Thread: The crisis in Syria

Ъ-Новости - Христианская деревня атакована боевиками в Сирии

Христианская деревня атакована боевиками в Сирии

Деревня в пригороде сирийского города Маалула, жители которой являются преимущественно христианами, была атакована боевиками, сообщает АР. Местная монахиня рассказала, что штурм населенного пункта начался на рассвете среды с теракта на территории контрольно-пропускного пункта в окрестностях Маалулы. По ее словам, она слышала звуки выстрелов и авиаударов. Базирующаяся в Лондоне организация Syrian Observatory for Human Rights подтверждает информацию об атаке и говорит, что нападавшие принадлежат к близкой к «Аль-Каиде» группировке «Джебхат ан-Нусра».

Originally Posted by Боб Уайтман

Ъ-Новости - Христианская деревня атакована боевиками в Сирии

Спасибо за ссылку.... ужас, просто УЖАС, что происходит. Мне грустно без слов...

Maybe the Japanese were just "sending the US a message" when they engaged in their "limited strike" on Pearl Harbor...?

Originally Posted by 14Russian

Those Russians going to the concert just went uninformed, not knowing anything... much like the fans of Putin.

Seriously, I don't think one can say something positive about being a fan of something and not even having a clue.

Who has time to be a fan, lol? I study 8 hours every day and then I have homework and chores to deal with. I still have a little time for my social life and maybe play a video game or something - if nothing else happens.
I know the lyrics to some songs I like but no way i could ever know the lyrics for all that stuff. And I've only been to a few concerts.
That's probably true for the Russians that went to the concert. They just wanted to hear some cool music NOT watch political crap.

If someone says that our government bites then that's cool. Governments always have corruption. But nobody has the right to do that to our flag so they didn't have the right to do that to Russia's flag. The flags belong more to the people than the government.
And yeah, like I've said before, Obama isn't totally right and Putin isn't totally right. No leader is ever totally right. But people aren't either. People just pick the good/bad that they mostly agree with.

Originally Posted by 14Russian

Kerry a liar? Most people who investigated that clown know about him already. He was being groomed for being a warmonger long ago.

Well, I don't know very much about him but all the warmongers needa be put in the war zones so they can really appreciate what they're doing. The reason they don't care is cause they've never been there.

Originally Posted by UhOhXplode

Well, I don't know very much about him but all the warmongers needa be put in the war zones so they can really appreciate what they're doing. The reason they don't care is cause they've never been there.

Actually, John Kerry served in Vietnam and was awarded three Purple Hearts among other honors. Which, in my mind, makes him a hypocrite. But you can't say he's "never been there."

Military career of John Kerry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*If you spend much time talking with veterans of war, you will find that they tend to fall into both the anti-war and pro-war camps. After all, the US glorifies war, and veterans are praised for their service. That is why many of them send their sons off to fight in wars as well. They believe it is the honorable thing to do. There are also plenty of veterans who return for multiple tours.

Poll: Majority Of Americans Approve Of Sending Congress To Syria | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

“I believe it is in the best interest of the United States, and the global community as a whole, to move forward with the deployment of all U.S. congressional leaders to Syria immediately,” respondent Carol Abare, 50, said in the nationwide telephone survey, echoing the thoughts of an estimated 9 in 10 Americans who said they “strongly support” any plan of action that involves putting the U.S. House and Senate on the ground in the war-torn Middle Eastern state. “With violence intensifying every day, now is absolutely the right moment—the perfect moment, really—for the United States to send our legislators to the region.”

“In fact, my preference would have been for Congress to be deployed months ago,” she added.

If only this were not satire!

Originally Posted by Deborski

Poll: Majority Of Americans Approve Of Sending Congress To Syria | The Onion - America's Finest News Source



If only this were not satire!

How many senators that can pilot F-17 things do you know, Deb?

Originally Posted by Deborski

Poll: Majority Of Americans Approve Of Sending Congress To Syria | The Onion - America's Finest News Source



If only this were not satire!

Or how about this: Send 10% of the Washington lobbyists to Syria to lobby for peace, using the same amount of resources they spend for lobbying for GM crops, medical insurance laws and similar types of issues.

For starters, they could bribe every single government AND rebel fighter to put down their arms... Proceeding to bribe Assad to open up faster and democratize.

Alan Grayson's Emails | Grayson in the NY Times on Syria Intel: “Trust, But Verify”

US Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL) demands that intelligence cited by President Obama and John Kerry to support a US military strike against Syria must be declassified. Grayson states that even US representatives have not been allowed to see the purported "evidence" proving that Assad is responsible for using sarin gas against civilians and children.

On Thursday I asked the House Intelligence Committee staff whether there was any other documentation available, classified or unclassified. Their answer was “no.”

The Syria chemical weapons summaries are based on several hundred underlying elements of intelligence information. The unclassified summary cites intercepted telephone calls, “social media” postings and the like, but not one of these is actually quoted or attached — not even clips from YouTube. (As to whether the classified summary is the same, I couldn’t possibly comment, but again, draw your own conclusion.)

Over the last week the administration has run a full-court press on Capitol Hill, lobbying members from both parties in both houses to vote in support of its plan to attack Syria. And yet we members are supposed to accept, without question, that the proponents of a strike on Syria have accurately depicted the underlying evidence, even though the proponents refuse to show any of it to us or to the American public.

In fact, even gaining access to just the classified summary involves a series of unreasonably high hurdles.

We have to descend into the bowels of the Capitol Visitors Center, to a room four levels underground. Per the instructions of the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, note-taking is not allowed.

Once we leave, we are not permitted to discuss the classified summary with the public, the media, our constituents or even other members. Nor are we allowed to do anything to verify the validity of the information that has been provided.

And this is just the classified summary. It is my understanding that the House Intelligence Committee made a formal request for the underlying intelligence reports several days ago. I haven’t heard an answer yet. And frankly, I don’t expect one.

Representative Grayson is a ranking member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Veteran Intelligence Professionals For Sanity Warn Obama On Syrian Intel | PopularResistance.Org

A group known as Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) states that, contrary to assertions made by the Obama administration, intelligence does NOT prove that Assad is responsible for the chemical weapons attack said to have killed over 1400 people.

We regret to inform you that some of our former co-workers are telling us, categorically, that contrary to the claims of your administration, the most reliable intelligence shows that Bashar al-Assad was NOT responsible for the chemical incident that killed and injured Syrian civilians on August 21, and that British intelligence officials also know this. In writing this brief report, we choose to assume that you have not been fully informed because your advisers decided to afford you the opportunity for what is commonly known as “plausible denial.”

Our sources confirm that a chemical incident of some sort did cause fatalities and injuries on August 21 in a suburb of Damascus. They insist, however, that the incident was not the result of an attack by the Syrian Army using military-grade chemical weapons from its arsenal. That is the most salient fact, according to CIA officers working on the Syria issue. They tell us that CIA Director John Brennan is perpetrating a pre-Iraq-War-type fraud on members of Congress, the media, the public – and perhaps even you.

There is a growing body of evidence from numerous sources in the Middle East — mostly affiliated with the Syrian opposition and its supporters — providing a strong circumstantial case that the August 21 chemical incident was a pre-planned provocation by the Syrian opposition and its Saudi and Turkish supporters. The aim is reported to have been to create the kind of incident that would bring the United States into the war.

According to some reports, canisters containing chemical agent were brought into a suburb of Damascus, where they were then opened. Some people in the immediate vicinity died; others were injured.

We are unaware of any reliable evidence that a Syrian military rocket capable of carrying a chemical agent was fired into the area. In fact, we are aware of no reliable physical evidence to support the claim that this was a result of a strike by a Syrian military unit with expertise in chemical weapons.

Apparently Russia has now said that it will protect Syria against a marine invasion.
I agree that this is right, but this is practically a cold war situation!
Best case scenario: The Russian presence works as a deterrence and they back off.
I like that Russia puts its' money where its' mouth is, but at the same time it's scary and an echo of the past.

Either way, the beautiful and previously stable country of Syria is in ruins. Regardless of what happens they have a decade of misery ahead of them, and 2 million already left the country.

It's such a tragedy and how anyone can be so shameless as to pretend that bombing will make things better, is unbelievable.

Originally Posted by Hanna

Apparently Russia has now said that it will protect Syria against a marine invasion.
I agree that this is right, but this is practically a cold war situation!
Best case scenario: The Russian presence works as a deterrence and they back off.
I like that Russia puts its' money where its' mouth is, but at the same time it's scary and an echo of the past.

Either way, the beautiful and previously stable country of Syria is in ruins. Regardless of what happens they have a decade of misery ahead of them, and 2 million already left the country.

It's such a tragedy and how anyone can be so shameless as to pretend that bombing will make things better, is unbelievable.

I am hearing conflicting stories regarding Russian ships in the Mediterranean. US news makes it sound like they are building up for a potential conflict with the US, but Russian news continues to state that the ships are there as part of a regular rotation which has been going on since before the crisis in Syria began two years ago.

If you have Russian articles stating that Russia intends to mount a military defense against the US, by all means share them because I haven't found any which say that.

This article was in RIA Novosti this morning (English edition)

Russia Boosts Mediterranean Fleet for Potential Evacuation – Kremlin | World | RIA Novosti

Russia’s Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov said earlier on Thursday that the country’s increased presence in the Mediterranean is “a legitimate, natural and predictable reaction to the situation developing” in the region.

“Our actions are in strict compliance with international law and the UN Charter,” he stressed, adding that the Mediterranean Sea is “quite close to Russia’s borders.”

However, he stressed that Russia’s naval presence in the Mediterranean Sea should not be interpreted as an indication that the country plans to take an active role in any regional conflict, he said.

This was RT's version of the story, which basically said the same thing and even quoted the RIA Novosti article directly.

Troubled waters: Naval forces line Syrian shores — RT News

I have also read through Russian-language news and have not seen anything saying that Russia intends to become involved militarily on any front.

At this point, the majority of US citizens strongly oppose a military strike against Syria, and the vote in Congress appears to be shaping up to support that, although there are still many undecided. Personally I hope the US does not strike, but if it does, I do not think that Russia is going to start attacking US warships, for which I am grateful. Not because I think America is doing the right thing with a military strike, but because someone has to keep a calm head and prevent World War Three from starting, if at all possible. I admire Russia for its restraint.

Originally Posted by Deborski

I am hearing conflicting stories regarding Russian ships in the Mediterranean. US news makes it sound like they are building up for a potential conflict with the US, but Russian news continues to state that the ships are there as part of a regular rotation which has been going on since before the crisis in Syria began two years ago.

If you have Russian articles stating that Russia intends to mount a military defense against the US, by all means share them because I haven't found any which say that.

This article was in RIA Novosti this morning (English edition)

Russia Boosts Mediterranean Fleet for Potential Evacuation – Kremlin | World | RIA Novosti



This was RT's version of the story, which basically said the same thing and even quoted the RIA Novosti article directly.

Troubled waters: Naval forces line Syrian shores — RT News

I have also read through Russian-language news and have not seen anything saying that Russia intends to become involved militarily on any front.

At this point, the majority of US citizens strongly oppose a military strike against Syria, and the vote in Congress appears to be shaping up to support that, although there are still many undecided. Personally I hope the US does not strike, but if it does, I do not think that Russia is going to start attacking US warships, for which I am grateful. Not because I think America is doing the right thing with a military strike, but because someone has to keep a calm head and prevent World War Three from starting, if at all possible. I admire Russia for its restraint.

Well I hope you are right and that the mere presence will make the Americans think twice.
But "routine military exercise" is the oldest excuse in the book, seriously. That's exactly what Britain happens to be involved in JUST as the Gibraltar issue flares up again. And it's no small exercise. I personally happen to support the UK on that, but I don't think anyone involved believes that the exercise is "long planned" as Cameron insists. It's also what triggers the annual stand-off with North Korea. Russia does have large military exercises as everyone on the Baltic coasts know. But they are always well advertised beforehand, whereas this wasn't from what I understand.

I don't care though. I think the US aggression must be stopped and if the presence of Russian ships will make them think twice they can use a white excuse as far as I'm concerned.

Originally Posted by Hanna

Well I hope you are right and that the mere presence will make the Americans think twice.
But "routine military exercise" is the oldest excuse in the book, seriously. That's exactly what Britain happens to be involved in JUST as the Gibraltar issue flares up again. And it's no small exercise. I personally happen to support the UK on that, but I don't think anyone involved believes that the exercise is "long planned" as Cameron insists. It's also what triggers the annual stand-off with North Korea. Russia does have large military exercises as everyone on the Baltic coasts know. But they are always well advertised beforehand, whereas this wasn't from what I understand.

I don't care though. I think the US aggression must be stopped and if the presence of Russian ships will make them think twice they can use a white excuse as far as I'm concerned.

There's no way to know for sure, but I am going off of what is being said in Russian news and what Russian officials are saying. I believe Russia is certainly showing more forbearance than the US, at any rate, and I'm glad someone is!

As for serving as a deterrent, that may be true as well. US articles make it sound like our ships are about to start firing on each other and that alone is enough to cause some Americans to oppose the airstrikes in Syria, regardless of whether it is true.

Originally Posted by Deborski

I am hearing conflicting stories regarding Russian ships in the Mediterranean. US news makes it sound like they are building up for a potential conflict with the US, but Russian news continues to state that the ships are there as part of a regular rotation which has been going on since before the crisis in Syria began two years ago.

If you have Russian articles stating that Russia intends to mount a military defense against the US, by all means share them because I haven't found any which say that.

This article was in RIA Novosti this morning (English edition)

Russia Boosts Mediterranean Fleet for Potential Evacuation – Kremlin | World | RIA Novosti



This was RT's version of the story, which basically said the same thing and even quoted the RIA Novosti article directly.

Troubled waters: Naval forces line Syrian shores — RT News

I have also read through Russian-language news and have not seen anything saying that Russia intends to become involved militarily on any front.

At this point, the majority of US citizens strongly oppose a military strike against Syria, and the vote in Congress appears to be shaping up to support that, although there are still many undecided. Personally I hope the US does not strike, but if it does, I do not think that Russia is going to start attacking US warships, for which I am grateful. Not because I think America is doing the right thing with a military strike, but because someone has to keep a calm head and prevent World War Three from starting, if at all possible. I admire Russia for its restraint.

As I said, triggering WW3 because someone attacked a country like Syria (EVEN IF it was an act of aggression) is the stupidest thing to do at this point; external countries may help alter a local conflict, but it absolutely has to be kept a local conflict, and everyone including Russia realizes that (I think even the USSR if it still existed would realize that);

On the other hand, I've heard the crazy dictator threatened to attack Israel, Turkey and Jordan if he got his @ss attacked, which shows HE doesn't fear a WW3 scenario, and is willing to do anything to stay in power, which suggests the safest situation in the region is achieved with him far far away from his throne.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

On the other hand, I've heard the crazy dictator threatened to attack Israel, Turkey and Jordan if he got his @ss attacked, which shows HE doesn't fear a WW3 scenario, and is willing to do anything to stay in power, which suggests the safest situation in the region is achieved with him far far away from his throne.

And what happens after we "topple Assad"? Does anyone even try to think that far ahead? Who takes power then? In whose hands will the chemical weapons end up? Which jihadist group will assume control and will they really be so much better for the stability of the region that Assad's secular government was?

Originally Posted by Deborski

And what happens after we "topple Assad"? Does anyone even try to think that far ahead? Who takes power then? In whose hands will the chemical weapons end up? Which jihadist group will assume control and will they really be so much better for the stability of the region that Assad's secular government was?

If their only two options are either a secular totalitarian dictatorship, or a sharia jihadist group, I feel so sorry for them...

Originally Posted by Hanna

Apparently Russia has now said that it will protect Syria against a marine invasion.
I agree that this is right, but this is practically a cold war situation!
Best case scenario: The Russian presence works as a deterrence and they back off.
I like that Russia puts its' money where its' mouth is, but at the same time it's scary and an echo of the past.

1) Россия конечно не будет воевать за Сирию (Мы в своё время воевали за Сербию (1914), за Египет и прочие страны, но благодарности за это не получили). Но своим присутствием мы можем увеличить неопределённость ситуации, чтобы американским стратегам было труднее принять решения о начале войны.
2) Если Америка начнёт атаку на Сирию, то нашей разведке будет интересно понаблюдать за этим с близкого расстояния. Америка раскроет при этом некоторые свои военные секреты. Это вторая причина, по которой наш флот наращивает там своё присутствие.
3) Третья причина: эвакуация из Сирии. Там много смешанных браков (русские жёны). На самолётах всех не вывезти.

Вчера смотрел программу "Вести недели" на канале Россия. Чувствуется, что чем ближе война, тем более резкие оценки и сравнения звучат из уст журналистов. Там есть сюжет о фашизме и США (начало 28:56). Сожалею только, что наши СМИ только в критические моменты говорят так хлёстко. В остальное время их как будто держат в узде властьимущие.

LOL

The "crazy dictator" threatened to attack Israel but the cannibals (supporting by the US), I suppose, will kiss an every Jew there after they win. What a pathetic thinking. Of course, if the cannibals get CW, they use it in Israel or even in Europe. Can you imagine thousands of killed people in Paris, London, Rome and so on? I can, it's absolutely a realistic picture. And the super-duper "democratic" state (USA) will be guilty of that. (Deleted. L.)

Do you know that some of these jihadists ALREADY think they fight against Israel (I watched some videos, they say about that freely)? Yes, they are very stupid and uneducated fanatics, so any commander can persuade them easily. But you all, who live in the "open" world, why are you that silly?

Originally Posted by Paul G.

LOL

The "crazy dictator" threatened to attack Israel but the cannibals (supporting by the US), I suppose, will kiss an every Jew there after they win. What a pathetic thinking. Of course, if the cannibals get CW, they use it in Israel or even in Europe. Can you imagine thousands of killed people in Paris, London, Rome and so on? I can, it's absolutely a realistic picture. And the super-duper "democratic" state (USA) will be guilty of that. And personally you, Eric C., if you live there.

Do you know that some of these jihadists ALREADY think they fight against Israel (I watched some videos, they say about that freely)? Yes, they are very stupid and uneducated fanatics, so any commander can persuade them easily. But you all, who live in the "open" world, why are you that silly?

I do NOT support the jihadists that fight there, no matter what side they're on. I think the Syrian people should get rid of both the dictator and jihadists, and I've stated this multiple times before, so I wonder if someone here has a reading problem. Or maybe, someone here thinks that stopping jihadists should always take bloody style scummy totalitarian regimes like that in Syria? I for one believe fighting terrorism is possible WITHOUT attacking law-abiding citizens for their views.