SYRIA WAR MEGATHREAD - Mod Note First Post

Jonny7

seanie_c wrote: »

Good post.

It's unfortunate most people can't get their head around the fact, these Arab leaders are bought and paid for by the US Empire.

In exchange for their loyalty, they are protected and live lives of luxury, there is no denying this.

Yet, some would imply you wear a tinfoil hat to point out the utterly absurd belief US has the support of the Arab world behind it?

There is no way to discuss anything with someone so ignorant.

There's plenty to criticise about US policy without having to invent conspiracy theories

I do agree that the latter can be more fun though.

seanie_c

Hi Seanie, I put the above question to you last night, now that its less busy, I wonder you could answer my question.

I have found no links to support what you called him. No cautions, no charges, nothing. never heard him referred to as a Peadophile. Could you direct me to the source you have.

Thanks.

I think John McCain and Lindsey Graham should do the honorable thing and get married.They make a good couple and love humanitarian causes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sg4cEQOAHKE

seanie_c

Jonny7 wrote: »

There's plenty to criticise about US policy without having to invent conspiracy theories

I do agree that the latter can be more fun though.

You know a man loses the argument when he starts calling people names.
As for it being more "fun" to theorize.

I don't have to theorize, I just observe and allow my own mind to make it's conclusions.
It insults me for John McCain to pretend he cares about Syrian Civilians.

Some people prefer others to make conclusions for them, which is fine also but I prefer not to engage with them on such a complex subject.

MonaPizza

seanie_c wrote: »

We live in a very bizarre world.

For example, Nodin and returnNull (who I won't be wasting my time responding to) have commented on Doctors Without Borders.

Kouchner, a staunch supporter of Israel and founder of DWB supported intervention of Iraq and Libya. Who do you think helped wounded Al Qaeda members while fighting Gaddafi's forces?

By the way, since Gaddafi had a bayonet stuck in his anus, Libya is a fantastic success as you know . . .cotton candy growing from trees, roses sprouting from sewers, at least they said on TV it was so, must be true.

When DWB were supporting the KLA against Serbia during Kosovo operations, it was later revealed an organ harvesting network had been established.

Lots of people missing..who can say where? Who cares?

Oh yeah, Kosovo is a paradise now too since NATO liberated the local population...just like Iraq and Afghanistan and naturally Syria will enjoy living in a paradise too, just as soon as we've finished demolishing it.

It's illogical to query who funds an NGO...there would never be any conflict of interest at all. It's completely absurd to think they would be belligerents in a country they haven't been invited to.

Diabolical.

I heard that DWB weren't actually on the ground in Syria but it was being reported that they were the ones who confirmed the presence of Sarin. Was that a media faux-pas or were DWB being used as willing accomplices to stitch-up the Assad regime?

Fratton Fred

seanie_c wrote: »

You know a man loses the argument when he starts calling people names.

Lol, you've done nothing but.

Jonny7

MonaPizza wrote: »

I heard that DWB weren't actually on the ground in Syria but it was being reported that they were the ones who confirmed the presence of Sarin. Was that a media faux-pas or were DWB being used as willing accomplices to stitch-up the Assad regime?

Looks like the former

https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/press/release.cfm?id=7042&cat=press-release

seanie_c

MonaPizza wrote: »

I heard that DWB weren't actually on the ground in Syria but it was being reported that they were the ones who confirmed the presence of Sarin.

I don't know about stitching up Assad but when I saw the report of them confirming a chemical attack, I read about their support for KLA against Serbia in 1998.

Within days of the bombing, MSF had teams in Macedonia, Albania and Montenegro providing humanitarian assistance for the largest and fastest efflux of refugees in Europe since the Second World War. For those making it across the border, the most common medical issue was physical exhaustion and psychological trauma due the inhuman campaign of brutality that people had endured in Kosovo. MSF quickly provided direct medical care, established mental health programs, and provided shelter, water, sanitation, and epidemic monitoring in the region.

On the surface, this is what you'd expect from such a group and it's reasonable to disbelieve they could be capable of taking sides in a conflict.

But we need to remember something, this is an NGO. Who knows where their funding comes from? And with what conditions attached?

The Serbian government at the time (accurately or not) accused them of supplying weapons to KLA fighters before and during NATO bombing Serbian military targets.

Fast forward to 2011 and the same NGO is in Libya apparently assisting with "opposition" fighters to remove Gaddafi....and we know he was impaled on a bayonet, much to the delight of Freedom Fighter Hillary Clinton who joked "We came, we saw...he died"

Incidentally, it was the same people behind OtPor! an NGO setup to inspire uprising against Milosevic that inspired the so-called color revolutions in Russia and the Arab Spring...

All these same people, NGOs all coordinating with each other for some strategic goal.

I don't really have any confidence when I see DWB cited in a report to confirm the use of chemical weapons by either side in a conflict.

On this occasion, DWB accused the Syrian government of using the chemical weapons which threw up a red flag for me as we know certain people wanted the US to obliterate Syria using air strikes/missiles irrespective of causalities on the ground.

seanie_c

In relation to Serbia

Even the 1999 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, France’s Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) or Doctors without Borders (DWB) expelled the Greek arm of DWB because the Greeks showed compassion by treating those injured or dying Serbians in Yugoslavia during NATO’s bombing campaign. Apparently the Hippocratic Oath by France’s Medecins Sans Frontiers stopped at the Serbian border.

seanie_c

seanie_c wrote: »

I think John McCain and Lindsey Graham should do the honorable thing and get married.They make a good couple and love humanitarian causes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sg4cEQOAHKE

Right, so you dont actually have any source, you just decided to label him a peadophile because you dont like the man.

Wow.

seanie_c

Jake1 wrote: »

Right, so you dont actually have any source, you just decided to label him a peadophile because you dont like the man.

Wow.

Dislike him?

Tell me why he personally cares so deeply for Syrian civilians?

seanie_c

seanie_c wrote: »

Dislike him?

Tell me why he personally cares so deeply for Syrian civilians?

So, again you dont have any source. You defame a man because you dont like him

Why on earth would you bring something like that into the thread??
What has him caring/not caring for Syrian civilians got to do with what you called him.

I detest Lindsey graham myself, but jesus, to label him a paedo because I dont like him, just not on.

Jonny7

seanie_c wrote: »

On the surface, this is what you'd expect from such a group and it's reasonable to disbelieve they could be capable of taking sides in a conflict.

But we need to remember something, this is an NGO. Who knows where their funding comes from? And with what conditions attached?

The Serbian government at the time (accurately or not) accused them of supplying weapons to KLA fighters before and during NATO bombing Serbian military targets.

Fast forward to 2011 and the same NGO is in Libya apparently assisting with "opposition" fighters to remove Gaddafi....and we know he was impaled on a bayonet, much to the delight of Freedom Fighter Hillary Clinton who joked "We came, we saw...he died"

Incidentally, it was the same people behind OtPor! an NGO setup to inspire uprising against Milosevic that inspired the so-called color revolutions in Russia and the Arab Spring...

All these same people, NGOs all coordinating with each other for some strategic goal.

I don't really have any confidence when I see DWB cited in a report to confirm the use of chemical weapons by either side in a conflict.

On this occasion, DWB accused the Syrian government of using the chemical weapons which threw up a red flag for me as we know certain people wanted the US to obliterate Syria using air strikes/missiles irrespective of causalities on the ground.

I'll offer my own theory, one which I believe is more accurate.

Upon reading or discovering a story that a medical organisation were involved in Syria. You mistakenly believed they were backed by the Israeli government, and from that association you suspected them of being part of a plot to aid terrorists.

The quoted part appears to be a very crude "guilt by association" theory based on that.

So the whole thing looks like a theory based on a misunderstanding.

Karl Stein

Jonny7 wrote: »

In 10 years of reading and hearing about various pipelines and their significance to the US, I've yet to hear an explanation of how they produce such a good return as to warrant invasions, the enormous cost and the loss of life

The saying 'there are none so blind as those who choose not to see' immediately came to mind on reading your post. What you're doing is choosing not to see the absolutely critical strategic importance of Middle east oil/gas and the reams of evidence and history of western involvement in the region for precisely that reason.

No doubt you'll be aware that middle eastern oil has long been seen as “a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history.” as a US state department official put it.

You're aware of the overthrow of the democratically elected Iranian government in 1953 on behalf of British oil interests. Google it if you're not and educate yourself.

The following key sentence, which was written by Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter's National Security Adviser, concludes the section:

Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.

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

What vital interests would those be Johnny? The sand? The camels? The palm trees?

Oil is the blood of Capitalism and pipelines and shipping lanes are the arteries and veins.

You and your innocence theories. Such delightful naivety.

returnNull

Jonny7 wrote: »

You mistakenly believed they were backed by the Israeli government, and from that association you suspected them of being part of a plot to aid terrorists.

apparently because the founder of MSF is a left wing french jew and strangely had been involved in'organ donations' in kosovo,lol :pac:

Couldnt make this sh1te up! well you could.......

Jonny7

Charlie Rock wrote: »

The saying 'there are none so blind as those who choose not to see' immediately came to mind on reading your post. What you're doing is choosing not to see the absolutely critical strategic importance of Middle east oil/gas and the reams of evidence and history of western involvement in the region for precisely that reason.

I sincerely hope it isn't the following..

Syria is in the Middle East
The US is trying to intervene in a Syrian affair
The ME has nat resources
The US has a history of interference in the region
therefore the US must be primarily involved in Syria as part of geopolitical strategy to secure/control oil/gas

topped off by a rambling 10 page articles by the likes of Pepe Escobar or John Pilger

No doubt you'll be aware that middle eastern oil has long been seen as “a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history.” as a US state department official put it.

Canada and Mexico must be feeling important since they are the US's biggest suppliers

The US could very well be up to some evil nefarious plan in relation to Syria, I would be interested in the details.

You're aware of the overthrow of the democratically elected Iranian government in 1953 on behalf of British oil interests. Google it if you're not and educate yourself.

No need for the condescending attitude - it comes up in every Iran thread for the past 10 years. Every. Single. Time.

What vital interests would those be Johnny? The sand? The camels? The palm trees?

Oil is the blood of Capitalism and pipelines and shipping lanes are the arteries and veins.

You and your innocence theories. Such delightful naivety.

You are the one suggesting the US is taking action against Syria because of a pipeline, who knows it could be true, I am more than willing to listen to any details or evidence you have

Seaneh

The Iraq-Iran-Syria pipeline would mean that Iran could massively increase their output, Iran are also planning to sell gas in Europe in Euros, it also means the gulf states (Kuwait, Bahrain, etc) are completely handicapped as Iran will be able to charge far less for gas than they can from shipping their liqud natural gas, this doesn't suit America. That's why they (the US) try to isolate Iran completely.

Regime Change in Syria isolates Iran, stops the pipeline and keeps America's vassal states in the gulf happy.


And the reason the overthrowing of Mosaddeq's government is brought up every time a America's position on Iran is brought up is because it's relevant and the cause of the current problem.

The US's entire history in the middle east has been for the benefit of the US and US companies and nothing else.

Seaneh

The pipeline is also the reason Qatar, Saudi, Kuwait and the rest are funding and arming the rebels along with the house of Saudi's salafist ideals.

Karl Stein

Jonny7 wrote: »

therefore the US must be primarily involved in Syria as part of geopolitical strategy to secure/control oil/gas

If you look back I said that oil and gas was one aspect of US/Western involvement. Wars happen for numerous reasons, almost never just one.

topped off by a rambling 10 page articles by the likes of Pepe Escobar or John Pilger

Ah yes, when you don't like what people have to say engage in character assassination.

Canada and Mexico must be feeling important since they are the US's biggest suppliers

If the US found a lake of oil twice the volume of all the reserves in the middle east underneath Nevada it wouldn't lessen the strategic importance of Middle Eastern oil to China and India and others.

it comes up in every Iran thread for the past 10 years. Every. Single. Time.

Get used to it. You shouldn't dismiss historical facts because they expose the nature of western involvement in the region.

You are the one suggesting the US is taking action against Syria because of a pipeline, who knows it could be true, I am more than willing to listen to any details or evidence you have

There are lots of reasons. Petroleum politics and geopolitical posturing would be one reason.

Cork boy 55

The award-winning documentary film about Syria, Not Anymore: A Story of Revolution, directed by Matthew VanDyke

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RA8HsfRioWE

Nodin

seanie_c wrote: »

He opposes war with Iran too of course, despite supporting sanctions and warning of war against Iran over their nuclear program..

'sanctions as an alternative to war'...its not a new concept.

seanie_c wrote: »

I think it's perfectly acceptable for Israel to have nukes, but I have a feeling you would disagree with me on that.....

In so much as that means everyone elses wants them and the fact it leads to hypocrisy in certain superpowers policies, it strikes me as a bad idea.

seanie_c wrote: »

This is why I don't reply to your posts.
Nearly 30k posts over 5 years on these forums only indicates one thing to me.

....that I've never indulged in sockpuppetry or closed an account and started again under a new name. True, true.

Jonny7

Charlie Rock wrote: »

If you look back I said that oil and gas was one aspect of US/Western involvement. Wars happen for numerous reasons, almost never just one.

I fully agree, no country is purely altruistic. However we live in a post-Iraq age where Cold War **** is a liittle harder to pull off. The commons vote is a good reminder of that.

Erdogan, who's a pretty keen ally of the "West" at the moment drew sharp criticism for use of a bit of tear-gas.

You said yourself the leadership in some of these countries are vile - Assad shot pretty much to the top of every country's hate list when he started to get very shooty in 2011.

Ah yes, when you don't like what people have to say engage in character assassination.

I'm preempting the bucketload of videos and blogs that can swamp threads like this.

Get used to it. You shouldn't dismiss historical facts because they expose the nature of western involvement in the region.

It drags the thread into a historical bash-fest (if it isn't already)

We don't here tuts at Merkels criticism of chemical weapon use considering the "relevant" German historical facts.

There are lots of reasons. Petroleum politics and geopolitical posturing would be one reason.

There's also the fact that Bashar is a ****. What he's done should never be tolerated.. but what can be done? that's the debate.

Russia, China, US, EU, UN, NATO, Arab league backed the action against Gadaffi for the same reason. We've heard all the conspiracy theories and geopolitical strategies that always spring up.. but there was the same defining motive.

Syria is not an opportunity, it's just a shiatty grim task. Doesn't matter if Assad falls tomorrow, the country is ****ed, it's just what can be salvaged.

This nonexistent pipeline is the last thing on anyone's mind.

Karl Stein

Jonny7 wrote: »

I fully agree, no country is purely altruistic. However we live in a post-Iraq age where Cold War **** is a liittle harder to pull off. The commons vote is a good reminder of that.

The Islamofasict menace replaced the Red Menace as the useful bogeyman.

You said yourself the leadership in some of these countries are vile - Assad shot pretty much to the top of every country's hate list when he started to get very shooty in 2011.

Oh he's a despicable mass murderer - no doubt. He should have allowed people vote at the time of the Arab Spring. But let's not forget that there are elements agitating and some of the people they're supplying wepaons with are just as vile - if the regime falls what replaces it and what are the ramifications for stability in the region... or is instability the goal?

We don't here tuts at Merkels criticism of chemical weapon use considering the "relevant" German historical facts.

The difference is that modern Germany is nothing like the Germany of pre-WWII and doesn't play much of a part in geopolitical machinations. The US/Britain and others are still up to the same type of thing they were 50 years ago.

Syria is not an opportunity, it's just a shiatty grim task. Doesn't matter if Assad falls tomorrow, the country is ****ed, it's just what can be salvaged. This nonexistent pipeline is the last thing on anyone's mind.

People will always see opportunities where us mere mortals only see a disaster. There's a good opportunity to drive a big nasty wedge between Iran and Hezbollah by taking a big bite out of the Shia Cresent. There's the opportunity of preventing the pipeline from being built which would prevent Iranian gas reaching the med. There's a Russian naval dock in Syria. Syria is part of Bush's Beyond the Axis of Evil nations.

S'all in the New Great Game, yo.

Jonny7

Oh he's a despicable mass murderer - no doubt. He should have allowed people vote at the time of the Arab Spring. But let's not forget that there are elements agitating and some of the people they're supplying wepaons with are just as vile - if the regime falls what replaces it and what are the ramifications for stability in the region... or is instability the goal?

Inaction and obstructionism have brought us the most violent country on earth, 2+ million refugees, thousands of orphans, one third of which have witnessed the violent death of a person near to them. Hordes of murdering Islamists and thugs streaming into the country from all corners of the region.

Virtually every common sense plan has been blocked, either by the Russians/Chinese or broken promises delivered by the regime.

We can sit here and thank the Bush administration for shooting the US in the foot when a genuine need arises to resolve one of the major modern disasters - but that's not going to help the Syrians.

People will always see opportunities where us mere mortals only see a disaster. There's a good opportunity to drive a big nasty wedge between Iran and Hezbollah by taking a big bite out of the Shia Cresent. There's the opportunity of preventing the pipeline from being built which would prevent Iranian gas reaching the med. There's a Russian naval dock in Syria. Syria is part of Bush's Beyond the Axis of Evil nations.

Iran, Russia and Hezbollah whose governments support the "despicable mass murderer" merrily escape criticism, in fact they become victims in favour of implicating the US administration.

old_aussie

No surprises here, predictable, I guess it's in their nature.

Now they FSA and al-qaeda turn on each other.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/alqaedalinked--gunmen-seize--syrian-town-20130920-2u32d.html

Nodin

old_aussie wrote: »

No surprises here, predictable, I guess it's in their nature.

....what do you mean by that?

theGEM

Nodin wrote: »

....what do you mean by that?

It's their culture..

Nodin

theGEM wrote: »

It's their culture..

What is? Civil war? You'll find that's not a thing confined to the middle east.

Karl Stein

old_aussie wrote: »

it's in their nature.

theGEM wrote: »

It's their culture..

Something's not adding up here...

seanie_c

Nodin wrote: »

'sanctions as an alternative to war'...its not a new concept.

Sanctions are part of war. Why you'd believe they aren't is beyond me.

....that I've never indulged in sockpuppetry or closed an account and started again under a new name. True, true.

No.

Nodin

seanie_c wrote: »

Sanctions are part of war. Why you'd believe they aren't is beyond me..

They aren't nessecarily, no.

seanie_c wrote: »

No.

Do please explain yourself then.