Syrian civil war

[Walsingham]

Government let British company export nerve gas chemicals to Syria

 

"The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills insisted that although the licences were granted to an unnamed UK chemical company in January 2012, the substances were not sent to Syria before the permits were eventually revoked last July in response to tightened European Union sanctions.

 

In a previously unpublicised letter to MPs last year, Mr Cable acknowledged that his officials had authorised the export of an unspecified quantity of the chemicals in the knowledge that they were listed on an international schedule of chemical weapon precursors."

 

So the chemicals apparently were never sent but still...wtf?

 

My own experience with such government tomfoolery is that the people involved aren't stupid, but the system they serve is beyond sane understanding. Beyond people like North Korea the definition of 'bad dude' becomes something like "Bad on Wednesday, and Fridays, or if owls are in the equinox, or a question has been asked in Parliament within one solar year."

 

It's hard to take a tough line on evil if no-one is wiling to define what the **** it is.

[obyknven]

I just leave it here

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Walsingham]

1) They would, in theory, be fighting in defence of Muslim civilians. This is to contradict Al Q, and fight the propaganda war.

 

2) It's a handful of people

 

3) I have to question whether these photos are even legit in the first place. You could mock them up with a couple of hundred pounds and a trawl of a good military surplus store.

[Gorgon]

When you join the military you are expected to do what the commander in chief tells you. It's not really a place for surplus political activism or an overactive conscience. 

[kgambit]

 

3) I have to question whether these photos are even legit in the first place. You could mock them up with a couple of hundred pounds and a trawl of a good military surplus store.

 

 

You can find the ribbons on Ebay.

 

Here's a set similar to the one shown in the navy E-7 pic

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/USN-NAVY-SEAL-ADMIRAL-26-SERVICE-RIBBON-BAR-NEW-/370879963105?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item565a2b1fe1

 

 

     

 

Edited September 2, 2013 by kgambit

[Rostere]

I really don't see the problem with Obama bombing Syrian artillery positions, army airports, and such stuff. Unlike the war in Afghanistan, in Syria there exists very clear military targets.

 

My only worry is that sooner or later the incompetent/lunatic military men will target foreign embassies (like in Serbia) or foreign journalists. Hopefully the civil war will be over by the time they've finished bombing the obvious military targets.

 

In the best case we will get another Libya.

[Blodhemn]

There is a problem because we have no business interfering, picking and choosing the good guys from the bad. They just want Assad out because he doesn't bend over and kiss their collective asses. 

[Orogun01]

1) They would, in theory, be fighting in defence of Muslim civilians. This is to contradict Al Q, and fight the propaganda war.

 

2) It's a handful of people

 

3) I have to question whether these photos are even legit in the first place. You could mock them up with a couple of hundred pounds and a trawl of a good military surplus store.

Have the rebels asked for assistance?

I'm of the opinion that the US should not intervene in other countries policies or conflicts and judging by how it has in the past come back to bite them in their asses I would recommend that they learn from their mistakes. Seriously, I'm starting to think of the US as the most buff guy at a bar that needs to keep picking fights because he feels insecure and has to continuously assert their authority. The sooner they stop this nonsensical belief that they are the overlords of the world and keep to themselves the better it will be.

 

Unless of course all the conspiracy theories are right and the US government is the tool of someone else.

[Zoraptor]

In the best case we will get another Libya.

That's the best case?

[Oerwinde]

Have the rebels asked for assistance?

.

http://huff.to/1dzXCIy

 

Not the rebels per se, but at least one opposition faction wantd them to stay out.

[obyknven]

Syrian SAM defence shut down F-22 Raptor.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7f4_1377959586

http://translate.google.de/translate?hl=de&sl=ar&tl=en&u=http://nrttv.com/nrt-ar/dreje.aspx?jimare=20333

 

[obyknven]

When you join the military you are expected to do what the commander in chief tells you. It's not really a place for surplus political activism or an overactive conscience. 

 

 

Reply from 1970

 

 

"When I was a kid, I used to be really proud of this country. I thought that this was a country that cared about people no matter who they were or where they came from. But now, when I see my country engaged in an endless war, a push-button war in which American pilots and electronic technicians are killing thousands of Asians without even seeing who they kill.

"When I see us each week stepping up the tonnage of bombs dropped on Indochina…then I don’t feel so proud any more. Because I thought that was what bad countries did…not my country."

 

[Walsingham]

There is a problem because we have no business interfering, picking and choosing the good guys from the bad. They just want Assad out because he doesn't bend over and kiss their collective asses. 

 

 

Stop. Breathe. Are you really claiming that's the only reason?

[Drowsy Emperor]

There is a problem because we have no business interfering, picking and choosing the good guys from the bad. They just want Assad out because he doesn't bend over and kiss their collective asses. 

 

 

It was the same with Hussein, Milosevic, and a host of other, previously western supported leaders. For as long as they did what they were told everything was fine and they could do what they wanted unchecked, when they eventually held enough power to lead their own politics they became a barrier to US political and business interests.

 

The US found out that its much easier to have all or most sides in a quasi democracy on your payroll while playing them against each other than it is to control one man who is not entirely spineless. With his back against the wall he will fight (like Assad is doing) - with a pretend democracy you can always blackmail or pay off someone, somewhere to get the government to collapse.

 

So yeah. This was is about Assad being an independent leader in an area where everyone else is a US puppet or vassal.

 

Neighboring countries:

Turkey - NATO vassal

Iraq - occupied territory

Israel - US policy maker/ally

Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia etc. - all US puppets

 

Syria and Iran are the only strictly independent and sovereign countries left in the region. If I was in Iran I'd be pretty worried now. Specifically about 6 years from now.

 

Unless the whole Syria thing escalates into something more.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Drowsy Emperor

[Malcador]

 

There is a problem because we have no business interfering, picking and choosing the good guys from the bad. They just want Assad out because he doesn't bend over and kiss their collective asses.

 

 

Stop. Breathe. Are you really claiming that's the only reason?

 

Is probably a really big driving one. Also, a lot of 'civilian' targets are military ones no ? Such as airports, power, water, etc. ?

Edited September 3, 2013 by Malcador

[Guard Dog]

I just sent a two paragraph email to both of my senators and my house rep explain that I was opposed to any intervention in Syria for the main reason that any intervention ultimately benefits Al-Qaeda. The secondary reasons were that the aim of the rebels was not to create a free and democratic country rather to replace a brutal military dictatorship with a brutal theocratic dictatorship. That is NOT an improvement. US aid should never become a destabilizing force. I'm curious what their reply will be. If there is one. From the Senators at best you get a non-committal form reply but my house rep is a good man. He usually sends back a personal reply.

[Gorgon]

 

When you join the military you are expected to do what the commander in chief tells you. It's not really a place for surplus political activism or an overactive conscience. 

 

 

Reply from 1970

 

 

"When I was a kid, I used to be really proud of this country. I thought that this was a country that cared about people no matter who they were or where they came from. But now, when I see my country engaged in an endless war, a push-button war in which American pilots and electronic technicians are killing thousands of Asians without even seeing who they kill.

"When I see us each week stepping up the tonnage of bombs dropped on Indochina…then I don’t feel so proud any more. Because I thought that was what bad countries did…not my country."

 

 

Those above soldiers who wouldn't show their faces haven't haD their legs blown off and weren't drafted. Important distinction. I don't see where the moral outrage comes from when nothing has been done yet.  If there is any moral outrage, shouldn't it be because so many people have died and nothing has been done ?

[Hildegard]

More and more I'm digging for information the more I'm convinced this conflict in Syria isn't as black and white like many mainstream media wants to portray it. For example this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lWB5ssifTg which was on CNN that's fake, that alleged lesbian from Syria and her heartbreaking blog about homophobic atrocities http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jun/13/syrian-lesbian-blogger-tom-macmaster. I'm sorry I can't find a link about the story I've read once where most pro-rebel videos from Syria come via office in London under the control of a certain Syrian immigration. 

 

Take for an example this article: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/middle-east/syria/121109/fake-syria-videos-images that just sums up some of the fake videos from Syria. Have in mind that I'm not trying to prove that horrible things aren't happening in Syria, that civilians aren't dying, that Assad isn't a dictator with blood on his hands.

 

What I've noticed is that for a last couple of months there is an active media campaign by certain groups via western mainstream media to show the conflict in Syria only as a 'romantic' conflict between the evil forces of a dictator and the oppressed people of Syria. Such a campaign is almost always a prelude to war where you prep the public for war and the truth aren't the facts on the ground, the truth is what you make it to be through mass media. But unlike Iraq, the world public, even that in US, isn't buying the 'truth' they are so eagerly trying to sell in a pace and quantity they want to.

 

To repeat myself before, I believe someone used chemical weapons in Syria. But who against whom nobody proved and I certainly won't trust Mr.Kerry when he says they have clear evidence, his word means nothing. If it is a smoking gun show it to the world. You won't? My, I'm shocked. When I try to get to the answer who used chemical weapons in Syria by myself I'm puzzled why would Assad authorize the use of chemical weapons being deployed when his forces are winning this conflict? Because he's evil? He could be really evil but I really don't think he's stupid and counterproductive to his own interests in such a matter. Then I ask myself, could the rebels get a hold of such weapons? Let me quote someone much more competent then myself:

 

A former Syrian general who once led the army’s chemical weapons training program said that the main storage sites for mustard gas and nerve agents are supposed to be guarded by thousands of Syrian troops but that they would be easily overrun.

The sites are not secure, retired Maj. Gen. Adnan Silou, who defected to the opposition in June, said in an interview near Turkey’s border with Syria. “Probably anyone from the Free Syrian Army or any Islamic extremist group could take them over,” he said.

 

If I'm to trust this former military officer that some Syrian rebel fraction could get their hands on such weapons couldn't have some of the Sunni extremists use it against Shia population? Sunni jihadist view Shia as worse scum then Jews or Christians. Couldn't some rebel group use it randomly or target civilians in an attempt to blame Assad and drag other countries into conflict on their side? Is that really a far stretched conspiracy theory? 

 

I'm not trying to put immediate blame on the rebels but are many plausible scenarios for me to raise a question and ask: give me proof who used chemical weapons against whom, and proof certainly isn't a word from a US government official. 

 

Let me bring up another what-if scenario, let's say hypothetically that some Syrian rebel forces got their hands on nerve gas and used it. And their usage of such weapons is somehow proven. Do you honestly believe that the US and France would pick out those rebel forces in this conflict and launch strikes on them? Don't even try answering that. 

 

For most people it is clear that this conflict is a very complicated one. You have Turkey and Saudi Arabia arming rebels for a lot longer then this whole thing was publicized, you've got Israel, the Hezbollah, Iran backing Assad, lot of interests on various sides. But I have to look at the US, the most powerful player in the field, what are they going to do, what is their interest and how are they gonna achieve it? The US can't afford a ground invasion in Syria for many reasons so I'm expecting only the use of aircraft and missiles. What can they accomplish with that? A regime change? Hardly but possible even so. Assad is currently winning the conflict in Syria and the US strike is suppose to change that but not to reverse the odds but to create a stalemate. It's not in US interests for Assad to go away if that means rebels coming into power with many extremists among them with a threat of Syria turning into an Islamist state. But a Syria torn by conflict, a weak Syria, a weak Assad, an adversary of the US in a way out of the picture with only Iran left standing. But this is not easily achieved because if you bomb Assad too hard you could get him out of the picture and have people in power that could easily pose much bigger problems in the future for the US. So i suppose it will be a limited strike with an imposed no fly zone, arming the rebels with ****load of weapons via Turkey and Saudi Arabia, blaming Assad for all civilian suffering, calling for the UN to come into Syria making that country a country only on paper. 

 

 

 

[Walsingham]

Excluding the Whitehouse I don't think many people ARE saying it's black and white, Hilde,

 

Where I think Gorgon and I are standing is the viewpoint that complexity does not excuse inaction. It is both immoral and unwise to let only immoral people steer this conflict.

[Guard Dog]

Excluding the Whitehouse I don't think many people ARE saying it's black and white, Hilde,

 

Where I think Gorgon and I are standing is the viewpoint that complexity does not excuse inaction. It is both immoral and unwise to let only immoral people steer this conflict.

Except in this case any intervention only benefits immoral people. Fact, the rebels are terrorist backed Sunnis who are only fighting because Assad & the Ba'athists are shi'ites. Fact both sides have committed atrocities  against civilians. Fact, no matter who wins civilians will be brutally executed by the hundreds and thousands as either side takes revenge/celebrates. Fact, no intervention that is being discussed will prevent any of that. By attacking the army we would be helping the rebels. If that turns the tide of the conflict enough that they win they THEY will have whatever weapons Syria has only now we will be complicit in anything they do afterwards. Including the inevitable massacres and ultimately attacking US or Israel. 

 

To hell with them all. I truly hope they completely kill each other off. And before you bring up civilians again, remember, they are screwed no matter what!

[Walsingham]

Well, GD. With respect for your normal good sense, you will need to try a bit harder to convince me that the rebels are all terrorists.

[Drowsy Emperor]

It didn't take much effort to convince you that Assad is an incarnation of Satan.

 

Even though Syria was one of the more secular and progressive places in the Islamic world under his rule. It is a well known fact that Christians had a decent position in Syrian society, unlike Egypt or SA where they're persecuted, churches burned and sometimes killed. 

 

Like the rebels are doing now:

http://www.dw.de/several-christians-killed-in-attack-by-syrian-rebels-near-homs/a-17027117

Some Christians have joined the pro-Assad forces, fearing for their future should rebels topple the president, now that Islamist brigades, some with links to al Qaeda, have joined the revolution.

 

[kgambit]

Syrian SAM defence shut down F-22 Raptor.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7f4_1377959586

 

 

 

Liveleak source has more holes than a sieve: 

 

There is no newspaper called the Oklahoma Post

A google search of John Blue Reed the alleged defense expert finds nothing

There were no Tomahawk launches from the Med.  The two observed "ballistics" were likely from the Israeli Sparrow Missile Test.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/04/world/middleeast/israel-us-missile-mediterranean.html?_r=0

 

The picture is of an F-22 Raptor that crashed outside of Nellis AFB on Wednesday, Dec. 22, 2004.

And here's two shots of the original

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/happyhappyjoyjoy/1302616031/

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?113454-F-22-crash-video   (scroll down to post #11 on 06-05-2007 by He219 )

 

 

According to multiple sources, the S-300 system has not been delivered (yet) . 

 

http://www.algemeiner.com/2013/09/01/report-russia-suspends-delivery-of-s-300-missile-defense-system-to-syria/

http://rt.com/news/syria-s-300-delay-russia-277/

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2013/07/22/Syrian-deputy-PM-set-for-Russia-talks-as-violence-rages.html

 

And the S-400 is not yet available for export

 

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070823/73849589.html

 

Got to be one of the lamest troll attempts I've seen, Oby.   

[Hildegard]

Well, GD. With respect for your normal good sense, you will need to try a bit harder to convince me that the rebels are all terrorists.

 

Of course not all of them are terrorist but how can you tell them apart when you give them support and arms? You think the guys I'm about to show in the video don't get weapons from SA financed by them, US, UK, France, Turkey and other countries?

 

If you have the stomach look at the entire video in the link and read the article: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b57_1372272008

 

Don't know about you but if I had my finger on the trigger, saw Assad's forces on one side and this bunch on the other I wouldn't think twice who to blow up. 

 

EDIT - and it's funny how you can see numerous videos from Syria that allegedly show atrocities done by Assad's military on CNN and other mainstream media but none or very very few when it comes to those done by freedom loving Syrian rebels. Wonder why's that. 

Edited September 3, 2013 by Hildegard

[Malcador]

I suppose bombing both sides is not an option.

Edited September 3, 2013 by Malcador