# Forum General General Discussion  The crisis in Syria

## Deborski

New poll: Syria intervention even less popular than Congress 
As this article states,* only nine percent of Americans* favor military intervention in Syria. 
Despite that, it appears that the US government is already making plans to deploy troops and missiles.  Obama is currently meeting with advisers who are requesting military action based on questionable reports that Assad has used chemical weapons on civilians.  This flies in the face of UN findings that the US-backed rebels are actually the ones using the chemical weapons.  UN accuses Syrian rebels of chemical weapons use - Telegraph 
As a pacifist, I am very much opposed to any kind of military intervention in the middle east right now.  I would support sending food, medical aid and clothing or tents for the thousands of refugees left homeless in surrounding countries.  America can not afford another war.  The majority of us do not support this.  And yet, it is happening despite everyone's protests. 
Comments?  Thoughts?

----------


## Deborski

Russia warns U.S. not to repeat in Syria past mistakes in region | Reuters 
Russia has warned the US against military intervention.  However, these warnings seem to be falling on deaf ears.  Anti-Russian sentiment in the west is as high as I can recall since cold war times.

----------


## Vladimir_S

Это уже было - так и не найденная атомная бомба в Ираке. И вот теперь "якобы найденное химическое оружие".

----------


## Deborski

> Это уже было - так и не найденная атомная бомба в Ираке. И вот теперь "якобы найденное химическое оружие".

 There is an American saying "Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me."  I imagine there is a similar поговорка in Russian. 
This time, most of us are not fooled.  We know it's a lie.  But they are going to make the "WMD" claim anyway, even if no one believes it.

----------


## maxmixiv

Сирия давно обречена, только чудо может её спасти.

----------


## Eledhwen

А вот сидящие здесь американцы — что они делают, чтобы остановить эту агрессию? У вас есть перо, которое может быть сильнее меча — как оно будет использовано?

----------


## eisenherz

while i agree the WMD story regarding Irak was a lie; i do believe that chemical weapons in Syria have been used. In my mind that is not a fabrication, what is not clear though is who used them.

----------


## Deborski

> А вот сидящие здесь американцы — что они делают, чтобы остановить эту агрессию? У вас есть перо, которое может быть сильнее меча — как оно будет использовано?

 Well, Eledhwen, we "сидящие американцы " vote for leaders who are sworn to represent us, and instead they represent the military/industrial sector.  Our leaders do not represent our wishes.  We protest.  We try to vote out the bad leaders.  We write news articles and editorials with our "перо" which are not picked up by the mainstream press.  We do everything we can, as a matter of fact.  Two years ago, I went to Washington DC, at great personal expense, to protest the evils in my country.   
Just as I am sure that you "сидящие русские" do all that you can, when your government ceases to represent you. 
I am not sure what you think we personally CAN do, other than that.  Maybe you would like to enlighten us all with your idea?  Please, be my guest.  I would like to know how you think we can force our government to stop it's decades-old pattern of global aggression. 
Давай.  Просвети нас.

----------


## Basil77

This article was deleted several hours after publishing more than half of a year ago:  U.S. 'planned to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it on Assad' | Mail Online 
All this Syria issue smells very dirty to me.

----------


## Deborski

> while i agree the WMD story regarding Irak was a lie; i do believe that chemical weapons in Syria have been used. In my mind that is not a fabrication, what is not clear though is who used them.

 There is no question that chemicals were used on thousands of people, so I agree that is fact.  But who did it?  Al-Assad or Al-Qaeda?  And in the end, even if both of them did it, does it justify military intervention?

----------


## Deborski

> This article was deleted several hours after publishing more than half of a year ago:  U.S. 'planned to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it on Assad' | Mail Online 
> All this Syria issue smells very dirty to me.

 I saw that article as well.  I agree, it smells very dirty.

----------


## Юрка

Америка воюет в основном дистанционно. Дорого, но без человеческих жертв в своей армии. Поэтому большого антивоенного движения внутри США не будет.
А что касается Сирии, то есть предсказания Ванги о третьей мровой войне. Вроде всё идёт по плану.

----------


## eisenherz

> There is no question that chemicals were used on thousands of people, so I agree that is fact.  But who did it?  Al-Assad or Al-Qaeda?  And in the end, even if both of them did it, does it justify military intervention?

 hmm, Deborski (Deborah); я не знаю, что было бы правильно. трудный вопрос. in principle i would think interventions should be considered if there are undeniable human rights abuses on a large scale. for example, i think intervention in Lybia was justified due to Gaddafi's clear history of abuse; even in Irak intervention was defendable for Hussein proven and documented use of chemical weapons in Irak. the problem is the US intervened for the wrong reasons (=self-interest, oil,  influence in the region, trumped up WMD stories) at the wrong time. it would really be nice if the big powers could act decisively and in unison and for the right reasons (=human right abuses). instead they try protect their own interests and ignore atrocities in countries where there is not much in it for them (eg Somalia, Sudan (Dafour), Liberia/Sierra Leone some time back, Rwanda some time back, DRC Congo, Zimbabwe (on a lesser scale)? did anybody help the Cambodians when the Khmer Rouge ran riot? who helped the Argentinians when the military junta made people disappear some 40 years ago? yip - no-one really. If Lybia had no oil reserves, would there have been an intervention? I doubt it. But should there have been one? Yes, i think so - but not for reasons of oil.

----------


## Боб Уайтман

I can see two major (just enormously large) problems in here. 
1. None of us can claim (s)he knows the truth. 
If you read news articles what western media write about the civil war in Syria, and what Russian media write, you'll get an impression there are two completely different events. Someone has already noted it on this forum as I remember.
According to the formal logic laws, there can not be two true statements which contradict to each other. Someone is lying. Or maybe someone is providing "half-truth" by pulling facts out of contexts and hiding some other facts. This "half-truth" is actually another sort of lie, just because it is aimed on cheating readers. Either US and Europe, or Russia do lie to their people - it is obvious from the logic laws. 
But the question is: WHO is lying? My deep feeling is: both sides are. I cannot fully trust any source on that. I cannot trust the US official opinion (thank Snowden!  ::  ), and frankly speaking I never felt like trusting it before. But I do not trust the Russian government either. Since there were obvious events when our government lied us (thank Parliament Elections 2012, with 146% for United Russia shown in state TV - I saw it myslef; thank "Время" TV programme which kept silence when the Net was full of pictures of mass protests in Moscow). 
So, I think what Russian government tells us about Syria is at least "half-truth" (a sort of lie), but it is no way the real truth. 
I think (unfortunately) no one wants to tell their people the truth. There is hardly any single country in the world which does not lie to their citizen and to other countries. It is just the world we all have now. It is a world ruled by personal interests of highest officials. It is a world ruled by big money. It is a world ruled by political ambitions of some specific people. It is not a world for everyone yet... 
2. The civil war lasts for 2 (or more?) years already with at least 100,000 died. How many wounded? How many people lost their parents, children, spouses? How many lost their homes and everything they had? 
Why no one made an effort to stop it before? I do not think the position "it's their own business, let them manage it" is fair in this case.
The civil war MUST be stopped. But how? 
Unfortunately, the modern world is not so good for that (see item 1). And here's the result we see. 
If world's governments had not been busy with defending their private interests, they would be able to consolidate their will to stop the war. I think there must be some kind of an international law and permanent international peace-keeping forces. 
Imagine: you walk along a street and you see some people scuffling and nearly killing each other. What would you do? Would you just pass them by pretending it is not you business? I hardly think anyone agrees it is a proper behaviour. We should intervene just to separate the fighters, or (if we do not feel confident of our physical force) at least should call the police. 
The internation forces should react wherever deadly violence starts and the local government cannot (or does not want to) suppress the violence immediately. Their task is not to prosecute anyone, is not to punish. Their task is to part the combatant parties with a minimum harm to the peaceful population. They must not support any of the combatant parties, neither to judge who is wrong and who is right. After the peace is established, an international trial (including local people) will judge. 
I understand it is something that is easy to say and not easy to do. But the world needs a strict, well-defined law for that. All the countries must participate, every country must delegate their representatives to the peace-keeping forces and to the international trial. Every country should have equal vote. Not the governments but experts must decide. 
However, it is hardly possible in the world of lie. And it is sad. 
I think the humanity will build a world of truth some day. To achieve that, it will have to get rid of the power of money.
"Everyone has a right to be elected" is a huge lie the modern democracies sell to us. Only someone who has a great influence already, or someone who possesses an enormous amount of money (which is almost the same) can be elected now. And having been elected, they do their best to promote their personal interest first of all. That is the source of all the problems we are facing right now in the world.

----------


## Юрка

> But the question is: WHO is lying?

 Чтобы ответить на этот вопрос достаточно научиться разбираться в людях. Информацию по Сирии даёт не государство, а конкретные люди. Например, журналист Анастасия Попова. Человек с таким открытым лицом, бегающий под пулями может врать?  

> thank Snowden!

 Короче, нет пророка в своём отечестве. Это мне напоминает случай с моей мамой. Я ей рассказывал о чём-то (сейчас точно не помню, о пользе какого-то продукта кажется), но она слушала меня совершенно безразлично. А когда через год она услышала то же самое от одной незнакомой женщины в очереди за продуктами, то сразу вдохновилась новой информацией и стала применять.

----------


## Боб Уайтман

> Чтобы ответить на этот вопрос достаточно научиться разбираться в людях. Информацию по Сирии даёт не государство, а конкретные люди. Например, журналист Анастасия Попова. Человек с таким открытым лицом, бегающий под пулями может врать?

 Спасибо, я обязательно посмотрю этот репортаж (сейчас нет пока возможности).
Девушка, бегающая под пулями, безусловно вызывает уважение. Но одна девушка (даже предельно честная и самоотверженная) не может знать всего.
Кроме того, а американские СМИ откуда черпают информацию? Разве не от своих же таких же журналистов? 
Юрка, я вовсе не хочу сказать "Всё, что говорят, - неправда". Также я не хочу сказать "Всё, что говорят, - правда". Я просто не вижу причины полностью доверять хоть чьей-то официальной позиции. Так как все официальные позиции заинтересованы и замешаны на своих интересах, которые могут быть весьма далеки от интересов сирийского народа. 
Есть официальная позиция руководства России по этому поводу. Есть та установка, по которой освещают новости. Но вот незадача: если я знаю на 100%, что моё правительство врёт мне относительно внутрироссийских дел, то как я могу ему полностью доверять в делах международных? 
Я не могу быть уверенным, что мне известна вся правда. Я не выгораживаю ни чью сторону. Единственно, в чём я уверен: Войну надо прекратить. Для чего надо в первую очередь просто разнять дерущихся. Причём разнять так, чтобы всем раз и навсегда стало предельно ясно: будете драться снова - снова разнимем. 
А насчёт поиска правды, и кто виноват, это я уже писал выше. Всё должны решать непредвзятые эксперты. Но это очень сложно реализовать в условиях, когда сталкиваются узкие интересы крупных держав.

----------


## Doomer

Пока что все идет согласно "плану", о существовании которого заявляют различные аналитки
Суть "плана" в следующем: 
необходимо уничтожить государственность на Ближнем Востоке. Если снять правящие верхушки в большинстве ближневосточных стран, то за власть начнут драться мелкие религиозные группы, таким образом все внимание этих стран будет сконцентрировано на внутреполитических вопросах.
Факты, подтверждающие существование "плана": 
- Попытка захвата Афганистана 
- Военное присутствие НАТО в Ираке и фактически захват страны и уничтожение государственности, как потом выяснилось без каких-либо весомых причин
- Поддержка НАТО войны в Ливии, что привело к уничтожению государственности
- Политическое осуждение Обамой действующего режима в Тунисе в 2011 году и поддержка восстания, что привело к отставке правительства Туниса. Аналогичная ситуация с Йеменом.
- Резкое осуждение США действий египетских военных, которые как мы помним не захотели религиозных фанатиков в правящей верхушке и быстренько арестовали все новоиспеченное правительство, таким образом в Египте сейчас более-менее мирно и это идет в разрез с "планом". Антиамериканские настроения в Египте усиливаются, хотя США всегда были союзниками Египта, до этого момента 
- Когда стало ясно, что повстанцам в Сирии не одолеть Асада, тут же быстренько нашелся зарин и теперь все "развитые страны" гудят что пора вводить войска в Сирию, например Франция заявила что им не интересны результаты расследований ООН по этому вопросу, они уже сейчас считают что ответственность за применение ОМП должен нести Асад. 
Зачем нужен "план":
Чтобы отвлечь внимание Ближнего Востока от США и сделать Ближний Восток более "управляемым" со стороны "развитых стран". Высвобождающиеся таким образом ресурсы можно бросить на конфронтацию с Россией и Китаем

----------


## Юрка

> Единственно, в чём я уверен: Войну надо прекратить. Для чего надо в первую очередь просто разнять дерущихся. Причём разнять так, чтобы всем раз и навсегда стало предельно ясно: будете драться снова - снова разнимем.

 Если верить никому нельзя, то и разнимать некому, так как все свиньи, а разнимать может только очень честная сторона. 
Кроме того, зачем разнимать? Это же не решение проблемы. Там одна сторона побеждает - вот это решение проблемы. Человечество десятки тысяч лет решает конфликты войной. И победитель как правило прав. На этом основан так называемый "божий суд". Или Вы думаете, что наши предки тупые-тупые, а мы сейчас что-то лучшее придумаем? Америка вмешивается в "божий суд" и сейчас сделает так, что победят неправые.

----------


## Боб Уайтман

> Если верить никому нельзя, то и разнимать некому, так как все свиньи, а разнимать может только очень честная сторона.

 С чем я совершенно согласен! См. мой пост на английском.   

> Кроме того, зачем разнимать? Это же не решение проблемы. Там одна сторона побеждает - вот это решение проблемы. Человечество десятки тысяч лет решает конфликты войной. И победитель как правило прав. На этом основан так называемый "божий суд". Или Вы думаете, что наши предки тупые-тупые, а мы сейчас что-то лучшее придумаем? Америка вмешивается в "божий суд" и сейчас сделает так, что победят неправые.

 Мы должны продолжать жить по варварским законам? "Победитель прав"? No comment... 
И пусть ещё перебьют сотню-другую тысяч, пока кто-нибудь победит? 
Англичане, истербившие бОльшую часть коренного населения Северной Америки, были правы?
Те же англичане, истребившие ПОЧТИ 100% коренного населения Австралии, были правы?
Римляне, захватившие Иудею и выгнавшие всех евреев оттуда, были правы? В результате чего евреи потеряли свою землю, и им пришлось расселиться по всему старому свету? Последствия этой правоты мир расхлёбывает до сих пор.
А русские всегда ли так были хороши? Значительная часть коренных народов Сибири была истреблена или насильственно ассимилирована. А черкесы, выселенные из Краснодарского края? Между прочим, они не были террористами, они просто хотели остаться на своей земле.
Турки, отобравшие свободу у курдов и запретившие им разговаривать на родном языке и упоминать этноним "курд"?
Англичане, отобравшие свободу у шотландцев?
Всё это по принципу "побеждает сильнейший".  _Вот скажи мне,_ _американец, в чём сила? Разве в деньгах? Вот и брат говорит, что в_ _деньгах . У тебя много денег, и чего? Я вот думаю, что сила в правде._ _У кого правда — тот и сильней._

----------


## Deborski

> Америка воюет в основном дистанционно. Дорого, но без человеческих жертв в своей армии. Поэтому большого антивоенного движения внутри США не будет.

 No, we continue to protest!  The problem is that no one listens to our protests these days.     

> А что касается Сирии, то есть предсказания Ванги о третьей мровой войне. Вроде всё идёт по плану.

 Я не понимаю точно.  Что означает слово "Ванги"?

----------


## Deborski

> hmm, Deborski (Deborah); я не знаю, что было бы правильно. трудный вопрос. in principle i would think interventions should be considered if there are undeniable human rights abuses on a large scale. for example, i think intervention in Lybia was justified due to Gaddafi's clear history of abuse; even in Irak intervention was defendable for Hussein proven and documented use of chemical weapons in Irak. the problem is the US intervened for the wrong reasons (=self-interest, oil,  influence in the region, trumped up WMD stories) at the wrong time. it would really be nice if the big powers could act decisively and in unison and for the right reasons (=human right abuses). instead they try protect their own interests and ignore atrocities in countries where there is not much in it for them (eg Somalia, Sudan (Dafour), Liberia/Sierra Leone some time back, Rwanda some time back, DRC Congo, Zimbabwe (on a lesser scale)? did anybody help the Cambodians when the Khmer Rouge ran riot? who helped the Argentinians when the military junta made people disappear some 40 years ago? yip - no-one really. If Lybia had no oil reserves, would there have been an intervention? I doubt it. But should there have been one? Yes, i think so - but not for reasons of oil.

 Exactly so!  I distrust when the government claims it wants to get involved for "humanitarian" reasons.  They pick and choose where and where not to be "humanitarian" - and it seems that money and oil are the real goals - and not some sort of altruistic desire to help people suffering from human rights abuses.

----------


## Юрка

> Мы должны продолжать жить по варварским законам?

 Не надо плевать в своё прошлое. А то оно плюнет в ответ.
1. Человек в последние тысячелетия практически не изменился (физически, интеллектуально, нравственно).
2. Наше прошлое (история, опыт и т.д.) по своей массе - это всё. Наше настоящее (наши идеи, мысли) по своей массе - ничто. 
Поэтому у нас нет морального превосходства над предками и их мудростью.  

> И пусть ещё перебьют сотню-другую тысяч, пока кто-нибудь победит?

 Америка вмешивается как раз потому, что бойня заканчивается, так как одна из сторон побеждает (побеждает благодаря стойкости духа и веры в правое дело. На войне говно не побеждает). Это их излюбленная тактика: подождать, когда русские с немцами друг друга уничтожат, а потом открыть второй фронт и стать главным победителем.  

> Значительная часть коренных народов Сибири была истреблена или насильственно ассимилирована.

 Откуда эта утка?

----------


## Боб Уайтман

> Я не понимаю точно. Что означает слово "Ванги"?

 Ванга was a Bulgarian soothsayer. She was quite famous in Russia. As far as I know, she was blind, very old, and she died just a few years ago. There were many stories about her mystic abilities. 
Hmm well, I found it. Here you are: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baba_Vanga.

----------


## iCake

I've just run into this article. It's in Russian. But the point of it is that "the West" will wage war against the "regime of Bashar Asad" in a couple of days  ::  
I wonder what the implications would be

----------


## Юрка

> Я не понимаю точно. Что означает слово "Ванги"?

 Это бабушка Ванга, болгарская ясновидящая. Ей приписывают пророчества о третьей мировой войне. Но скорее всего она их не делала.

----------


## Боб Уайтман

> Не надо плевать в своё прошлое. А то оно плюнет в ответ.
> 1. Человек в последние тысячелетия практически не изменился (физически, интеллектуально, нравственно).

 Нравственно???   

> 2. Наше прошлое (история, опыт и т.д.) по своей массе - это всё. Наше настоящее (наши идеи, мысли) по своей массе - ничто. 
> Поэтому у нас нет морального превосходства над предками и их мудростью.

 Ну это же всё патетика. Нужно отделять мухи от котлет  ::  Сожжение ведьм, инквизиция - это тоже достойно восхищения?   

> Откуда эта утка?

 Увы, это не утка. Это история народов Сибири. В школах этого, конечно, не учат. Непатриотично. Я и сам не так давно узнал. Конечно, неприятно узнавать такое про свой народ. Но нужно уметь и правде в глаза посмотреть. Как Россия отхватила себе огромную территорию от Урала и до Дальнего Востока? Взять хотя бы русско-чукотские войны. Постараюсь найти и запостить пруф-линки. А вообще в сети масса исторических материалов. Они все на русском, и неоправданно думать, что всё это - чья-то провокация. 
Вот хотя бы про чукчей:  http://zaimka.ru/to_sun/chukchi.shtml  http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CF%F0%...EE%F1%F1%E8%E8  http://docent-psy.ucoz.net/index/vza..._imperii/0-164  http://clubfile.ru/?q=node/288515 
вот про юкагиров ещё  http://www.tforum.info/forum/index.php?showtopic=33157 
да полно всего об этом.

----------


## Deborski

US gave Saddam blessing to use toxins against Iranians — RT News 
Related article claims that US urged Saddam Hussein to use chemical weapons back in the 1980's.   
I don't know if this is true or not, since I am not (слава богу!) CIA.  But given what I have read and heard from news sites other than America's mainstream news-media, it seems clear to me that CIA have been secretly orchestrating many of these situations - creating dictatorships, then setting them up to fail.  Many Americans share my point of view, that the US has been setting up puppet dictatorships all around the world, in the Middle East and in Latin-American countries.  Saddam must not have been a good puppet ruler, because US took him out.  US wants to do the same with Al-Assad. 
I am not at all convinced that Assad is a "good guy" or that the Syrian government did not use chemical weapons.  But at the same time, from everything I've been reading, the rebels are not exactly the "good guys" either!  They appear to be a haphazard mix of Al-Qaeda, Al-Nusra, and the original "free Syria" rebels, who had a legitimate reason for protest, but seem to have been co-opted by nefarious forces.   
I have a friend in Syria who insists that the original Syrian rebels are NOT Al-Qaeda or Al-Nusra - they are just regular people who were tired of being oppressed.  Her husband volunteers as a doctor in the refugee camps.  I tend to believe what she says more than what I hear on the news, since she actually lives there and her husband is working there.  She tells me that the rebels do NOT want the US involved!  They originally asked the UN for a  no-fly zone, but they didn't get it, and so their movement was taken over by terrorist groups, since no one else would help them.

----------


## Юрка

> Нравственно???

 Мне нравится ваше удивление! Да, нравственно. А Вы думали, что уважение к старшим - это фигура речи и не более? Типа, сиди, бабуля, сопи в две дырки, читай мурзилку, а мы тут без тебя разберёмся?  

> Это история народов Сибири.

 Кого попало я не читаю. В Сети много глупых, злых и лживых авторов. Вы читали книги Льва Гумилёва про освоение русскими Сибири? 
Про войны с чукчами я читал несколько лет назад. Но большая война на Севере - это пара тысяч воинов. Нашими там командывал майор. Так что геноцида там не было. Но и без книг можно понять, что не было, раз численность этих народов растёт с той же скоростью, что и численность русских. Я сравнивал численность некоторых народов тогда и сейчас. Если сравнить с ситуацией с индейцами США, то есть разница.

----------


## maxmixiv

Вот этой бабушки: Ванга — Википедия 
Если всех разнимать - драться будут в 10 раз больше. И разве не странно, что разнимающие до этого соревновались, кто больше смертоносного оружия продаст?
Это как? Чтобы "вызванной" полиции поинтереснее было?
А сила - в деньгах, как бы это не было противно. И пока большинство американцев живут сыто и без особых потрясений, их руководство будет творить что хочет.

----------


## Deborski

> Это бабушка Ванга, болгарская ясновидящая. Ей приписывают пророчества о третьей мировой войне. Но скорее всего она их не делала.

 I tend to be distrustful of so-called "mystics" who make predictions.  This may be because my own uncle - an American televangelist and religious leader - made several prophesies about when the world would end.  He first predicted that the "End" would be in 1975.  But the apocalypse didn't happen that year, so he changed his prophesy to 1976, and so on.   
I also remember all the soothsayers claiming the world would end in 2000 (Y2K).  Everyone was so convinced that there would be mass rioting, and since I was a TV reporter at the time, I was ordered to sit in a cold newsroom on New Year's eve 1999 and to be ready to cover all the mayhem which was supposed to occur.  Nothing happened.  I spent the night playing poker and freezing my butt off. 
Then everyone got freaked out about 2012.  The world was supposed to end in December, 2012.  But - here we all still are. 
I have no doubt that humans will manage to start World War Three eventually.  Even Syria might be the "last straw."  But I'm more inclined to listen to geopolitical experts and analysts whose predictions are based on broad knowledge of what is going on, than so-called mystics who claim to have some kind of magic or divine powers of divination.

----------


## Deborski

> Вот этой бабушки: Ванга — Википедия 
> Если всех разнимать - драться будут в 10 раз больше. И разве не странно, что разнимающие до этого соревновались, кто больше смертоносного оружия продаст?
> Это как? Чтобы "вызванной" полиции поинтереснее было?
> А сила - в деньгах, как бы это не было противно. И пока большинство американцев живут сыто и без особых потрясений, их руководство будет творить что хочет.

 We Americans are not really living "сыто"... in fact hundreds of thousands of us have been protesting!  Did you see what happened to the Occupy Wall Street movement?  They were ignored completely by our leaders, and even our press barely covered their protests. 
In fact, thousands of protesters have been arrested and silenced.  http://occupyarrests.moonfruit.com/

----------


## Eric C.

> I tend to be distrustful of so-called "mystics" who make predictions.  This may be because my own uncle - an American televangelist and religious leader - made several prophesies about when the world would end.  He first predicted that the "End" would be in 1975.  Then, when the world didn't end, he prophesied that it would end in 1976, and so on.   
> I also remember all the soothsayers claiming the world would end in 2000 (Y2K).  Everyone was so convinced that there would be mass rioting, and since I was a TV reporter at the time, I was ordered to sit in a cold newsroom on New Year's eve 1999 and to be ready to cover all the mayhem which was supposed to occur.  Nothing happened.  I spent the night playing poker and freezing my butt off. 
> Then everyone got freaked out about 2012.  The world was supposed to end in December, 2012.  But - here we all still are. 
> I have no doubt that humans will manage to start World War Three eventually.  Even Syria might be the "last straw."  But I'm more inclined to listen to geopolitical experts and analysts whose predictions are based on broad knowledge of what is going on, than so-called mystics who claim to have some kind of magic or divine powers of divination.

 One man (not sure exactly who he was) said, "I'm not sure what weapons will be involved in WW3, but there's no doubt it will be sticks and axes for WW4"; I totally agree about this, and think with the current progress made by humanity, WW3 is a real threat to its very existence; THOUGH, I truly doubt countries like Syria have ability to trigger any events of that kind, because assuming that would be equal to assuming that either everyone in the world is Syrian, or the IQ of an average human being has dropped by something about a 100 points.

----------


## Deborski

> One man (not sure exactly who he was) said, "I'm not sure what weapons will be involved in WW3, but there's no doubt it will be sticks and axes for WW4"

 It was Einstein who said that.   

> I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -- Albert Einstein

----------


## Deborski

U.S. military "ready" to attack Syria, Hagel says - CBS News 
The latest news in America - troops and missiles are ready for deployment.  They are just waiting for Obama to give the word.

----------


## Hanna

Per the Independent today: 
 The USA and the UK are literally jumping up and down in their eagerness to use the alleged nerve gas incident as the excuse they have been waiting for, to get involved with bombing in Syria.  Russia is trying to calm them down, and apparently Lavrov said it would be illegal to get involved according to international law.  
Exactly the same totally unverified nonsense as they used to go into Iraq!  
It's a repetition of the exact same story again and again. 
 ---- USA (and little brother UK) minding other countries business for their own sinister agenda of world / economic domination.  
The propgaganda angle on Syria has been absolutely unbelievable, not to mention deliberate stirring up local dissidents, playing the religious card to get the fanatical jihadists on board (Syria is their latest "playground")....  
They have picked one after another of the "axis of evil" countries off the list... 
Remaining ones are practically only North Korea and Iran: neither is wanting to play ball with the USA...  
I can certainly understand why these countries are wanting to have strong armies and possibly nuclear deterrent.

----------


## Боб Уайтман

> Вы читали книги Льва Гумилёва про освоение русскими Сибири? 
> Про войны с чукчами я читал несколько лет назад. Но большая война на Севере - это пара тысяч воинов. Нашими там командывал майор. Так что геноцида там не было. Но и без книг можно понять, что не было, раз численность этих народов растёт с той же скоростью, что и численность русских. Я сравнивал численность некоторых народов тогда и сейчас. Если сравнить с ситуацией с индейцами США, то есть разница.

 Я не хочу спорить на тему, был геноцид или нет. Это неблагодарное занятие. Я всего лишь привёл примеры того, к чему приводит принцип "победитель прав". Кстати, насчёт численности: а ведь целый ряд языков Сибири сейчас на грани исчезновения - ительменский, корякский, кетский. Керекский уже вымер.
Но не в этом вообще предмет дискуссии. 
Дело не в чукчах, и даже не в индейцах. Дело в том, что было время, когда убить считалось нормальным. Съесть врага - нормальным. Захватить народ, превратить его в рабов или ограбить, заставить платить дань - нормальным. Принести в жертву младенца... Это на тему нравственности всё. 
Только не нужно меня упрекать, что я плюю в прошлое. Понятия нравственности меняются, и это факт. Спорить с этим абсурдно. В целом всё же человек нравственно совершенствуется. Хотя и не без огрехов. К сожалению, этот процесс происходит гораздо медленнее, чем технологическое развитие. 
Вот я не понимаю тех, которые рассуждают по образцу: 
"В Советском Союзе ВСЁ было хорошо, ВСЁ было лучше, чем сейчас. Потому что это был Советский Союз"
или так:
"В Советском Союзе ВСЁ было плохо, просто ужасно. Потому что это был Советский Союз" 
Почему нельзя принять поостую вещь: Были вещи хорошие. И были вещи плохие. Сейчас многое что изменилось. Но всё же мы имеем снова вещи хорошие, и вещи плохие. 
Война - однозначно плохая вещь. По принципам нравственности нашего времени.

----------


## Deborski

> "В Советском Союзе ВСЁ было хорошо, ВСЁ было лучше, чем сейчас. Потому что это был Советский Союз"
> или так:
> "В Советском Союзе ВСЁ было плохо, просто ужасно. Потому что это был Советский Союз"

 Black and white thinking, all or nothing thinking, either/or thinking... is not really "thinking."   ::  
There was a lot of good the Soviet Union did, as well as a lot of bad.  I wish we could just hold onto the good, and throw out the bad.  The same goes for every other country in the world.  America is not all good or all bad.  We get some things right, and we get other things wrong.  It seems to be a rare person who can separate the issues rather than "throw the baby out with the bathwater."

----------


## Deborski

Syrian rebels used Sarin nerve gas, not Assad's regime: U.N. official - Washington Times 
As of today, Monday 27 Aug., the UN still states that it was rebels who used sarin gas, not the Syrian government.  
Despite this, US insists there is "evidence" that Assad is to blame and they are urging immediate action in Syria, even though the UN is still investigating the situation.   
This sounds all too much like what happened in Iraq.

----------


## Deborski

Saudis offer Russia secret oil deal if it drops Syria - Telegraph 
Saudi Arabia appears to be threatening Russia over its support of Syria's government: 
According to this article, Saudi Arabia is basically telling Russia "Stop helping Assad and we will give you oil. Keep helping Assad, and we will tell our Chechen friends to terrorize your citizens during the Winter Olympics in Sochi." 
Excerpt:   

> As-Safir said Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord. “I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us,” he allegedly said.

----------


## Eric C.

> Saudis offer Russia secret oil deal if it drops Syria - Telegraph 
> Saudi Arabia appears to be threatening Russia over its support of Syria's government: 
> According to this article, Saudi Arabia is basically telling Russia "Stop helping Assad and we will give you oil. Keep helping Assad, and we will tell our Chechen friends to terrorize your citizens during the Winter Olympics in Sochi." 
> Excerpt:

 I wonder who under current circumstances would stand for the Syrian "government" besides the regime itself; it's such a mess now, and the only solution to it is to get the regime deactivated ASAP, only that way the mass killings can be stopped; it seems like everyone realizes that except for the "crowned prince" who inherited dictatorial powers from his shady daddy; what some governments are trying to achieve by supporting that regime is really inconceivable; if I was Russian, the first question I'd be asking myself would be, "does my country have any sense of self-respect at all???"

----------


## Hanna

> There was a lot of good the Soviet Union did,

    I actually like the USSR better every day, as I think about it.  
The USA would never dare to touch Syria, if the USSR had still been around! 
The Syrians would still have their cities intact, schools, hospitals and a dignified future. As it looks now, they are doomed to be the bottom of the pile for decades to come, regardless of what happens.  
Probably, Assad will be toppled sooner or later, if actual Western airstrikes commence.  
And the sweatshops, French call centres, multinational banks and Euro/US multinationals will move in. Hurrah, drop the social democracy for pure unabridled capitalism with some really desperate poor people who lost everything..  
And once people can afford it; McDonalds and European super market chains, as happened places like Romania where people are only marginally better off than they were in Syria.  
Syria under Assad was not a bad country; it took in millions of Iraqi and Palestinian refugees and helped them integrate, it allowed religious freedom for different muslim faiths, Christians and even Jews, despite their views on Israel. It provided good, free education for all and free healthcare. They had reached a status quo with Israel.  
Sure -- they needed a bit of glasnost / perestroika ----> and that was exactly what Assad had started doing when all this happened.  
This is a horrible tragedy! Too bad there is no superpower around that can reign in the USA!! It's getting more out of control every day.

----------


## Deborski

Only a Peace Conference, Not Air Strikes, Can Stop Further Bloodshed | Common Dreams 
This editorial is very thought-provoking.  It discusses how the US airstrikes (which are expected shortly) will NOT end the bloodshed in Syria, and proposes more meaningful, peaceful alternatives.   

> The sense of urgency among foreign powers generated by the present crisis should be used to launch the much-delayed peace negotiations in Geneva. A peace conference between the warring sides was proposed by the US and Russia in May, but has been repeatedly postponed. It is unrealistic to imagine for now that negotiations between people whose prime aim is to kill each other will lead to any long-term political solution for Syria. The priority should rather be to prevent the continuing escalation in the violence and the further disintegration of Syrian society. 
> A ceasefire is the greatest need, in which  power-sharing would be geographical with each side holding the territory it controls. Such a truce should put in place and monitored by UN teams. It might not cover all the country and would no doubt be frequently breached, but it would be better than the present bloody anarchy. There were hundreds of ceasefires during the Lebanese civil war and they were regarded with cynicism by the Lebanese, but thousands more people would have died without them. 
> Why has a peace conference not happened before? Within Syria the main reason is that government and opposition each believe they can still win and do not contemplate sharing power with anybody.

  

> One of the dangers of the air strikes now being considered by the US is that, unless they are accompanied by a fresh drive towards a peace conference, the opposition thinks it is half way to getting the Western powers to win the war for it. Nevertheless, the opposition can be pressured by their foreign backers, supposing they wish to do so. 
> Peace conferences have the best chance of succeeding when one side knows it has won and wants to formalise its victory while the defeated want the best terms possible. Alternatively, peace negotiations may be productive when both sides are exhausted and come to realise they are not going to win a complete victory. The danger of supplying more weapons to the opposition is that it is not going to enable them to win but will simply fuel the level of the fighting.

----------


## Deborski

Well, I called the White House today and told them NO WAR! as did all of my friends, but I very much doubt anything we say matters at this point.  Potential U.S. Strike On Syria - Business Insider    

> President Obama is considering a strike on Syrian military targets involving sea-launched cruise missiles or possibly long-range bombers that would last no more than two days, according to senior administration officials and reported by Karen DeYoung and Anne Gearan of The Washington Post. 
> The limited strike would seemingly be a response to allegations that the Syrian government used chemical weapons on its own people before dawn on August 21. Hundreds were killed and thousands suffered "neurotoxic symptoms."

----------


## Eric C.

> Well, I called the White House today and told them NO WAR! as did all of my friends, but I very much doubt anything we say matters at this point.  Potential U.S. Strike On Syria - Business Insider

 Deb, "WAR" sounds horrible, I agree; but it has to be something a little bit more than THAT to be called a "WAR"; I think it's (all) gonna end pretty soon...

----------


## Deborski

> Deb, "WAR" sounds horrible, I agree; but it has to be something a little bit more than THAT to be called a "WAR"; I think it's (all) gonna end pretty soon...

 It doesn't matter what word you want to call it.  It means bombing and killing people.  Words like "air strike" or "surgical" "intervention" only sterilize and shift the meaning.  I'd just as soon call a spade a spade.  Air strike = bombing and killing people.

----------


## Deborski

People in the US are starting to freak out about Syria, now that our government is saying an air strike will commence as soon as Thursday...  
I am hearing mostly opposition to the war from everyone discussing it.  There are a few people who support air strikes, but they do not seem very well informed about the situation and they tend to shut up when the more knowledgeable people start explaining why the air strikes are an incredibly bad idea. 
Not helping the situation, *is a fake news site* claiming that Putin is threatening to launch air strikes at Saudia Arabia.  It's an outright lie, but unfortunately the fake news story  has been picked up by other fake news sites and people are sharing it on facebook.  Naturally there is no confirmation of this at any major news sites in US or Russia that I have been able to find.  *The fake article originated at "EU Times" - which is actually a right-wing/libertarian/teabagger propaganda site:*  Putin Orders Massive Strike Against Saudi Arabia If West Attacks Syria | EUTimes.net 
The intent of this fake article seems clear to me - frighten people so that they will be more likely to support military action. 
A lot of Americans are calling the White House, calling our Congress and Senate, doing all we can to urge them AGAINST this... but it seems that US government has a will all its own and is not interested in the will of the people.   
Russia and China are both promising "catastrophic" consequences if the US goes through with the air strikes.  I have no idea what these consequences might be.  Someone needs to stop the US, but how to do that without actually going to war against America?  I have absolutely no idea.  All I can hope is that cooler heads prevail...

----------


## Юрка

> было время, когда убить считалось нормальным. Съесть врага - нормальным. Захватить народ, превратить его в рабов или ограбить, заставить платить дань - нормальным. Принести в жертву младенца...

 Сейчас что-то изменилось? И едят, и убивают, и покоряют народы. Может быть под другим соусом (под разговоры о нарушении прав человека и т.д.), но делают всё то же самое. Кстати, раньше детей ели более гуманно. О них плакали. Во время голода в деревне в 30-ые годы: "Вот уже Манечку съели, а теперь Ванечку засолим". А сейчас просто, без сантиментов, выбрасывают в окно или на помойку.
Вы зря лишаете древних людей эмоций. Они не были монстрами. Об этом говорят древние культы, наскальная живопись и здравый смысл. Даже животные имеют эмоции и умеют плакать. Кстати, животные умеют быть более искренними, чем люди.
У Энгельса я встречал мысль о том, что развитие человеческого общества - это развитие человеческого греха. Что капитализм потому опередил феодализм, что сумел развить алчность и сделать из него двигатель.
В Библии сказано: "Что было, то и будет; и что делалось, то и будет делаться, и нет ничего нового под солнцем".
В общем, с какой стороны ни зайди, ясно, что теория преимущества нашей морали над моралью "дикарей" не выдерживает критики. 
Что касается ваших слов о том, что войны не должно быть, то это пока лишь слова, которыми оправдываются ещё более серьёзные войны, чем те, которые подавляются.

----------


## Юрка

> According to this article, Saudi Arabia is basically telling Russia "Stop helping Assad and we will give you oil.

 Арабам не понять души самурая. Думают, что мы меркантильные собаки.  

> Keep helping Assad, and we will tell our Chechen friends to terrorize your citizens during the Winter Olympics in Sochi."

 У нас у самих есть "чеченские друзья", которые загнали "чеченских друзей" саудитов в такие ямки, что им до Сочи ползти и ползти. 
Евгений Сатановский: "Для того, чтобы ударить по Ирану, США необходимо ликвидировать Сирию".  

> ...если есть гонка по минному полю, и вас непременно хотят обогнать, так пропустите вперед желающих. Собственно говоря, зачем страдать от очередной драки, в которую американцы и европейцы по своей инициативе, и по инициативе своих арабских и турецких союзников влезают.

----------


## Eric C.

> Арабам не понять души самурая. Думают, что мы меркантильные собаки.

 Вы всерьез полагаете что в помощи личностям вроде Ассада есть некое благородство?

----------


## Юрка

> Вы всерьез полагаете что в помощи личностям вроде Ассада есть некое благородство?

 Вы не представляете, насколько высоко это благородство. Просто Вы смотрите другой телевизор. Поэтому у Вас такая реакция. Мы с Вами жертвы разных пропагандистских машин.  ::  
Что касается фразы "помощи личностям вроде Ассада", то у нас в СМИ проблема рассматривается глубже. Это у американцев почему-то принято сводить всё к личностям. Наверное, чтобы проще было смещать и назначать новых марионеток.

----------


## 14Russian

> I've just run into this article. It's in Russian. But the point of it is that "the West" will wage war against the "regime of Bashar Asad" in a couple of days  
> I wonder what the implications would be

 It makes no sense that Assad would gas his own people.   It has also been reported that he has been "winning" (whatever that means) against the rebels.   There's also a large contigent within the rebels that are said to be Al-Qaeda, which as you know, are said to have U.S. funding from time to time.   Everything points to the acts being perpetrated by the rebels.   This parellels to Irag (already mentioned) and is a good point to keep in mind.  The U.S. and their allies are no stranger to deception to accomplish various goals.  There are morons in the U.S. that still support Obomber, though.   It's unbelievable.

----------


## Doomer

> It makes no sense that Assad would gas his own people.   It has also been reported that he has been "winning" (whatever that means) against the rebels.

 так и есть
но сейчас некоторые страны пытаются перекричать здравый смысл, чтобы выиграть в своих шкурных интересах

----------


## Doomer

> Russia and China are both promising "catastrophic" consequences if the US goes through with the air strikes.

 Россия и Китай совершенно четко представляют последствия
Если Ближний Восток падет, то внимание США переключится на Россию и Китай и тогда наступит очередная "Холодная Война", но на это раз экономическая

----------


## Lampada

> так и есть
> но сейчас некоторые страны пытаются перекричать здравый смысл, чтобы выиграть в своих шкурных интересах

 "Перекричать смысл" , "выиграть в своих интересах" - не сочетаются эти слова в русском языке. 
Каждое предложение должно начинаться с большой буквы.

----------


## Юрка

> Someone needs to stop the US, but how to do that without actually going to war against America?

 Никто Америку не остановит, если она сама вдруг не сочтёт это целесообразным. А это вряд ли. Вчера на канале Россия 24 была передача об экономической целесообразности войны в Сирии. Повышение цен на нефть больше ударит по Китаю, а не по США. Война станет аргументом для расширение лимита на дефицит бюджета США и т.д. Оказалось, что со всех сторон эта война выгодна Америке экономически.
Наш МИД занимается Сирией, а Путин демонстративно только внутренними делами (наводнением на Дальнем Востоке). Не знаю, станет ли Иран воевать за Сирию. Но и у самой Сирии неслабая армия и отличается духом (в отличии от иракской). Посмотрим, недолго осталось.

----------


## Deborski

> Никто Америку не остановит, если она сама вдруг не сочтёт это целесообразным. А это вряд ли. Вчера на канале Россия 24 была передача об экономической целесообразности войны в Сирии. Повышение цен на нефть больше ударит по Китаю, а не по США. Война станет аргументом для расширение лимита на дефицит бюджета США и т.д. Оказалось, что со всех сторон эта война выгодна Америке экономически.
> Наш МИД занимается Сирией, а Путин демонстративно только внутренними делами (наводнением на Дальнем Востоке). Не знаю, станет ли Иран воевать за Сирию. Но и у самой Сирии неслабая армия и отличается духом (в отличии от иракской). Посмотрим, недолго осталось.

 С этим я вообще согласна. Я рада, что наконец мы можем согласиться.  Конечно, это не значит, что я рада о войне.  На самом деле мне грустно без слов!

----------


## Deborski

A short, but somewhat meaningful humor break, courtesy John Cleese of Monty Python fame:   
ALERTS TO THREATS
IN 2013 EUROPE 
From JOHN CLEESE 
The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent events in Syria and have therefore raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved." Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." The English have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies nearly ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorized from "Tiresome" to "A Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was in 1588, when threatened by the Spanish Armada.  
The Scots have raised their threat level from "Pissed Off" to "Let's get the Bastards." They don't have any other levels. This is the reason they have been used on the front line of the British army for the last 300 years.  
The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in France are "Collaborate" and "Surrender." The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France 's white flag factory, effectively paralyzing the country's military capability.  
Italy has increased the alert level from "Shout Loudly and Excitedly" to "Elaborate Military Posturing." Two more levels remain: "Ineffective Combat Operations" and "Change Sides."  
The Germans have increased their alert state from "Disdainful Arrogance" to "Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs." They also have two higher levels: "Invade a Neighbour" and "Lose."  
Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual; the only threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels ..  
The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.  
Australia, meanwhile, has raised its security level from "No worries" to "She'll be right, Mate." Two more escalation levels remain: "Crikey! I think we'll need to cancel the barbie this weekend!" and "The barbie is cancelled." So far no situation has ever warranted use of the last final escalation level.  
Regards,
John Cleese ,
British writer, actor and tall person  
And as a final thought - Greece is collapsing, the Iranians are getting aggressive, and Rome is in disarray. Welcome back to 430 BC. 
Life is too short...

----------


## Deborski

Review & Outlook: Loose Lips on Syria - WSJ.com 
From this article:   

> An American military attack on Syria could begin as early as Thursday and will involve three days of missile strikes, according to "senior U.S. officials" talking to NBC News. The Washington Post has the bombing at "no more than two days," though long-range bombers could "possibly" join the missiles. "Factors weighing into the timing of any action include a desire to get it done before the president leaves for Russia next week," reports CNN, citing a "senior administration official." 
> The New York Times, quoting a Pentagon official, adds that "the initial target list has fewer than 50 sites, including air bases where Syria's Russian-made attack helicopters are deployed." The Times adds that "like several other military officials contacted for this report, the official agreed to discuss planning options only on condition of anonymity."

 Typical, Murka, typical.  Shoot first.  Talk later.

----------


## Hanna

I just get totally sickened by this. How many bloody more times is this going to repeated!!
How long until people get it? These wars help NOBODY apart from the weapons, oil and engineering industries.  
It's been done in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, misc. countries in South America and in East Asia in the Cold War.  
Syria was NOT even a particularly bad dictatorship. Check out the film series "Syrian School" by the BBC for a realistic view of Syria as it was. This was a relatively decent country and Al-Assad Jr. was quite enlightened as a middle eastern leader.  
It makes me sick to think my tax money will be used to destroy Syria even further in the interest of some sinister agenda 
One of those, being to weaken the region around Iran, with the aim of war with Iran.
There is at least one regular member here, who lives in Iran, a really sweet person judging from her posts.    *--------------------------------------------------
National demonstration: No attack on Syria* 
                                                    Stop the War Coalition,  31 August 2013.                                *National Demonstration: assemble Saturday 31 August, 12 noon, Temple Place, London (nearest tube Temple)* 
   The national demonstration on Saturday will gather at Temple Place  (near Temple tube) and march via Parliament and Downing Street, ending  in central London for a political rally to say No attack on Syria.
  Called by Stop the War and CND. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------


## Doomer

> "Перекричать смысл" , "выиграть в своих интересах" - не сочетаются эти слова в русском языке. 
> Каждое предложение должно начинаться с большой буквы.

 это точно

----------


## Deborski

I have fond memories of Syria...  
In the 1980's I walked through the streets of Damascus and sipped Turkish coffee with a man selling embroidered table cloths at a bazaar.  I listened to the sounds of prayers coming from the minaret towers and ate tabbouleh under a canvas covering in a garden scented with jasmine flowers and citrus.  I walked into ancient mosques in my bare feet, stood upon hand-woven tapestries and marveled at the intricate, colorful tile mosaics.   
Later we drove across a vast desert in a van, forded the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers on our journey to Palmyra, the ruins of a once-great trading mecca along the ancient "silk road".  There I walked along a colonnaded promenade, among sand-blasted pillars still standing as if in a final salute to their builder, the great warrior Queen, Zenobia, descendent of Cleopatra, who in the third century had the gall to challenge Rome.  Palmyra was also known as Tadmor or "Palm City,"  because it was an oasis where caravans piled with the wealth of the ancient world once stopped to quench the thirst of their weary camels and horses.  Zenobia, said to be as good with a sword as any man, rode with her generals into battle and fought against the armies of the great Emperor Aurelian.  Her armies brazenly conquered many Roman territories, including Alexandria, before the armies of Rome burned Palmyra to the ground and Aurelian slapped Zenobia into golden chains and dragged her, naked, through the streets of Rome in triumph.  Even so, the former splendor of one of the most wealthy trading empires in the world could still be seen, gleaming faintly as the setting sun cast long shadows on columned ruins and stained them pink. 
I spotted a pair of Soviet MiGs hurtling through the skies above a ridge overlooking Palmyra, and was reminded that Syria was now a strategic location in the modern world, just as Palmyra once was in Roman times.   
We journeyed through Aleppo to Northern Syria where we arrived at our destination, the ancient city of Urkesh, known as Tel Mozan.  The Turkish border, only a kilometer away, was clearly visible, dotted with giant guard towers that occasionally were struck by lightening when a sandstorm rolled through, explosions brightening the storm-darkened sky.  We were there to work on a significant archaeological find dating back more than 5,000 years and as we labored in the intense 48C heat, we sifted through sand for potsherds, ancient bones and mysterious cult objects from the temple we were excavating.  There, we found two skeletons burned by a fire which had destroyed the temple untold thousands of years before our arrival, crushing the people inside under a fallen wall.   
The Arab workmen, who helped us to remove large rubber buckets filled with sand, were curious about us, strange light-skinned visitors from the west, and asked many questions as we drank water or the terrible beer of the region which was called Al Shark and smelled like urine.  They warned me with comments of _"shway shway!"_ - "caution" - whenever I accidentally dug too close to hole of a camel spider.  These strange arachnid-like creatures were as large as dinner plates and aggressive, sometimes sneaking into our barracks in the middle of the night where we smashed them with our boots. 
Our small expedition of a dozen or so archaeological professors and students shared only one toilet, built in the Arab style, a porcelain grid in the dirt with only a hose to wash away our waste.  The foreign food was problematic for most of us and so there was always a line of uncomfortably shifting people waiting for a turn inside the outhouse.  One time, I sneaked onto the top of the Tel in the dark of the night to urinate, and discovered to my horror that I was squatting in the middle of a line of marching ants a meter wide!  It was all I could do not to scream and alert the entire camp, as I jumped about and shook the biting ants from my pant-legs.   
Despite the heat, we women workers did not uncover our wrists or ankles, nor expose our throats because we were told it might offend the Muslim workmen who labored alongside us.  My hair was bound up in a keffiyeh or hijab which helped prevent the sun from burning my scalp. 
We played volleyball with the Syrian and Kurdish workmen, who were distracted at first by the western women playing with them and  seemed afraid to hit the ball, but, upon realizing that the women were winning too many games, they decided to play with us just as they played with the other men, punching and slapping the ball back and forth across the net.  There, I saw a handsome Kurdish man holding his delicate, blond-haired daughter astride his neck, his surprising blue eyes filled with pride and love. 
And now I wonder, what will become of all of that? 
I have no words for the heartbreak I feel.

----------


## Eric C.

Nobody from the outside world said back then, in 2011, "Assad, you're a dictator and we're gonna bomb you"; it was the Syrian people themselves who ultimately got fed up with that hypocritical authoritarian rule who declared war on the regime; a few weeks of those protests made it evident that the regime had become totally unwelcome there; if it wasn't such a bad dictatorship, that would've been enough for that "government" to go away; instead, they started waging a war against their own people ultimately killing over 100,000 civilians as of now; there's already no that Syria that somebody keeps warm memories of, because it has been destroyed by its dictatorial rule; now it's just time to stop the dictator felons from their further crimes, and do some sort of justice on them for what they already have done.

----------


## Deborski

> Nobody from the outside world said back then, in 2011, "Assad, you're a dictator and we're gonna bomb you"; it was the Syrian people themselves who ultimately got fed up with that hypocritical authoritarian rule who declared war on the regime; a few weeks of those protests made it evident that the regime had become totally unwelcome there; if it wasn't such a bad dictatorship, that would've been enough for that "government" to go away; instead, they started waging a war against their own people ultimately killing over 100,000 civilians as of now; there's already no that Syria that somebody keeps warm memories of, because it has been destroyed by its dictatorial rule; now it's just time to stop the dictator felons from their further crimes, and do some sort of justice on them for what they already have done.

 
The rebels are not exactly good guys either, Eric.  For starters, the rebel movement has been co-opted by Al Qaeda and Al Nusra.  Secondarily, the UN investigation so far reveals that it was the rebels - and not Assad - who used sarin gas.  And lastly, the rebels engaged in acts of cannibalism - ripping the organs out of their enemies and eating their hearts and intestines. 
I cannot begin to comprehend why the US is supporting these people.  It's absolutely horrifying.  I did not vote for Obama because I wanted to see another repeat of George W. Bush's actions in Iraq.

----------


## Deborski

Cheat Sheet On Syria: Events Are Moving Quickly Now… Here’s What You Need to Know 
This article did an excellent job of summing up all the reasons why a military intervention is an incredibly BAD idea.  Each of the reasons given has links to supporting information provided in the article, which states:   

> Bombing Syria will only strengthen the hardliners … and harm America’s national security. The top U.S. military commander says that attacking Syria would be risky and expensive 
>     A Syrian war could be one of the least popular wars in American history 
>     In fact, most of the world is against attacking Syria 
>     War against Syria could spike oil prices and plunge us back into another recession 
>     Russia has repeatedly stated that it would consider an attack on Syria as an attack on its national security. China has also strongly cautioned the U.S. against attacking Syria. China and Russia hold alot of U.S. debt, and could make life difficult for us economically if we unnecessarily anger them 
>     Experts have – so far – expressed doubts that chemical weapons were actually used 
>     The American government – in a replay of the Iraq war – is trying to stop UN weapons inspectors from seeing if chemical weapons were used 
>     If chemical weapons were used, it’s unclear who used them 
>     The U.S. has repeatedly falsely accused others of using chemical weapons 
> ...

----------


## Deborski

And in other news, those beautiful ruins of Palmyra which I described earlier are already swarming with soldiers and tanks.  Ancient antiquities have been destroyed, and an ancient Roman temple has been shelled.  The ruins withstood thousands of years of history and could very well be WIPED OUT in an instant during this modern conflict.

----------


## DrBaldhead

Ten years ago the US battled against Al Qaeda in Afganistan. Now the US will fight alongside Al Qaeda in Syria. Looks like Obama wasn't quite satisfed with his Nobel prize after all.

----------


## Боб Уайтман

> I have fond memories of Syria...

 Is it your own story, do I get it right? Have you been to Syria? Sorry, I've never known that.

----------


## Deborski

> Is it your own story, do I get it right? Have you been to Syria? Sorry, I've never known that.

 Yes, my own experiences.  I served on an archaeological expedition to Syria in 1987.

----------


## Deborski

> Ten years ago the US battled against Al Qaeda in Afganistan. Now the US will fight alongside Al Qaeda in Syria. Looks like Obama wasn't quite satisfed with his Nobel prize after all.

 If he invades Syria, then I think his Nobel prize should be rescinded.  As for US relationship with Al Qaeda?  It goes back a long way, as does the US relationship with the Taliban.  It appears that America calls them "freedom fighters" or "terrorists" - depending on the situation.  osama.jpg 
For example, this photo from the early 1990's depicts Osama Bin Laden as "warrior for peace" following the end of the Soviet/Afghan war.  Taliban were "freedom fighters" when they were killing Russians.  Then, after 9/11 they became "terrorists" because they killed Americans. 
In my view, they were always terrorists.  And most Americans do not seem to understand that the Soviets were *invited* by the Afghan government to put down an insurrection.  They think that the Soviets "invaded" Afghanistan, which is patently not true.

----------


## Deborski

Apparently, I am not the only one who thinks Obama's Nobel Peace prize should be rescinded if he invades Syria.  Obama should be stripped of his Nobel Peace prize if he starts Syria war — RT Op-Edge

----------


## Deborski

George Carlin would certainly not approve of invading Syria!

----------


## Lampada

"'...America and war….
It’s the old American double standard, you know, say one thing, do something different. And, of course, the country is founded on the double standard. That’s our history. We were founded on a very basic double standard. This country was founded by slave owners who wanted to be free. Am I right? A group of a slave owners who wanted to be free, so they killed a lot of white English people in order to continue owning their black African people, so they could wipe out the rest of the red Indian people and move west and steal the rest of the land from the brown Mexican people, giving them a place to take off and drop their nuclear weapons on the yellow Japanese people. You know what the motto of this country ought to be? You give up a color, we’ll wipe it out. You got it.
So, anyway, about eighty years after the Constitution is ratified, eighty years later, the slaves are freed. Not so you’d really notice it, of course. Just sort of on paper. And that was, of course, during the Civil War. Now, there’s another phrase I dearly love. That is a true oxymoron if I’ve ever heard one: civil war. Do you think any country could really have a civil war? “Say, pardon me” [gun shots]—“I’m awfully sorry. I’m awfully sorry.” Now, of course, the Civil War has been over for about 120 years, but not so you’d really notice it, because we still have these people called Civil War buffs, people who thought it was a really keen war, and they study the battles carefully, and they try to improve on the strategies and the tactics to increase the body count, in case we have to go through it again sometime. In fact, some of these people actually get dressed up in uniform once a year and go out and refight these battles. You know what I say? Use live ammunition, [bleep], would you please? You might just raise the intelligence level of the American gene pool.
But what do you expect? Hey, come on, this is a warlike country. We come from that northern European, basically the northern European genes, the blue eyes. Those blue eyes. Boy everybody in the world learned real quick, didn’t they? When those blue eyes sail out of the north, you better nail everything down [bleep]. Nail it down, strap it down, or they’ll grab it. If they can’t take it home, they’ll burn it. If they can’t burn it, they’ll [bleep]. That’s what happened to us. And it’s a warlike country. C’mon, I mean, forget foreign policy. Even the domestic rhetoric is warlike. Everything about our domestic policy invokes the thought of war. We don’t like something in this country, we declare war on it. The war on poverty, the war on drugs, the war on crime, the war on AIDS, the war on cancer. We’ve got the only national anthem that mentions [bleep] rockets and bombs in the [bleep] thing. You know what I mean?"

----------


## Deborski

I edited my post to include the longer version of Carlin's "We Like War" presentation.  I especially enjoy the part towards the end where he talks about how it's all really about men comparing the size of their dicks!  Carlin was a genius.  No one ever said it as well as he did.  Brilliant man.  Died too young.

----------


## 14Russian

Americans voted in Obomber (TWICE) and then complain afterwards.   Typical lefties.

----------


## diogen_

> And most Americans do not seem to understand that the Soviets were *invited* by the Afghan government to put down an insurrection. They think that the Soviets "invaded" Afghanistan, which is patently not true.

 Actually it’s not true, and  I hope you’re  simply misguided by communist propaganda.    

> Режим Амина не пользовался популярностью, положение президента было шатким, а смена власти в Афганистане могла привести к его выпадению из советской сферы влияния. Более того, предполагалось, что Амин сотрудничает с ЦРУ и может сблизиться с западными странами, и, это было наиболее опасным, Хафизулла мог разрешить размещение военных баз НАТО на территории своей страны. Допустить появления войск вероятного противника у своих границ руководство СССР не могло, поэтому *12 декабря 1979 года Политбюро ЦК КПСС приняло секретное постановление «К положению в Афганистане». Суть его сводилась к тому, что необходимо устранить Хафизуллу Амина, на его место поставить Бабрака Кармаля, а для стабилизации положения послать в Афганистан войска*. 
> 27 декабря началась подготовка к штурму Тадж-Бека. *Советские агенты подсыпали яд в еду Амина, когда тот давал обед по случаю возвращения из Москвы секретаря ЦК НДПА Панджшири.* Ничего не подозревавшие советские медики смогли спасти ему жизнь, после чего спецгруппы КГБ пошли на штурм дворца. Бой во дворце длился 43 минуты. По воспоминаниям участников, хирург Анатолий Алексеев довёл Амина до бара. Афганский лидер присел к стене, но тут раздался детский плач и откуда-то выбежал сын Амина, который, увидев отца, бросился к нему. *Амин обнял его, а спустя какое-то время пять бойцов спецгруппы КГБ «Альфа» ворвались в комнату и дали очередь из автоматов.* *Хафизулла Амин и его сын были убиты.* Ночью кабульское радио сообщило, что по решению революционного суда Амин приговорён к смертной казни и приговор приведён в исполнение. Один из советских врачей, оказывавших помощь Амину, также был убит советскими спецназовцами.

 http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Амин,_Хафизулла

----------


## Deborski

Russian14:  Do you even know how to have a discussion without insulting people?  Maybe you would get more likes if you were not constantly insulting everyone all the time.  Let's see you rise above the petty name calling and childish "neener neener" behavior and join in an adult, civil discussion.   
As for me, I do not lump everything together.  I do not like to engage in either/or, black/white, bad/good thinking.  The world is much more complex than that. 
Obama has done good things, and he has done bad things.  I voted for him because my husband was dying of a heart condition and we wanted universal healthcare.  And thanks to Obama, my husband is 1) still alive and 2) we will be able to purchase affordable healthcare for me in 2014 so that I can finally see a doctor too. 
That does not mean I support the war in Syria.  Should Obama invade Syria, however, that will not undo the good accomplished with health care reform. 
Let's stick to the issues, please, and let's rise above this nonsense name-calling and slandering of people.  There are a lot of things I could say about you as well, but I will refrain because frankly, I do not care to play in the_ детский сад._

----------


## Deborski

> Actually it’s not true, and  I hope you’re  simply misguided by communist propaganda.   http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Амин,_Хафизулла

 Be that as it may, it is a different discussion for another time and I do not want to get into a dispute over it and derail this thread into a discussion about Soviet politics.  My point is that the labels change over the years.  Yesterday's "freedom fighters" become today's "terrorists" who become tomorrow's "freedom fighters" again.  It's all a big semantics game.

----------


## Deborski

Speaking of semantics games....

----------


## Deborski

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...empty/2726493/   

> Russian state-owned media reported that two Russian warships were sailing for the eastern Mediterranean Sea to protect Russian interests as tensions escalate in the region. 
> The ships, a missile cruiser and a large anti-submarine vessel, are traveling from the North Atlantic and will arrive in a number of days, Reuters reported. 
> Middle East analysts say weapons and terrorist networks at Iran's disposal mean the threats should be taken seriously. 
> "Iran is a huge threat," said Ariel Cohen, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation. 
> Both Iran and Syria have threatened to retaliate against Israel and other U.S. allies in the Middle East in the event of a U.S. attack on Syria over its alleged use of chemical weapons against civilians. Hundreds of Syrians in a region held by rebels were reported killed in an Aug. 21 attack.

 
So here is the really scary question:  Are we looking at another proxy war between US and Russia?  Or will Russia's response be even more direct?  If the US invades Syria, will this escalate into a global conflict?

----------


## Deborski

Alan Grayson On Syria Strike: 'Nobody Wants This Except The Military-Industrial Complex' 
Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL) speaks out in opposition to a US airstrike against Syria; says that such an action would only benefit war profiteers:   

> "One thing that is perfectly clear to me in my district, and I think is true in many other districts from speaking to other members, is that *there is no desire, no desire on the part of people to be the world's policeman,*" Grayson said on SiriusXM's "The Agenda with Ari Rabin-Havt," which aired Thursday morning. "For us to pick up this gauntlet even on the basis of unequivocal evidence of chemical warfare by the Syrian army, deliberately against its own people -- even if there were unequivocal evidence of that -- that's just not what people in my district want." 
> That doesn't mean that opposition is universal, Grayson allowed. "I did notice, for what it's worth, that the manufacturer of the missiles that would be used has had an incredible run in their stock value in the last 60 days. Raytheon stock is up 20 percent in the past 60 days as the likelihood of the use of their missiles against Syria becomes more likely. So I understand that there is a certain element of our society that does benefit from this, but they're not the people who vote for me, or by the way the people who contribute to my campaign," he said. "*Nobody wants this except the military-industrial complex.*" 
> Raytheon stock has in fact surged over the past two months, though it's been slightly shy of 20 percent.

----------


## Hanna

> If he invades Syria, then I think his Nobel prize should be rescinded..

 He  should never have had it in the first place! I have no idea why he got it.. He's killed a lot more people than Bin Laden, just as a comparison.  
 Imo, the reason he even got it, was a bunch of Norwegians on the Nobel Prize comittee wanting to demonstrate their outstanding political correctness - I think he got it because of his skin colour; they were just excited and thought it was a big milestone (which it was). But his war record is actually worse than Bush!         
In the UK, even the policians are waking up to the insanity of the proposition to invade Syria.  
I mean, the darn Iraq war just ended and the UK still has tens of thousands of guys in Afghanistan. 
And all the papers are running stories about "We lost in Afghanistan" and "We made it worse in Iraq"....  (both of which are undeniably true).  
The other thing that people need to be clear on, is that this is about two objectives:  
1) Get rid of a government that isn't pro-Western (but is in fact quite good by Middle Eastern standards).  
2) Pave the way for invading Iran.   
Syria had been opening up, essentially doing market reforms, and "perestroika" for over a decade.  There was already a softening up taking place.  Many of those who initially supported the rebels have changed back to supporting the government when they see what kinds of people the rebels are (foreign jihadists!)  
This country has been set up, cheated, manipulated and raped. Such a tragedy. 
At least let's not start bombing them too!

----------


## Deborski

Russia Worried About Strikes on Syria? Not Really | Features & Opinion | RIA Novosti 
Some encouraging news from Russia.   

> *One thing Russia will not do is fight for Syria.* Lavrov said it explicitly Monday, and pundits were unequivocal in agreeing he meant it. Like many recent US-led military operations, a strike against Syria simply would not touch enough on Russia’s vital geopolitical interests, leaving Moscow without an incentive to expend the considerable economic and military effort required by overseas military operations, analysts said. Another concern would be public opinion: About the only example of Russia’s military involvement against a US-led military offensive was a sudden takeover by Russian paratroopers of a Kosovo airport in 1999, which left the world slack-jawed but had few consequences otherwise. In that case, however, Moscow could boast to the Russian public of its bold support for the Serbs, a brethren Slavic people perceived as unfairly attacked by the West.

----------


## Deborski

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/30/wo..._20130829&_r=0 
Britain Rules Out Military Strike on Syria. 
Seems not all of Britain's lawmakers are as eager as Prime Minister Cameron is, to take orders from the US!   

> Prime Minister David Cameron said that Britain would not participate militarily in any strike against Syria after he lost a parliamentary vote by 13 votes on Thursday on an anodyne motion urging an international response. 
> It was a stunning defeat for a government that had seemed days away from joining the United States and France in a short, punitive cruise-missile attack on the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad for reportedly using chemical weapons against civilians. 
> Thursday evening’s vote was nonbinding, but in a short statement to Parliament afterward, Mr. Cameron said that he respected the will of Parliament and that it was clear to him that *the British people did not want to see military action over Syria*. “I get it,” he said.

----------


## Eric C.

> The rebels are not exactly good guys either, Eric.  For starters, the rebel movement has been co-opted by Al Qaeda and Al Nusra.  Secondarily, the UN investigation so far reveals that it was the rebels - and not Assad - who used sarin gas.  And lastly, the rebels engaged in acts of cannibalism - ripping the organs out of their enemies and eating their hearts and intestines. 
> I cannot begin to comprehend why the US is supporting these people.  It's absolutely horrifying.  I did not vote for Obama because I wanted to see another repeat of George W. Bush's actions in Iraq.

 Well, the way things are going now, I'm inclined to believe some of the sources that depict the rebels as monsters like that. But were they always like that? Do you remember how the whole thing was starting 2 years ago? There wasn't any "rebellion" back then; there were peaceful demonstrations held by completely unarmed people, typically on Fridays; *every demonstration had several to several dozen people killed!* Whose hands was that blood on? There were no "terrorists" or "Al-Qaeda rebels" at that point, and the dictatorial government didn't even seem to be bothered hiding evidence that it was their soldiers who shot people; now, if you cannot peacefully fight for your rights (or they'll kill you), do you have much of a choice? Anything but starting an armed fight for your rights and dignity? That was how the rebellion started. 
It's very sad that now, there are lots of war criminals and provokers there who pretend to be "rebels"; I'm sure enough there wasn't much of them 1-1.5 years ago; anyway, I think the "true rebels", those who fight for their rights and freedom against the dictatorial regime are real heroes, and helping them will help their country, eventually.

----------


## Deborski

> Well, the way things are going now, I'm inclined to believe some of the sources that depict the rebels as monsters like that. But were they always like that? Do you remember how the whole thing was starting 2 years ago? There wasn't any "rebellion" back then; there were peaceful demonstrations held by completely unarmed people, typically on Fridays; *every demonstration had several to several dozen people killed!* Whose hands was that blood on? There were no "terrorists" or "Al-Qaeda rebels" at that point, and the dictatorial government didn't even seem to be bothered hiding evidence that it was their soldiers who shot people; now, if you cannot peacefully fight for your rights (or they'll kill you), do you have much of a choice? Anything but starting an armed fight for your rights and dignity? That was how the rebellion started. 
> It's very sad that now, there are lots of war criminals and provokers there who pretend to be "rebels"; I'm sure enough there wasn't much of them 1-1.5 years ago; anyway, I think the "true rebels", those who fight for their rights and freedom against the dictatorial regime are real heroes, and helping them will help their country, eventually.

 In the beginning, the rebels asked the UN for a no-fly zone.  They were denied.  So Al Qaeda stepped in to help them because no one else did.  At least that is my understanding from talking with a friend of mine from Syria, whose husband has been volunteering in the refugee camps.  But even she tells me that* the rebels do not want America to get involved militarily.* 
If we want to help people, we should send food, medical aid, blankets, tents... whatever we can do to help anyone who is suffering.  But military involvement will not bring an end to all the bloodshed.  It will only worsen the situation, if what the majority of analysts say is true.

----------


## Eric C.

> In the beginning, the rebels asked the UN for a no-fly zone.  They were denied.  So Al Qaeda stepped in to help them because no one else did.  At least that is my understanding from talking with a friend of mine from Syria, whose husband has been volunteering in the refugee camps.  But even she tells me that* the rebels do not want America to get involved militarily.* 
> If we want to help people, we should send food, medical aid, blankets, tents... whatever we can do to help anyone who is suffering.  But military involvement will not bring an end to all the bloodshed.  It will only worsen the situation, if what the majority of analysts say is true.

 The people should ultimately defeat the regime though... I'm not sure what exact help that will take, but it occurs to me that just food and clothes won't be sufficient (they'll be helping people survive, but that war might never end that way)

----------


## maxmixiv

Exactly. So best way to do is support "the dictatorial government" (and I wonder, could exist non-dictatorial one in the East at all?) to suppress the opposition and take away their arms. Then, in gratitude Asad will unfold civic reforms, and may be even eventually lose the power.
Forecasts are gloomy, though, in any case. For many years it would be like Egypt or worse.

----------


## Deborski

> Exactly. So best way to do is support "the dictatorial government" (and I wonder, could exist non-dictatorial one in the East at all?) to suppress the opposition and take away their arms. Then, in gratitude Asad will unfold civic reforms, and may be even eventually lose the power.
> Forecasts are gloomy, though, in any case. For many years it would be like Egypt or worse.

 I think many people in the middle east want a non-dictatorial leadership, but they are inexperienced with it and it seems that every time a leader is established, he turns into a dictator, no matter how he got into power.

----------


## Deborski

U.S. military officers have deep doubts about impact, wisdom of a U.S. strike on Syria - The Washington Post 
Many of America's top military brass don't want to take action against Syria either!   

> Former and current officers, many with the painful lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan on their minds, said the main reservations concern the potential unintended consequences of launching cruise missiles against Syria. 
> Some questioned the use of military force as a punitive measure and suggested that the White House lacks a coherent strategy. If the administration is ambivalent about the wisdom of defeating or crippling the Syrian leader, possibly setting the stage for Damascus to fall to fundamentalist rebels, they said, the military objective of strikes on Assad’s military targets is at best ambiguous.

----------


## Deborski

Syrian Novelist Khaled al-Khalifa on a Possible US Strike  
A noted Syrian novelist, opposed to American involvement, speaks out:   

> Tell me when did the invaders bring freedom? 
> “At the end I will never be in favour of any American intervention in our area, because I know them very well. They could have defended the values from day one of our revolution and could have helped us, but they waited till the country was destroyed.

----------


## 14Russian

(Deleted. L.)

----------


## Lampada

> ...

 This if off-topic post and sounds strictly personal as like some other of you posts. Are you aware of existence of Private Messaging on this forum? Before I removed your post could you please send it via PMing? 
P.S.  I copy-saved your post in case you'd need it

----------


## Deborski

> I don't post for 'likes' unlike you.     For me, it's not a popularity contest.   Of course, the non-Russian mod will censor the truth I give.   But, anyone who engages you is wasting their time since you will just pull the persecution/paranoia card any time anyone illustrates your lack of reason. 
> I'm not talking about your points but when someone disagrees.  
> It doesn't matter about your justification for voting for Obomber.   Most Americans should have known what they were getting.   There was plenty of criticism and insight about it prior to both elections.   There's the internet, fyi.   Maybe, you've heard of it?

 You make a lot of assumptions, 14Russian... and you judge people too harshly.  I am sorry that you see everyone as so inferior to yourself.  My posts have nothing to do with wanting "popularity" - LOL - in case you didn't notice I have been attacked because of my "so popular" views on gay rights.  Even my husband's website was hacked.  So your point is meaningless.  As for the victim card, I am no one's "victim" but I sure as hell am not going to shut up when people attack me.  I'm going to call them on it, expose them, and do all in my power to stop the attacks.   
I have nothing further to say to you.

----------


## Deborski

> This if off-topic post and sounds strictly personal as like some other of you posts. Are you aware of existence of Private Messaging on this forum? Before I removed your post could you please send it via PMing? 
> P.S.  I copy-saved your post in case you'd need it

 He knows that if he PM's me, I will just ignore it and not respond.  He addresses me in a public forum because he hopes to gain points with those who already hate me.  But I agree, all this personal attacking and nonsense has no place in a serious discussion.   
I don't care who people voted for.  It doesn't make some kind of blanket statement about people!  It isn't as if Americans have a lot of choices in any case.  It was Obama, or it was Romney, or it was one of a dozen other lesser candidates who would never win anyway.  Simple choice and I feel no shame for it.  My husband is alive today because of Obamacare.  Nothing which happens in Syria can take that away from me, and there is STILL A CHANCE that Obama might back off from the precipice and decide against the air strikes, since so few Americans support this!

----------


## Deborski

> Of course, the non-Russian mod will censor the truth I give.

 Кстати, Лампада, кажется, что ты не русская!  Жалко.   ::  
Но я должна сказать, что ты всё равно отлично говоришь по-русски!   ::

----------


## Lampada

> Кстати, Лампада, кажется, что ты не русская! Жалко.  
> Но я должна сказать, что ты всё равно отлично говоришь по-русски!

 Мой сын считает, что я русская. ::

----------


## Eric C.

By the way, 14, I know your attitude for different sorts of propaganda, which I have to say I like, and having said this, I'd like to bring up some point here which I think you should consider, which is, *no one of the participants on this thread has come even close to the level of propaganda buying at which those fighting the war in Syria on Assad's side are*

----------


## Deborski

> Мой сын считает, что я русская.

 ))))))  Его кот тоже, наверное, русский!

----------


## Lampada

У него две кошки. 
Наши евреи смеются: "Там мы были евреями, а тут мы все сразу стали русскими".

----------


## Deborski

> У него две кошки. 
> Наши евреи смеются: "Там мы были евреями, а тут мы все сразу стали русскими".

 Да ))))  И в Америке, кажется, что я даже русская.  Я слишком часто говорю о Россие, по-этому мои друзья все называют меня "русская"   ::  
Странно, потому-что когда я жила в России, меня называли "американка"... 
Я уже не знаю, кто есть я  ::

----------


## Deborski

U.S. to release information about Syria's chemical weapons use - CNN.com 
So - back to topic - looks like the US is going to release its "evidence" that Assad is responsible for the chemical attacks.  I have to say I am very skeptical of US intelligence, recalling how US intel about WMD's in Iraq turned out to be false.  But I guess we shall see what we shall see.   

> The Obama administration will release declassified intelligence Friday backing up a government assessment that the Syrian regime was responsible for a chemical weapons attack, a senior administration official said. 
> This comes amid talk among major powers of a military response against the forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The administration has said that the information would be made public by the end of the week. 
> But diplomatic and political developments this week raised the chances of the United States going it alone in a military intervention.

----------


## Deborski

Hands Off Syria - Take action against U.S. intervention! 
To get a broad picture of just how many Americans oppose military involvement in Syria, this article has a list of all the anti-war protests going on across the US.  It is an *extensive* list!

----------


## Basil77

> Russia Worried About Strikes on Syria? Not Really | Features & Opinion | RIA Novosti 
> Some encouraging news from Russia.

 I don't see nothing encouraging here. Just very cynical count of profits and losses from the tragedy that Syrian people currently suffer.

----------


## Deborski

> I don't see nothing encouraging here. Just very cynical count of profits and losses from the tragedy that Syrian people currently suffer.

 
I know what you mean.  But I meant "encouraging" only in the sense that Russia does not plan to confront the US in a military way.  In the US right now, there is a lot of speculation that Russia, China, and Iran will try to fight us.  There are reports that Russian warships have started massing in the Suez.  So, if the Russian article is accurate, it shows that Russia has no intent of intervening militarily.   
As for the profits and losses from the tragedy, and the suffering of the Syrian people... that, of course, is sad beyond words.

----------


## Eric C.

> Exactly. So best way to do is support "the dictatorial government" (and I wonder, could exist non-dictatorial one in the East at all?) to suppress the opposition and take away their arms. Then, in gratitude Asad will unfold civic reforms, and may be even eventually lose the power.
> Forecasts are gloomy, though, in any case. For many years it would be like Egypt or worse.

 I thought we were discussing ways to help the Syrian people without heavy military intervention; what you're suggesting fails on both levels: it implies military intervention, + it's gonna ruin those people's lives completely, coz they will be defeated by the thugs; I don't get it unless some hidden sarcasm was meant which I didn't understand.

----------


## Deborski

> I thought we were discussing ways to help the Syrian people without heavy military intervention; what you're suggesting fails on both levels: it implies military intervention, + it's gonna ruin those people's lives completely, coz they will be defeated by the thugs; I don't get it unless some hidden sarcasm was meant which I didn't understand.

 I thought it was sarcasm mostly ))

----------


## maxmixiv

No need for intervention. Just help to cut the flow of weapons and ammo to rebels.

----------


## Hanna

> I don't see nothing encouraging here. Just very cynical count of profits and losses from the tragedy that Syrian people currently suffer.

 I just feel this is so incredibly tragic.    Syria was a country where moslems and Christians were living happily side by side, each group having the option to be as religious or as secular as they wanted.They had a good standard of education and a decent free health care system.The country was reforming at a steady pace.Syria had taken care of millions of refugees from around the Middle East, primarily Iraqis and Palestinians. It showed great generosity on the part of the state and the people there.It's one of the oldest civilisations on earth and it's got amazing cities and structures that are on the world heritage list.  
They're now going to be attacked, occupied, westernised / Americanised, dragged screeming and kicking into the global econonomy, which, for them will mean a position near the bottom: Sweatshop country.  
Their country will then be exploited for bases and to further the US ultimate objective of invading the oil trophy No 1: IRAN. 
That is the real name of the game; all serious security analysts are quite honest about it if you read serious articles in broadsheet papers.  
And all this was roadmapped back in the 1990s, when the USA realised that sans the USSR, the Middle East would be theirs for the picking, if they played the manipulation and propaganda cards right. And it's not a consipiracy theory; the proof is available on Wikileaks and even Youtube, 
Sure, the Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya interventions were miserable failures, from a human and democracy perspective. But the bases are there, and the oil is flowing, on Western conditions.... No price too high for that.  
Bring your wallets out, Americans, because you will be funding yet another decade long war, and eventually the Iran war that's now written in the sky.

----------


## Hanna

I have one more thing to say on this:  
You Russians think Putin is undemocratic and corrupt. Sure, this may be right, and I hope it gets sorted out one way or another. It's not really for me to comment on his domestic policies anyway, since they don't concern me.  
But he has the RIGHT idea in terms of foreign policy and you should honestly be proud of that!
 The USA with it's constant aggressiveness and rhetoric may have some of the European countries in its pockets...  
But the rest of the world will admire Russia (and China) for acting in a principled way in world politics, and not using its military strength to bully, invade and oppress.  Hopefully this will pay off -- sooner or later.  
Your tax money is paying for the one English speaking international channel that tells the truth about what's going on in places like Syria.

----------


## Eric C.

> I have one more thing to say on this:  
> You Russians think Putin is undemocratic and corrupt. Sure, this may be right, and I hope it gets sorted out one way or another. It's not really for me to comment on his domestic policies anyway, since they don't concern me.  
> But he has the RIGHT idea in terms of foreign policy and you should honestly be proud of that!
>  The USA with it's constant aggressiveness and rhetoric may have some of the European countries in its pockets...  
> But the rest of the world will admire Russia (and China) for acting in a principled way in world politics, and not using its military strength to bully, invade and oppress.  Hopefully this will pay off -- sooner or later.  
> Your tax money is paying for the one English speaking international channel that tells the truth about what's going on in places like Syria.

 It would be better if their tax money helped improve their roads and raise the scale of living in the countryside, though.

----------


## Deborski

'Syrian rebels take responsibility for the chemical attack admitting the weapons were provided by Saudis' - source - News - World - The Voice of Russia: News, Breaking news, Politics, Economics, Business, Russia, International current events,   

> “From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,” he writes in the article. 
> The rebels noted it was a result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them. 
> “My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry,” said Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of a rebel fighting to unseat Assad, who lives in Ghouta. 
> As Gavlak reports, Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels died in a weapons storage tunnel. The father stated the weapons were provided to rebel forces by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, describing them as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.” 
> “They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them,” complained a female fighter named ‘K’. “We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.” 
> “When Saudi Prince Bandar gives such weapons to people, he must give them to those who know how to handle and use them,” she warned. She, like other Syrians, do not want to use their full names for fear of retribution. 
> Gavlak also refers to an article in the UK’s Daily Telegraph about secret Russian-Saudi talks stating that Prince Bandar threatened Russian President Vladimir Putin with terror attacks at next year’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if Russia doesn’t agree to change its stance on Syria.

----------


## Deborski

US intel report stops short of confirming Assad is responsible for chemical attack — RT USA 
“Our high confidence assessment is the strongest position that the US Intelligence Community can take *short of confirmation,*” the report reads in part. 
So in other words, US still DOES NOT ACTUALLY HAVE CONFIRMATION.

----------


## Hanna

Apparently there are also pretty good signs that the rebels already used chemical weapons.          
And remember that this has very little to do with democracy, human rights or any concern for the Syrian people. 
Eyes on the prize as far as these guys are concerned. It's Iran they really want, and Syria, from there perspective is a really worthwhile milestone in that project.

----------


## 14Russian

> I have one more thing to say on this:  
> You Russians think Putin is undemocratic and corrupt. Sure, this may be right, and I hope it gets sorted out one way or another. It's not really for me to comment on his domestic policies anyway, since they don't concern me.  
> But he has the RIGHT idea in terms of foreign policy and you should honestly be proud of that!
>  The USA with it's constant aggressiveness and rhetoric may have some of the European countries in its pockets...  
> But the rest of the world will admire Russia (and China) for acting in a principled way in world politics, and not using its military strength to bully, invade and oppress.  Hopefully this will pay off -- sooner or later.  
> Your tax money is paying for the one English speaking international channel that tells the truth about what's going on in places like Syria.

 Blah, blah, blah...  Just because they might be accurate about one thing, doesn't mean they tell 'the truth' about everything or anything else.  
'It's not really for me to comment on his domestic policies anyway, since they don't concern me.' 
Then why are you 'telling Russians' to think A or B about Putin at all?   How do you conclude anything?   LOL! 
"But he has the RIGHT idea in terms of foreign policy and you should honestly be proud of that!"
Proud of what?   Perhaps, they are just glad that his puppet masters are not pushing him to go full throttle (like those 'leaders' in the USA, UK and France?)? 
Anyway, I agree with most of the comments regarding Syria that the USA is in the wrong.    
But, there are no 'good guys' here.  They are all just in for their own self-interest and what strategy is best for them.   However, the USA is among the most unethical as they have participated in something so heinous in supporting rebels who gassed innocent Syrians.   If there's no proof or evidence given (either way), the U.S. is committing the despicable in totally lying already without anything to substantiate their claims.   Regardless, it is not their job to 'police' and people are fed up with it.   Furthermore, to add to this, they are bankrupt so it is absolutely laughable that they would even engage in more military involvement.   Do Americans not care about that?!?   The polls show only 50% support a strike??!?!?   I'm very wary of polls but this number is quite high.   I wonder if it's just manufactured because the number should be ZERO.

----------


## Deborski

> Apparently there are also pretty good signs that the rebels already used chemical weapons.  
> And remember that this has very little to do with democracy, human rights or any concern for the Syrian people. 
> Eyes on the prize as far as these guys are concerned. It's Iran they really want, and Syria, from there perspective is a really worthwhile milestone in that project.

 
A few days ago, it seemed that bombing was imminent.  They even said the airstrikes would commence on Thursday. The fact that this has been delayed encourages me.  There are massive protests going on in the US (whether our war-loving media covers them is another matter) and we have been calling the White House and our representatives NONSTOP.  I hope this is a sign that Obama is backing away from a military intervention.  Of course, I could be wrong. 
PS, Hanna, remember what you said about trolls?  As you can see, the one you were describing before, isn't the only one...     ::

----------


## UhOhXplode

Okay. I just finished reading the whole thread.  
First, I agree with post #36 (Russia vs USSR). I think there's always good and bad in any government and I think that was true for Syria. They had a decent government and they wanted even more. Now they've lost everything cause they were too impatient to wait for changes to happen. 
I kinda agree with post #69. I read about the Afghan thing in 1979. The leader was too friendly with the west and the Russians wanted him out for National Security reasons. The US used that as an excuse to train Middle East terrorists to attack the new system in Afghanistan. One of those terrorists was Osama bin Laden. It was another way to set up a military base aimed at Russia. And Afghanistan became the poorest country in the world. The score was America gets everything, Afghanistan gets almost nothing. 
Now the US wants Syria so they can seriously damage Iran's economy. Obama doesn't care how many Syrian people die or even how they die. If they died because of illegal chemical weapons then that's even better cause he can use that excuse to bomb Syria. Then he can put his own dictator in power and yeah, Syria can be another sweatshop country. And who gets all the profits from that? The factories.
The next thing that happens is Obama will find a reason to bomb Iran. 
It's too sad to even think about all the people who will die from all these wars.
That's why I believe that Assad should win. Yeah, a lot of people will still suffer and die but not as many as there will be if Iran is attacked too. These wars need to stop! 
Also, if Obama gives arms and stuff to the rebels then he's giving them to the terrorists and Al-Qaeda too. And that's called "Aiding The Enemy". And that's treason.
There's 2 things I saw and read that really scared me about all this.  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/31/wo...isks.html?_r=0  akEobyCsktY 
I think Medvedev may have just been saber rattling. But it was scary and that NY Times article is even scarier. It could escalate into something nobody can control.
I just hope Congress can stop Obama before any of this can happen.

----------


## Deborski

Why Syria Intervention Plan Is Being Pushed by Oil Interests, Not Concern About Chemical Weapons | Alternet 
From this article:   

> So what was this unfolding strategy to undermine Syria and Iran all about? According to  retired NATO Secretary General Wesley Clark, a memo from the Office of the US Secretary of Defense just a few weeks after 9/11 revealed plans to "attack and destroy the governments in 7 countries in five years", starting with Iraq and moving on to "Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran." In a subsequent interview, Clark argues that this strategy is fundamentally about control of the region's vast oil and gas resources.

----------


## Deborski

Experts warn Syria attack could escalate violence and further destabilize region | The Raw Story 
From this article:   

> Some Middle East experts are throwing cold water on the Obama administration’s contention that a limited missile strike on Syria won’t actually result in more violence and a further destabilization of the region. According to an article at the top of the New York Times website, even a well-executed strategic strike against the nation could aggravate tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia — both nations that seek to dominate the region politically and militarily — and actually have the effect of buoying up Syria’s beleaguered President Bashar al-Assad. 
> Middle East watchers say that the only truly predictable thing about the highly unstable region is that any actions will produce unintended consequences. They warn of a possible Assad-bolstering surge of anti-Americanism or even a spreading of hostilities to other countries in the region, including Turkey and Israel. 
> Ryan Crocker, a key figure in the U.S. mishandling of the invasion and occupation of Iraq told the Times, “Our biggest problem is ignorance; we’re pretty ignorant about Syria.” He served as ambassador to Iraq from 2007 to 2009 and is currently the Dean of the George W. Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University. 
> Drawing from his own experience attempting to manage the situation in Iraq after the catastrophic waves of violence that enveloped the country in 2006, Crocker warned that one U.S. raid is no assurance that Assad will stop carrying out chemical raids. 
> “So he continues on in defiance — maybe he even launches another chemical attack to put a stick in our eye — and then what?” Crocker asked. “Because once you start down this road, it’s pretty hard to get off it and maintain political credibility.”

----------


## Eric C.

> Why Syria Intervention Plan Is Being Pushed by Oil Interests, Not Concern About Chemical Weapons | Alternet 
> From this article: 
> So what was this unfolding strategy to undermine Syria and Iran all about? According to retired NATO Secretary General Wesley Clark, a memo from the Office of the US Secretary of Defense just a few weeks after 9/11 revealed plans to "attack and destroy the governments in 7 countries in five years", starting with Iraq and moving on to "Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran." In a subsequent interview, Clark argues that this strategy is fundamentally about control of the region's vast oil and gas resources.

 By coincidence, those were (and some still are) the nastiest dictatorships in the region.

----------


## Deborski

Just spoke with my friend from Syria - and she says she fears any US military involvement will only trigger retaliation from terrorists, and the Syrian people will pay the price.  I think she is exactly right.

----------


## Eric C.

> Just spoke with my friend from Syria - and she says she fears any US military involvement will only trigger retaliation from terrorists, and the Syrian people will pay the price.  I think she is exactly right.

 Good enough she acknowledges it's Assad's forces who are the terrorists. I would say any military action in that region brings on a lot of responsibility, it just has to have absolute success, which is very hard to guarantee under current conditions, that is probably why it was delayed.

----------


## Deborski

> Good enough she acknowledges it's Assad's forces who are the terrorists. I would say any military action in that region brings on a lot of responsibility, it just has to have absolute success, which is very hard to guarantee under current conditions, that is probably why it was delayed.

 You read into her statement.  She didn't acknowledge that at all. BOTH SIDES have done horrific things.  Neither side is innocent.

----------


## Eric C.

> You read into her statement.  She didn't acknowledge that at all. BOTH SIDES have done horrific things.  Neither side is innocent.

 In my view, that conflict has 3 parties (not 2): 
1. Dictatorial thugs
2. Rebels
3. External thugs and terrorists pretending to be rebels 
From this perspective, I'd say #2 is innocent, while the other 2 totally aren't. As for me reading into her statement, I mean which party is most likely going to be aggressive about U.S. military intervention?

----------


## Deborski

President Obama is preparing to address the nation regarding Syria.  He is* not expected* to announce a military strike.   
I can hear people protesting in the background.  http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/la...ke-a-point.ece

----------


## Deborski

> In my view, that conflict has 3 parties (not 2): 
> 1. Dictatorial thugs
> 2. Rebels
> 3. External thugs and terrorists pretending to be rebels 
> From this perspective, I'd say #2 is innocent, while the other 2 totally aren't. As for me reading into her statement, I mean which party is most likely going to be aggressive about U.S. military intervention?

 Gross oversimplification.  There are also *thousands of people* who are not involved in either side.

----------


## Deborski

Listening to Obama speaking now: 
He states that he personally favors "limited" military involvement (airstrikes), however, *he is going to wait for a vote from Congress*, following a debate when Congress reconvenes on September 9th. 
Additional coverage of Obama's presser here:  http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2...nst-syria?lite

----------


## UhOhXplode

> By coincidence, those were (and some still are) the nastiest dictatorships in the region.

 Have you been to Detroit? There's so many innocent people dying and so many houses being torched! When is Assad going to bomb America and save those people? Or should it be Italy? 
Or how about they fix their own problems.   

> In my view, that conflict has 3 parties (not 2): 
> 1. Dictatorial thugs
> 2. Rebels
> 3. External thugs and terrorists pretending to be rebels 
> From this perspective, *I'd say #2 is innocent*, while the other 2 totally aren't. As for me reading into her statement, I mean which party is most likely going to be aggressive about U.S. military intervention?

 I'm confused. Are you talking about the cannibals, the ones that were slaughtering civilians, or the ones that launched the bomb at the civilian bus? 
Maybe it was just bad photographers cause i totally did miss the angel wings on the rebels or anyone else fighting over there. 
"We the people of the United States..." - So when did the people turn into only 9% of the people? I totally did miss that too.
Well, Obama finally backed off. I hope he backs all the way off to Altzheimers and leaves the White House so we can have a real President.

----------


## Eric C.

> Have you been to Detroit? There's so many innocent people dying and so many houses being torched! When is Assad going to bomb America and save those people? Or should it be Italy? 
> Or how about they fix their own problems.

 It's completely different in the U.S. The easiest example I can think of is, how about you being put behind the bars for saying there are some miserable households in Detroit? Would you be saying it's a free country then? That's what that dictatorship used to be like (and now it's not coz it's too busy with the war) - not only did it make people's lives miserable, but it also told them HOW to live and WHAT to think.   

> I'm confused. Are you talking about the cannibals, the ones that were slaughtering civilians, or the ones that launched the bomb at the civilian bus? 
> Maybe it was just bad photographers cause i totally did miss the angel wings on the rebels or anyone else fighting over there.

 Did you notice the third side I mentioned? It pretty much includes all of the categories you're talking about. They're as nasty as the dictatorial regime thugs are, I agree. 
If you're a rebel fighting for a better way for your country, fighting against the oppressive system, why in the world would you turn into a cannibal or attack civilians??? That doesn't even make sense. 
And by the way, I'm no big fan of Obama either.  ::

----------


## UhOhXplode

> It's completely different in the U.S. The easiest example I can think of is, how about you being put behind the bars for saying there are some miserable households in Detroit? Would you be saying it's a free country then? That's what that dictatorship used to be like (and now it's not coz it's too busy with the war) - not only did it make people's lives miserable, but it also told them HOW to live and WHAT to think.

 Yeah, compared to the US they were oppressed. But not if you compare Syria to a lot of countries in Africa or the rest of the Middle East. Nothing's perfect but those are their countries.
They should Not try to fix Detroit. And we should Not try to fix Syria. It's like making a patch for a game when you don't even know how it was coded. Just look at Iraq. Total Fail.   

> Did you notice the third side I mentioned? It pretty much includes all of the categories you're talking about. They're as nasty as the dictatorial regime thugs are, I agree.
> If you're a rebel fighting for a better way for your country, fighting against the oppressive system, why in the world would you turn into a cannibal or attack civilians??? That doesn't even make sense.
> And by the way, I'm no big fan of Obama either.

 Sorry.  ::  I was trying to add stuff to mom's shopping list and I totally did miss that. Yeah, #3 was what I was talking about. They are  :: .
But that makes it even more difficult to help anyone cause now nobody knows which are the Syrian people and which are the terrorists. So if we did the strikes then who will be in power? That's easy. The other thugs - the terrorists. no win/no win. 
About Obama: Congress already cautioned him that he could be "Aiding The Enemy" (terrorists) with his actions. That would be a serious offense against his own country and an extreme dishonor. 
Some people claim that he wasn't even an American when he was elected. But that's still not important. When someone lives in a country, they should never do anything that threatens that country. That's the worst dishonor there is.
People can complain and even fight to change their country. But if they think they need to threaten it, then it's time for them to find another country to believe in - That's the honorable thing.
But "Aiding The Enemy" is an epic red line that I hope Obama doesn't try to cross. And, imo, the "collateral damage" thing doesn't count if it aids the enemy.   
Tbh, I agree with his healthcare plans but that's all. So yeah, I'm not a huge Obama fan, lol. And he's weak. Very weak. Not because he won't stand up and risk helping the terrorists in Syria. No, he's just weak and he never stands up for anything he says he believes in. Well, at least he did stand up for the healthcare thing so that's cool. Doesn't help us since we already had healthcare plans but it will help people who can't afford it.

----------


## Deborski

Personally, I have to say I admired Obama's restraint today.  Dubya would have shot from the hip and ordered a unilateral strike without waiting for Congress.  At least Obama had the temperance to wait for Congress to at least vote on it.  Perhaps this will give the UN enough time to complete their investigation and find forensic evidence to prove who is actually responsible for the chemical weapons attack, since both sides are pointing fingers.  I'd like to see some solid evidence rather then secondhand information from supposedly "trustworthy" sources.  Congress reconvenes September 9th.   
Regardless, I will still not favor military involvement personally.  I'd rather see us exhaust all diplomatic means first, and considering that the US has been postponing and canceling every meeting Russia tries to arrange, I'd say we have a long way to go before we should be reaching for the gun. 
People get all hysterical about chemical weapons, but the sickening truth is that thousands of people have already died in Syria from bullets, shells, starvation, sepsis and god knows what else.  The time to have helped was two years ago when all of this began, before the rebel movement was co-opted by terrorist factions.  The rebels pleaded for a no-fly zone.  It was not granted.  And so, here we are. 
I will certainly be calling my representatives to tell them I oppose all military intervention no matter what words they want to use to "soften" it.  "Surgical,"  "intervention," "humanitarian" - why not just call a spade a spade and say BOMBING and KILLING people, because that is what air strikes are for. 
I think we all know what George Carlin would say if he was still around.

----------


## Eric C.

Around a year and a half ago, one Syrian (presumably) fellow asked me to translate a bit of news report text into Russian. The text was telling about the atrocities going on in Syria at that moment. I have to say I was truly shocked and that was when I decided I would follow the situation in that area closer. I would like to bring that text (and the translation) down here, accompanied by two warnings - first, it's pretty long (and more than that, there are 2 untranslated parts), and as it's said, READER DISCRETION IS ADVISED! 
Here it is (the translated part for now), as of March 2012  
There have been over 630 documented reports of casualties of children, and over 9200 total deaths. There are also many accounts of babies being killed with video evidence. 420 of these deaths are documented cases of death from torture. These estimates of course are only a small fraction compared to actual death count as only cases with evidence are documented. 65,000 have been reported as missing, 35,000 injured, and 220,000 incarcerated. 
A number of adult detainees and security force members who had defected and who were interviewed confirmed the presence and torture of child detainees in facilities across Syria. “Samih,” a former adult detainee held in a political security facility in Latakia, said that children were subjected to worse treatment than adults, including sexual abuse more so than adults. Many died in detention. There are many accounts of mutilated bodies being sent to parents to prolong their fear to resist. 
“Hossam,” age 13, said that security forces detained him and a relative, also 13, in May 2011 and tortured him for three days at a military security branch. Every so often they would open our cell door and yell at us and beat us. They said, “You pigs, you want freedom?” They interrogated me by myself. They asked, “Who is your god?” And I said, “Allah.” Then they electrocuted me on my stomach, with a prod. I fell unconscious. When they interrogated me the second time, they beat me and electrocuted me again. The third time they had some pliers, and they pulled out my toenail. They said, “Remember this saying, always keep it in mind: We take both kids and adults, and we kill them both.” I started to cry, and they returned me to the cell. 
We were 70 to 75 people in a group cell that was 3 by 3 meters. We slept with our knees to our chests. Some people had broken hands, legs, their heads were swollen. There were 15 and 16 year old kids in the cell with us, six or seven of them with their fingernails pulled, their faces beaten. They treat the kids even worse than the adults. There is torture, but there is also rape for the children more so for boys. We would see them when the guards brought them back to the cell, it’s indescribable, you can’t talk about it. One boy came into the cell bleeding from behind. He couldn’t walk. It was something they just did to the boys. We would cry for them. 
Children also said that security forces kept them in overcrowded group cells, deprived of food and water. Ala’a said, “There were 75 people in a very small cell, 4 by 6 meters. The cell was not even fit for animals, the smell of blood was unbearable. I spent 10 days there. We had to take turns standing and sitting to sleep. How did they give us water? They’d take a bottle, maybe 1.5 liters, and spray it in the air, everyone would open their mouths and try to catch a few drops. For food, everyone had half a piece of bread.” The detainees reported buses of people arriving daily for torture. Interviews with defecting army officers also confirm accounts by detainees. An army officer said that they had recieved orders to arrest any male over the age of 14 or 15 in large-scale raids. 
Some of the arrests took place in schools. “Nazih”, a 17 year old girl from Tal Kalakh, said that in May 2011, security forces entered her school and arrested all the boys in her class, after questioning them about the anti-regime slogans painted on the school walls. Children, some as young as 13, reported that officers kept them in solitary confinement, severely beat and electrocuted them, burned them with cigarettes, and left them to dangle from metal handcuffs for hours at a time, centimeters above the floor. Detention facilities where children reported being tortured include: the military security detention center in Homs. 
​ Most deaths are from security forces being ordered to fire into crowds. They have done this so much they do it regardless of if they are ordered or not. More shockingly they target funerals where crowds of family and friends gather in mourning carrying the bodies of the dead in caskets before they are buried. There are so many cases of this that rights group don't document them. If wounded are taken to the hospital they are denied usually because security forces monitor hospitals and will even kill doctors for treating protesters. Many have been turned to military hospitals and they wont treat opposition. They will just give the body back with more holes.   
Задокументировано более 630 жертв среди детей и более 9200 смертей всего. Также много случаев убийств новорожденных с видео подтверждением. 420 случаев этих смертей - документированные случаи смерти от пыток. Эти оценки, конечно, только малая часть по сравнению с реальным количеством смертей, так как документируются только случаи с подтверждением. Сообщается о 65,000 пропавших, 35,000 раненых, и 220,000 помещенных в тюрьмы. 
Определенное количество задержанных взрослых граждан и сотрудников сил безопасности которые перешли на другую сторону и были опрошены подтвердило наличие пыток над задержанными детьми в лагерях по всей Сирии. "Samih", бывший задержанный, удерживаемый в политическом лагере в Латакии, сказал что дети подвергались худшему обращению чем взрослые, включая сексуальное насилие в большем количестве чем над взрослыми. Многие погибли в заключении. Есть много случаев посылки изувеченных тел родителям, чтобы усилить их страх к сопротивлению.  
"Hossam," 13 лет, сказал что силы безопасности задержали его и его родственника, тоже 13 лет, в Мае 2011 и пытали его три дня в отделении военной безопасности. Довольно часто они открывали дверь камеры, и кричали на нас и били нас. Они 
говорили, "Вы свиньи хотите свободы?" Они допрашивали меня обо мне. Они спросили, "Кто твой Бог?" И я сказал, "Аллах." Потом они ударили меня электрошоком в живот. Я потерял сознание. Когда они допрашивали меня второй раз, они снова били меня и ударяли электрошоком. В третий раз у них были какие-то щипцы, и они выдернули мне ноготь на ноге. Они сказали, "Запомни это, и всегда помни: Мы забираем и взрослых и детей, и убиваем и тех и других." Я начал плакать, и они вернули меня в камеру. 
Нас было 70-75 человек в групповой камере размером 3 на 3 метра. Мы спали прижав колени к груди. У некоторых людей были сломаны руки, ноги, их головы опухли. С нами в камере были 15- и 16-летние, шесть или семь из них с вырванными ногтями, разбитыми лицами. Они обращаются с детьми даже хуже чем со взрослыми. Существуют пытки, но существуют также изнасилования детей, особенно мальчиков. Мы видели их когда охранники вернули их в камеру, это неописуемо, невозможно говорить об этом. Один подросток пришел в камеру истекая кровью сзади. Он не мог идти. Это было то, что они делали с мальчиками. Мы плачем за них. 
Дети также говорили что силы безопасности держали их в переполненных групповых камерах, лишенных пищи и воды. Ala’a говорил, "В очень маленькой камере, 4 на 6 метров, было 75 человек. Камера была непригодна даже для животных, запах крови был непереносим. Я провел там 10 дней. Нам приходилось спать по очереди. Как они давали нам воду? Они брали бутылку, наверное 1.5-литровую, и распрыскивали ее в воздух, каждый должен был открыть рот и пытаться поймать хоть несколько капель. В качестве еды, у каждого была половина куска хлеба." Задержанные сообщали об автобусах с людьми, прибывающих для пыток каждый день. Интервью с перешедшими на другую сторону армейскими офицерами также подтверждают слова задержанных. Один офицер сказал что они получили приказ арестовывать любое лицо мужского пола в возрасте свыше 14 или 15 лет в ходе масштабных рейдов. 
Некоторые аресты проводились в школах. “Nazih”, 17-летняя девушка из Тал Калах, сказала, что в Мае 2011 силы безопасности ворвались в ее школу и арестовали всех мальчиков в ее классе, после опрашивания их об анти-режимных слоганах, нарисованных на школьных стенах. Дети, некоторые не старше 13 лет, сообщили что офицеры держали их в одиночном заключении, жестоко избивали их и били электрошоком, прижигали сигаретами, и оставляли болтаться на металлических наручниках часами, в сантиметрах от пола. Лагеря для задержанных, в которых, по словам детей, их пытали, включают: центр военной безопасности в Хомсе. 
Большинство жертв происходит из-за приказов силам безопасности стрелять по толпе. Они делали это так много раз, они делают это вне зависимости от того, приказано им или нет. Более ужасно, они открывают огонь по похоронным процессиям, где толпы семьи и друзей собираются в трауре, неся гробы с телами погибших до их похорон. Таких случаев так много что правозащитники не документируют их. Если раненых привозят в больницу, им обычно отказывают, так как силы безопасности следят за больницами и могут даже убить докторов за лечение протестующих. Многие обращались в военные госпитали, и те не лечат оппозицию. Они только вернут тело обратно с большим количеством дыр.

----------


## Deborski

I would also like to share a testimonial written by a victim of torture.  I warn readers, this account is extremely graphic. 
****** 
    During investigations, I was threatened with rape, attacks on my family in Saudi Arabia, my daughter being kidnapped, and my murder - assassination - by their spies in the Middle East if I went back to Saudi Arabia. 
    They went to a detainee and put his head in the toilet. The toilets in Camp Delta are iron, Turkish-style toilets and then they flushed his head down the toilet until he almost died. They went to a detainee and started beating his head against the toilet rim until he lost consciousness and he could not see for more than 10 hours. 
    One detainee, called Abdul Aziz Al-Masri, was ill and was asleep in the hospital. These soldiers went and beat him very badly in the hospital in front of the doctors and nurses. His injuries were excessive and caused his spine to break. He is now hemiplegic. They are now trying to operate on him but he is refusing out of fear that they will play with his back and make it worse rather than make it better as their operations often do. These kinds of incidents happen often. They would make sending them to the detainees an excuse for incidents in which we would suffer extensive injuries, severe disfiguration and fractures as there was no one monitoring or following up their actions. Rather, their officers and officials gave them the orders. 
    At the end of 2003, a major incident happened to me in the investigation room. The soldiers took me to the investigation room and the investigator - who I only ever saw on this one occasion - had a Koran in his hand when he entered the room. He put it on the table and started talking and raving. Then he asked some soldiers to come in so some soldiers came. This investigator had brought the American and Israeli flags in with him. He then ordered the soldiers to wrap the flags around me tightly and then he took the Koran, threw it on the floor and damaged it with his shoe. Then he exposed his penis and urinated on it. He said a lot of things to me, such as, "this is a holy war between the star of David and the cross against the crescent" and "the whole world will submit to us and if any one doesn't submit to us. 
**** 
This is the testimony of Jumah al-Dossari, which he wrote in July 2005 in the *U.S. detention facility* at Guantanamo Bay naval base, Cuba and was printed by Amnesty International. 
I am not posting this to in any way invalidate or lessen the torture you just described Eric.  But my point is that this happens all around the world, and in the United States too. 
Does that mean some other country should commence missile strikes on Washington DC? 
Former President Jimmy Carter today stated that we should urgently engage in peace talks and try to find a diplomatic solution.  I am inclined to agree.  I do not believe that launching missiles into Syria is going to stop atrocities going on.  In fact, it could even escalate the bloodshed.  http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...#ixzz2dYvaK72S   

> The Carter Center urged against a military response to possible chemical weapons use without a U.N. mandate, saying the action would be “illegal under international law and unlikely to alter the course of the war.” 
> “Instead, all should seek to leverage the consensus among the entire international community, including Russia and Iran, condemning the use of chemical weapons in Syria and bringing under U.N. oversight the country’s stockpile of such weapons,” the center said in the statement.

----------


## UhOhXplode

> Former President Jimmy Carter today stated that we should urgently engage in peace talks and try to find a diplomatic solution.  I am inclined to agree.  I do not believe that launching missiles into Syria is going to stop atrocities going on.  In fact, it could even escalate the bloodshed.  Jimmy Carter calls for Syria peace summit - James Arkin - POLITICO.com

 I agree. A limited surgical strike (okay, blasting people to pieces with bombs - since they don't always hit their military targets) would just add more fear and anger. And where does all that fear and anger go? Into the civil war so, more torture and more deaths.
Oh wait! There is Israel and Israel is an American ally. So... unless Obama is hoping they'll attack Israel...

----------


## Deborski

Human bones found at infamous Florida reform school | The Raw Story 
Another example of horrendous torture of children in the US.  This concerns the infamous Dozier Reform School for Boys in Florida.  So far, more than 50 bodies have been found, of young boys who were so badly beaten and tortured, under the auspices of the school's "corporal punishment program," that they died.  The school never reported their deaths, it just covered everything up, and buried the boys on school grounds. 
This was only just discovered in 2011 and was just in the news again today because more bodies were found.   

> In the short time since the school closed in 2011, survivors and relatives of Dozier residents have come forward with stories about students there being subjected to sexual abuse, regular beatings and deaths that were either not explained or outright suspicious in nature.

 Torture, brutality, atrocities, murder of children... is not limited to Syria, unfortunately.  It is a sickening and disgusting state of humanity.     http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...n-florida?lite   

> Some "large-bone fragments" were found on the first day of digging, Wells said. They were human bones, he added, but it was impossible to know if they came from any of the teenaged boys who were housed at Dozier during its infamous 111-year existence. The school was closed in mid-2011. 
> The bones will be examined in laboratories at the University of South Florida and the University of North Texas, as part of a program funded by the U.S. Department of Justice and state of Florida.

----------


## Paul G.

Americans are merely teenagers who unexpectedly became adults. That's why there are so many problems in the world.
This is a very good example of such behavior:

----------


## Deborski

> Americans are merely teenagers who unexpectedly became adults. That's why there are so many problems in the world.
> This is a very good example of such behavior:

 In what way does a picture of Obama with his foot on a desk prove anything.....?     
Maybe this picture proves that Putin is an evil warmonger who loves guns? 
I could just as easily rush to judgement.  Certainly a lot of my countrymen have decided that Putin is evil based on propaganda and nonsense. 
What is the point?  I am sorry you despise Americans so much, Paul.  You also seem to place a lot of value on stereotypes.  I guess if I were to judge Russians by stereotypes, I would think you all wear fur hats, wrestle bears and play the balalaika.  I might also believe that all Russians are unemotional and cruel - and "that's why there are so many problems in the world." 
Fortunately, *I do not think like that.* 
I am going to ignore your further attempts at trolling.

----------


## Deborski

Perhaps we can glean more understanding from this photo.  Many of America's soldiers feel the same way.  Our military does not support Obama's plans for attacking Syria.  Even the top brass have spoken out against it.

----------


## Deborski

https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/20...1/18742429.php 
I got this article directly from the reporter who wrote it.  He asserts that US-backed rebels want to impose Sharia law on women in Syria, and that female Kurdish soldiers are combating them.     

> The U.S. arms the anti-woman religious fanatics of Syria, and is preparing direct military air strikes to help bring them to power. Meanwhile, these same people list the secular and pro-woman Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) as a terrorist organization. The PYD is labeled a terrorist organization by the governments of Turkey, the United States, the European Union, and by NATO. Yet, the true terrorists are the U.S. backed Islamists in Syria. 
> Despite appeals for help from the Kurdish PYD to Amnesty International in exposing the crimes of the U.S. backed Islamists, Amnesty International is instead advising the U.S. on how best to carry out impending U.S. bombing raids on Syria. This reflects a far rightward turn the organization has taken in openly supporting U.S. imperialist wars. 
> The U.S. has long opposed the national rights of the Kurdish people, aiding Saddam Hussein as he murdered 90,000 Kurds in Iraq with poison gas and giving Turkey the military aid to murder tens of thousands of Kurds. In Syria, the U.S. prefers the Islamic puppets it is trying to groom for power within the rebel forces as an attempt at reliable allies in a post-secular Syria that will privatize the oil in the Kurdish oil rich region. They probably see the communist influenced PYD as less likely to sell-out Kurdish control of their own resources to world imperialist oil interests than the Islamist rebels they hope to place in power.

 This article is one of the most in-depth I have seen on the entire Syrian situation and bears thorough reading by all who wish to be fully informed on the crisis.   
Photo: August 28, 2013, Kurdish women in Ras Al-Ayn, liberated Kurdish Syria, battling against U.S. backed al Qaeda insurgents. Everywhere the U.S. backed rebels have come to power they have imposed anti-woman Sharia (Islamic) law and they have carried out genocide against Kurds, Christians, Alawites, and Shi’ites. [Photo credit Harold Doornbos and Jenan Moussa / FP]

----------


## Paul G.

> In what way does a picture of Obama with his foot on a desk prove anything.....?

 It proves that Obama is a little boy who plays cowboy in father's private office. That's why he's in a doghouse now. And Americans too.   

> Maybe this picture proves that Putin is an evil warmonger who loves guns?

 There are a lot of pictures where Obama is shooting. It doesn't matter.

----------


## Deborski

"Russia Sharply Steps Up Criticism of US Over Syria" - Washington Post  - The Washington Post 
From this article:   

> “I would like to address Obama as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate: Before using force in Syria, it would be good to think about future casualties,” Putin told Russian news agencies in Vladivostok during a tour of the country’s flood-stricken Far East. 
> “Russia is urging you to think twice before making a decision on an operation in Syria,” he said.

----------


## Deborski

Analysis: Military action in Syria faces uncertain fate in Congress | Reuters 
Analysis: Military action in Syria faces uncertain fate in Congress - Reuters (US)   

> Underscoring the division was immediate discord over the timing of Congressional deliberations on Syria, particularly the decision by the House leadership to wait until the end of the summer recess on September 9 to get going, instead of returning to Washington on Tuesday or sooner. 
> While the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said late on Saturday it would begin hearings next week before Congress officially returns, no similar plan had been announced by the House. 
> "Congress should return to Washington immediately and begin to debate this issues," said Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, considered a likely Republican presidential contender in 2016. 
> The president has the authority under the Constitution to call Congress back in session "on extraordinary occasions," but so can the congressional leadership. Neither so far has taken that action. 
> Senior administration officials said Obama left it up to congressional leaders to decide whether to bring members back early because the administration wants to do classified briefings and make the case to Congress in the week ahead, and there were logistical issues with the Labor Day holiday on Monday and religious holidays in the middle of the week.

----------


## Eric C.

> Human bones found at infamous Florida reform school | The Raw Story 
> Another example of horrendous torture of children in the US.  This concerns the infamous Dozier Reform School for Boys in Florida.  So far, more than 50 bodies have been found, of young boys who were so badly beaten and tortured, under the auspices of the school's "corporal punishment program," that they died.  The school never reported their deaths, it just covered everything up, and buried the boys on school grounds. 
> This was only just discovered in 2011 and was just in the news again today because more bodies were found.   
> Torture, brutality, atrocities, murder of children... is not limited to Syria, unfortunately.  It is a sickening and disgusting state of humanity.     Human bones found in dig at notorious Dozier reform school in Florida - U.S. News

 That's just horrifying, Deb, a middle east style torture facility in the middle of Florida! I think there had been plenty of very good reasons to shut down that hellhole forever. I hope it never opens again. In the meantime, the U.S. juridical system actually recognizes those actions taken by the staff as really serious felonies, and if anyone of those who committed that is still alive, they're most likely going to jail for the rest of their lives.

----------


## Deborski

> That's just horrifying, Deb, a middle east style torture facility in the middle of Florida! I think there had been plenty of very good reasons to shut down that hellhole forever. I hope it never opens again. In the meantime, the U.S. juridical system actually recognizes those actions taken by the staff as really serious felonies, and if anyone of those who committed that is still alive, they're most likely going to jail for the rest of their lives.

 Yes, this one got shut down... but only after getting away with it for over *ONE HUNDRED YEARS.* 
And I could provide dozens, if not hundreds, of examples of abuse, rape, torture, child molestation and so on that takes place in America's "for profit" prison industry as well.  And as for our "justice system" - it does not always work nearly as well we would like to believe it does.  In Texas, sheriff's deputies routinely grope the genitals of random citizens just because they get some kind of perverted kick out of it.  All around the country, churches encourage parents to "pray to god" rather than seek medical attention when their kids are sick.  Police stomped all over the protesters during the Occupy movement.  There are rampant stories about the most horrible things you can imagine when you scratch beneath the veneer of "the land of the free." 
I'm not in any way minimizing what is going on in Syria, I am just trying to put it into perspective.  If every country acted like the US and decided to police the world with its military forces, I imagine a hundred nuclear bombs might be launched on our nation in retaliation for our many crimes against humanity, not just in our own country, but overseas! 
What about all the chemical weapons the US has used?  Remember "agent orange"?  What about Nagasaki and Hiroshima where hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians died?  Those atrocities were not even necessary - despite all the justifications our government has brainwashed us with - because Japan was ready to surrender before we even dropped the bombs.  It was all just a big show of force, to establish the US as the new bully on the block.

----------


## Deborski

My friend from Syria, whom I mentioned earlier, just sent me this clip from Canadian television interviewing her husband, a doctor who volunteers his time at the refugee camps, helping those who have fled Syria. 
The interview is mostly in French, but there is a little English, and it does give you an idea of just how much he and the other volunteers are up against, who are just trying to provide humanitarian aid.  The video shows him trying to get medical equipment and other much needed emergency supplies to the refugee camps, which is almost impossible at times.  http://www.radio-canada.ca/widgets/m...dianet/6811656 
If anyone's French is adequate to interpret what he said in its entirety, I would be much obliged!

----------


## Hanna

> This article was deleted several hours after publishing more than half of a year ago:  U.S. 'planned to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it on Assad' | Mail Online 
> All this Syria issue smells very dirty to me.

  
You are JOKING, is this for real!?!  
It's totally outrageous. He's talking about actions that could start a war, as if it was a stroll in the park.  
The guy exists, he is on LinkedIn and all, and they've got personnel in the Middle East and connections to Ukrainians. I didn't quite get why the people filming it had to speak Russian, but I get that the general idea was to plant false evidence villifying Assad.  
And "David Goulding" for goodness sake. I wonder what religion he might be.   *This smells to high heaven. I can hardly believe it's for real.* This is the very worst fears I had about Syria, that this sort of stuff was happening.  
And what a t-sser to mail something like this over the internet where it obviously got hacked or otherwise picked up by somebody who "shouldn't" have seen it.

----------


## Paul G.

> You are JOKING, is this for real!?!  
> It's totally outrageous. He's talking about actions that could start a war, as if it was a stroll in the park.

 That's ordinary American practice. They kill their own citizens for the political purposes, organize provocations all over the world etc, so don't you think they care about these nasty muslims somewhere in the hole like Syria? Even if those muslims are not religious fanatics? (There are a lot of Christians in Syria, by the way)   

> I didn't quite get why the people filming it had to speak Russian

 Are you really so naive? It shocked me.
They want to produce kinda "evidence" that Russia supports Assad and helps him to kill people with the help of CW. Because they think it would take Russia out of the game, if they publish these "facts" in the US Media. Of course, these "facts" must be obvious even for the most stupid American lookers. 
I hope we are watching the last burping of the stinking monster before it croaks. Amen.

----------


## Deborski

NATO data: Assad winning the war for Syrians’ hearts and minds | World Tribune 
Meanwhile, Assad has more support from the Syrian people than Obama has from the American people:   

> “The people are sick of the war and hate the jihadists more than Assad,” a Western source familiar with the data said. “Assad is winning the war mostly because the people are cooperating with him against the rebels.” 
> The data, relayed to NATO over the last month, asserted that 70 percent of Syrians support the Assad regime. Another 20 percent were deemed neutral and the remaining 10 percent expressed support for the rebels.

----------


## Deborski

Nobel Peace Prize laureste, Mairead Maguire, tells her account of her visit to Syria. 
While Maguire was in Syria she discovered that the war in Syria is not as depicted a civil war but a proxy war with serious breaches of International laws and the Humanitarian International laws. The protection of the foreign fighters by some foreign countries among the most powerful gives them a kind of an unaccountability that pushes them with impunity to all kind of cruel deeds against innocent civilians. Even war conventions are not respected resulting in many war crimes and, even, crimes against humanity.

----------


## Eric C.

> NATO data: Assad winning the war for Syrians’ hearts and minds | World Tribune 
> Meanwhile, Assad has more support from the Syrian people than Obama has from the American people:

 Those are terrifying numbers. If that's true, I honestly have no idea what else that dictator has to do to make those people "unsupport" him... (I would understand 70 percent of neutral ones vs 20/10 for the dictator and rebels respectively, but 70 percent for the dictator? Terrifying...)

----------


## Basil77

> You are JOKING, is this for real!?!

 This doesn't look like a joke for me at all. "Civil" war in Syria is fueled by Quatar and Saudi Arabia, "rebel" forces consist mainly from jihadist Al-Quaeda mercenaries hired by these two countries, if not for them, Assad would ended this long ago imho. And I believe those "nice" and "peace loving" countries can do ANY nasty thing if it suits their goals. Fortunately for them, USA (=NATO="democratic world") consider them allies, so they have some sort of indulgence and "free democratic" media is more likely to believe any bullsh!t they make up instead of obvious facts.

----------


## Hanna

> “The people are sick of the war and hate the jihadists more than Assad,”  a Western source familiar with the data said. “Assad is winning the war  mostly because the people are cooperating with him against the rebels.”

 Yup, and that was clear to anyone who bothered listening to any kind of non-mainstream media over a year ago. 
"Better the devil you know" obviously, and Assad was not that bad, by Middle Eastern standards. 
It's quite unbelievable that BBC made quite charming "week-away" reports from Aleppo and Latakia only a few years ago, and portrayed the Assad regime as just a bit quaint and rather harmless and apologetic dictator who was earnestly trying to reform, with his super-chic British wife by his side. She worked as an analyst or something like that, for JP Morgan, if you would believe it!! ] 
But then, they become aware that Syria is on Uncle Sam's hit list, and suddenly Syria is an evil dictatorship somebody wants to take it down and suddenly he's the worst monster that ever walked the earth, and his wife is Imelda Marcos / Marie Antoinette.    

> That's ordinary American practice. They kill their  own citizens for the political purposes, organize provocations all over  the world etc, so don't you think they care about these nasty muslims  somewhere in the hole like Syria? Even if those muslims are not  religious fanatics? (There are a lot of Christians in Syria, by the way)  
> Are you really so naive? It shocked me.
> They want to produce kinda "evidence" that Russia supports Assad and  helps him to kill people with the help of CW. Because they think it  would take Russia out of the game, if they publish these "facts" in the  US Media. Of course, these "facts" must be obvious even for the most  stupid American lookers. 
> I hope we are watching the last burping of the stinking monster before it croaks. Amen.

 Yeah, maybe I  AM  a bit naive. I really didn't want to think they were doing things like that for real. 
I don't WANT to hate America, and I want to give it the benefit of the doubt, but it's just impossible.  
I have a particularly strong hatred for hypocrisy - I hate that, whether it's a country or a person displaying it. 
I feel I must be sick in the head or something, because lately I am revising my view and beginning to genuinely feeling that the wrong and less worthy country won the Cold War. I was taken in by all the shocking "revelations" in the 90s and assumed the USA must be the lesser of two evils, but I am beginning to think I bought into a lie on all that. The USSR was doing it's dirty business to its own citizens early in its histry,  instead of double-dealing around the world! Towards the end, it just wasn't prepared to play as hard and dirty as the game required, at home or abroad. The USA has no such scruples, clearly! The USA has more lives on its hands then the USSR had, I'd say.  
Spying on the whole world, by default as we now know for sure, and then planting false and misleading evidence to start a war! While Putin is talking about "partners" and actually seems to be making gestures of friendship towards the USA, they plan this kind of things, with Quataris.  
The email is real, 99% certain and I am sure people better than me tried to verify it, with more access as well. 
That Malaysian hacker seems like the real deal for sure.  
Go figure the Daily Mail pulled it after an hour! Probably they got a phone call from high up! Freedom of the press, huh! 
Who are we to then complain that other countries put the lid on things! Or maybe it's not censorship if it happens here! It's perhaps anti-terrorism or something...  
Daily Mail is quite conservative on most issues, but rather unexpectedly it will occassionally be extremely anti-American, to the extent you almost fall off your chair. In a sort of highbrow conservative British way that is extremely patronising and scornful. There was a similar article yesterday with regards to the USA, the Syria role and the UK.  
Such a relief that the House of Commons saw sense on this war at last! I was mortified that my tax money should be used to kill innocent people in Syria, and open the country up for globalist exploitation.  
It's a tragedy that it came to this. Apparently it was genuinely nice and safe for an Arab country, with everything from ancient ruins, cool souks and beaches. Now it's in ruins and millions have fled the country. We are expecting millions of refugees to try to make it to the EU, The Greek are mortified that they'll have a million of Syrians to take care of by international law, when their country is bankrupt.     

> The data, relayed to NATO over the last month, asserted that 70 percent
> of Syrians support the Assad regime. Another 20 percent were deemed  neutral and the remaining 10 percent expressed support for the rebels.

  I think he always had at least 50% more or less behind him. Instead of having elections, places like this have revolutions or coups.   
Meanwhile the people of Bahrain struggle on  and nobody could care less in the Western media. 
They can't have an Arab Spring because their regime is strongly west allied and and supports the US naval base there... 
(and somehow it's wrong that Russia has a tiny, tiny base in Syria while it's completely ok that the USA has a kickass base in Bahrian.

----------


## Deborski

> Those are terrifying numbers. If that's true, I honestly have no idea what else that dictator has to do to make those people "unsupport" him... (I would understand 70 percent of neutral ones vs 20/10 for the dictator and rebels respectively, but 70 percent for the dictator? Terrifying...)

 There is no way to know whether the people were ordered to support Assad, of course.  I think 70% is a little high as well.

----------


## Deborski

I just spoke with my friend from Syria and she disagrees with the Assad poll.  She thinks it was staged, like many of the pro-Assad demonstrations are.  However, she agrees with me that the Syrian people do not like the jihadists either!  The original rebel movement has, unfortunately, been taken over by terrorist factions much like the Taliban, who want to turn Syria into a religious state like Iran where women are not allowed to show their faces in public.  My friend strongly opposes any military action in Syria by the US.  In her words, it will escalate the situation and bring retaliation upon the people of Syria.  She, like me, wishes more people would just send food, medical supplies, clothing, blankets, tents and anything/everything that can help the thousands of refugees!  Fortunately, her own family and friends are safe and she herself is living in Canada.

----------


## Deborski

Syria refugee crisis: how to donate | Global development | theguardian.com 
In honor of my friend's wishes - here is an article from the Guardian UK with information on how to donate to the refugees of Syria.  The article lists several reputable organizations who are trying to help.  If you care about Syria, please give what you can.  Every bit helps!

----------


## maxmixiv

> and somehow it's wrong that Russia has a tiny, tiny base in Syria while it's completely ok that the USA has a kickass base in Bahrian

 Hanna, please forget about superpower USSR/Russia. Its influence belongs in the past (or distant future?) We are still making missiles, but that's it.
Бабло победило...

----------


## Suobig

> There is an American saying "Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me."  I imagine there is a similar поговорка in Russian. 
> This time, most of us are not fooled.  We know it's a lie.  But they are going to make the "WMD" claim anyway, even if no one believes it.

 There's an aphorism by Kozma Prutkov (you can read Wikipedia article about that "author") based on russian proverbs: "Единожды солгавши, кто тебе поверит?" ("Thou who lied once, who will believe thou after?")

----------


## Боб Уайтман

> The original rebel movement has, unfortunately, been taken over by terrorist factions much like the Taliban, who want to turn Syria into a religious state like Iran where women are not allowed to show their faces in public.

 Just a minor correction. In Iran women do not hide their faces. They are only required to wear a headscarf at least partially hiding their hair. Nevertheless, it is fashionable to leave the front part of the hair open. Many Iranian women even do plastic surgery to make their faces more beautiful. 
The country where women tend to hide their faces is Afghanistan. When Taliban was ruling, they were not allowed to show faces in public at all. Now, as far as I know, there is no legal restriction, but many women still tend to hide their faces there.

----------


## Deborski

> Just a minor correction. In Iran women do not hide their faces. They are only required to wear a headscarf at least partially hiding their hair. Nevertheless, it is fashionable to leave the front part of the hair open. Many Iranian women even do plastic surgery to make their faces more beautiful. 
> The country where women tend to hide their faces is Afghanistan. When Taliban was ruling, they were not allowed to show faces in public at all. Now, as far as I know, there is no legal restriction, but many women still tend to hide their faces there.

 Fair enough, however, depending on what brand of Islam they subscribe to, women in many Muslim countries do wear the full burkha rather than just the hijab which only covers the hair.  When I was in Syria during the 1980's, women completely covered in black burkhas were a common site even though the government at that time was secular.  But you are correct, the government of Iran does not require women to hide their faces.  Some of the more extreme factions fighting in Syria do.

----------


## Throbert McGee

> It's totally outrageous. He's talking about actions that could start a war, as if it was a stroll in the park. 
>  The guy exists, he is on LinkedIn and all

 Indeed -- someone who wanted to *fake* a "smoking gun" email between a high-level manager and the founder of this "Britam Defence" company would have an easy time finding out the two guy's names, 'cause they're publicly known and can easily be found on LinkedIn.   

> And "David Goulding" for goodness sake. I wonder what religion he might be.

 Well, don't keep us all in suspense, darling -- why don't you share with us your interesting theories about what his religion might be?  ::  
(Personally, I wonder whether he likes having sex with other guys, as 98.07% of British men do...)   

> This smells to high heaven. I can hardly believe it's for real.

 It's good that you can hardly believe it, because it's not for real -- and the only thing you smell is the stink of incompetent forgery. Apparently, someone hacked into the servers of Britam Defence, found a genuine email from Goulding to Doughty discussing "the Iranian issue", and then modified it to create the email discussing . (The most suspicious detail: the "Iran" email and the "Syria" email were both supposedly sent at exactly 23:57:18 Singapore Time, and both were received at exactly 23:57:27 London Time. I would also note the difference in tone between the "Iran" and "Syria" emails. The Iran one uses rather vague language describing "the Iranian issue" and "preparatory details" -- one would naturally expect the executives in a corporate-security firm to be pretty vague in an unencrypted email -- while the Syria message is like the villain in a movie explaining his evil-genius plan in complete detail, unaware that the hero has a tape-recorder in his jacket...) 
And, incidentally, British courts agreed back in June that the emails were fake -- resulting in a £110,000 libel suit against the _Daily Mail._  
Though I suppose it's theoretically possible that* the British courts were paid by the CIA* to declare that the email (which was actually genuine) was a fake, as part of a complicated scheme to advance the interests of the US military-industrial complex, the Freemasons, and the Rothschilds, while creating a phony pretext for the future invasion of Iran, AND making innocent Russia look bad at the same time! However, I doubt it.

----------


## Hanna

> Indeed -- someone who wanted to fake an email between a high-level manager and the founder of this "Britam Defence" company would have an easy time finding out the two guy's names, 'cause they're publicly known and can easily be found on LinkedIn.   
> Well, don't keep us all in suspense, darling -- why don't you share with us your interesting theories about what his religion might be? 
> (Personally, I wonder whether he likes having sex with other guys, as 98.07% of British men do...)  
> It's good that you can hardly believe it, because it's not for real -- and the only thing you smell is the stink of incompetent forgery. Apparently, someone hacked into the servers of Britam Defence, found a genuine email from Goulding to Doughty discussing "the Iranian issue", and then modified it to create the email discussing . (The most suspicious detail: the "Iran" email and the "Syria" email were both supposedly sent at exactly 23:57:18 Singapore Time, and both were received at exactly 23:57:27 London Time.) 
> And, incidentally, British courts agreed back in June that the emails were fake -- resulting in a £110,000 libel suit against the _Daily Mail._  
> Though I suppose it's theoretically possible that* the British courts were paid by the CIA* to declare that the email (which was actually genuine) was a fake, as part of a complicated scheme to advance the interests of the US military-industrial complex, the Freemasons, and the Rothschilds, while creating a phony pretext for the future invasion of Iran, AND making innocent Russia look bad at the same time! However, I doubt it.

 From your gleeful response I'm assuming that you can't wait to "liberate" the poor Syrians and bring them some "democracy", huh?    
.....and fake or not (haven't got the time to dig around online) Britain DOES do this type of stuff, and always has, sadly. It wouldn't be much out of character, just not something you normally see proof of. But after GCHQ, I am prepared to believe almost anything. The taste of money and power is so sweet that they spy on their own citizens and pass on the findings to a third country.  
The UK has it's good sides as a country, but extremely dirty playing is  unfortunately part of the way this country stays at the top of the pack. 
If you think you're insulting me by insulting British men, you are wasting your time. I'm neither a man, nor British and I have no particular love for it. 
I agree the timings would be suspicious. But hacking an account to pull the emails would be just how somebody would come across correspondence of that nature. The UK has some very sinister "security consultancy" firms and it certainly isn't inconceivable that someone would pull rank on a court or a judge if national security was at stake. We just don't know. 
It's not like the legal system would just thank the hacker for revealing a scandal. Just look at how Assange is treated in this country. It's got s-d all to do with the "crime" he's suspected for.

----------


## Throbert McGee

> From your spiteful response I'm assuming that you can't wait to "liberate" the poor Syrians and bring them some "democracy", huh?

 No -- I supported the Iraq War at the time because I regarded it as a "rational gamble" in the post-9/11 environment to project American military power into the Muslim Arab world (to remind them that we COULD, and to show that we weren't deaf when Middle Easterners complained about our historic willingness to tolerate and prop up dictatorial regimes in the name of stability, and for other reasons).  
I now admit that we disastrously underestimated the degree to which Saddam's oppression of Iraq had been a stabilizing force that PREVENTED a lot of deaths as a result of ethnic/religious conflict among Iraqis, and that we should not repeat this mistake by attacking Syria.

----------


## Deborski

My husband has a theory that Obama is actually playing a complex game of "chess" and orchestrating the vote with Congress so that the air strike initiative will fail.  He says that Obama is only trying to appear "strong" but that in reality the president has no intention of attacking Syria.   
Personally, I hope he's right.  But the cynical side of me thinks that US military action in Syria is inevitable, given our track record in the Middle East. 
By the way, I did not support the war with Iraq, but I did support the war with Afghanistan (post 9/11) because I thought it would be a "limited engagement," that we would get Osama Bin Laden and then get out of there.  Ten years later Osama was still breathing and the Taliban was as strong as ever, while untold thousands of innocent people were dead.   
So now, I regret that we invaded Afghanistan and I do not believe that engaging Syria will be a stroll in the park as some people are suggesting, and I detest words like "humanitarian intervention,"  "punitive measures,"  "sending Assad a message" or "surgical strike."  Many experts and military brass even say that if we invade Syria it will turn into a prolonged engagement, that it will only further destabilize the region and that no one will gain from it except those who make their profits from feeding the war machine.

----------


## Throbert McGee

> If you think you're insulting me by insulting British men, you are wasting your time.

 (1) Even if I *really* believed -- which I don't! -- that 98.07% of British men enjoy having sex with other men, I would hope it should be rather obvious  by now that I don't personally consider it insulting to suggest that a person is homosexual -- for the same reason that you wouldn't consider it insulting if I said that 98.07% of British men are secretly Swedish.  
(2) In any case, it was a joke -- the point being that to make guesses about a man's religion because his name is "David Goulding" is as ridiculous as making guesses about a man's sexual orientation because he's British.  
PS Of course, there ARE names -- or forms of names -- that are particularly associated with one religion or another -- a Christian boy is unlikely to be named "Shlomo", a Jewish boy is unlikely to be named "Christopher", and neither of these boys is likely to be named "Muhammad"! _However, neither "David" nor "Goulding" happens to be one of those names that are strongly linked to a particular faith, at least in English._

----------


## Deborski

> (1) Even if I *really* believed -- which I don't! -- that 98.07% of British men enjoy having sex with other men, I would hope it should be rather obvious  by now that I don't personally consider it insulting to suggest that a person is homosexual -- for the same reason that you wouldn't consider it insulting if I said that 98.07% of British men are secretly Swedish.  
> (2) In any case, it was a joke -- the point being that to make guesses about a man's religion because his name is "David Goulding" is as ridiculous as making guesses about a man's sexual orientation because he's British.  
> PS Of course, there ARE names -- or forms of names -- that are particularly associated with one religion or another -- a Christian boy is unlikely to be named "Shlomo", a Jewish boy is unlikely to be named "Christopher", and neither of these boys is likely to be named "Muhammad"! _However, neither "David" nor "Goulding" happens to be one of those names that are strongly linked to a particular faith, at least in English._

 My last name is Armstrong.  Unfortunately, it doesn't mean I get to be an astronaut or an Olympic skier either ))))) 
That said, I can't count the times people have asked me if I'm related......  ::

----------


## Deborski

Raytheon Company Common Stock Stock Chart | RTN Interactive Chart - Yahoo! Finance 
Speaking of the profits to be gained from military involvement, Raytheon stock is already up by almost 20% - and that is just from the *threat* of war.  Raytheon, as some of you probably know, manufactures Tomahawk missiles.  Once an airstrike is formally announced, you can expect to see stocks go through the roof. I'm sure investors are already wetting their pants in anticipation.  Syria strike could bring Raytheon payday - Austin Wright - POLITICO.com  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3836276.html

----------


## Deborski

Kerry Admits Possibility of 'Boots on the Ground' in Syria | Common Dreams 
Kerry Admits Possibility of 'Boots on the Ground' in Syria:   

> Asked by Senate Robert Menendez (D-NJ) whether or not language should be inserted in a congressional authorization for an attack on Syria that would prohibit 'U.S. boots on the ground,' U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that would not be good idea. Kerry stammered, and then declared—"in the event Syria imploded, for instance"—that he wouldn't want to take that option "off the table" by inserting such a clause. 
> The exchange occurred as Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, and Chairman of the Joints Chief of Staff Adm. Martin Dempsey delivered testimony about the Obama administration's push for military action—also known as war—against Syria before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday. 
> In a follow-up question on the issue, Kerry said he wanted to "shut the door" on the impression left by his previous answer regarding boots on the ground.

----------


## UhOhXplode

When Kerry said "shut the door", what he means is "don't let anyone know what we're planning". Kerry, McCain, and Obama wanna creep into Syria with a "limited" strike, then escalate it into a "boots on ground" war.
It's easier to get Americans to agree to a "surgical" strike... then they can create a new story to get Americans to agree to a war.
Bullies at school use that same strategy.

----------


## Deborski

Why I think President Obama doesn't really want to attack Syria   

> By seeking Congressional approval, and forcefully making the case for intervention, President Obama is goading Congressional Republicans into giving him an excuse to keep American cruise missiles out of Syria and avoid provoking a skittish Iran. And in deferring to the legislature, President Obama will ensure that future presidents will be expected to consult Congress before embarking on unilateral military excursions, and suffer the political consequences for failing to do so.

 This writer takes the same view as my husband and a few other people I have spoken with lately, who believe that Obama is actually playing a master game of chess with Congress and secretly has no intention of military involvement in Syria.   
Personally, I hope he's right, but given America's track record as well as Obama's and John Kerry's constant hammering of their invasion agenda, I am inclined to doubt it.

----------


## Doomer

> This writer takes the same view as my husband and a few other people I have spoken with lately, who believe that Obama is actually playing a master game of chess with Congress and secretly has no intention of military involvement in Syria.

 Let's hope the "endspiel" wouldn't be the same as for Libya or Iraq, which were already "democratized" 
I don't know if the writer is comfortable with his head buried in the sand but I guess everybody should have an opinion, might as well be this opinion. I disagree on the writer's view though

----------


## Юрка

Вчера смотрел по российскому телевидению кусок прямой трансляции из Конгресса США. Речь шла о войне США против Сирии. 
Мои впечатления такие:  
1. Как же они зомбируют своих конгрессменов! Сплошные фразы о том, что они "сегодня должны принять решение" и всё. Никакого рассмотрения по существу, никаких деталей, никакого включения мозга и попытки мыслить. Это больше похоже на сеанс коллективного зомбирования, а не на работу. 
2. Ораторское искусство Обамы и прочих совершенно одинаково: они как бы пытаются сплотить аудиторию, объединить её вокруг какой-то идеи. Для этого смотрят то направо, то налево. Причём, держат при этом каждый раз паузу. И кто-то на заднем плане начинает кивать головой. Ну, ребята, у вас там всё очень запущенно.  ::  
3. Америка вообще понимает, что национальные интересы и мораль - это разные вещи, иногда прямо противоположные? Такое ощущение, что американские домохозяйки готовы замочить кого угодно, если им от этого будет безопаснее и комфортнее жить. Вообще, Америка показывает нам, что демократия может быть очень кровожадной, ведь она учитывает только интересы человека, а они низменны. Если человек глуп, жаден, ленив, труслив, завистлив, а мы учтём его интересы, то мы должны будем поубивать миллионы вокруг, чтобы этот человек мог продолжать вести привычный образ жизни. Обама, похоже, раб этих тупых обывателей. И не важно, что он там в глубине души сам думает. Он повторяет то, что хочет слышать обыватель: "наземной операции не будет, у нас не будет жертв, но мы покажем, кто хозяин в доме". Вот и всё его отличие от Буша - он лучше чувствует интересы домохозяек, которые чего-то боятся.

----------


## Боб Уайтман

> My last name is Armstrong. Unfortunately, it doesn't mean I get to be an astronaut or an Olympic skier either ))))) 
> That said, I can't count the times people have asked me if I'm related......

 A great surname! But why did you not mention the jazz singer? He is definitely more famous than the Olympic skier. At least in Russia  ::  
I knew two Armstrongs until now: the astronaut and the musician. Now I know four  ::

----------


## Боб Уайтман

> 3. Америка вообще понимает, что национальные интересы и мораль - это разные вещи, иногда прямо противоположные? Такое ощущение, что американские домохозяйки готовы замочить кого угодно, если им от этого будет безопаснее и комфортнее жить. Вообще, Америка показывает нам, что демократия может быть очень кровожадной, ведь она учитывает только интересы человка, а они низменны. Если человек глуп, жаден, ленив, труслив, завистлив, а мы учтём его интересы, то мы должны будем поубивать миллионы вокруг, чтобы этот человек мог продолжать вести привычный образ жизни. Обама, похоже, раб этих тупых обывателей. И не важно, что он там в глубине души сам думает. Он повторяет то, что хочет слышать обыватель: "наземной операции не будет, у нас не будет жертв, но мы покажем, кто хозяин в доме". Вот и всё его отличие от Буша - он лучше чувствует интересы домохозяек, которые чего-то боятся.

 This is one of the problems of democracy. The very idea of democracy has its own weak sides: the will of majority is not always the best choice.
We can see this issue well illustrated by the recent events in Egypt: the majority there has poor education, and they belong to the lowest social class. That majority is easily affected by the ideas of the radical islam. They easily believe in everything muslim brotherhood leaders say. There is another part of the population, well educated, who do not want to live under the Sharia law. But after Mubarrak was displaced in 2011, the majority voted for the Muslim Brotherhood. And it was truly democratic (according to the definition of democracy as we know it), no sarcasm here! It WAS democratic. But now we all can observe the consequences of that approach.

----------


## Lampada

> Вчера смотрел по российскому телевидению кусок прямой трансляции из Конгресса США. Речь шла о войне США против Сирии. 
> Мои впечатления такие:  
> 1. Как же они зомбируют своих конгрессменов! Сплошные фразы о том, что они "сегодня должны принять решение" и всё. Никакого рассмотрения по существу, никаких деталей, никакого включения мозга и попытки мыслить. Это больше похоже на сеанс коллективного зомбирования, а не на работу. 
> 2. Ораторское искусство Обамы и прочих совершенно одинаково: они как бы пытаются сплотить аудиторию, объединить её вокруг какой-то идеи. Для этого смотрят то направо, то налево. Причём, держат при этом каждый раз паузу. И кто-то на заднем плане начинает кивать головой. Ну, ребята, у вас там всё очень запущено.  
> 3. Америка вообще понимает, что национальные интересы и мораль - это разные вещи, иногда прямо противоположные? Такое ощущение, что американские домохозяйки готовы замочить кого угодно, если им от этого будет безопаснее и комфортнее жить. Вообще, Америка показывает нам, что демократия может быть очень кровожадной, ведь она учитывает только интересы человека, а они низменны. Если человек глуп, жаден, ленив, труслив, завистлив, а мы учтём его интересы, то мы должны будем поубивать миллионы вокруг, чтобы этот человек мог продолжать вести привычный образ жизни. Обама, похоже, раб этих тупых обывателей. И не важно, что он там в глубине души сам думает. Он повторяет то, что хочет слышать обыватель: "наземной операции не будет, у нас не будет жертв, но мы покажем, кто хозяин в доме". Вот и всё его отличие от Буша - он лучше чувствует интересы домохозяек, которые чего-то боятся.

 Пустая болтовня, демагогия. "мыслью по древу". Опять по логике: я так разложил - это теперь будет чистой правдой. ::

----------


## UhOhXplode

> Вчера смотрел по российскому телевидению кусок прямой трансляции из Конгресса США. Речь шла о войне США против Сирии. 
> Мои впечатления такие:  
> 1. Как же они зомбируют своих конгрессменов! Сплошные фразы о том, что они "сегодня должны принять решение" и всё. Никакого рассмотрения по существу, никаких деталей, никакого включения мозга и попытки мыслить. Это больше похоже на сеанс коллективного зомбирования, а не на работу. 
> 2. Ораторское искусство Обамы и прочих совершенно одинаково: они как бы пытаются сплотить аудиторию, объединить её вокруг какой-то идеи. Для этого смотрят то направо, то налево. Причём, держат при этом каждый раз паузу. И кто-то на заднем плане начинает кивать головой. Ну, ребята, у вас там всё очень запущено.  
> 3. Америка вообще понимает, что национальные интересы и мораль - это разные вещи, иногда прямо противоположные? Такое ощущение, что американские домохозяйки готовы замочить кого угодно, если им от этого будет безопаснее и комфортнее жить. Вообще, Америка показывает нам, что демократия может быть очень кровожадной, ведь она учитывает только интересы человека, а они низменны. Если человек глуп, жаден, ленив, труслив, завистлив, а мы учтём его интересы, то мы должны будем поубивать миллионы вокруг, чтобы этот человек мог продолжать вести привычный образ жизни. Обама, похоже, раб этих тупых обывателей. И не важно, что он там в глубине души сам думает. Он повторяет то, что хочет слышать обыватель: "наземной операции не будет, у нас не будет жертв, но мы покажем, кто хозяин в доме". Вот и всё его отличие от Буша - он лучше чувствует интересы домохозяек, которые чего-то боятся.

 Props for that! That's the best description of Congress I've ever read. They only believe what they wanna believe - then they pass laws and make wars. 
About Obama's "master game of chess with Congress": I don't believe that. I think the only reason he decided to wait for a decision from Congress was because he wants to look better at the G20 summit. He doesn't want the other countries to think he's a warmonger. Well, at least until the summit is over. It's all about economics and politics and posturing.

----------


## Doomer

> A great surname! But why did you not mention the jazz singer? He is definitely more famous than the Olympic skier. At least in Russia  
> I knew two Armstrongs until now: the astronaut and the musician. Now I know four

 I doubt that anybody would ask Deborah about her relation to a black guy

----------


## 14Russian

> Let's hope the "endspiel" wouldn't be the same as for Libya or Iraq, which were already "democratized" 
> I don't know if the writer is comfortable with his head buried in the sand but I guess everybody should have an opinion, might as well be this opinion. I disagree on the writer's view though

 There's no shortage of idiotic writers.   Political Science major or not, anyone who thinks that Obomber actually *doesn't want to* does have their head in the sand.   Obomber is a puppet and if these things take a little time, then so be it.   Everyone is a fool if they think that because he's "asking" for input from Congress means he is following the rule of law or is somehow being ethical in any way.   They should look up all the Constitutional violations and the NDAA.   There's people putting up 'Impeach Obama' banners all over the U.S.   This thing with Syria has already been building long ago.   Obomber should have way more criticism than he does now and it's a shame so many Americans have their heads in the sand.   It's just sad...

----------


## Eric C.

> 3. Америка вообще понимает, что национальные интересы и мораль - это разные вещи, иногда прямо противоположные? Такое ощущение, что американские домохозяйки готовы замочить кого угодно, если им от этого будет безопаснее и комфортнее жить. Вообще, Америка показывает нам, что демократия может быть очень кровожадной, ведь она учитывает только интересы человека, а они низменны. Если человек глуп, жаден, ленив, труслив, завистлив, а мы учтём его интересы, то мы должны будем поубивать миллионы вокруг, чтобы этот человек мог продолжать вести привычный образ жизни.

 Самое интересное, это написано *человеком*. Если вы говорите что интересы человека учитывать глупо, а при этом вы человек, значит вашу позицию можно проигнорировать, вы согласны? =)

----------


## Deborski

> A great surname! But why did you not mention the jazz singer? He is definitely more famous than the Olympic skier. At least in Russia  
> I knew two Armstrongs until now: the astronaut and the musician. Now I know four

 Well, it would be a great honor if anyone thought I was related to Louis Armstrong, but since I am white, people rarely make that connection )))

----------


## Deborski

Ann Wright, retired US Army Colonel and former US Diplomat, writes:   

> Its 4am and I can’t sleep, just like 10 years ago when President Bush was telling the world that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and the United States must invade and occupy Iraq to rid humanity of these weapons. I didn’t believe President Bush ten years ago and I resigned as a U.S. diplomat. 
> Now a decade later, President Obama is telling the world that the use of chemical weapons in Syria by the Assad government must be answered by other weapons, even though the results of the UN inspection team have not been compiled—just as the Bush administration refused to wait for the UN report by the inspectors who had been looking for WMD in Iraq.

 https://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/08/31-3

----------


## Deborski

Putin: Russia might let U.N. OK strike against Syria - CBS News 
Surprising statement from Putin:   

> President Vladimir Putin warned the West against taking one-sided action in Syria but also said *Russia "doesn't exclude" supporting a U.N. resolution on punitive military strikes if it is proven that Damascus used poison gas on its own people.* 
> In a wide-ranging interview with The Associated Press and Russia's state Channel 1 television, Putin said Moscow has provided some components of the S-300 air defense missile system to Syria but has frozen further shipments. He suggested that Russia may sell the potent missile systems elsewhere if Western nations attack Syria without U.N. Security Council backing.

----------


## UhOhXplode

I'm not surprised that President Putin would support a UN resolution for strikes if there's proof that Assad used the chemicals. Russia's a legit country that respects International laws.
Now I needa find a hammer so I can smash my Bloodhound Gang CD and toss it in the trash. I'll never listen to that band again.

----------


## Deborski

Jon Stewart is Back: Lampoons Syrian Red Line, Ridicules Cable News Idiots | Alternet 
American humorist Jon Stewart weighs in on the crisis in Syria, says "the red line they crossed is actually a d*ck-measuring ribbon."      

> "100,000 Syrians have already been killed," he said. "So why now? The red line is apparently: You can't use chemicals to kill your own people. You have to do it organically."  
> Still more: "We have to bomb Syria because we are in 7th grade. The red-line that they crossed is actually a dick-measuring ribbon. The only way to keep America's penis from looking small is to conduct a limited operation deisgned to fail. We'll call it Operation Just the Tip." 
> While Stewart is clearly not impressed with the Administration's thinking on Syria, he reserved some of his sharpest humor for the "parade of idiots" that cable news calls experts who have been trotted out on cable news, the same cabal that got everything wrong on Iraq.

----------


## Боб Уайтман

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».

----------


## Deborski

> Ъ-Новости - Христианская деревня атакована боевиками в Сирии

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

----------


## Deborski

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

----------


## Юрка

> Самое интересное, это написано *человеком*. Если вы говорите что интересы человека учитывать глупо, а при этом вы человек, значит вашу позицию можно проигнорировать, вы согласны? =)

 А что если мои слова продиктованы не интересами, а чем-то другим?  ::  
Вообще, прикольно слушать американцев. Даже противники войны против Сирии ссылаются на интересы США. Мол, это дорого, не эффективно и т.д. Но не говорят, что это несправедливо, бесчеловечно, жестоко и т.д.

----------


## 14Russian

> I'm not surprised that President Putin would support a UN resolution for strikes if there's proof that Assad used the chemicals. Russia's a legit country that respects International laws.
> Now I needa find a hammer so I can smash my Bloodhound Gang CD and toss it in the trash. I'll never listen to that band again.

 But, you already liked them enough to listen to them the first time.   Hey, I like the Pearl Harbour Meme.... good one.

----------


## UhOhXplode

> А что если мои слова продиктованы не интересами, а чем-то другим?  
> Вообще, прикольно слушать американцев. Даже противники войны против Сирии ссылаются на интересы США. Мол, это дорого, не эффективно и т.д. Но не говорят, что это несправедливо, бесчеловечно, жестоко и т.д.

 Yeah, nobody's suppose to think about all the suffering. They think it's a game but it's not. It's destroying peoples' lives.   

> But, you already liked them enough to listen to them the first time.   Hey, I like the Pearl Harbour Meme.... good one.

 No, dad liked them enough to buy me the CD. They were never one of my favorite bands but the music was okay. Even the Russians that went to the concert liked them till they desecrated the flag. Then they stopped liking them and so did I. 
And yean, imo, a "surgical strike" is an Act of War. Also we would be attacking a country that didn't attack us and that's just wrong on so many levels! 
What's even worse is that we would be fighting for Al-Qaeda and that's treason! A lot of US soldiers are saying they won't do that. 
EDIT. Something interesting to add. President Putin calling Kerry a liar. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-...liar-on-syria/

----------


## Doomer

> Surprising statement from Putin:

 It is surprising because it's not true  :: 
I watched the interview yesterday, he didn't say "Russia "doesn't exclude" supporting a U.N. resolution on punitive military strikes if it is proven that Damascus used poison gas on its own people."
He said "Если у нас будут объективные точные данные о том, кто совершил эти преступления, тогда будет и реакция. Сейчас предполагать и заранее сказать: да, мы будем делать то или это, было бы абсолютно некорректным. В политике так не поступают. Но я вас уверяю, что мы займем принципиальную позицию." Эксклюзивное интервью Владимира Путина - о Сирии, США и событиях в  watch 1:08  
It's would be similar to say "President Obama doesn't exclude supporting nuclear strike against China". He didn't say that he supports it nor he said that he doesn't, so it would be "safe to assume" that he "doesn't exclude it". It's sad that this kind of twisted logic propagandized by such big guys as CBS

----------


## 14Russian

> Yeah, nobody's suppose to think about all the suffering. They think it's a game but it's not. It's destroying peoples' lives. 
> No, dad liked them enough to buy me the CD. They were never one of my favorite bands but the music was okay. Even the Russians that went to the concert liked them till they desecrated the flag. Then they stopped liking them and so did I. 
> And yean, imo, a "surgical strike" is an Act of War. Also we would be attacking a country that didn't attack us and that's just wrong on so many levels! 
> What's even worse is that we would be fighting for Al-Qaeda and that's treason! A lot of US soldiers are saying they won't do that. 
> EDIT. Something interesting to add. President Putin calling Kerry a liar. Putin calls Kerry a liar on Syria - CBS News

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

----------


## Deborski

> It is surprising because it's not true 
> I watched the interview yesterday, he didn't say "Russia "doesn't exclude" supporting a U.N. resolution on punitive military strikes if it is proven that Damascus used poison gas on its own people."
> He said "Если у нас будут объективные точные данные о том, кто совершил эти преступления, тогда будет и реакция. Сейчас предполагать и заранее сказать: да, мы будем делать то или это, было бы абсолютно некорректным. В политике так не поступают. Но я вас уверяю, что мы займем принципиальную позицию." Эксклюзивное интервью Владимира Путина - о Сирии, США и событиях в  watch 1:08  
> It's would be similar to say "President Obama doesn't exclude supporting nuclear strike against China". He didn't say that he supports it nor he said that he doesn't, so it would be "safe to assume" that he "doesn't exclude it". It's sad that this kind of twisted logic propagandized by such big guys as CBS

 I watched the entire interview on RT, and although it was dubbed-over in English, I doubt RT would twist Putin's words.    
At 2:30 he clearly states that he will not rule out supporting a US strike against Syria
At 3:40 he states that Russia firmly believes that use of chemical weapons is a war crime and that Russia will take a "compelling stance" (should there be *solid proof* of Assad's guilt)
6:00 if detailed evidence is provided of Assad's guilt, Russia "will take decisive and serious action" (he does not detail specifically what action) 
He also turns the question back on the American journalist, asking what America would do if it turns out that the insurgents were responsible for releasing the chemical weapons.

----------


## UhOhXplode

> 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.  ::    

> 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.

----------


## Deborski

> 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.

----------


## Throbert McGee

> Now I needa find a hammer so I can smash my Bloodhound Gang CD and toss it in the trash. I'll never listen to that band again.

 Huh? Why? _
[Google-googlity-googling...]_ 
Oh, I see! 
Well, the Ukrainian audience seemed to like the gesture... but I can see why Russians were upset!

----------


## UhOhXplode

> 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.

 Oh. Well I know Obama never did any military service and neither did Bush (except stateside). List of Presidents of the United States by military service - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
But I still don't get why anyone would sign up for the milirary if they were anti-war. Btw, I'm not anti-war but I am anti-this-war.   

> Huh? Why? _
> [Google-googlity-googling...]_ 
> Oh, I see! 
> Well, the Ukrainian audience seemed to like the gesture... but I can see why Russians were upset!

 Chirping's never cool and especially against other countries. 
Anyway, Brokencyde's 1st album and the Midnight Beast trump Bloodhound Gang!  ::  And they sound really lame compared to the World Alive, Sum 41, Psyko Punkz, Avenged 7x, and tons more bands. Even Cage the Elephant trumps Bloodhound Gang so no huge loss! If I wanna hear that style of music, I'll listen to 5 Finger Death Punch or Hollywood Undead.  :: 
I think the only bands worse than Bloodhound gang were White Stripes and Nickelback.

----------


## Doomer

> Well, the Ukrainian audience seemed to like the gesture... but I can see why Russians were upset!

 Well, their loss anyway. They got their rotten eggs and tomatoes for what they did. 
It is sad though because they and their supporters think that they are heroes but in reality they are just mediocre and foolish copycats.

----------


## Deborski

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*!

----------


## Eric C.

> 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?  ::

----------


## Hanna

> 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.

----------


## Deborski

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.

----------


## Deborski

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.

----------


## 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.

----------


## Deborski

> 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.

----------


## Hanna

> 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.

----------


## Eric C.

> 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.

----------


## Deborski

> 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.

----------


## Deborski

> 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?

----------


## Eric C.

> 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...

----------


## 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. (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?

----------


## Eric C.

> 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.

----------


## Deborski

> 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.

 And I for one believe that we can defeat terrorism without attacking.  Period.  We have not even begun to exhaust all other diplomatic means.   
This Syrian woman summed it up nicely when she bravely stood up to Senator John McCain the other day.  McCain, of course, only voted against Obama's air-strike because McCain thinks an air-strike would not be enough military intervention.  He favors a full-on, troops on the ground, military conflict which could go on for years (and provide plenty of money for him and his friends who invest in Raytheon and other military stocks).

----------


## Eric C.

> And I for one believe that we can defeat terrorism without attacking.  Period.  We have not even begun to exhaust all other diplomatic means.   
> This Syrian woman summed it up nicely when she bravely stood up to Senator John McCain the other day.  McCain, of course, only voted against Obama's air-strike because McCain thinks an air-strike would not be enough military intervention.  He favors a full-on, troops on the ground, military conflict which could go on for years (and provide plenty of money for him and his friends who invest in Raytheon and other military stocks).

 She wants both sides to stop being supported by Saudi Arabia/Iran; I can imagine how the congress could get SA to stop supporting the rebels, but do you think it will be that easy with Iran? It will just become a one side street with all the dictatorships in the region supporting Assad, and of course he'll win and re-run his oppressive system one more time. By the way, this conflict might give him excuses to go after his opponents among the civilians in even harsher ways, and a lot of people might suffer just for what they think. Is that what you'd want?

----------


## Deborski

> She wants both sides to stop being supported by Saudi Arabia/Iran; I can imagine how the congress could get SA to stop supporting the rebels, but do you think it will be that easy with Iran? It will just become a one side street with all the dictatorships in the region supporting Assad, and of course he'll win and re-run his oppressive system one more time. By the way, this conflict might give him excuses to go after his opponents among the civilians in even harsher ways, and a lot of people might suffer just for what they think. Is that what you'd want?

 You are making so many assumptions here that I cannot keep track!  For starters, you are assuming that the US actually has proof of Assad's guilt, which there is no way to know since all of that intelligence is so "classified" that even our representatives are not allowed to see it.  Please refer to the article by Congressman Alan Grayson above.  As for Iran, Russia still has quite a lot of influence in that country.  Why do you assume that only the US wants to achieve peace?  A united international effort would go much, much further towards resolving the situation and reining in both sides, than just America swaggering in like a cowboy with his gun drawn and making a bunch of threats.  As for what I want?  You assume a lot about that as well, which makes me wonder as to who it is not really reading the posts here.  What makes you think that a US strike against Syria will not result in exactly what you describe:  further retaliation against the people of Syria.  That is what my Syrian friend's concerns are, in fact, and that is why she is strongly opposed to US military intervention.  Since it is *her family actually living over there*, I respect her opinion and I do not take it lightly! 
I do not, and never will, understand the kind of mindset which thinks that ONLY MILITARY ACTION can be the solution!  There are a million other things we could try - but you do not even consider those things, you are just stuck on this mindset that the response MUST BE MILITARY.  It's impossible to reason with someone who is so closed minded that they cannot even imagine any alternatives to military force.

----------


## Eric C.

> You are making so many assumptions here that I cannot keep track!  For starters, you are assuming that the US actually has proof of Assad's guilt, which there is no way to know since all of that intelligence is so "classified" that even our representatives are not allowed to see it.  Please refer to the article by Congressman Alan Grayson above.  As for Iran, Russia still has quite a lot of influence in that country.  Why do you assume that only the US wants to achieve peace?  A united international effort would go much, much further towards resolving the situation and reining in both sides, than just America swaggering in like a cowboy with his gun drawn and making a bunch of threats.  As for what I want?  You assume a lot about that as well, which makes me wonder as to who it is not really reading the posts here.  What makes you think that a US strike against Syria will not result in exactly what you describe:  further retaliation against the people of Syria.  That is what my Syrian friend's concerns are, in fact, and that is why she is strongly opposed to US military intervention.  Since it is *her family actually living over there*, I respect her opinion and I do not take it lightly! 
> I do not, and never will, understand the kind of mindset which thinks that ONLY MILITARY ACTION can be the solution!  There are a million other things we could try - but you do not even consider those things, you are just stuck on this mindset that the response MUST BE MILITARY.  It's impossible to reason with someone who is so closed minded that they cannot even imagine any alternatives to military force.

 I do know there may be quite a few solutions to that situation, and I don't support the idea of a military strike for the sake of a military strike; what I was doing was examining one of those possible solutions, not saying there's nothing but a military strike.

----------


## Paul G.

> someone here thinks that stopping jihadists should always take bloody style scummy totalitarian regimes like that in Syria?

 I think you twist the things. First of all, Assad's regime is not bloody. I even can say Saddam Husein was not that scummy and bloody like the western media portrays him. Of course, if you keep on staying on the brainwashed side, it's ok. 
I believe that all the societies must evolve by themselves. Syria is not a democratic state, but any modern dictator is closer to democracy than cannibals. It's obvious. Yes, Assad is better than the cannibals. Anyone who says "it doesn't matter" and "both are equal" is supporting the evil in its metaphysical sense.
(Deleted. L.)

----------


## Deborski

Syria chemical weapons attack not ordered by Assad, says German press | World news | The Guardian 
Meanwhile, German intelligence suggests that Assad is *not guilty* for the chemical attack:   

> President Bashar al-Assad did not personally order last month's chemical weapons attack near Damascus that has triggered calls for US military intervention, and blocked numerous requests from his military commanders to use chemical weapons against regime opponents in recent months, a German newspaper has reported , citing unidentified, high-level national security sources. 
> The intelligence findings were based on phone calls intercepted by a German surveillance ship operated by the BND, the German intelligence service, and deployed off the Syrian coast, Bild am Sonntag said. The intercepted communications suggested Assad, who is accused of war crimes by the west, including foreign secretary William Hague, was not himself involved in last month's attack or in other instances when government forces have allegedly used chemical weapons.

----------


## Hanna

It's not any of our business what happens there. 
It's between the Syrians and their government!  
Just like what goes on in the USA (within its borders) is not my business, it's between the Americans and their government.  
It's when countries get aggressive and starts meddling, disturbing, invaduing or provoking other countries that there is a problem. Syria was minding its own business. If they wanted to get rid of their government they should do it themselves, off their own initiative. Just like the French, the Russians, the Americans and many others have thrown out corrupt goverments when they got enough. Without the involvement of anybody else. 
Why should the Syrians not have the same opportunity and responsibility?

----------


## Paul G.

> It's not any of our business what happens there. 
> It's between the Syrians and their government!

 How can't it be your business, if thousands of the mercenaries fight against the Syrian Government? These mercenaries were hired with the help of the US and their "partners" like the UAE, Qatar etc. 
They are NOT Syrians. It's a genetic trash from all the muslim world. You can find some soldiers even from Russia there (from the Caucasus, of course).

----------


## Eric C.

> How can't it be your business, if thousands of the mercenaries fight against the Syrian Government?

 That's genius  ::  If it was THAT simple, I could only suggest they keep fighting until they annihilate each other xD Unfortunately, it's not even close to being that way...

----------


## Hanna

> How can't it be your business, if thousands of the mercenaries fight against the Syrian Government? These mercenaries were hired with the help of the US and their "partners" like the UAE, Qatar etc. 
> They are NOT Syrians. It's a genetic trash from all the muslim world. You can find some soldiers even from Russia there (from the Caucasus, of course).

 Yeah, these mercenaries should not have been sent there to start with, and the campaign to blackpaint Assad in Western media was wrong.
They should have been left to sort out their differences from Day 1.

----------


## UhOhXplode

> And I for one believe that we can defeat terrorism without attacking.  Period.  We have not even begun to exhaust all other diplomatic means.   
> This Syrian woman summed it up nicely when she bravely stood up to Senator John McCain the other day.  McCain, of course, only voted against Obama's air-strike because McCain thinks an air-strike would not be enough military intervention.  He favors a full-on, troops on the ground, military conflict which could go on for years (and provide plenty of money for him and his friends who invest in Raytheon and other military stocks).

 So, McCain went to Syria. A dude with $40 million dollars who probably owns his own Learjet. He looks really healthy for somebody who's been to Syria. Did he have military bodyguards or did he just stay away from the war zones?
Does that mean that if I visit Russia, have dinner at Cafe Pushkin with some opposition members, and talk to the waiter, that I know everything about Russia and I can decide about Russia's future? LOL!
If I lived in Russia for a whole year, I probably still wouldn't know enough to even vote. But McCain thinks he knows everything after 1 trip. 
I've seen more of those vids of that meeting. McCain never listens to anybody. He just keeps saying he's right and ignores everybody else. Even the Syrian people!
What that meeting proved is that McCain doesn't care what anyone thinks, period. He was only there to push his agenda.
If there is a strike, it will be an act of aggression and the Syrians will have a reason to hate America. Also, President Putin said he will provide Syria with a missile shield and replace anything that's lost in the strike.
So maybe the Obama administration just wants to kill more people cuz that's all that a strike will do.

----------


## Deborski

> So, McCain went to Syria. A dude with $40 million dollars who probably owns his own Learjet. He looks really healthy for somebody who's been to Syria. Did he have military bodyguards or did he just stay away from the war zones?
> Does that mean that if I visit Russia, have dinner at Cafe Pushkin with some opposition members, and talk to the waiter, that I know everything about Russia and I can decide about Russia's future? LOL!
> If I lived in Russia for a whole year, I probably still wouldn't know enough to even vote. But McCain thinks he knows everything after 1 trip.

 I lived in Russia two years and still would not even dare to claim I know everything about it!  To really understand a country, you have to live there your whole life.  And even then... well, America can still baffle me!

----------


## Deborski

So why isn't everyone up in arms and ready to bomb some people over THIS?  2,000 female genital mutilation victims seek help at London hospitals in just 3 years | Mail Online   

> More than 2,100 victims of female genital mutilation have been treated in London hospitals since 2010, it emerged today. 
> Almost 300 women needed surgery to help them recover from the brutal ritual, new figures have revealed. 
> Among those treated in the capital's hospitals included 12 children, including one girl who had been left with an 'open wound' following the criminal act. 
> Despite being illegal in the UK, female genital mutilation is on the rise with an estimated 66,000 women dealing with the after-effects and more than 20,000 young girls thought to be at risk. 
> The procedure is associated with communities in Africa, particularly Mali, Somalia, Sudan and Kenya, as well as some parts of the Middle East.

  

> Nimko Ali was just seven years old when she was taken to Somalia for a 'holiday' where she would be subjected to the horrific procedure. 
> 'There was a woman at the door in a burka. I was scared and instinctively started running. When I was caught, I was taken into a room filled with instruments I didn't recognise,' she said. 
> 'The woman I was so afraid of was there waiting for me. She scolded me for running away, telling me how difficult it was to obtain equipment like this; how ungrateful I was. 
> 'I blacked out before she started cutting. I'm still not sure whether it was the anaesthetic or pure fear'. 
> When Ali woke, she was in agony with her legs bound together. Taken back to the Uk two days later, Ali found that friends and teachers were unwilling to take her story seriously, leaving her feeling let down and alone.

 Thousands upon thousands of little girls are cruelly sliced with rusty blades by twisted and perverted religious fanatics... yet there is no huge outcry and no one screaming that we must STOP THIS at all costs, even if that means sparking off a global conflict.  No one is pushing for airstrikes against Mali, Somalia, Sudan and Kenya or the other countries where the governments ALLOW and even CONDONE this! 
This outrage over the atrocities in Syria is understandable, but it is hypocritical when people are not equally outraged over all the atrocities which occur every day on this sad little planet of ours.   
Obviously bombing the countries which allow this unspeakable act to go on, is out of the question.  Why?  Because it's their country, and we figure that it's their business how they run things, as sick and horrific as it may be.  So what is so special about Syria, that suddenly we care about women and children suffering? 
Power.  Control.  Money to be made.  It always comes down to that.  To believe that a US bombing raid on Syria is in any way humanitarian, is not only naive, but hypocritical.

----------


## Юрка

> 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.

----------


## Deborski

Syria 'welcomes' proposal to hand over control of chemical weapons - CNN.com 
Has a diplomatic solution finally been found?     

> Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem told reporters in Moscow that his nation "welcomes" a proposal Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov made during talks Monday morning: put Syria's chemical weapons under international control to avert a U.S. military response. 
> "I declare that the Syrian Arab Republic welcomes Russia's initiative, on the basis that the Syrian leadership cares about the lives of our citizens and the security in our country," Moallem said. "We are also confident in the wisdom of the Russian government, which is trying to prevent an American aggression against our people." 
> The comments came after Secretary of State John Kerry discussed a similar scenario, but a State Department spokeswoman said earlier Monday that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad could not be trusted to hand over the country's chemical weapons stockpile.

 Comments??

----------


## Doomer

I think the US officials would try to resist this option as much as the can but if the UN accepts it, it might be a way to resolve the situation for now. 
However if the UN agrees, other CW attacks in Syria might happen to stir up the issue

----------


## Lampada

> Syria 'welcomes' proposal to hand over control of chemical weapons - CNN.com 
> Has a diplomatic solution finally been found?     
> Comments??

 Ой, ну тут проще простого:  дружки сговорились, как обезвредить Обаму и потом посмеяться над ним.  
Я абсолютно против бомбёжки, но то, что преступники уйдут от ответа, удручает.

----------


## Hanna

It sounds like a really sensible solution and a very good idea. 
I don't believe that Syria used the weapons to begin with, but I don't deny there is a possibility I might be wrong. 
Either way it's a good reflection on Russia and if the US  choose to accept it, that would prove the US is not hellbent at war and takeover according to an existing blueprint... Which is certainly what it looks like right now.

----------


## Deborski

FreakOutNation: President Obama’s Brilliant Strategy No One Seems To Recognize 
This is thought-provoking and certainly worth considering.  Why would Obama ask for permission from Congress if he knows he's not going to get it?  Could it be that, contrary to the image he is fostering in the media, that Obama actually has no intention of invading Syria and is merely using this as a means to change the way things are done in Washington DC, so that subsequent commanders-in-chief must first get the congressional green light before they can invade foreign countries? 
Obama is not a stupid man.  I would not put this past him.  In fact, it would be in character for him to be playing a master game of chess with a bunch of career politicians who have become too comfortable playing checkers.   

> If this sounds like an improbable scenario I ask that you to ponder for a moment the potential outcome: 
> No war
> Obama and America look strong and world leaders should not doubt Obama’s willingness to take action
> Congress was made to do their job
> Congress will take the responsibility of inaction
> Republicans have to pretend they are anti-war
> Americans comes out against any further wars thereby providing the beginning of the end to our perpetual war
> Puts pressure on the UN to take other action
> Suddenly the UN is eager to accept other harsh non-military actions against Syria

----------


## Lampada

How *Vladimir Putin* Became The Chuck Norris Of International Politics - Yahoo! Finance  Точно о Путине:   "_He's clever and duplicitous, very skilled at playing people's own weaknesses and blunders against them — skills he honed as a KGB case officer."_

----------


## Hanna

I have no idea who Chuck Norris is....

----------


## Deborski

> I have no idea who Chuck Norris is....

 He is a right-wing American superhero... 
Or, in other words, a poor actor who starred in a bunch of action flicks, including some very stupid anti-Russian ones, but whose real "fame" came from selling athletic equipment and mounting political campaigns to force children to read the bible in public schools and to destroy the separation of church and state. 
He is another raging teabagger similar to Ted Nugent.  He loves war, the bible, guns and roundhouse kicks, not necessarily in that order...

----------


## Юрка

> Has a diplomatic solution finally been found? Comments??

 Простая идея. Жаль, что я не додумался до неё. Честно говоря, голова работала не ту сторону.
Это шанс для Обамы. Если он хочет найти повод, чтобы не воевать, то вот он.
Но это и тест для Обамы. Если он хочет воевать, то проигнорирует этот вариант решения проблемы.

----------


## UhOhXplode

It's a solution! Obama said he wouldn't strike if Assad turns over his chemical weapons! Assad agreed and Russia will work with Assad so I just know this will happen.  Obama says Russian Syria proposal could be a breakthrough Syria says it &lsquo;welcomes&rsquo; Russia proposal on chemical weapons - The Washington Post

----------


## it-ogo

> He is a right-wing American superhero... 
> Or, in other words, a poor actor who starred in a bunch of action flicks, including some very stupid anti-Russian ones, but whose real "fame" came from selling athletic equipment and mounting political campaigns to force children to read the bible in public schools and to destroy the separation of church and state. 
> He is another raging teabagger similar to Ted Nugent.  He loves war, the bible, guns and roundhouse kicks, not necessarily in that order...

 I know this guy! He is the one who was beaten by bruce Lee in The Way of the Dragon.

----------


## Юрка

> U.S. officials said Kerry’s comment, made in response to a question at a news conference in London, was not intended to be a diplomatic opening... As Kerry flew back to Washington to help lobby lawmakers, he received a midair call from Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who said he had heard the secretary’s remarks and was about to make a public announcement.

 Наши дипломаты поймали бедного Керри на слове. Но его никто за язык не тянул. Думаю, что ему объявят строгий выговор за срыв войны. Но слово не воробей, вылетит - не поймаешь.  ::

----------


## Deborski

> Наши дипломаты поймали бедного Керри на слове. Но его никто за язык не тянул. Думаю, что ему объявят строгий выговор за срыв войны. Но слово не воробей, вылетит - не поймаешь.

 I was telling an American Facebook friend about this yesterday and he simply could not give the Russians credit.  He kept saying that Obama deserved all the credit "for putting the pressure on the Russians" and that it never would have happened if Obama hadn't threatened the air-strike.  When I argued with him, he said "Putin is a thug."  I deleted him from my friends' list because I am so tired of that kind of stale cold war thinking.  But other friends of mine were really happy about Russia's proposal and were celebrating, hoping that this means there will not be a war after all.   
I am keeping my fingers crossed.  Until Obama formally states that the air-strikes are completely off the table, I will not be able to relax.  And meanwhile, who will unarm the jihadists?  And if they have chemical weapons, who can make sure they turn those over and do not use them?   
I hope the Russian proposal works out and that Obama takes this "out" to cancel his plans for invading Syria.  Congress will still put it to a vote tomorrow, but it looks likely that the majority will vote against military action.

----------


## Deborski

Obama has announced that he will formally address the nation tonight at 9:00 EST.  Keep your fingers crossed!

----------


## Deborski

My Syrian friend, who lives in Canada, just sent me this video of her husband who was interviewed on TV again, this time in English.  He has been working long hours trying to get medical supplies to the more than two million Syrian refugees, especially the little children, as well as serving in the refugee camps himself, as a doctor. Because of laws in Syria preventing the delivery of the medical supplies, he has been smuggling them in and has risked his own life in his war-torn homeland.  A very brave man!

----------


## Deborski

In case anyone would like to help get medical equipment to the refugees - the group which my friend's husband volunteers for is called *Canadian Relief for Syria.*  You can see him in a video clip which I posted earlier today in this thread, doing an interview on Canadian news. 
Here is a link to the group's website:  Home 
You can donate directly on their site!  So if you can spare anything - and you feel compelled to help the many thousands of Syrians, including little children, who have been injured during the war in Syria, I highly recommend this group.   
My friend's husband has risked his life smuggling medical equipment into the region and treating injured children there and even though there has been a breakthrough diplomatically, the fighting has not stopped yet and these people are still in desperate need of help. 
Thank you!

----------


## Юрка

> But other friends of mine were really happy about Russia's proposal and were celebrating, hoping that this means there will not be a war after all.

 Гарантии пока нет. Обама вроде сказал, что всё зависит теперь от решения Конгресса. 
Наши дипломаты сейчас вместе с сирийскими дипломатами разрабатывают подробный план постановки химического оружия Сирии под контроль. Работа чисто техническая, но её лучше сделать быстро, чтобы никто не сослался на технические трудности реализации нашего предложения. Вообще мне нравится, как действует Лавров и его команда. Правительственные награды они заслужили, если будет результат (отсутствие войны).  

> And meanwhile, who will unarm the jihadists?

 Асад. Он добьёт эти банды, даже если арабские страны и Запад будут продолжать поддерживать их оружием и людьми.  

> And if they have chemical weapons, who can make sure they turn those over and do not use them?

 Позавчера по российскому телевидению сказали, что по данным разведки сирийская "оппозиция" готовит новую провокацию: применение химического оружия против Израиля. Причём, с территории, находящейся под контролем Сирии. А Израиль в этом случае может ответить незамедлительно, без всякий слушаний в Конгрессе.  

> I deleted him from my friends' list because I am so tired of that kind of stale cold war thinking.

 Дебора, у Вас там нешуточные баталии. Держитесь, я с Вами.  ::

----------


## UhOhXplode

Okay.
President Obama screaming for "limited" strikes = Fail.
President Putin getting with Syria to put the chemical weapons under international control = Win. 
Yeah, I think President Putin deserves the Nobel Peace prize, not President Obama. And I'm not the only one that thinks that: Putin is the one who really deserves that Nobel Peace Prize | Fox News

----------


## Юрка

Как же непросто сдерживать этих нобелевских лауреатов мира... (подумал Путин, вытирая со лба пот).  ::

----------


## it-ogo

> Okay.
> President Obama screaming for "limited" strikes = Fail.
> President Putin getting with Syria to put the chemical weapons under international control = Win.

 To be just, getting any kind of international control over Syrian Chemical weapon (unless it is empty words) would hardly be possible without intensive preparation of USA to war. So they can say later that the whole mess was a performance to get control over CW, and take Nobels for O as the best actor in a leading role and P as the best supporting actor.

----------


## Юрка

> To be just, getting any kind of international control over Syrian Chemical weapon (unless it is empty words) would hardly be possible without intensive preparation of USA to war. So they can say later that the whole mess was a performance to get control over CW, and take Nobels for O as the best actor in a leading role and P as the best supporting actor.

 Так, глядишь, Обама и вторую медаль получит. Но до Брежнева ему всё равно далеко.  ::

----------


## Deborski

I think both Obama and Putin deserve credit if this plan can forestall a global conflict!  But Americans are more likely to see Obama as the "victor" here because many of them have an intense (and unjustified) hatred for Putin.  Right-wing Americans are only praising Putin because they hate Obama.  The moment Putin does something that isn't in line with Republican core "values" they will go back to their Cold War era "Red Dawn" inspired hatred of Putin and all things Russian. 
As for Obama's language during his address to the nation last night:  I was nodding my head enthusiastically though the first few moments of his speech, but when he slipped into the rhetoric about how the US must be the World Police and all, I was shaking my head and saying, "oh please just shut up and stop while you're ahead." 
My husband told me to calm down and said, "he has to add all that rhetoric to please the mass majority of constituents who fall for that stuff."  But listen carefully to his words.  He said "action" would be needed.  He did not specifically say "military action".  So Obama stated that our troops are "standing by" and ready to strike *if* Assad does not cooperate with the international team, he did not state that the strike will commence regardless. 
The significant thing he said was at the beginning of the speech, where he stated that the Congressional vote for military action has been "postponed."  He also gave Putin some credit and talked about cooperation with Russia and other nations - and this is a HUGE step which should not be overlooked! 
For the US to COOPERATE with Russia and other nations is practically *revolutionary*  during this era of America's "lone cowboy" antics of running roughshod all around the globe without seeking anyone's permission!   
I am beginning to believe that my husband has been right all along, and that Obama actually is playing a very complex and masterful game of chess here.  He got to appear strong by calling for the airstrikes, then he got to show his "respect for the people" by putting the vote to the right-wing-majority Congress, all the while knowing they would disapprove because they disapprove of everything he tries to do.  Meanwhile, he met privately with Putin while he was in St. Petersburg, and they worked out this brilliant diplomatic plan to disarm Syria of its chemical weapons. 
Of course this could still be completely wrong and he could turn around and announce that we will attack Syria after all.  But I rather doubt that.  I think if anyone makes a new proposal to attack Syria, it will be the right-wing neocons who will jump on the idea - but only after Obama abandons it completely.

----------


## Deborski

> Гарантии пока нет. Обама вроде сказал, что всё зависит теперь от решения Конгресса. 
> Наши дипломаты сейчас вместе с сирийскими дипломатами разрабатывают подробный план постановки химического оружия Сирии под контроль. Работа чисто техническая, но её лучше сделать быстро, чтобы никто не сослался на технические трудности реализации нашего предложения. Вообще мне нравится, как действует Лавров и его команда. Правительственные награды они заслужили, если будет результат (отсутствие войны).
> Асад. Он добьёт эти банды, даже если арабские страны и Запад будут продолжать поддерживать их оружием и людьми.
> Позавчера по российскому телевидению сказали, что по данным разведки сирийская "оппозиция" готовит новую провокацию: применение химического оружия против Израиля. Причём, с территории, находящейся под контролем Сирии. А Израиль в этом случае может ответить незамедлительно, без всякий слушаний в Конгрессе.
> Дебора, у Вас там нешуточные баталии. Держитесь, я с Вами.

 
Спасибо - я рада, что я не одна )))) 
Но это тоже моя забота, что "оппозиция" готовит новую провокацию...

----------


## Deborski

Here is the entire video of Obama's speech last night, for those who did not see it:

----------


## Hanna

I have lost any ounce of respect for that man. 
I actually prefer Bush Jr, because he was so dim, that it was kind of understandable that he acted the way he did. . Obama isn't - he is intelligent and an achiever. 
He must know that he is talking tosh, regurgitating propaganda and is being used as a puppet for economic interests more powerful than the presidency.  
And the big deal about Obama being "black" is also rather silly. He grew up with his WHITE mother who is an academic. 
His father is NOT the descendant of American slaves, but just some random Kenyan guy who happened to date his mother. His skin colour is completely incidental, and he grew up in a white culture. I'll be impressed when somebody whose ancestors was dragged over to the USA in chains, becomes president. 
He's a murderer for not putting a stop to the drone strikes, and an arrogant tyrant for imagining that his country has the right to topple any regime it doesn't like, or kill foreign citizens in countries that has done nothing against the USA.
The USA seems to be more aggressive for every dollar its foreign debt grows by.... Seems it won't rest until every single nation in the world is a USA puppet.

----------


## Deborski

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/wo...ria.html?_r=1&  *
U.N. Rights Panel Cites Evidence of War Crimes by Both Sides in Syria*   

> GENEVA — As the United States and Russia searched for a diplomatic solution to the crisis over Syria’s chemical weapons, a four-person United Nations rights panel presented detailed evidence on Wednesday of what it said were war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by pro-government forces and, to a lesser extent, rebels in the 30-month-old conflict.  
>  Bolstered by weapons and money from regional and global powers waging a proxy war, Syria’s government and rebel forces have committed murder, torture, rape and indiscriminate attacks on civilians, without fear of future punishment, the panel, a Commission of Inquiry that was expanded last fall, said in its latest report, to be presented to the United Nations Human Rights Council here in Geneva on Monday. 
> The report was careful to hold both sides responsible, but the unevenness of the conflict — with heavily armed government forces battling rebels with scanty, sometimes homemade arsenals — was evident. Of the nine mass killings the panel investigated for the report, eight were attributed to the government side and one to rebels. 
> Emphasizing the warring parties’ sense of impunity, the panel pointed out that it had continued to update its list of individuals and institutions identified as responsible for crimes and atrocities. In comments to reporters earlier in the week, one panel member, Carla Del Ponte, a former chief prosecutor of two United Nations criminal law tribunals, said, “It’s a long list.”

----------


## Deborski

Russia went on war alert over missile test 
Here is a clear example of Russia showing commendable restraint.  A few days ago, US-Israeli forces launched a cruise missile from one of their warships in the Mediterranean.   
Fortunately the launch was just a test.  Unfortunately, US-Israeli forces did not think to WARN anyone ahead of time.  So when the launch was picked up on Russian radar, it was perceived as a preemptive strike against Syria and President Putin was immediately notified.  Thankfully for everyone in the world, cooler heads prevailed and no retaliatory action was taken.   

> WASHINGTON – Just as the Syrian crisis was getting under way, a joint U.S.-Israeli test of an anti-missile system prompted the Russian General Staff to go on “high alert” and notify President Vladimir Putin that missiles may be incoming on Syria. 
> The reason: Neither the United States nor Israel bothered to notify Russia that the Sept. 2 test was going on in the Mediterranean near Syria. 
> Moscow’s response was immediate. 
> The Russian General Staff thought Israel had launched a preemptive attack on Syria in the eastern Mediterranean which some Russian officials said could have led to World War III. 
> When the truth came out about the unannounced anti-missile test, Russian Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov criticized Israel for undertaking such a launch during a crisis occurring in the neighboring country of Syria. 
> Referring to the Mediterranean region as a “powder keg,” Antonov warned that anything such as an unannounced missile test could explode into war. 
> “A match is enough for fire to break out and possibly spread not only to neighboring states but to other world regions as well,” Anotov said. “I remind you that the Mediterranean is close to the borders of the Russian Federation.”

 
If the situation had been reversed, and a Russian ship had launched a missile without telling anyone it was a "test" - how do you think the US would have responded?  America has a reputation for being trigger happy, so my answer is that we very well might have reacted without waiting to find out what had really happened.  I would hope that the US would show the same level of restraint, but who knows? 
Interestingly, this story has not been given any play in US media, although I saw several Russian news stories about the test launch being picked up on Russian radar, very shortly after it happened.

----------


## Deborski

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/op...f=opinion&_r=0 
This open letter to the American people by Russian President Vladimir Putin was posted in the New York Times today. 
Excerpt:   

> No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with the fundamentalists. Reports that militants are preparing another attack — this time against Israel — cannot be ignored. 
> It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan “you’re either with us or against us.” 
> But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces withdraw. Libya is divided into tribes and clans. In Iraq the civil war continues, with dozens killed each day. In the United States, many draw an analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to repeat recent mistakes. 
> No matter how targeted the strikes or how sophisticated the weapons, civilian casualties are inevitable, including the elderly and children, whom the strikes are meant to protect. 
> The world reacts by asking: if you cannot count on international law, then you must find other ways to ensure your security. Thus a growing number of countries seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. This is logical: if you have the bomb, no one will touch you. We are left with talk of the need to strengthen nonproliferation, when in reality this is being eroded. 
> We must stop using the language of force and return to the path of civilized diplomatic and political settlement.

----------


## Doomer

> Interestingly, this story has not been given any play in US media, although I saw several Russian news stories about the test launch being picked up on Russian radar, very shortly after it happened.

 I believe when I saw it on the news, they were saying that Russia asked the US first and the US has denied any knowledge about the launch but after Israel admitted that it was their rocket the US said that it was mutual operation. What a shame for the country, I guess some US officials never got out of a high school.

----------


## UhOhXplode

While President Putin was making plans to remove the chemical weapons, Obama was arming the rebels (no, I didn't forget to add 'president' to his name but he has been arming the rebels and that means Al-Qaeda too - now that I know about it, I don't respect him). CIA begins weapons delivery to Syrian rebels - The Washington Post 
Obama claims that the weapons can be tracked so Al-Qaeda doesn't get them. Yeah, right! Like someone could go to Al-Qaeda and get them back! I don't even think so.
If Al-Qaeda gets any of those weapons, then Obama is a traitor.

----------


## Юрка

> He also gave Putin some credit and talked about cooperation with Russia and other nations

 Я обратил внимание на формулировки.
1. Амерканцы сделали вид, то это их заслуга. Мол, Америка надавила на Сирию, заставила сотрудничать Россию, и результат пришёл. Да здравствует сила.
2. Путин в своём выступлении был дипломатичен. Не говорил, что это победа России, или что Америка была поймана на слове. Тем самым даёт Обаме шанс сохранить лицо. 
Но это риторика, главное результат. 
P.S. А как зовут журналиста, задавшего в Лондоне вопрос Керри? Его тоже надо наградить.

----------


## Deborski

> While President Putin was making plans to remove the chemical weapons, Obama was arming the rebels (no, I didn't forget to add 'president' to his name but he has been arming the rebels and that means Al-Qaeda too - now that I know about it, I don't respect him). CIA begins weapons delivery to Syrian rebels - The Washington Post 
> Obama claims that the weapons can be tracked so Al-Qaeda doesn't get them. Yeah, right! Like someone could go to Al-Qaeda and get them back! I don't even think so.
> If Al-Qaeda gets any of those weapons, then Obama is a traitor.

 I saw that and it made me furious.  How can arming the US arming the rebels in any way help the diplomatic efforts by Russia to disarm Assad?  This is why the Russians accuse Washington DC of sending mixed messages.  It does. 
No idea how this is going to turn out.

----------


## Deborski

> Я обратил внимание на формулировки.
> 1. Амерканцы сделали вид, то это их заслуга. Мол, Америка надавила на Сирию, заставила сотрудничать Россию, и результат пришёл. Да здравствует сила.
> 2. Путин в своём выступлении был дипломатичен. Не говорил, что это победа России, или что Америка была поймана на слове. Тем самым даёт Обаме шанс сохранить лицо. 
> Но это риторика, главное результат. 
> P.S. А как зовут журналиста, задавшего в Лондоне вопрос Керри? Его тоже надо наградить.

 
Я согласна, что это риторика.  Я не люблю реторику, но что делать?  Вот наши руководители так говорят постояно.  Я предпочитаю, чтобы они говорили прямо и честно, но это лишь мечта.

----------


## Юрка

> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/op...f=opinion&_r=0
> This open letter to the American people by Russian President Vladimir Putin was posted in the New York Times today.
> Excerpt:

 Читаю комментарии американцев к статье Путина. Весьма познавательно. 
Часто встречается: "Кто ты такой?! Сам дурак!"  ::  
С таким общественным мнением трудно быть лучше, чем Обама.
Я вот думаю, можно ли изменить общественное мнение США или это невозможно? Мнение страны обладает огромной инерцией. Причём, они долго живут сказками. Новаую информацию воспринимают только тогда, когда её можно как-то пристроить в давно сформированную сказочную картину мира.
Большинство чувствует правоту слов Путина, но они входят в противоречие с тем, что они знали до этого (мифы о России) и поэтому новая информация отторгается психикой. Вот если будет доказано, что химию применили боевики, а не армия Асада, то это может немного помочь словам Путина пробить дорогу на Запад.

----------


## Deborski

> Читаю комментарии американцев к статье Путина. Весьма познавательно. 
> Часто встречается: "Кто ты такой?! Сам дурак!"  
> С таким общественным мнением трудно быть лучше, чем Обама.
> Я вот думаю, можно ли изменить общественное мнение США или это невозможно? Мнение страны обладает огромной инерцией. Причём, они долго живут сказками. Новаую информацию воспринимают только тогда, когда её можно как-то пристроить в давно сформированную сказочную картину мира.
> Большинство чувствует правоту слов Путина, но они входят в противоречие с тем, что они знали до этого (мифы о России) и поэтому новая информация отторгается психикой. Вот если будет доказано, что химию применили боевики, а не армия Асада, то это может немного помочь словам Путина пробить дорогу на Запад.

 
Ну, по моему, большинство людей его не любят, и по-этому они не читают его слова. Наверное, они слишком много смотрели фильм "Red Dawn" когда они были молодыми и помогать им нельзя.  Но, есть люди, кто умеют думать и читать, и я даже видела где они сказали, "Путин прав" и "Путин умный" и так далее.  Лично, я не люблю законы против геев (как Вы уже знаете), но всё равно я согласна с Путином как касается Сирии.  Только мне кажется, что вообще люди не знают, как разделить вопросы, так что они думают "Путин против геев, по-этому он не может делать ничего хорошего" или что-то так.  Не знаю точно, как они думают, потому-что я не такая как они.  По-моему, Путин иногда прав, а иногда не прав, и всё.  Надеюсь, что это понятно.

----------


## Hanna

Russia is really doing well in terms of foreign policy lately, isn't it?!  
The way the Snowden issue was handled was really smart, diplomatically. They managed to do the right thing, while simultaneously downplaying its role, and impressing everybody who admired Snowden (quite a few people in America, Europe and elsewhere).  
Now, Russia made a constructive and helpful suggestion that is actually accepted by Syria and obviously would solve any international concerns, if it could be implemented properly.  
Well done Lavrov - he's a very sharp politician and diplomat, isn't he?  
Russia is definitely "winning friends and influencing people"  on the international scene... People need to remember that at the end of the day, the USA is only ONE country. The loyalties of other countries are not set in stone. 10 more years of American aggressiveness and Russian top class diplomacy, and opinions may really have changed among regular people across the world.  
Keep up the good work, Russia!

----------


## Deborski

> Как и все люди
> Политик должен думать прежде всего об интересах страны. Прав он или нет, это понятие растяжимое, нельзя понравится всем

 Ну, вот.  Tеперь мы согласны!  Что делать?   ::

----------


## Basil77

Although I rather support Putin's actions in Snowden and Syria cases, I'm far from believing that he is doing this because he is such a good guy. He needs popularity and support all over the world for very cynical reason: he and his buddies have their families living in Europe and USA, keep their money there, their children are getting education there, they have real estate there etc. They just using Russia as a "milk cow" to gain their well-being, but are planning to live elsewhere. They don't plan in any way becoming an outcasts like North-Korean elite. So some international PR suits their interests very well.

----------


## Deborski

> Although I rather support Putin's actions in Snowden and Syria cases, I'm far from believing that he is doing this because he is such a good guy. He needs popularity and support all over the world for very cynical reason: he and his buddies have their families living in Europe and USA, keep their money there, their children are getting education there, they have real estate there etc. They just using Russia as a "milk cow" to gain their well-being, but are planning to live elsewhere. They don't plan in any way becoming an outcasts like North-Korean elite. So some international PR suits their interests very well.

 Hehehe.  I don't think Putin is a "good guy" or a "bad guy."  I think he is a politician and the leader of one of the greatest nations in the world.  I do not envy that responsibility, and I do not envy Obama's role either.  Both of them are going to do what they can to appeal to their constituents.  We can only hope that they try to appeal to the INTELLIGENT constituents rather then the troglodytes in both of our countries.

----------


## Deborski

::

----------


## Deborski

CIA begins weapons delivery to Syrian rebels - The Washington Post 
Even as Russian officials are working with Assad to eliminate Syria's stockpile of chemical weapons, the US is overtly delivering arms to insurgents in that country, according to this article in the Washington Post:   

> The CIA has begun delivering weapons to rebels in Syria, ending months of delay in lethal aid that had been promised by the Obama administration, according to U.S. officials and Syrian figures. The shipments began streaming into the country over the past two weeks, along with separate deliveries by the State Department of vehicles and other gear — a flow of material that marks a major escalation of the U.S. role in Syria’s civil war. 
> The arms shipments, which are limited to light weapons and other munitions that can be tracked, began arriving in Syria at a moment of heightened tensions over threats by President Obama to order missile strikes to punish the regime of Bashar al-Assad for his alleged use of chemical weapons in a deadly attack near Damascus last month

 Not everyone in America agrees with this policy, however.  Congressman Dennis Kucinich has been outspoken against supplying the rebels with arms, which may fall into the hands of jihadists, despite reassurances from the Obama administration that the weapons can be "tracked."  kucinich.bluestatedigital.com | TELL CONGRESS: STAND FOR AMERICA - VOTE NO TO ANY ATTACK ON SYRIA 
A Pew Research Center poll also reveals that 70% of Americans oppose arming the insurgency, according to another Washington Post article:  Americans clearly against arming Syrian rebels, even after ‘red line’ crossed, polls show   

> The United States is moving to arm Syrian rebels following White House confirmation that the Syrian government used chemical weapons on its own people, but the American people aren't on-board, according to new polls. 
> A new Pew Research Center poll shows 70 percent of Americans oppose sending arms to the opposition groups, while a new Gallup poll shows 54 percent oppose the Obama administration's decision, compared to 37 percent who support it. 
> Opposition in the Pew poll is actually higher than ever before in the two-year-old civil war. And that's even as much of the poll was conducted after the White House announced Thursday that the Syrian government had crossed the "red line" and used chemical weapons. 
> But while the red line was significant to the White House, it doesn't seem to have altered the perceptions of the American people.

----------


## Deborski



----------


## Deborski

Good news, as of this morning we are all still alive and have not blown each other to smithereens.    Russia, US Agree Syria Chemical Weapons Deal in Geneva | Russia | RIA Novosti 
In fact, US Secretary of State John Kerry appears to be on a first-name basis with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.  They have reached an agreement regarding how to go about destroying Syria's stockpile of chemical weapons.

----------


## Deborski

A more gruesome reality which we must not forget is still going on...  http://lightbox.time.com/2013/09/12/...ter-cruelty/#1 
This is a TIME photographer's personal account of an execution he witnessed in Syria, performed by the "Free Syrian Army."  I warn you, the images in the link above are graphic and horrifying.  The description to follow is also very hard to stomach, and the photographer witnessed not just one, but DOZENS of executions that day:   

> I saw a scene of utter cruelty: a human being treated in a way that no human being should ever be treated. But it seems to me that in two and a half years, the war has degraded people’s humanity. On this day the people at the execution had no control over their feelings, their desires, their anger. It was impossible to stop them. 
> I don’t know how old the victim was but he was young. He was forced to his knees. The rebels around him read out his crimes from a sheet of paper. They stood around him. The young man was on his knees on the ground, his hands tied. He seemed frozen. 
> Two rebels whispered something into his ear and the young man replied in an innocent and sad manner, but I couldn’t understand what he said because I don’t speak Arabic. 
> At the moment of execution the rebels grasped his throat. The young man put up a struggle. Three or four rebels pinned him down. The man tried to protect his throat with his hands, which were still tied together. He tried to resist but they were stronger than he was and they cut his throat. They raised his head into the air. People waved their guns and cheered. Everyone was happy that the execution had gone ahead.

 
It should be noted that TIME Magazine never ran this story and never published the photos.  The story has only been picked up by "alternative" media.

----------


## Deborski

While the majority of Americans cheer the agreement reached by US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, US Senator John McCain criticizes it as "weakness" and stands by his contention that prolonged military involvement in Syria is the best way to go.   John McCain, Lindsey Graham Criticize Syria Deal: 'An Act Of Provocative Weakness'   

> "It requires a willful suspension of disbelief to see this agreement as anything other than the start of a diplomatic blind alley, and the Obama administration is being led into it by Bashar Assad and (Russian President) Vladimir Putin," the senators said.

----------


## Deborski

There has been plenty of Russian participation in the thread earlier.  Maybe it's just the weekend and they have other things to do, than talk about Syria?  *shrug*

----------


## Marcus

> Ужасная шутка  
> Но я согласна, что Америка стала хулиганом. Мне это совсем не нравится.  Вообще, (простые) американцы ненавидят это тоже.  Мы громко говорим "НЕТ ВОЙНЕ", но руководители не слушают.  Что делать?  Революция нужна? (Нужна революция?)  Я не знаю...

 "Нет войны" means "There is no war".

----------


## Deborski

> "Нет войны" means "There is no war".

 I meant to say "No (to) war!" - so I guess "Нет войну!" would be better?

----------


## Dmitry Khomichuk

"Нет войне!" was correct

----------


## Deborski

McCain feels a ‘little lonely’ because nobody wants to attack Syria | The Raw Story 
Poor Senator John McCain feels "lonely" because no one else wants to bomb Syria.

----------


## Deborski



----------


## alexsms

D.Bykov, Russian poet: 
На фоне жуликов, воров
И скалозубых технократов
У нас имеется Лавров – 
Спаситель Сирии и Штатов.

----------


## Eric C.

Syria: 'Bashar al-Assad ordered me to gas people - but I could not do it' - Telegraph  _Gen Sakat said the regime wanted to "annihilate" the opposition using any means, and said he received his first orders to use chemical weapons in October last year. On three occasions, he said he was told to use a mixture of phosgene and two other chlorine-based agents against civilian targets in Sheikh Masqeen, Herak, and Busra, all rebel-held districts. 
However, under cover of darkness, he said he had replaced the canisters containing the chemicals with ones containing water mixed with dilute bleach which would give off a similar chlorine smell. 
At first, his trick worked. "They were completely convinced that this was the same poisonous material," he told the Sunday Telegraph in an interview. "In this way I saved hundreds of lives of children and others." 
But after the third occasion, in January, his bosses became suspicious at the lack of deaths in his "attacks" and he began to plot his escape to Jordan, where he has been based since the spring._

----------


## Юрка

> Syria: 'Bashar al-Assad ordered me to gas people - but I could not do it' - Telegraph

 Убедительнее ничего нет? 
Статейки, газетёнки... 
Беглый генерал не сразу, а именно сейчас "вспомнил" о приказе того, кого он предал. 
Напечатали это британские СМИ, в то время как свидетель Пьер Пиччинин да Прата говорит о британском следе в этой истории применения химического оружия.

----------


## Deborski

U.S., Russia Agree On Syria U.N. Chemical Arms Measure  *U.S., Russia Agree On Syria U.N. Chemical Arms Measure*    

> A U.S. State Department official hailed the deal as a "breakthrough." 
> "The Russians have agreed to support a strong, binding and enforceable resolution that unites the pressure and focus of the international community on the Syrian regime to ensure the elimination of Syria's chemical weapons," the official said. 
> Diplomats from the permanent Security Council members - China, Russia, the United States, France and Britain - had been haggling over the details of a resolution to back the American-Russian accord announced on Sept. 14 in Geneva to eliminate Syria's chemical weapons. 
> Assad agreed to destroy Syria's chemical weapons amid an international outcry over a sarin gas strike in the suburbs of Damascus last month - the world's deadliest chemical attack in 25 years.

 The resolution also says that troops can be brought in, if there are any difficulties in getting Assad to comply with destruction of chemical weapons. 
Russia earlier offered its own troops to safeguard and ensure destruction.  If US decides to send some troops of its own, this could even turn into a joint US/Russian military peacekeeping action.   
Russia has also stated that any chemicals under control of the rebels should also be destroyed, but I don't know where the US ended up on that negotiation, or if it fell through the cracks.  It does appear that US officials have backed down on some of their initial demands, in the interest of finding agreement with Russia. 
Overall, I think this is a positive development.

----------


## Deborski

UN Syria Resolution to Cite Military Option – Report | World | RIA Novosti 
Here is RIA Novosti's coverage of the resolution and the "military option" which was cited:   

> A United Nations Security Council resolution on eliminating Syria’s chemical weapons will refer to – but not automatically trigger – military action to enforce Syria’s compliance with a US-Russian deal to destroy its arsenal, The Associated Press (AP) cited a Russian diplomat as saying Wednesday.

----------


## Deborski

> Well, it owns that they finally agreed on a solution for Assad's chemical weapons but that won't help if they don't get the chemical weapons away from the rebels too. It only fixes half the problem.

 I agree 100%.  I am glad that the original rebels have split away from the jihadists though.  Not sure how this will change the US stance if at all.  
Personally I'd be happy if all the countries in that region had to give up their chemical weapons.
The idea that such weapons even exist nauseates and disgusts me.
Then again, I live in a country with a cache of nuclear arms so vast we could wipe out the world several times over.
It is the sad reality we all live in today.

----------


## UhOhXplode

> I agree 100%.  I am glad that the original rebels have split away from the jihadists though.  Not sure how this will change the US stance if at all.  
> Personally I'd be happy if all the countries in that region had to give up their chemical weapons.
> The idea that such weapons even exist nauseates and disgusts me.
> Then again, I live in a country with a cache of nuclear arms so vast we could wipe out the world several times over.
> It is the sad reality we all live in today.

 Yeah, and our country still has 3,188 of the 31,100 metric tons of chemical weapons that the UN said had to be destroyed by 2012. Now they wanna extend it to 2021 and President Bush rejected the verification process.
That needs to change cause having chemical weapons is NOT cool. United States and weapons of mass destruction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 
But there's good news too! Most of Assad's chemical weapons aren't even weaponized yet so they can be neutralized fast. Most of Syria&rsquo;s toxins can be destroyed more easily than officials initially thought - The Washington Post 
And yeah, it's cool that the rebels split from the Al Nusra fighters but the Al Nusra = 75% of the rebel fighters. And in that last article I'm posting, even the U.S. admits that the opposition coulda stolen some of those chemical weapons. But the Al Nusra fighters probably already got chemical weapons from Saudi Arabia anyway.
Well, at least the refugees are getting some good support from the Lebanese Prime Minister. He's calling on UN member states to send aid to help them out. Lebanon engulfed by tide of Syrian refugees | euronews, world news

----------


## Lampada

Порядка 70 офтопиковых постов перенесены в две отдельные темы:  http://masterrussian.net/f16/%D0%BF%...s-syria-21943/   http://masterrussian.net/f13/%D0%B4%...47/index3.html

----------


## Lampada

**

----------


## Hanna

They didn't even kill each other in large numbers until somebody armed the opposition and started giving them logistic and PR support.

----------


## Юрка

Ссылка на статью.  

> Причиной вспышки полиомиелита в Сирии являются джихадисты из Пакистана... К суннитским повстанцам, воюющим против режима президента Башара Асада, присоединились тысячи иностранных боевиков. В их числе и исламисты из Пакистана. В 2013г. лишь три страны (Афганистан, Нигерия и Пакистан) в мире остаются эндемичными по полиомиелиту.Несколько дней назад Всемирная организация здравоохранения подтвердила предположения о вспышке полиомиелита в Сирии с помощью лабораторного анализа взятых проб. Из 22 зафиксированных случаев 10 - подтверждены, результаты относительно 12 станут известны после завершения исследований. Пробы были взяты в районе г.Дейр эль-Зор на северо-востоке Сирии недалеко от иракской границы. В группе риска находятся более 100 тыс. детей в регионе

----------


## Hanna

45 Orthodox Christians in Syria massacred by the terrorists, "freedom fighters". 
I wonder if my tax money to Her Majesty's Government paid for the weapons that they used?  The Tablet - 45 Syrian Christians massacred

----------


## Deborski

It's interesting because those who are really egging on the fanaticism and the religious warfare are not the Syrians, but jihadists from the surrounding countries who have poured in.  At least that is what my Syrian friend tells me.  Before all of the warmongers came in, christians and muslims in Syria did not have this level of hostility.  I saw an article about this in RT the other day as well, and my Syrian friend said it was spot on.

----------


## Hanna

> It's interesting because those who are really egging on the fanaticism and the religious warfare are not the Syrians, but jihadists from the surrounding countries who have poured in.  At least that is what my Syrian friend tells me.  Before all of the warmongers came in, christians and muslims in Syria did not have this level of hostility.  I saw an article about this in RT the other day as well, and my Syrian friend said it was spot on.

 I just saw the earlier quote from you, about Saudi trying to BRIBE the entire nation of Russia to drop Syria completely, and get some sweet oil deals. 
It's a good thing Russia has oil of its own and enough integrity as a nation to decline.  
Russia's intervention re the chemical weapons was really impressive. 
This might just be the first time in 25 years that the USA faces a nation that can't be brainwashed, bought off, intimidated or ignored as the US pursues its agenda of global domination and picking off anyone who is not willing to be a vassal state one by one. Russia took a lot of flack for it, but it didn't really budge at all and I applaud that. Bashar Al Assad may not be a saint, but as leaders in the Arab world go, I would give him 8/10, and just like in Libya it's a case of "better the devil you know" for the population - total chaos, sectarian war and Western imperialism - or somebody like Assad - try to find an unbiased source and you'll find that he was trying to modernise and bring about social justice while keeping all religions happy. Really you can do a lot worse.  
Compare with the vulgar, medieval types that run Saudi while beating their servants, treating their wives as their property, stoning people alive and running the whole country like a medieval monarchy. Not my business but if somebody should complain about regimes in the Middle East it's beyond comprehension that a modern, moderate and enlightened leader like Al-Assad is targetted and the regimes in Saudi and Bahrain are ignored.

----------


## Eric C.

The Syrians themselves want neither the dictatorial bastard nor jihadists. They want some peace and civilization. They probably want their country to become something like the U.K. or Sweden some day. (Deleted. L.)

----------


## Юрка

> Руководители американского телеканала CNN «вырезали» из интервью высказывания полномочного представителя России при ООН Виталия Чуркина. В эфир не попали призыв российского дипломата учитывать волю сирийского народа при разрешении сирийского кризиса, а также слова Чуркина о сирийской оппозиции.

 Ссылка на статью RT.

----------


## Hanna

> The Syrians themselves want neither the dictatorial bastard nor jihadists. They want some peace and civilization. They probably want their country to become something like the U.K. or Sweden some day. (Deleted. L.)

 Well in that case, let them get there themselves, like the UK did, and like Sweden did. 
Neither country was occupied or had civil wars that anybody else interferred in. 
Nobody came and told the UK or Sweden how to do democracy (to the extent that it exists in either country). *We figured it out ourselves, and it took a long time. * 
You are absolutely speculating and I think it varies a lot what they want. Some there are Moslems, and might prefer "Sharia", others might be happy with the "Baath" philosophy of Assad, which is apparently a mix of socialism, market economy and moderate Islam. They have both branches of Islam there. Some are Orthodox Christian and might have other preferences.  
If you look at the EU today, it is NOT a model for a lot of people. Do you really think these Moslems and faithful Christians, admire teenage pregnancies, gang rapes, gay pride parades, out-of-control teenagers, unemployment and sink estate gangster culture that's rampant in Europe today?
It's not admired by the Chinese, by most Russians and even millions of people in the EU itself, just for starters.

----------


## Eric C.

> If you look at the EU today, it is NOT a model for a lot of people. Do you really think these Moslems and faithful Christians, admire teenage pregnancies, gang rapes, gay pride parades, out-of-control teenagers, unemployment and sink estate gangster culture that's rampant in Europe today?
> It's not admired by the Chinese, by most Russians and even millions of people in the EU itself, just for starters.

 What I don't admire is someone telling other people what to do. I don't care what parades one person is attending, or what age another person chooses to get pregnant. If that's what they want - fine, who am I to tell them they're "wrong"? My religion tells me not to mess with other people's lives. I'm not sure what yours tells you...

----------

