite-according-to-plan-part-2-the
-plot
/
http://thesaker.is/war-on-syria-not-quite-according-to-plan-part-3-a-u
sa-unable-to-bomb-syria
/

I know a real-life Mideast expert, a journalist who learned Hebrew and lived in Israel and Egypt for many years and who still maintains contacts there (both journalistic and regular citizens). Although I can't vouch for the accuracy of the above statements, HE said they were very accurate and complete, an excellent history and analysis of Syria, it's relationship with Lebanon, al Qaida, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel, IS etc. So I recommend that you look into them, you may not agree with everything that is said but you will come away with a lot more information or at least a lot more questions. And, of course, if you have any information to the contrary (information, not opinion, allegations, or conjecture) please post it.

So like I said, a lot of this was unfamiliar.

But Kadi did touch on something I've been wondering about for quite a while, and that was how much IS was under USA control, and whether(or not) the USA and Saudi Arabia were truly done with IS.

As described, the real mastermind behind IS was Bandar ("Bush") bin Sultan, former head of Saudi Security. He thought (according to Kadi) that since he was bankrolling IS, he controlled them.

He even threatened Putin with an unleashing of terrorism against the Sochi Olympics (I even posted about that here). But somewhere along the way, Bandar bin Sultan was stripped of his title and power, and sent as a "Special Envoy" to Jordan, a distinct demotion from the inner halls of USA and Saudi Arabia. (I also posted about that here). So some of what Kadi talks about tracks with what I've previously read.

According to Kadi, you can bankroll IS, but they will never do what you say because they're not motivated by money, they really are religious fanatics. When the USA failed to bomb Syria (AGAIN) after the IS-prompted chemical attack on Ghouta (2013), IS got disgusted with American failure to support them with bombing attacks on Assad's forces. In addition, since they had developed their own source of money (oilfields in northern Iraq and northern Syria, laundered by Turkey) they felt free to tell Saudi Arabia to piss off. That's when Bandar was removed from his post: He had failed to keep control of his pet terrorists, which became a potential threat to the corrupt Saudi regime.

Saudi Arabia STILL thinks of al Qaida/ al Nusra as its friends. Apparently, so do some high-ranking ex- and present- military officers and State Dept officials. That's why you hear some high-ranking American military people (like Gnl Petraeus) calling for support of al Qaida:

Because al Qaida are the "friendly" Saudi terrorists who helped us in Afghanistan and Chechnya and potentially Syria (that was the plan, anyway. Not saying anything about Iraq, Yemen, Libya, and Sudan tho. Prolly considered acceptable collateral damage.) ...

But IS is the dangerous genie that Saudi Arabia let out of the bottle.

Anyway, what I got out of the articles is that there really is a split between Saudi Arabia and IS and between IS and the USA. Plus a lot of history and background. If you want to know more, read the articles.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 29, 2015 7:56 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Syria and Yemen may have been the "bridge too far" for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. According to some sources, there is a letter circulating among the Saudi royal family, some of whom are anxious to depose the current King Salman. They're unhappy with the plan to drive oil prices down plus the expenses of running a war in Yemen and Syria.

Between the lost revenues and the increased expenses, even the Saudi coffers are running bare. Apparently, you CAN overspend, even if you've got billions and billion in the bank!

Here is one source but there are many others which say the same thing

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/28/saudi-royal-calls-regime-
change-letters-leadership-king-salman


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 2, 2015 8:04 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Yes, it was darkly amusing to hear Obozo call for nations to respect "human rights" and sovereignty, even after the USA killed hundreds of thousands (if not a million) people in the mideast, destroyed three nations, and was STILL calling for "regime change" for a fourth nation (Syria)!

The irony was not lost on me either.

--------------

BTW- by either conveniently forgetting USA misdeeds ... or deliberately failing to mention them .... you paint a VERY flattering picture of the USA.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 2, 2015 8:30 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


GSTRING, I quoted you in my post, where you said:

Quote:

I say you don't answer my questions and you call me a liar. So I prove you wrong ten times in this thread alone - GSTRING
Nothing about "points" in there!

Now, you COULD say that I posted-edited that word ("points") out, since it was the text that I had access to. On the other hand, I COULD say that you post-edited the word "points" in to your threads, since that was the text that YOU had access to.

GSTRING, your "points", or questions, or whatever you want to call them, aren't worth addressing, for the most part.

You asked me if I was honest. That's a question worth answering?

You wondered whether people in Assad-controlled parts of Syria feel free to answer polls honestly, when (1) many polls are conducted by international organizations and Assad likely has no way of finding out what was said, and (2) by comparison, pollsters can't even operate in ISIS-controlled areas for fear of death.

On the other hand, you made what I thought was a significant point that in your view, there are no solutions in the middle east.

My question to you, was that - based on your own statement - should ANY foreign nation be interfering in the ME, whether bombing, or invading, or creating no-fly zones, or "safe" zones, or what-have-you.

And you refuse to expand on your very own point.

One might think that you were so focused on arguing against Russian interference that you failed to notice that your argument would apply to western nations as well... and the west has been interfering in the ME for decades. And because you were so completely blindsided by your focus on RUSSIA, you actually refuse to discuss where your very own (biased) logic has taken you. At least, that's what I get out of it. Unless you clarify otherwise.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 2, 2015 8:47 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


There are continuing rumors that Chinese ships are waiting on the Mediterranean. What they're waiting for, according to these rumors, is either a request from Assad for help, or a request from the Russians, before they enter Syrian waters.

There is a coalition of Iran, Syria, Russia, Hezbollah, and Iraq is sharing information with this group. Potentially China and the Kurds could join as well.

It occurred to me that we could get to see how much against this alliance Obama really is by whether or not he re-introduces sanctions on Iran, since it's Iran that's providing the largest "boots on the ground" component.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 2, 2015 8:56 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


New York Times story that Russians aren't bombing ISIS locations is contradicted by ... the BBC:

New York Times (9/30/15)
Quote:

A Syrian opposition activist network, the Local Co-ordination Committees, said Russian warplanes hit five towns—Zafaraneh, Rastan, Talbiseh, Makarmia and Ghanto—resulting in the deaths of 36 people, including five children.
None of the areas targeted were controlled by IS, activists said.



BBC (9/30/15)
Quote:

The Islamic State jihadist group executed nine men and a boy it accused of being gay in central and northern Syria on Monday, a monitoring group said.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the jihadists shot dead seven men in Rastan, a town in Homs province of central Syria, “after accusing them of being homosexual.”



That puts into question either the NYT and the "activists" that it's quoting, or the BBC. I'd put my money on the "activists" being jihadists and the NYT being dishonest or careless, but maybe that's just me.



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 2, 2015 9:36 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Also, I found this headline funny!

With One Bombing Run Russia Gets the US to Acknowledge CIA’s 'Covert' Regime Change Forces

Apparently, the parts being bombed that weren't ISIS were CIA. Whooda thunk???
/snicker

I think it's kinda creepy ... in a squirmy sort of way ... how Obama pretends that the CIA hasn't been attempting "regime change" in Syria for at least four years. The various USA administrations have told so many lies, they can't keep their story straight anymore. I'll bet if you could find a a few thousand REAL "moderate rebels" in Syria, you'd be lucky. Russia is doing what Putin said it would do: Supporting the Assad government and fighting terrorist. From that POV it doesn't matter if they're fighting ISIS or the CIA or Saudi Arabia or Turkey or al Qaida or al Nusra.

There's a great deal to be gained from simply saying what you do and doing what you say. Too bad that USA administrations can't afford to do that.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 2, 2015 7:43 PM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by G:
It was darkly amusing to hear Putin on Charlie Rose talking about the need to protect and respect the sanctity of the current Syrian government... #loadedwithobviousandpurposefulirony Who knew he was a stand-up?



Once again SIG's response to you has nothing to do with what you posted. You posted about what Putin said and she posts a subjective response. I wonder how many are ready to admit she is not American. That she is nothing but a troll with the mission of propaganda against the U.S..


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 2, 2015 8:22 PM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by G:
Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:
Quote:

Originally posted by G:
It was darkly amusing to hear Putin on Charlie Rose talking about the need to protect and respect the sanctity of the current Syrian government... #loadedwithobviousandpurposefulirony Who knew he was a stand-up?



Once again SIG's response to you has nothing to do with what you posted. You posted about what Putin said and she posts a subjective response. I wonder how many are ready to admit she is not American. That she is nothing but a troll with the mission of propaganda against the U.S..




What's funny is she spouts that endlessly here of all places, where there's like what, 10 people? She's a horrible recruiter. But then again I don't think she needs much if any audience - as long as she can read what she posts that's all that matters.



I also think she and 1kiki are responsible for driving away so many that used to post here. With those two it is the same story over and over again. America bad and it's thread after thread started by those two saying it. It gets redundant and people not looking to constantly battle mostly move on. Some stay because they are Firefly fans and like coming to the site but for the most part everything posted here by those two is bad news in the form of attacks. They have spread a disease here. They are two very sick females. It's very apparent they are miserable.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 2, 2015 11:04 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


kpo

"Lol, yes, God forbid peaceful and stable Syria become another Libya..."

So, I'm reading my way down, and I gotta ask - what's so good about Libya today?


http://www.activistpost.com/2015/01/pentagon-hillarys-push-for-war-in-
libya.html

Pentagon: Hillary’s Push For War In Libya Was Based on ”Stupid Facts”
NATO’s 2011 air-bombing assault on Libya turned the most successful country in Africa into a failed state now run by terrorists.
If the result of this so-called humanitarian intervention wasn’t bad enough, it appears that our leaders lied to sell this war to the public, again.


http://www.theguardian.com/world/libya
Ban Ki-moon calls for Libya peace deal as factions miss ceasefire deadline
UN secretary general appeals for end to fighting as experts fear looming humanitarian disaster






SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 2, 2015 11:17 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.



Some direct links drawn between the Assad regime and ISIS: https://kyleorton1991.wordpress.com/2014/09/03/provocation-and-the-isl
amic-state-why-assad-strengthened-the-jihadists
/



And who is Kyle Orton, exactly. Oh he writes exclusively for the National Review.
"National Review (N.R.) is a semimonthly magazine founded by author William F. Buckley, Jr., in 1955 and based in New York City. It describes itself as "America's most widely read and influential magazine and web site for conservative news, commentary, and opinion."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Review

Yeah, no bias there!




"Russia Is Sending Jihadis to Join ISIS" - http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/23/russia-s-playing-a-do
uble-game-with-islamic-terror0.html



And Michael Weiss? With Exposing Russia’s Secret Army in Syria, Russia Puts Boots on the Ground in Syria, Russia Is Sending Jihadis to Join ISIS, Robert Conquest, the Man Who Unearthed the Big Soviet Lie, and Putin Sends Dirty War Forces to Syria http://www.thedailybeast.com/contributors/michael-weiss.html to his name, I have no problems believing he is as described: Michael Weiss, Pro-Israel Neocon ... http://www.richardsilverstein.com/2012/01/12/michael-weiss-pro-israel-
neocon-authors-blueprint-for-western-military-intervention-in-syria-approved-by-syrian-ex-pats
/

Why you put your trust in skanks is beyond me.






SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 3, 2015 8:10 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

So, I'm reading my way down, and I gotta ask - what's so good about Libya today?

Compared to Syria? Everything. If you can't see that, then there's no hope for you.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russian losses in Ukraine
Mon, March 18, 2024 23:45 - 982 posts
Punishing Russia With Sanctions
Mon, March 18, 2024 23:44 - 496 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:27 - 3338 posts
I'm surprised there's not an inflation thread yet
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:09 - 709 posts
Elections; 2024
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:08 - 1982 posts
Grifter Donald Trump Has Been Indicted And Yes Arrested; Four Times Now And Counting. Hey Jack, I Was Right
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:06 - 753 posts
MO AG Suing Large Nationwide Child Sex-slave Trafficker
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:24 - 2 posts
New Peer-Reviewed Research Finds Evidence of 2020 Voter Fraud
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:21 - 7 posts
RCP's No Toss-Up State Map (3-15-2024)
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:19 - 2 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Mon, March 18, 2024 08:03 - 6091 posts
Israeli War
Mon, March 18, 2024 01:27 - 31 posts
CNN: Is the US on the brink of another civil war?
Mon, March 18, 2024 01:22 - 1 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL