Syrian dictatorship continues slaughtering children

[obyknven]

I'm kinda curious what you think of Syria's human rights record. Or does that simply not register through your centimeter thick Russia goggles.

Oh, these wonderful human rights organizations again. Firstly answer simple question - do you known who they really are? Or more exactly - who funding they?

One is major world human right funding organizations is National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

 

Their Board of Directors (2007)

OFFICERS

 

The Honorable Vin Weber

(Chairman)

Clark & Weinstock

Clark & Weinstock http://www.sourcewat...ark_&_Weinstock

 

Mr. Thomas R. Donahue

(Vice-Chair)

Senior Fellow

Work in America Institute

 

Mrs. Julie Finley

(Treasurer)

Founder, Board Member

United States Committee on NATO

 

Mr. Matthew F. McHugh,

(Secretary)

Counselor to the President

The World Bank

 

Carl Gershman,

President

 

 

DIRECTORS

 

Ambassador Morton Abramowitz,

Senior Fellow

Century Foundation

Morton Abramowitz

- United States Ambassador to the Mutual and Balanced Force Reduction Negotiations in Vienna

- Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense

- Director of the Bureau of Intelligence and Research in the government of Ronald Reagan (1985-1989)

- Director of the International Crisis Group (ICC) (1991 - present)

- Adviser to the delegation of Albanian separatists in Rambouillet

- Now works in the Century Foundation

Century Foundationhttp://www.sourcewat...tury_Foundation

 

 

 

The Honorable Evan Bayh

United States Senate

 

The Honorable Frank Carlucci,

The Carlyle Group

Frank Carlucci

- Deputy Director of the CIA from 1978–1981

- Deputy defense secretary from 1981 until 1983

- United States Secretary of Defense (1987-1989)

Among the awards: - Medal for the CIA;- Medal for service in the "defense"

Since 1989, the President of Carlyle Group

Carlyle Group http://www.sourcewat...p/Carlyle_Group

 

General Wesley K. Clark,.

Stephens Group, Inc.

Wesley K. Clark,

- Director of strategic plans and policy for the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon (1994-1996).

- The commander of NATO forces during the aggression against Yugoslavia by NATO in 1999

- The commander of U.S. forces in Europe (1997 - 2000).

Among the awards - the Medal "For operations in Kosovo," and "For operations in Yugoslavia"

Stephens Group http://www.democrati...4&mesg_id=60117

 

 

The Honorable Christopher Cox,

United States House of Representatives

 

Ms. Ester Dyson,

Chairman

Edventure Holdings

 

Ms. Jean Bethke Elshtain,

University of Chicago

 

The Honorable William H. Frist,.

United States Senate

 

Dr. Francis Fukuyama,

Johns Hopkins University,

Paul H. Nitze School for Advanced International Studies

 

Ms. Suzanne Garment,

Dow, Lohnes & Albertson

 

Mr. Ralph J. Gerson,

President & CEO

Guardian International Corp.

 

The Honorable Bob Graham,

United States Senate

 

The Honorable Lee H. Hamilton,

Director

The Woodrow Wilson Center

Lee Hamilton

- Senator of the U.S. Congress from 1964 to 2000

- Member of the U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

- Member of the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Awards:

- he Central Intelligence Agency Medallion in 1988

- the Defense Intelligence Agency Medallion in 1987

 

Ambassador Richard C. Holbrooke

Counselor

Perseus

 

Mr. Emmanuel A. Kampouris, More...

President and CEO, Retired

American Standard, Inc.

 

The Honorable Jon Kyl

United States Senate

 

Mr. Leon Lynch,

Vice President

United Steelworkers of America

 

Mr. Michael Novak,

American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

 

The Honorable Donald M. Payne,.

United States House of Representatives

 

These list looks awesome if you known who they are.

 

P.S. Continue later.

[Volourn]

Yet you completely avoid his question. Coward.

[obyknven]

Yet you completely avoid his question. Coward.

This question makes no sense, because his information source not trustworthy. I don't trust reports about war crimes from organisations funded by Military lobbyists, CIA and Banking elite. They just want casus belli for war, because wars extremely profitable for them. It's capitalism, baby.

[BruceVC]

Yet you completely avoid his question. Coward.

This question makes no sense, because his information source not trustworthy. I don't trust reports about war crimes from organisations funded by Military lobbyists, CIA and Banking elite. They just want casus belli for war, because wars extremely profitable for them. It's capitalism, baby.

 

Yeah and your sources don't come from anti-western, RT funded, conspiracy based websites that believe in global companies pulling the worlds strings where 9/11 was perpetuated by the Americans themselves.

 

Your links are no more credible than anyone else's, sorry to tell you the truth.

[obyknven]

Maybe historical lessons learn you to something.

Another wonderful human rights organization is Ford Foundation (FF). It's one of main "private" funds used by USA in cultural Cold War against USSR. In 1950s these organization have tight relations with CIA. For example Richard Bissell become President of the Foundation in 1952. In his two years in office Bissell met often with the head of the CIA, Allen Dulles, and other CIA officials in a "mutual search" for new ideas. In 1954 Bissell left Ford to become a special assistant to Allen Dulles in January 1954 . Under Bissell, the Ford Foundation (FF) was the "vanguard of Cold War thinking".

http://en.wikipedia....M._Bissell,_Jr.

 

In 1954 the new president of the FF was John McCloy. Prior to becoming president of the FF he had been Assistant Secretary of War, president of the World Bank, High Commissioner of occupied Germany, chairman of Rockefeller's Chase Manhattan Bank, Wall Street attorney for the big seven oil companies and director of numerous corporations. As High Commissioner in Germany, McCloy had provided cover for scores of CIA agents. It's not conspiracy theories, it's history. Even wikipedia known about this.

http://en.wikipedia....lligence_Agency

 

After 1970s CIA scandals FF become more cautious. They stop include CIA directors in own trustees and directors list. But even now these fund leaded by peoples who really rule USA. President FF Susan Berresford (1996-2007), she is not only member of very important Council on Foreign Relations (in company of ex-directors of CIA and ex-secretary of defense), but also member Trilateral Commission, where have membership all major political, financial and industrial leaders from North American, Europe and Japan (http://www.trilatera...Page.View&pid=6).

 

Also you can google about Mac-Arthur Foundation. Especially about Henry Bienen (http://www.northwest.../biography.html) and Dr. Victor Rabinowitch.

 

If CIA used human rights organizations just as tools against political opponents before...

Why do you think something change now? Do you really thinks, what guys related with CIA do want protect human rights? And how you can trust information from these guys after all this?

[Gorgon]

I take Amnesty international to be a credible source, especially because the US have tried to discredit them in the past. I haven't heard of these other suspected CIA outfits. Copy pasting their entire payroll is not really an argument. Sheer volume of text is not one in itself either.

[obyknven]

I take Amnesty international to be a credible source, especially because the US have tried to discredit them in the past. I haven't heard of these other suspected CIA outfits. Copy pasting their entire payroll is not really an argument. Sheer volume of text is not one in itself either.

O RLY?

http://www.ngo-monit...researcher_bias

http://www.sourcewat...y_International

[Gorgon]

Yes. I believe their main interest is in writing these reports and being factual about it. Everything is connected to everything else. You aren't going to find any one body that is truly impartial.

 

Of course it could well be argued that they shoud'nt have any employees at all, just volounteers.

[obyknven]

http://youtu.be/ovS0MKE_OJU

Moar: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=41d_1351962703
Nubs everywhere!

[Agiel]

These days, composite armour being what it is, firing a LAW or an RPG at a main battle tank is only going to result in making the crew spill their coffee. There was a report that a Challenger 2 in Iraq had took more than 70 RPG rounds, with only the commander's optics suffering any significant damage.

[obyknven]

These days, composite armour being what it is, firing a LAW or an RPG at a main battle tank is only going to result in making the crew spill their coffee. There was a report that a Challenger 2 in Iraq had took more than 70 RPG rounds, with only the commander's optics suffering any significant damage.

Wrong. Modern tanks can be destroyed by  skilled infantry unit with RPG's, if they use properly tactics.  Especially in city fight. All tanks have weak points,  where they can be penetrated even by retarded RPG-7.  But all sides of this conflict can't into tactics and have low skills.

 

[obyknven]

Excellent example of Syrian army stupidity. Tank in city ( without infantry support ) don't live long.  

http://youtu.be/Q0qa3IcgHX0

RPG-29 "Vampire".  In 2006 Lebanon war this weapon stopped Israel tanks. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-29

[obyknven]

Russia sell arms to both sides of conflict. It's obvious. Looks like our real interests in Syria is not Assad. While Assad and FAS weakened each other, third force grown, with our help. Only PKK, only hardcore!

http://youtu.be/hx2L9a2BRXw

http://youtu.be/0W-xf7I9M-0

 

[Agiel]

A bit optimistic thinking here, but hopefully everybody can win (or at least, everybody who matters in the short run). Russia can keep its naval base in the Mediterranean if they can make nice with the rebels, and Iran is deprived of its only state actor regional ally, which would really put the screws in the clerics when UN sanctions are doing a number to their economy (not to mention Hezbollah potentially being de-fanged to boot).

 

However, my biggest concern if the rebels win are pogroms against Shi'ites and Alawites in Syria, and whoever takes over would probably put Syria's more than half-century long project of taking back the Golan Heights by force into overdrive.

[rjshae]

It's a horribly tragic situation that may not end even once Assad is out of power. The nature of this fight reminds me of the Spanish civil war, 1936-1939, although certainly the motivations are different. I can't see a democracy flowering in the aftermath--more likely it'll be yet another "oriental despotism". Sad.

[BruceVC]

It's a horribly tragic situation that may not end even once Assad is out of power. The nature of this fight reminds me of the Spanish civil war, 1936-1939, although certainly the motivations are different. I can't see a democracy flowering in the aftermath--more likely it'll be yet another "oriental despotism". Sad.

 

Once Assad is gone, and this is inevitable, its unlikely we will see a Western or Middle East form of Democracy. There are too many Islamic extremist groups involved with the rebels now. These groups are helping overthrow Assad but they have there own political agenda's and these groups will influence the new governments decision. The reality is I can't blame there influence as they are fighting and dying in the towns and fields of Syria in this war against Assad.

 

If Russia had not vetoed Military action by the UN security council this war would have been over months ago and you wouldn't have had intervention by extremist groups, so I blame the failure of any form of Democracy that will be implemented squarely on the Russians.

[Rostere]

I agree with the last posts. I am very pessimistic about the outcome of this war, and sadly, the longer they fight, a healthy democracy at the end of this becomes less likely.

[Malcador]

If Russia had not vetoed Military action by the UN security council this war would have been over months ago and you wouldn't have had intervention by extremist groups, so I blame the failure of any form of Democracy that will be implemented squarely on the Russians.

Not too sure the aftermath of a glorious Western intervention would be very clean.

[BruceVC]

 

If Russia had not vetoed Military action by the UN security council this war would have been over months ago and you wouldn't have had intervention by extremist groups, so I blame the failure of any form of Democracy that will be implemented squarely on the Russians.

Not too sure the aftermath of a glorious Western intervention would be very clean.

 

Well the last two Western interventions have worked as expected. In Libya and Mali Western forces assisted militarily. The example of Libya is the perfect example of necessary regime overthrow, the West had no real troops on the ground but used there air power to assist the forces fighting Gaddafi. They destroyed his air force and tanks but they let the Libyan rebels do the ground fighting. Thats all the Syrian rebels asked for from the UN, they were prepared to  the hard hand to hand battles. By using air power the West can play an important role in many conflicts without a protracted and expensive commitment

[Malcador]

Well in terms of blowing stuff up, NATO's good at that but just thinking of the aftermath in the country when the various rebels take over in this scenario. I guess Assad wishes he had put down the rebellion in a lighter fashion now.

[BruceVC]

Well in terms of blowing stuff up, NATO's good at that but just thinking of the aftermath in the country when the various rebels take over in this scenario. I guess Assad wishes he had put down the rebellion in a lighter fashion now.

 

You have raised a good point, Assad had numerous chances to implement meaningful political change. He refused and believed he could crush political dissension through the might of his army and police.

[Zoraptor]

We've been through it before, the west lied in Libya and that is why Russia and China- ie the two permanent states on the UNSC which don't require US approval for everything up to and including breaking wind- vetoed their latest bout of White Man's Burden Neocolonist PR Tailored Woo Yeahism. All the west achieved in Libya was swapping the location of the oppressed from Benghazi to Bani Walid and Sirte, cities that somehow did not qualify for protection from heavy weapons and indiscriminate bombardment as the UNSC resolution specified, I'm not sure why, might be that the west are gigantic hypocrites, it's always a big philosophical question as to why the west feels it can break UN resolutions with impunity and aid in the bombardment of civilian targets like Sirte and why plenty of people are happy to simply ignore facts to paint them in a good light etc etc

 

Lebanon is a better model for the war than Spain- a lot of the issues there are similar. Well do I remember the glorious western interventions in Lebanon. Well, I don't, because they were partisan, ineffectual meddling from a group of biased clowns trying to impose their solutions on people with no regard for reality that just made things worse. Plus ça change...

[BruceVC]

We've been through it before, the west lied in Libya and that is why Russia and China- ie the two permanent states on the UNSC which don't require US approval for everything up to and including breaking wind- vetoed their latest bout of White Man's Burden Neocolonist PR Tailored Woo Yeahism. All the west achieved in Libya was swapping the location of the oppressed from Benghazi to Bani Walid and Sirte, cities that somehow did not qualify for protection from heavy weapons and indiscriminate bombardment as the UNSC resolution specified, I'm not sure why, might be that the west are gigantic hypocrites, it's always a big philosophical question as to why the west feels it can break UN resolutions with impunity and aid in the bombardment of civilian targets like Sirte and why plenty of people are happy to simply ignore facts to paint them in a good light etc etc

 

Lebanon is a better model for the war than Spain- a lot of the issues there are similar. Well do I remember the glorious western interventions in Lebanon. Well, I don't, because they were partisan, ineffectual meddling from a group of biased clowns trying to impose their solutions on people with no regard for reality that just made things worse. Plus ça change...

 

"  the west lied in Libya"

 

No, no my friend thats a spurious assessment of the reality of the Libyan conflict. The West extended its mandate to prevent a humanitarian massacre and catastrophe. And yes they did a little more than they were suppose to but it was completely necessary under the circumstances

 

In order to truly understand my point you need to go back to the early stages of the Libyan conflict. I want you to forget the UN, the West, Russia and China then ask yourself a simple question. Seriously only one question in all these Western interventions is relevant "does a government have a right to use its own army, police and full force to suppress political unrest". I am hoping you say "no"

 

In the Libyan conflict in the beginning the rebels were  basically surrounded in Misratah, remember the "Siege of Misratah". Gaddafi would have happily annihilated the  entire town and killed every man, women and child. He was a brutal and mentally unbalanced dictator who was never the legitimate ruler of Libya and who would have  had no issues with the killing of vast parts of his population. How can anyone with good conscience allow any  government that controls its own army to use that army internally within its own borders? The West broke the siege of Misratah and then continued to destroy Gaddafi's air force and tanks but it was the Libyan rebels who did the main fighting throughout the civil war. If you think the civilian causality list is bad in Syrian it would have paled in comparison compared to Libya if the West hadn't intervened. How can you not say that the West did the right thing?

 

So what is more important to you, the prevention of the systematic killing of large segments of a population or that fact the West did more than the UN mandate stipulated? It doesn't matter if you say the West intervened for future Oil or reconstruction contracts, they did still prevent a genocide. And once again Syria is an example of what happens when the West is blocked from helping. Surly you can't think thats a better situation than Libya?

Edited March 12, 2013 by BruceVC

[Zoraptor]

Bro, that's rubbish. Gaddafi was by no means a nice guy, but he'd never indulged in systematic wide scale murder of the type you're ascribing to him and there's no reason to suspect he would have. Yeah, he would have killed some people just as he always had- including when he was buds with Tony, Hungarian Nick, Silvio et alia- mostly in retaking the cities but some of the more prominent rebels too, much as the rebels killed some other people mostly in retaking the cities and, well, executed some of the more prominent Gaddafites too (actual war crime executing a prisoner btw, and one that the west was equally culpable in) as well as blacks, US ambassadors, each other etc.

 

"does a government have a right to use its own army, police and full force to suppress political unrest"

 

Yes, if you're, say, Britain in Northern Ireland. Or Britain in Kenya. Or Britain in Cyprus. Or Bahrain, or Saudi Arabia. Or, well, anyone safely pro western. Same as it's fine to 'annihilate' a town if it's Sirte, Bani Walid or Fallujah, so long as the 'right' people are doing the annhilating as in 80's Iraq.

[BruceVC]

Bro, that's rubbish. Gaddafi was by no means a nice guy, but he'd never indulged in systematic wide scale murder of the type you're ascribing to him and there's no reason to suspect he would have. Yeah, he would have killed some people just as he always had- including when he was buds with Tony, Hungarian Nick, Silvio et alia- mostly in retaking the cities but some of the more prominent rebels too, much as the rebels killed some other people mostly in retaking the cities and, well, executed some of the more prominent Gaddafites too (actual war crime executing a prisoner btw, and one that the west was equally culpable in) as well as blacks, US ambassadors, each other etc.

 

"does a government have a right to use its own army, police and full force to suppress political unrest"

 

Yes, if you're, say, Britain in Northern Ireland. Or Britain in Kenya. Or Britain in Cyprus. Or Bahrain, or Saudi Arabia. Or, well, anyone safely pro western. Same as it's fine to 'annihilate' a town if it's Sirte, Bani Walid or Fallujah, so long as the 'right' people are doing the annhilating as in 80's Iraq.

 

Sorry but you need to go back and study the facts around the Libyan conflict, you are misinformed. The siege of Misrata was real and the town would have been reduced to rubble and all occupants killed if the West hadn't intervened

 

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

 

Secondly there hasn't been a single historical case I can think of  in the last 40 years where any Western country has decided they are going to destroy a whole town with no regard to the inhabitants. In other words indiscriminate killing of all civilians , including women and children. Yes innocents have been killed but this wasn't intentional as steps are almost  always taken when the West intervenes to ensure minimal civilian loss. If you dispute this please provide links. In fact I can't recall a single incident in the last 40 years, or longer,  where the West's intention was utter destruction of town or city. The military objectives are normally to defeat the enemy forces withing the town.