Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 62

Thread: Syria in 2016: an exchange on what to do

  1. #21
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    849

    Default Terrorists or Freedom Fighters?

    There are over 1,000 armed opposition groups in Syria against Assad. I have read of numbers as high as 2,500.

    The "Free Syrian Army" itself is an umbrella organization with dozens of different units.

    Therefore, I find it ludicrous that we can even reliably categorize the opposition as secular/moderate or Islamist, even though we know all these ideologies exist on the ground.

    What I can say with certainty is that the Sunni Arabs have a polarizing choice if they are to protect themselves from sectarian violence: they can support or join an Islamist group (including the extreme forms of AQ and IS) or the secular/moderates.

    If we continue to allow the Iranians, Russians and Shia irregulars to primarily attack secular/moderate opposition forces (or the most secular/moderate of the opposition) then AQ and IS will come to dominate the opposition.

    And unless anyone plans on using nuclear weapons, there will be millions of potential recruits...

  2. #22
    Council Member CrowBat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Haxbach, Schnurliland
    Posts
    1,563

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azor View Post
    There are over 1,000 armed opposition groups in Syria against Assad. I have read of numbers as high as 2,500.
    Well, if your list would be complete, the figure would be closer to 7,000.

    Means not that they're 'completely and hopelessly disunited' though. There are about a dozen of umbrella organizations that really matter. It's like if there are about a dozen of political parties: nothing unusual under given circumstances.

    Therefore, I find it ludicrous that we can even reliably categorize the opposition as secular/moderate or Islamist, even though we know all these ideologies exist on the ground.
    Well, that's the essence of the 'problem': knowing about all the different political positions of various of its combatants, the FSyA said already back in July or August 2011: we are non-political; we first want to remove Assad, then we'll talk about politics.

    But nah: everybody else knew 'better'. Therefore, all the possible foreign powers have ever since conditioned their aid on political declarations, colour of flag and other BS. First to do so was Turkey, which imposed an ultimatum upon the FSyA leadership to subject itself to the Moslem Brotherhood already in November 2011. Just a week or so later, it was followed by Qatar and Kuwait, which began providing extensive aid on condition of insurgents pledging alegiance to groups Salafist and Wahhabist movements... and when everybody else attempted to create 1-2 umbrella organizations, in autumn 2012, Qatar and Kuwait did whatever was possible to disunite, and provide aid directly to 'hand-picked' groups - all of which subsequently joined Jabhat an-Nusra.

    Eventually, there is only one solution: remove Assad, then organize free and fair elections, and let the people decide on their own. Without that, we'll never know what kind of government majority of Syrians actually want to have, and whether that majority of them are 'really blood-thirsty terrorists' - like all the nearly everybody in the West and most of the East 'knows' - or else.

    If we continue to allow the Iranians, Russians and Shia irregulars to primarily attack secular/moderate opposition forces (or the most secular/moderate of the opposition) then AQ and IS will come to dominate the opposition.
    Sounds OK but... well, if Syrians haven't turned into wildest extremists after the last five months of barbaric Russian bombardment, they'll never do so.

    Means: that train is already away.

    More problematic is the fact that meanwhile the JAN - which was just one foot away from all-out war not only against the FSyA, but also against the (Salafist) Ahrar ash-Sham, and which would've lost that war very badly - is now profiting from a new wave of Jihadists that are travelling to Syria in reaction to Russian military intervention there, exactly as announced here back in September.

    Once again: congratulations Oblabla, and now also special thanks to Putler.

  3. #23
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Eventually, there is only one solution: remove Assad, then organize free and fair elections, and let the people decide on their own. Without that, we'll never know what kind of government majority of Syrians actually want to have, and whether that majority of them are 'really blood-thirsty terrorists' - like all the nearly everybody in the West and most of the East 'knows' - or else.
    That would require a war with Russia at this point, to "simply" remove Assad and his allies, and those free elections would go south with Qatari/Kuwaiti money, Turkish pressure, and MB/AQ muscle.

    Shades of thinking skinny jean wearing pro-western hipsters were going to run Egypt.

    irst to do so was Turkey, which imposed an ultimatum upon the FSyA leadership to subject itself to the Moslem Brotherhood already in November 2011. Just a week or so later, it was followed by Qatar and Kuwait, which began providing extensive aid on condition of insurgents pledging alegiance to groups Salafist and Wahhabist movements... and when everybody else attempted to create 1-2 umbrella organizations, in autumn 2012, Qatar and Kuwait did whatever was possible to disunite, and provide aid directly to 'hand-picked' groups - all of which subsequently joined Jabhat an-Nusra.
    Our lovely and endangered regional allies, who we simply "must support."

    mwe12.....care to comment on this weird Russian FM statement...can you provide me the confrontation they are talking about.....the llast time I checked Kerry and Obama did not confront Putin on anything lately...
    Nothing out of the ordinary.

    Let's see using that logic the 132 killed in Paris is not being counter balanced by 169 killed in a single day in Syria....racist is that not????
    Not racist at all.

    NOW explain to us poorly informed here just how it is that in this Russian air strike Islamic State is nowhere to be found ----actually the closest IS position to this strike is 60kms...
    They are totally within their rights to pummel the FSA/IF/JAN/MB along with ISIS. That people flip out over it is rather comical.

    If we continue to allow the Iranians, Russians and Shia irregulars to primarily attack secular/moderate opposition forces (or the most secular/moderate of the opposition) then AQ and IS will come to dominate the opposition.
    JAN, the IF and other crazies get lumped by Anti-Assad groups into that vaunted "non-ISIS forces" that Putin is bombing on top of civilians. "Vetted" groups fight hand in hand with terrorists. It's a weird neverland when guys who are in a military alliance with groups who are part of AQ still get considered to be moderates.

    http://america.aljazeera.com/article...h-to-lose.html
    “It is a complete failure,” one Western diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Reuters as the HNC boycott loomed. “With whom [is the Syrian government] going to talk? If you want to engage in negotiations, you have to have a partner. It’s a wonderful occasion for the regime to show they are willing.”

    That is precisely the dilemma for the HNC, and the reason Syria's opposition is lukewarm on the peace effort even after five years of bloodshed: No matter what happens in Geneva, and regardless of whether they show up or not, the government can benefit merely by sitting down. The risks are far greater for the rebels, who know that sitting down with Assad will be perceived on the ground as legitimizing the government and could therefore further erode their already splintered support if talks do not bear any fruit. Hence, the importance in securing some concessions to present their supporters before Geneva kicked off.

    ...
    But rebel contempt for the diplomatic process is not merely about their mistrust of the government. There is a widely held perception among the HNC and its supporters that the geopolitical balance in Syria’s war now tilts decidedly in favor of Assad's forces, largely due to Russia's military intervention in Syria that is beginning to pay dividends for Assad on the ground. Backed by Russian airstrikes on key rebel targets (as well as occasional strikes on the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant), government forces scored their latest and perhaps biggest victory last week when they captured the southern town of Sheikh Miskeen, cutting off a critical transit route for the rebels between Daraa and Damascus.

    ...
    Publicly, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry had urged the HNC to abandon its demands for preconditions and warned against missing a “historic opportunity." Behind closed doors, however, some rebel sources told reporters this week that Washington was threatening to cut off aid if the HNC did not attend Geneva — an allegation Washington denied.
    http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-w...ited-to-talks/
    Saleh Muslim, co-president of the Democratic Union Party, or PYD, left when it became clear he would not be invited to participate, according to Kurdish official Nawaf Khalil.

    The participation of the PYD has been a divisive issue in advance of the Geneva talks. Turkey, which has struggled with its own large Kurdish population, considers the PYD a terrorist organization and the HNC claims they are too close to the Syrian government.

    Unlike other groups from outside the HNC that were invited as advisers, the PYD received no invitation from U.N. Special Envoy to Syria Staffan de Mistura.

    The move to exclude the PYD angered Qadri Jamil, a former Syrian deputy prime minister who has become a leading opposition figure but is not part of the HNC. Jamil said the PYD’s military wing has been the most effective force on the ground in Syria fighting the Islamic State group.

    “The PYD is a historic part of the Syrian democratic opposition and PYD today is fighting terrorism on the ground and it is a main force,” Jamil told a group of journalists in Geneva on Saturday.

    Jamil said they are working with the U.N. to resolve the crisis regarding the representation of the PYD.

    Bassam Bitar of the opposition’s Movement for a Pluralistic Society said the PYD will most likely be invited to take part in future rounds of negotiations.
    Last edited by mwe12; 01-30-2016 at 08:44 PM.

  4. #24
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Russian info warfare or what is known as "weaponization of information" trolling requires a number of things....among them the ability to deflect, distort and distract. (key elements of the Russian 6Ds of propaganda)........all the while setting a particular narrative....as the narrative is the message they are attempting to push.

    It has been seen in the last 18 months of weaponization of information that those that troll tend to have an interesting indicator or fingerprint so to speak.....they specifically fail to address questions placed to them and tend to reinforce their own narrative by massive cutting and pasting as if it lends creditability to their narrative AND the cutting and pasting is used to reinforce the deflection, distortion and distraction of their narrative.

    Specific questions were placed to this commenter and none answered......why is that?....answering the question/questions pulls the troll off his or her "narrative"....and then it is hard to get back on "message" and control the narrative.

    You will notice that this particular commenter tends to fulfill the above points .....
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 01-30-2016 at 10:45 PM.

  5. #25
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    Russian info warfare or what is known as "weaponization of information" trolling requires a number of things....among them the ability to deflect, distort and distract. (key elements of the Russian 6Ds of propaganda)........all the while setting a particular narrative....as the narrative is the message they are attempting to push.

    It has been seen in the last 18 months of weaponization of information that those that troll tend to have an interesting indicator or fingerprint so to speak.....they specifically fail to address questions placed to them and tend to reinforce their own narrative by massive cutting and pasting as if it lends creditability to their narrative AND the cutting and pasting is used to reinforce the deflection, distortion and distraction of their narrative.

    Specific questions were placed to this commenter and none answered......why is that?....answering the question/questions pulls the troll off his or her "narrative"....and then it is hard to get back on "message" and control the narrative.

    You will notice that this particular commenter tends to fulfill the above points .....
    Here is the example of just how the trolling works.......

    I will place question to mwe12 a newly recently joined member and we will see if it is answered.......

    mwe12 what is your position on these demands from the HNC which really are the same demands in the last UNSC resolution supported by both Russia and the US ......??

    HNC spokesman Riad al-Agha says 3 steps before talks start are end of sieges, end of bombardment of civilians, & release of prisoners.

  6. #26
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    16

    Default

    mwe12 what is your position on these demands from the HNC which really are the same demands in the last UNSC resolution supported by both Russia and the US ......??
    Preconditions meant to derail the talks.

    They are essentially demanding the right to hide among civilians without Putin/Assad being able to club them. Clearly they know Russia will not end the air campaign and Assad/Iran will not drop their offensives, so they hope this can be a way out of them having to take part in talks.

    You will notice that this particular commenter tends to fulfill the above points .....
    After your comments about how great those crazy JAN kids are maybe you are the one getting paid per post (and you do seem to like to respond to one post 5 times).

    Specific questions were placed to this commenter and none answered......why is that?....answering the question/questions pulls the troll off his or her "narrative"....and then it is hard to get back on "message" and control the narrative.
    I would like to think I brought out the DeMarini in response to your points. You rail with worn out talking points about genocide and Obama being at fault, because practically no-one in his base wants to go to war over this, but when pushed all you have is weird rants about a Russian internet conspiracy to hire people to disagree with you.

    Pointing out that Russia is free to flatten another terrorist group 60km away from an ISIS position in response to you saying that is not deflecting your points, it's pointing out a truth.

    Russian info warfare or what is known as "weaponization of information" trolling requires a number of things....among them the ability to deflect, distort and distract. (key elements of the Russian 6Ds of propaganda)........all the while setting a particular narrative....as the narrative is the message they are attempting to push.
    Conspiracy theory nonsense. It is possible to read the MSM give liver-eaters op-ed space and run with AJ's narrative and still come to the conclusion we are better with groups allied to and brigaded with AQ dead.



    And the British dressmaker still has it at considerably more terrorists per civilian, though I would question the actual civilian status of many of those.
    http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News...r-strikes.html
    Reuters, Amman Saturday, 30 January 2016

    Russian airstrikes on Syria have killed nearly 1,400 civilians since Moscow started its aerial campaign nearly four months ago, a group monitoring the war said on Saturday.

    The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which collects information from a network of sources on the ground, said the Russian strikes had also killed 965 ISIS fighters as well as 1,233 fighters from various other insurgent groups.
    Not much of a genocide.
    Last edited by mwe12; 01-31-2016 at 01:16 AM.

  7. #27
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mwe12 View Post
    Preconditions meant to derail the talks.

    They are essentially demanding the right to hide among civilians without Putin/Assad being able to club them. Clearly they know Russia will not end the air campaign and Assad/Iran will not drop their offensives, so they hope this can be a way out of them having to take part in talks.



    After your comments about how great those crazy JAN kids are maybe you are the one getting paid per post (and you do seem to like to respond to one post 5 times).



    I would like to think I brought out the DeMarini in response to your points. You rail with worn out talking points about genocide and Obama being at fault, because practically no-one in his base wants to go to war over this, but when pushed all you have is weird rants about a Russian internet conspiracy to hire people to disagree with you.

    Pointing out that Russia is free to flatten another terrorist group 60km away from an ISIS position in response to you saying that is not deflecting your points, it's pointing out a truth.



    Conspiracy theory nonsense. It is possible to read the MSM give liver-eaters op-ed space and run with AJ's narrative and still come to the conclusion we are better with groups allied to and brigaded with AQ dead.



    And the British dressmaker still has it at considerably more terrorists per civilian, though I would question the actual civilian status of many of those.
    http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News...r-strikes.html


    Not much of a genocide.
    mwe12...notice you never reply to the commenter you attempt to cut and paste on do you?

    2. this by the way is the core tenor of your narrative for the entire post.

    Preconditions meant to derail the talks.

    They are essentially demanding the right to hide among civilians without Putin/Assad being able to club them. Clearly they know Russia will not end the air campaign and Assad/Iran will not drop their offensives, so they hope this can be a way out of them having to take part in talks.


    Example of a troll is then set/contained within this above statement.

    Why is this statement interesting ...because you in effect take on the Putin mindset that yes I will play at supporting the US to get the latest UNSC resolution passed WHICH specifically sets out the urgent need for humanitarian aid to flow AND it sets out that bombing of civilians MUST stop.

    WHICH mwe12 then places Russia on record for stopping the bombing and starting the flow of humanitarian aid.

    BUT since you are a troller you fully understand that this is just Russian camouflage as Putin knows aid will never make it in thus he can continue his bombing of the Assad opposition ALL the while arguing in front a camera...see they are setting "pre conditions"....BTW Obama even uses this argument so where is the difference between say Putin and Obama's strategies in Syria?...Putin has one and Obama has none.

    3. this previous comment of yours is trolling as well as is it deflecting from the overall truth of Syria....namely there was and still is genocide being driven by Assad and now Putin.

    Your comment not mine....
    A. Assad is not committing a genocide.
    B. Russia has bombed ISIS. Russia is still bombing ISIS.
    C. Russia is within its rights to bomb the FSA/IF/JAN while supporting Assad. Putin does not have to limit his strikes to only ISIS.


    mwe12...you are attempting as a troll to cover the very public press conference held by Putin before he flew to the UNGA meeting...will be more than happy to point you to the actual Russian version where if you spoke Russian you would clearly hear and see that he states "his only reason for engaging into Syria was the destruction of IS...end of story....THAT exact story was then repeated in his UNGA speech also in Russian.

    BUT then as a troll you would have also known that he and his FM BOTH in two separate interviews two days later defined a "terrorist" as someone carrying an AK47 and fighting against Assad...will be more than happy to point you to that Russian interview as well.....always use the native language of the individual not some MSM translation into English.

    SO now based on the widened Putin definition of what a "terrorist" is then your narrative that you are pushing makes sense at least to you as it makes sense to Putin and his FM.

    Using the Putin definition of what a "terrorist is" would make the large number of US militias in fact "terrorists".

    Again this response and all of your responses are nothing more than trolling as you really do not contribute anything that has not been already published by say Sputnik, TASS or Interfax and or uttered by a Russian FM who basically lies with every interview.

    NOW a challenge to you.....if you think the Russian FM is not a lair then check his recent press conference this week WHERE he makes the statement and clearly makes the statement again in Russian THAT Russia did not violate the 1994 Budapest Memorandum because "they did not nuke the Ukraine".

    As he is a major troller himself he naturally failed to mention that he was only talking about one of six points in the Budapest Memo... he FORGOT conveniently the other FIVE points that Russia did/has been in fact violating
    .

    JUST as he always states during press conferences that the Ukraine has not implemented all 11 points in Minsk 2 WHEN Russia has not even fulfilled the single beginning point IE a true "ceasefire" and the required all for all POW exchanges.....

    BTW your responses here were again; distortion, deflection and a distraction.

    This section is interesting has it shows you are attempting to combine distortion, deflection and distraction into one comment.....

    Quote:

    Russian info warfare or what is known as "weaponization of information" trolling requires a number of things....among them the ability to deflect, distort and distract. (key elements of the Russian 6Ds of propaganda)........all the while setting a particular narrative....as the narrative is the message they are attempting to push.

    Your response;
    Conspiracy theory nonsense. It is possible to read the MSM give liver-eaters op-ed space and run with AJ's narrative and still come to the conclusion we are better with groups allied to and brigaded with AQ dead.


    Again highly suggest you reread the entire Ukrainian 2014-2015 and now 2016 threads to fully understand the term "weaponization of information"...

    Because you fully use the Russian 6Ds of propaganda.

    BTW cut and pasting really does make staying on message easy for trollers...
    same technique is being used over on the Twitter side.

    SECOND challenge to your trolling... with the initially secret Russian Syrian unrestricted SOFA signed in AUGUST and WHEN did Putin start bombing and WHAT is his true intent in Syria??....the destruction of any and all opposition to Assad that could be a future problem for his SOFA.

    BTW this agreement was not released by the Russian FM... it was released by "a so called independent Russian specialist" residing in the West and rumored to be close to Putin.......AND the US MSM did not pick it up for almost a week.

    Russian soldiers at the Hameimim air base in Latakia. Assad's flag nowhere in sight. #SovereignSyria?

    Prove that you can provide a direst answer to the two direct questions...but make them more than a single sentence and not in the cut and past trolling format.
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 01-31-2016 at 09:07 AM.

  8. #28
    Council Member CrowBat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Haxbach, Schnurliland
    Posts
    1,563

    Default

    I'm happy to have put him on igno... but from reading your posts, Outlaw, it seems he's claiming that insurgents are 'hiding between civilians'.

    This is a typical idiotic narrative about this war - in complete ignorace of the fact that the insurgents are Syrians, and fighting for safety of their families and homes.

    After all, nearly 70% of the ex-Syrian Arab Army (and other of regime's military branches) have defected in 2011-2012 period. Practically all of FSyA, nearly all of IF and AAS units are led by officers and NCOs that defected. Each of them has a wife and kids. If they make up only 50% of the insurgency, and each has a wife and two kids only (most have more kids, but well...), we're talking about 400,000 people.

    Where should they all go? And why should they leave their homes?

    And where should 13 million internally displaced Syrians - majority of whom fled from regime's, IRGC's, and now Russian terror - go?

  9. #29
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CrowBat View Post
    I'm happy to have put him on igno... but from reading your posts, Outlaw, it seems he's claiming that insurgents are 'hiding between civilians'.

    This is a typical idiotic narrative about this war - in complete ignorace of the fact that the insurgents are Syrians, and fighting for safety of their families and homes.

    After all, nearly 70% of the ex-Syrian Arab Army (and other of regime's military branches) have defected in 2011-2012 period. Practically all of FSyA, nearly all of IF and AAS units are led by officers and NCOs that defected. Each of them has a wife and kids. If they make up only 50% of the insurgency, and each has a wife and two kids only (most have more kids, but well...), we're talking about 400,000 people.

    Where should they all go? And why should they leave their homes?

    And where should 13 million internally displaced Syrians - majority of whom fled from regime's, IRGC's, and now Russian terror - go?
    CrowBat... follow the trolling logical end game...if terrorists are hiding his term among civilians and if the civilians are bombed/killed then that is OK as they should have not been hiding the "terrorists" in the first place.

    Which if followed to the end means it is the "fault" of those killed as they should have kicked the" terrorists" out of their houses, schools, churches, food relief/NGO centers, IDP centers and hospitals and Putin is doing us all a great favor by killing them for us....

    "Thus no genocide is being committed"...."just good ole fashion killing of terrorists"......and if stupid people get in the way it is their fault...his logical thought pattern to its conclusion.

    Remember he basically admitted this with his comment on the 132 killed in Paris with a massive outcry and no one says anything if 169 are killed by Putin in a single day...and that day after day...meaning he accepts that French civilians are better than Syrian civilians or taking it a step further dead Christians outweigh dead Muslims....but he will not go that far.....as that is in fact racist...it is not in what he says..it is how the words he uses says what he wants to say.

    There is a very old US saying and it is racist....." a good Indian is a dead Indian......"

    NOTICE he mentioned nothing about say Hezbollah and the Iraqi Hezbollah KH both being declared by the US as "terrorist organizations" fighting along side Putin and their killing/starving of Syrian civilians.

    AND if in fact he is a "true American" then one would think he would be interested in Putin killing them as well as they have a ton of "US blood on their hands"...but certainly not in having Putin working with them as that would then mean Putin approved of them killing Americans in the past....

    That he conveniently skipped over that in his perceived anger against Sunni terrorists.
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 01-31-2016 at 09:51 AM.

  10. #30
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    mwe12...notice the posted comment on the Iraqi Hezbollah terrorist group KH........fully supported and backed by the IRGC...and is fighting in Syria and has been declared a known terrorist group by the US and has killed a large number of US military personnel.

    Khamenei.ir @khamenei_ir
    Order of Fat'h given by Chief Commander of Armed forces to IRGC Navy commanders who captured intruding U.S. marines.

    pic.twitter.com/1gkGz2bh2p

    So while Putin is "killing Sunni terrorists for the West" the known Shia terrorists are being over looked......right??

    And that was not the intent of the Obama Iran Deal.......???

    BUT WAIT did not Putin claim he was fighting all terrorists.....he must not have been thinking about those pesky Shia terrorists he is supporting with his air strikes.....

  11. #31
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    BUT WAIT Putin in his UNGA speech "claimed" to want to destroy IS and that was why he was in Syria....

    So how does this match the Russian rhetoric.......?

    News
    The #RuAF once again flies massive supportive air strikes for #ISIS, hitting rebel positions north of #Aleppo


    No surprise that rebels fighting #ISIS in Sandaf & Mare’a in north rural #Aleppo were targeted by #Russia|n airstrikes today.

    Russian-led #coalition heading for stunning #victory in #Syria, 'Almost all hospitals & schools have been destroyed'
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 01-31-2016 at 03:00 PM.

  12. #32
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs...t-all-there-is

    January 28, 2016

    Geneva: Is That All There Is?

    By Frederic C. Hof

    Without doubt the High Negotiations Committee of the Syrian opposition will authorize and direct its delegation to go to Geneva to engage in indirect "proximity talks" under the supervision of UN Special Envoy Staffan de Mistura. Whatever burdens have been borne by this opposition for the better part of five years, it simply cannot risk being blamed for the collapse of a diplomatic initiative spearheaded by an otherwise empty-handed United States. Whatever disappointments the opposition has experienced over the years from the mismatch between administration words and actions, it simply is not in a position to alienate Washington. As it did two years ago in Geneva, the opposition will mount the gallows of Syrian public opinion and hope the hangman overslept.

    From the beginning of the Syria crisis, those who rose against the incompetence, corruption, and brutality of the Assad regime have suffered from a friendship deficit. Washington's desire to see Assad gone was and remains somewhere between wishful and advisory in nature—no match for the material determination of Tehran and Moscow to keep their client indefinitely in power in at least part of Syria.

    The Obama administration sought, for its own domestic political purposes, to camouflage this fundamental imbalance with rhetoric about red lines and people stepping aside. It sacrificed its own reputation and credibility in the process. Iran, on the other hand, used its Lebanese militia to save Assad militarily in 2013. Russia has been employing its air force to save Assad since the fall of 2015. The American response to the strategic, diplomacy-shaping actions of others has been plaintive: surely Assad's friends know what an asset he is for the Islamic State (ISIL, ISIS, Daesh); surely Russia and Iran know that ISIL is our common enemy; surely Moscow and Tehran will work with us to put Assad to the side so Syrians can unite against ISIL; surely they know what a mistake they are making by intervening militarily. To speculate on how all of this is processed in the Kremlin, Tehran, and Damascus is to invite clinical depression.

    One can be as critical as one wants about the performance to date of the external Syrian opposition. Indeed, it is infinitely easier for senior American and UN officials to take a didactic tone with the High Negotiations Committee than it is to confront Russian President Vladimir Putin or Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov about their actions or those of their client in creating a rising toll of death, destruction, displacement, and terror among Syrian civilians—all of which benefit ISIL and all of which make creative diplomacy and compromise impossible. It is easier to lecture the Syrian opposition about its responsibility to engage in a dialogue than it is to corner Iran's president—now doing a "come and sell stuff to Iran" victory lap through European capitals —about Tehran's role in facilitating war crimes and crimes against humanity in Syria.

    The Syrian opposition is, to be sure, organizationally challenged. It is fractious. It cannot defeat Iran, Russia, and the regime inside Syria. Its ability to protect its own constituents is very limited. If airdropped tomorrow onto a welcoming Damascus it might, while eschewing collective punishment and mass murder, still prove lacking in governing skills. But this oft-reviled opposition wants Assad—an asset for ISIL and a tool of Hezbollah—gone. Is this not a basis for a close relationship with Washington? Are these people neither worth cultivating nor treating with respect?

    And for all of their defects they are neither blind nor stupid. They see Russians and Iranians killing armed Syrian rebels and civilians alike for the sake of preserving a useful client. They know that the greatest power on earth—the United States of America—has protected not a single Syrian inside Syria from the depredations of the Assad regime or its allies—not a single Syrian. And now they are being told exactly what they were told in 2013, before the Geneva conference fiasco of January 2014: come to Geneva, engage in dialogue, help the world see who is serious about this process and who is not, and we will be with you if the other side does not deliver.

    There are two missing ingredients in the relationship between the US government and the Syrian opposition: trust and confidence. Evidently some of what Secretary of State John Kerry said days ago to the General Coordinator of the High Negotiations Committee, former Syrian Prime Minister Riyad Hijab, was misunderstood and/or deliberately misrepresented to the media by some of Kerry's listeners. The Department of State has moved rapidly to refute allegations that Kerry was essentially presenting Russian talking points. Did the American side care enough about the audience to insure that the words it used were measured carefully and clearly understood? Was the Syrian side—on the basis of past performance—predisposed to hear something that simply was not said? How can this relationship be so lacking in basic trust and confidence? Who was it, after all, that the United States recognized in December 2012 as the legitimate representative of the Syrian people?

    If the Obama administration wants the Syrian opposition to risk whatever positive standing it may have inside Syria for the sake of a diplomatic due diligence exercise aimed at proving to the world that which is already known—that the Assad regime, Russia, and Iran have no interest in genuine Syrian political transition—then it will have to sit with the opposition and spell out what it intends to do to protect Syrian civilians once the exercise has run its course. The course itself need not be lengthy. If the bombings, sieges, and mass incarcerations continue, there is nothing to discuss—it is, as Special Envoy Staffan de Mistura told the UN Security Council on January 18, just another trip to Geneva. If the Assad regime does not accept the terms of reference embodied in the June 30, 2012 Geneva Final Communique, there is nothing to negotiate. It will just be a repeat of Geneva, January 2014.

    On January 27 the following exchange, which did not escape the attention of the High Negotiations Committee, occurred during the Department of State daily press briefing:

    QUESTION: And the—and at the same time, the Russians and the Syrians are providing additional support to the fight, or to their side of the fight. At what point does the United States decide that this test may be—that they failed the test and decide to increase—to increase pressure or change the balance of power on the ground in support of the people that the Americans are supporting?

    MR TONER: Sure. I think that’s a very valid but also very difficult question to answer. I would say we’re still committed—strongly committed—to seeing this process move forward. We feel like, since really this process began and has taken shape throughout the autumn, that we have gathered a little momentum here, that we have moved the parties together in the sense of having these talks, and that we’ve got to keep that momentum going.

    In the immortal words of the late Peggy Lee, "Is that all there is?" Because if that's all there is—if the Obama administration is just going to keep on dancing for the next twelve months-minus—2016 will be a very bad year indeed for Syrians, their neighbors, Western Europe, and the United States. The Syrian opposition will, with much apprehension and dread, play the role it has been asked to play in helping to reveal the obvious and unveil that which is already plainly visible to those who elect to see. It is, after all, the weakest of the actors. It continues to hope that the strongest will emerge from hiding behind the curtain and appear, at last, center stage.

  13. #33
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Here is a truly critical sentence that even Hof missed......and he wrote it..

    This is the same exact US Obama policy being pushed onto Ukraine for the last year by the US and what I call unilateral appeasement without a single reciprocal Russian move....the same exact argument amazing......


    Paraphrased it goes lie this....you Ukraine you must implement all aspects of Minsk 2 and then if the Russians do not then the whole world will see that Russia is not implementing Minsk.....THE core problem is then Ukraine has basically given away the store for ABSOLUTELY nothing after actually being invaded and their territory militarily annexed in the 21st Century ALL with the assistance of the US....

    And now they are being told exactly what they were told in 2013, before the Geneva conference fiasco of January 2014: come to Geneva, engage in dialogue, help the world see who is serious about this process and who is not, and we will be with you if the other side does not deliver.

    The last part of the sentence is the critical part....that is exactly what the Ukraine is being told repeatedly by Kerry, Biden and Nuland...and all the while the Russian military and her mercenaries are still conducting between 40-70 attacks a day killing and wounding UAF AND not a single comment by Obama, Kerry and Nuland AND here is the important piece...Russia has never fulfilled a single point of Minsk 2 NOR does it every plan to.

    SO the core question just why does it appear that the Obama foreign policy is the exact same foreign policy of Putin.....??

  14. #34
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    http://mebriefing.com/?p=2140

    How Obama Ended Up Following Putin’s Syria Script and Giving Assad a Victory?

    The meeting between Secretary John Kerry and the head of Syrian opposition’s delegation in the transitional talks Dr. Riyad Hijab January 23 in Riyadh stirred a very negative reaction in many opposition circles. Kerry tried to convey a message that lowers opposition’s expectations and packs their goals into the practical frame of the talks drawn with the Russians. But the Secretary’s language threatened the prospects of constructive engagement by the groups which are proposed to participate in the talks.

    Mr. Kerry had the difficult task of incorporating Russian-Assad positions and parameters within a plan that addresses as well the goals of the opposition. It is the usual intrinsic challenge of trying to reach a framework for negotiating an end to a tough conflict like the one in Syria. The result was a clear tilt to Moscow’s position. The question now is: Will these talks succeed?

    Kerry’s message confused Hijab and the opposition groups alike. It is still not clear if this was done intentionally by the Secretary of State. He made it clear that there will be no preconditions set for the talks, not even a commitment to the departure of Assad at any point in the future. He also oscillated between describing Geneva-1 and Vienna communiques as “references” of the negotiations. And he used the term “unity government” side by side with the term “transitional government” which caused additional confusion.

    Furthermore, Kerry’s proposed “confidence building” measures did not include exchange of prisoners or a halt of air raids or barrel bombs targeting civilian areas during talks. The secretary also said other opposition representatives, proposed by Moscow and considered by the rest of the opposition as too close to the Assad regime, will also be present in the talks. Faced with solid rejection by the opposition, those Assad-friendly groups would be labeled “consultants” to the UN envoy Staphan de Mistura and not a parallel opposition delegation.

    After Turkey’s threats to end its cooperation in the process if the PKK linked Syria’s Kurdish Democratic Union is invited, de Mistura decided to avoid inviting the group. The Russian selected “opposition” delegation will be stationed in Lausanne while the talks would be in Geneva. The letter of invitation failed to mention the Geneva-1 communique even after President Obama and Secretary Kerry hailed the Geneva-1 communique as the “foundation” of the solution since it was signed in 2012.

    The difference between the two communiques, the Geneva-1 and Vienna’s, is that the former emphasizes the importance of the transitional phase towards a solution while the later failed to mention distinctively this phase, and emphasized instead the need to fight terrorism. This applies as well to the UNSC Resolution 2254. This difference expressed a retreat from the previous position of insisting on excluding Assad’s effective governance during the transition phase. The Geneva-1 pointed out to “a transitional body that enjoys all executive powers”. Russia accepted the Geneva-1 communique before having its military “surge” in Syria. It de facto withdrew its support of the communique at the beginning of its military operations there.

    This shift in emphasis gained a central place in the preparatory talks of the last few weeks, particularly with Kerry’s ambiguous language on the issue of Geneva-1. An opposition leader told MEB that basing the talks on the Vienna communique “will lead nowhere”. “The Vienna process gives prominence to the regional dynamics of the crisis and almost neglects its domestic Syria dimension. It presupposes the willingness of Assad to reach a deal with his opponents. This presupposition reflects that the two powers, Russia and the US, reached a joint understanding and took it to the region to include the regional powers. The question remains: Where would the Syrians fit here? I do not think that the Syrian crisis was merely a regional or global issue. No solution will be sustainable without a genuine and full inclusion of the opposition”, he said.

    It is possible that Kerry overplayed his hand under the impact of freshly reached understanding with Lavrov and Saudi Arabia. It cannot be dismissed neither that the approach of the Secretary may work in starting a partial ceasefire. Yet, it is almost certain that this approach, and regardless of any argument that it was the only possible one, may not be sustainable and will not represent a real “solution” to the crisis.

    The State Department rushed to contain the negative impact of Kerry-Hijab meeting. Michael Ratney, the administration’s point man for Syria, spent hours with opposition leaders on the phone following the meeting. Ratney tried to play down the points that caused concern among opposition groups all the while keeping the main lines of the US-Russian understanding intact. But Kerry’s warning that if the opposition refused to go to the talks, the negotiation will start anyway, was echoing loudly among the opposition groups and splitting them further.

    The talks, if they start, which is still a big “if”, are slated to go on for 10 days. The “Syria Friends” group of nation will then meet in February 11 to evaluate the results of the talks and prepare the following round. The main focus of the first round will be the ceasefire and providing humanitarian aid to Syria’s civilians. Issues related to transition and the future of the country will not be discussed.

    However, the invitation issued by de Mistura emphasized the need to form a transitional government to set a time table for the transitional process. This process would result in elections supervised by the UN and to form a non-sectarian, inclusive and credible government and start the process of writing a new Constitution” (No word about a transitional government with full powers). Theoretically, Assad would be able to run again in the elections. Kerry hinted to GCC foreign ministers during their meeting in Riyadh that Assad will not run “if everything goes according to plan”. Those were almost word by word what Putin told his interlocutors since last fall.

    The whole picture reflects a shift in the previous US approach to Syria. The illicit logic of that shift gives priority to counterterrorism over looking at Syria within the boundaries of its overall political conflict, which gave rise to terrorism. The nature of the new approach gives precedence to working with Russia and regional powers. In other words, Mr. Putin succeeded in causing a deeper effect than expected on the US approach to the Syrian conflict.

    On the ground, however, it is difficult to see how this approach would achieve the required effects, either in fighting terrorism or in solving the political crisis, even if regional powers decided, under pressure, to stop their assistance to the opposition. The weak point of this “Russian” approach –now adopted now by Washington- lies in its crudeness.

    For if a deal is reached on the bases of considering most opposition groups terrorists, as seems to be the essence of this approach, a wider war will be in our hands in a matter of few months. This will buy the Obama administration a cheap and superficial “accomplishment” for a short time, while failing to end the crisis on any sustainable way. The bottom line of this approach is exactly what Putin wanted all along. All what happened is that the US delivered its allies to the Kremlin.

    The reason behind this conclusion stems from the fact that the approach has the following underlying aspects:

    * It places the emphasis on immediate goals at the expense of the overall objectives. This is clear in giving priority to ceasefire and humanitarian aid, and in neglecting to frame these objectives in a process that promises the non-terrorist opposition leaders a possible solution which enables them to restrain their members.

    * It is based on duel “references”, that of Geneva-1 which is acceptable by the mainstream opposition groups, and that of Vienna and the UN SCR 2254, which were promoted as the only acceptable references by the regime and the Russians, and which drop the need for Assad to leave or commit to departure after a successful transition.

    * It enables terrorist groups like ISIL and Nusra to ask the others: What have you really achieved after five years of fighting? The question would turn into a major factor in pulling members of other groups, who saw their families and friends killed by the regime, to join those who refuse this kind of solution which effectively means that Assad won. In other words, there is nothing for the leaders of the invited groups to show their members in terms of justification for their participation in the talks.

    * There are enough arms in Syria to make dependence on either regional powers or the US minimal.

    * It cannot be certain that what Kerry hears wherever he goes is true or will indeed happen. Pressure may bring about a superficial consent while the real calculations may be carefully hidden and acted upon.

    Continued........

    But is there any chance it could work?

    Continued......

    Washington has given up a lot of grounds in Syria to Moscow’s views. The initial position of Washington, that the Assad regime can never return Syria to stability, was the right one. There will be no stability in Syria for years to come if Russia’s crude and militarized “Grozny” approach carry the transitional process to where Mr. Putin wants it to go.

    Continued.....

    Secretary Kerry ended up following Putin’s Syria script. No surprise. As this administration proved over and over again that it does not have a strategy, it was to be expected that it will follow those who do.

    Continued.......

  15. #35
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    16

    Default

    mwe12...notice you never reply to the commenter you attempt to cut and paste on do you?
    I do respond. I take each one of your points to the woodshed. I think you are either paid by the post (hopefully you monetize this) or live in a well padded room.

    1. Dealt with your genocide lie.
    2. Pointed out correctly that Putin is free to bomb other armed groups.
    3. Pointed out correctly Putin has killed more terrorists/Islamists than civilians by a wide margin.
    4. Pointed out the US/US public is not on board to go fight Assad to put those clowns in power.
    5. You support JAN.
    6. I believe we are safer with Assad in power. Several Presidential candidates back that position. And it's not an uncommon position on the street here.
    7. I think the US should be striking JAN/IF forces and anyone they are brigaded with.
    8. Obama/Kerry also consider those to be preconditions on talks and had to threaten our little Islamists to show up.
    9. Now everyone who doesn't agree with you is a racist.

    Not sure what is ducking or trolling on my end. On yours you rant and complain that Russian agents are raiding your fridge, and call me a troll but your genocide argument is a dud, you new racism argument holds no water, and basically you are on the fringe side of an issue.

    Again this response and all of your responses are nothing more than trolling as you really do not contribute anything that has not been already published by say Sputnik, TASS or Interfax and or uttered by a Russian FM who basically lies with every interview.
    I think you live in a ideologically protected world where anyone who disagrees with you is a paid Russian spy.

    Example of a troll is then set/contained within this above statement.
    Disagreeing with your stance, as does most of the American public and our President it appears, does not make someone a troll part of a conspiracy to steal your matching socks. You are in a fantasy world. The American public is opposed to doing what you want, the President/Kerry are lukewarm on it and pushing for talks without Islamist preconditions, and two top candidates have basically we are better off with Assad. Sorry you are on the fringe terrorist supporting side of an issue.

    SECOND challenge to your trolling... with the initially secret Russian Syrian unrestricted SOFA signed in AUGUST and WHEN did Putin start bombing and WHAT is his true intent in Syria??....the destruction of any and all opposition to Assad that could be a future problem for his SOFA.
    As I said there is nothing illegal about him blowing to bits the other anti-Assad groups (which includes your AQ buddies).

    Again highly suggest you reread the entire Ukrainian 2014-2015 and now 2016 threads to fully understand the term "weaponization of information"...
    If it is pages of you responding to your own rants with more rants about Russian circus midgets stealing your bodily fluids, I'll pass.

    AND if in fact he is a "true American" then one would think he would be interested in Putin killing them as well as they have a ton of "US blood on their hands"...but certainly not in having Putin working with them as that would then mean Putin approved of them killing Americans in the past....
    If a group of Shia terrorists slit the throats of Sunni terrorists (who rammed airliners into the towers/are brigaded with them) I am amazingly indifferent. I am safer with a Putin/Assad/Iran win than a win by the anti-Assad forces.

    Dude you cheer-lead for AQ, that's like no-fly list zone crazy.

    Using the Putin definition of what a "terrorist is" would make the large number of US militias in fact "terrorists".
    Well we finally cracked down on those idiots. And had you watched the coverage there was outrage those guys were not being called terrorists.

    Remember he basically admitted this with his comment on the 132 killed in Paris with a massive outcry and no one says anything if 169 are killed by Putin in a single day...and that day after day...meaning he accepts that French civilians are better than Syrian civilians or taking it a step further dead Christians outweigh dead Muslims....but he will not go that far.....as that is in fact racist...it is not in what he says..it is how the words he uses says what he wants to say.
    It's not racist in the least. Poor play of the race card. Though with the misspelling and mocking of the Presidents name, I think you guys might want to check your own privilege.

    There is a very old US saying and it is racist....." a good Indian is a dead Indian......"
    "The only good Indian is a dead one/Indian" - at least get the expression correct, even though your usage here is wrong.

    BUT WAIT Putin in his UNGA speech "claimed" to want to destroy IS and that was why he was in Syria....
    He is free to attack other groups in support of Assad. Nothing illegal or immoral about bombing the IF/MB/JAN/FSA as well. Net gain to be honest.

    BUT since you are a troller you fully understand that this is just Russian camouflage as Putin knows aid will never make it in thus he can continue his bombing of the Assad opposition ALL the while arguing in front a camera...see they are setting "pre conditions"....BTW Obama even uses this argument so where is the difference between say Putin and Obama's strategies in Syria?...Putin has one and Obama has none.
    So I guess Obama is also a paid Russian troll. Saying "we won't talk unless Russia/Assad/Iran seriously and potentially cripplingly limit their operations" is a precondition. They know it won't be agreed to as a precondition for these talks, they simply don't want to take part in the talks which is why it is rumored Kerry had to threaten them.

    So while Putin is "killing Sunni terrorists for the West" the known Shia terrorists are being over looked......right??
    Run with AQ and people are going to rank your side below Hezbollah. Amazing.

    "Thus no genocide is being committed"...."just good ole fashion killing of terrorists"......and if stupid people get in the way it is their fault...his logical thought pattern to its conclusion.
    Fault of the terrorists who hide among them/the people that hang out around them. Seeing as the SOHR's Pallywood style accounting puts Putin at 1380 civilians killed (ignoring that 60% or so of those are adult men and probably not all non-combatants) to 2198 terrorists. Surprisingly despite using 1960-1970s bombing tech and not being anywhere near as concerned about Human Rights backlash as we in the west are; Putin has managed to kill far more terrorists than alleged civilians based on pro-Islamist sources.

    =========
    If the Obama administration wants the Syrian opposition to risk whatever positive standing it may have inside Syria for the sake of a diplomatic due diligence exercise aimed at proving to the world that which is already known—that the Assad regime, Russia, and Iran have no interest in genuine Syrian political transition—then it will have to sit with the opposition and spell out what it intends to do to protect Syrian civilians once the exercise has run its course. The course itself need not be lengthy. If the bombings, sieges, and mass incarcerations continue, there is nothing to discus
    Thankfully little will and no public pressure in the US for that.

    The Syrian opposition is, to be sure, organizationally challenged. It is fractious. It cannot defeat Iran, Russia, and the regime inside Syria. Its ability to protect its own constituents is very limited.
    So they aren't going to win.

    If airdropped tomorrow onto a welcoming Damascus it might, while eschewing collective punishment and mass murder, still prove lacking in governing skills.
    LOL.

    But this oft-reviled opposition wants Assad—an asset for ISIL and a tool of Hezbollah—gone. Is this not a basis for a close relationship with Washington? Are these people neither worth cultivating nor treating with respect?
    Not at all, and of course he down plays the whole these guys are allied with AQ/MB angle. The fact the opposition is full of Islamists and AQ supports/allies has to go unmentioned or else he would admit his cause was bankrupt and unpopular.
    Last edited by mwe12; 01-31-2016 at 08:13 PM.

  16. #36
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mwe12 View Post
    I do respond. I take each one of your points to the woodshed. I think you are either paid by the post (hopefully you monetize this) or live in a well padded room.

    .
    4. Pointed out the US/US public is not on board to go fight Assad to put those clowns in power.
    5. You support JAN.
    6. I believe we are safer with Assad in power. Several Presidential candidates back that position. And it's not an uncommon position on the street here.
    7. I think the US should be striking JAN/IF forces and anyone they are brigaded with.
    8. Obama/Kerry also consider those to be preconditions on talks and had to threaten our little Islamists to show up.
    9. Now everyone who doesn't agree with you is a racist.

    Not sure what is ducking or trolling on my end. On yours you rant and complain that Russian agents are raiding your fridge, and call me a troll but your genocide argument is a dud, you new racism argument holds no water, and basically you are on the fringe side of an issue.



    I think you live in a ideologically protected world where anyone who disagrees with you is a paid Russian spy.



    Disagreeing with your stance, as does most of the American public and our President it appears, does not make someone a troll part of a conspiracy to steal your matching socks. You are in a fantasy world. The American public is opposed to doing what you want, the President/Kerry are lukewarm on it and pushing for talks without Islamist preconditions, and two top candidates have basically we are better off with Assad. Sorry you are on the fringe terrorist supporting side of an issue.



    As I said there is nothing illegal about him blowing to bits the other anti-Assad groups (which includes your AQ buddies).



    If it is pages of you responding to your own rants with more rants about Russian circus midgets stealing your bodily fluids, I'll pass.



    If a group of Shia terrorists slit the throats of Sunni terrorists (who rammed airliners into the towers/are brigaded with them) I am amazingly indifferent. I am safer with a Putin/Assad/Iran win than a win by the anti-Assad forces.

    Dude you cheer-lead for AQ, that's like no-fly list zone crazy.



    It's not racist in the least. Poor play of the race card. Though with the misspelling and mocking of the Presidents name, I think you guys might want to check your own privilege.



    "The only good Indian is a dead one/Indian" - at least get the expression correct, even though your usage here is wrong.





    So I guess Obama is also a paid Russian troll. Saying "we won't talk unless Russia/Assad/Iran seriously and potentially cripplingly limit their operations" is a precondition. They know it won't be agreed to as a precondition for these talks, they simply don't want to take part in the talks which is why it is rumored Kerry had to threaten them.



    Run with AQ and people are going to rank your side below Hezbollah. Amazing.


    Fault of the terrorists who hide among them/the people that hang out around them. Seeing as the SOHR's Pallywood style accounting puts Putin at 1380 civilians killed (ignoring that 60% or so of those are adult men and probably not all non-combatants) to 2198 terrorists. Surprisingly despite using 1960-1970s bombing tech and not being anywhere near as concerned about Human Rights backlash as we in the west are; Putin has managed to kill far more terrorists than alleged civilians based on pro-Islamist sources.

    =========


    Thankfully little will and no public pressure in the US for that.



    So they aren't going to win.



    LOL.



    Not at all, and of course he down plays the whole these guys are allied with AQ/MB angle. The fact the opposition is full of Islamists and AQ supports/allies has to go unmentioned or else he would admit his cause was bankrupt and unpopular.
    1. Dealt with your genocide lie.
    2. Pointed out correctly that Putin is free to bomb other armed groups.
    3. Pointed out correctly Putin has killed more terrorists/Islamists than civilians by a wide margin

    He is free to attack other groups in support of Assad. Nothing illegal or immoral about bombing the IF/MB/JAN/FSA as well. Net gain to be honest.

    Run with AQ and people are going to rank your side below Hezbollah. Amazing

    Well we finally cracked down on those idiots. And had you watched the coverage there was outrage those guys were not being called terrorists.


    Russian troll and or just a poorly uninformed Trump voter or maybe both???

    Why do I say that...the comment on Hezbollah indicates you have absolutely no understanding of and or no knowledge of ME politics, the difference say between a secularist, a Salafist and or jihadi nor did you serve a single day in the Army in Iraq and or AFG.

    Why is that...then you would have fully understood my comment "blood on the hands" in reference to the Iraqi Hezbollah KB.....

    AND this further indicates that KH has killed and or wounded American military in full support of Iran...why do I say that...if you had served in Iraq you would be intimately familiar with the term EFP....well all the EFP parts were made and smuggled into Iraq for their use against US military BY no other than the IRGC....ALSO a major player in Syria ....

    So again if we revisit say JaN that you place in the same grouping as IS/AQ and want they all killed.....just as Putin/Assad does.....

    UP TO TODAY 1 Feb 2016 JaN has not killed a single American and has no US "blood on their hands".

    BTW check what "blood on their hands" means in the Koran and in Arabic until then..... it is a waste of time to deal with a troller with little to no knowledge of the subject he claims to be knowledgeable in .

    Anyone can cut and paste critic...any one...

    AND yes I am getting monetized by the thousands of Euros....and just what does Russia pay you BTW??

    Genocide.. and "complicit" .....remember I told you to check Websters as you were supposedly riding the silver line which you do not do BTW......

    The international legal definition of the crime of genocide is found in Articles II and III of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide.

    Article II describes two elements of the crime of genocide:


    1) the mental element, meaning the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such", and

    2) the physical element which includes five acts described in sections a, b, c, d and e. A crime must include both elements to be called "genocide."


    Article III described five punishable forms of the crime of genocide: genocide; conspiracy, incitement, attempt and complicity.


    Excerpt from the Convention on the Prevention and
    Punishment of Genocide (For full text click here)
    "Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:


    (a) Killing members of the group;

    (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

    (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

    (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

    (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

    Article III: The following acts shall be punishable:

    (a) Genocide;

    (b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;

    (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

    (d) Attempt to commit genocide;

    (e) Complicity in genocide. "

    It is a crime to plan or incite genocide, even before killing starts, and to aid or abet genocide: Criminal acts include conspiracy, direct and public incitement, attempts to commit genocide, and complicity in genocide.
    Punishable Acts The following are genocidal acts when committed as part of a policy to destroy a group’s existence:

    Killing members of the group includes direct killing and actions causing death.

    Causing serious bodily or mental harm includes inflicting trauma on members of the group through widespread torture, rape, sexual violence, forced or coerced use of drugs, and mutilation.

    Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to destroy a group includes the deliberate deprivation of resources needed for the group’s physical survival, such as clean water, food, clothing, shelter or medical services. Deprivation of the means to sustain life can be imposed through confiscation of harvests, blockade of foodstuffs, detention in camps, forcible relocation or expulsion into deserts.

    Prevention of births includes involuntary sterilization, forced abortion, prohibition of marriage, and long-term separation of men and women intended to prevent procreation.

    Forcible transfer of children may be imposed by direct force or by fear of violence, duress, detention, psychological oppression or other methods of coercion. The Convention on the Rights of the Child defines children as persons under the age of 18 years.

    Genocidal acts need not kill or cause the death of members of a group. Causing serious bodily or mental harm, prevention of births and transfer of children are acts of genocide when committed as part of a policy to destroy a group’s existence.

    The law protects four groups - national, ethnical, racial or religious groups.

    A national group means a set of individuals whose identity is defined by a common country of nationality or national origin.

    An ethnical group is a set of individuals whose identity is defined by common cultural traditions, language or heritage.

    A racial group means a set of individuals whose identity is defined by physical characteristics.

    A religious group is a set of individuals whose identity is defined by common religious creeds, beliefs, doctrines, practices, or rituals
    mwe12... my friend and what is occurring in Syria "ain't genocide...get real my friend".....
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 02-01-2016 at 08:55 AM.

  17. #37
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    mwe12......here is the Websters definition of "complicit" which you were asked to look up on the silver line that you do not ride......

    act of helping to commit a crime or do wrong in some way

    NOW if you agree and you actually must agree..Obama gets a security briefing every morning...a summary of global events....and the US IC literally "sees and hears everything" 24 X 7 X 365 in a grouping called "Indications and Warnings"......

    So now convince me that you are fully knowledgeable of the IC world....which BTW you are not...they have been confirming the use of chemical gas against Syrians specifically anyone who disagrees with Assad and now Putin, they have seen and confirmed the indiscriminate use of barrel bombs again with chlorine yesterday BTW, they have seen and confirmed the use of starvation, they have seen and confirmed the indiscriminate killing of civilians by air strikes and the indiscriminate destruction of critical civilian infrastucture.

    SO if the US President physically "knows all of this" and if you deny he does not then the US is in serious trouble......if he knows all of this AND yet undertakes nothing......absolutely nothing......no public statements, nor interviews on the subject, no international press conference, no UNSC demanded meetings on the subject, no direct phone calls to Putin other than the lame Kerry "asking" pretty please for Russian FM Lavrov to end the bombings.....

    WHEN legally he falls under the 1948 Convention for "complicity" and is liable for war crimes....even if he does nothing...

    BUT WAIT he is a Nobel Peace Prize winner...so he knows international humanitarian law already...thus he really is "complicit" AND he is a lawyer from the blue ribbon universities so he fully understands the word "complicit"..

    Trolling is easy, critic is easy, cut and paste is easy...... being an American outside the US is great as it gives you a total different look on life other than the Trump view........

    BTW there I fly easily to the US...why I have proven my "loyalty" to the US more times than you have had birthdays......and that my friend sits deep in the computers....getting the computers to change that fact...very hard.

    So get off the critic of being un-American...we had that phase in the US in the 50s...and where did it get the US but again you would not know that as you where not born in those times??

    But again you troll and that is easy to prove and you just keep on doing it......reminds me of a former SWJ commenter mirhond who has not been around awhile...kind of miss him as he would at least post photos.

    If you check your profile and comments..and compare it to his profile and comments..no basic difference is there....??
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 02-01-2016 at 08:36 AM.

  18. #38
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mwe12 View Post
    I do respond. I take each one of your points to the woodshed. I think you are either paid by the post (hopefully you monetize this) or live in a well padded room.

    1. Dealt with your genocide lie.
    2. Pointed out correctly that Putin is free to bomb other armed groups.
    3. Pointed out correctly Putin has killed more terrorists/Islamists than civilians by a wide margin.
    4. Pointed out the US/US public is not on board to go fight Assad to put those clowns in power.
    5. You support JAN.
    6. I believe we are safer with Assad in power. Several Presidential candidates back that position. And it's not an uncommon position on the street here.
    7. I think the US should be striking JAN/IF forces and anyone they are brigaded with.
    8. Obama/Kerry also consider those to be preconditions on talks and had to threaten our little Islamists to show up.
    9. Now everyone who doesn't agree with you is a racist.

    Not sure what is ducking or trolling on my end. On yours you rant and complain that Russian agents are raiding your fridge, and call me a troll but your genocide argument is a dud, you new racism argument holds no water, and basically you are on the fringe side of an issue.



    I think you live in a ideologically protected world where anyone who disagrees with you is a paid Russian spy.



    Disagreeing with your stance, as does most of the American public and our President it appears, does not make someone a troll part of a conspiracy to steal your matching socks. You are in a fantasy world. The American public is opposed to doing what you want, the President/Kerry are lukewarm on it and pushing for talks without Islamist preconditions, and two top candidates have basically we are better off with Assad. Sorry you are on the fringe terrorist supporting side of an issue.



    As I said there is nothing illegal about him blowing to bits the other anti-Assad groups (which includes your AQ buddies).



    If it is pages of you responding to your own rants with more rants about Russian circus midgets stealing your bodily fluids, I'll pass.



    If a group of Shia terrorists slit the throats of Sunni terrorists (who rammed airliners into the towers/are brigaded with them) I am amazingly indifferent. I am safer with a Putin/Assad/Iran win than a win by the anti-Assad forces.

    Dude you cheer-lead for AQ, that's like no-fly list zone crazy.



    Well we finally cracked down on those idiots. And had you watched the coverage there was outrage those guys were not being called terrorists.



    It's not racist in the least. Poor play of the race card. Though with the misspelling and mocking of the Presidents name, I think you guys might want to check your own privilege.



    "The only good Indian is a dead one/Indian" - at least get the expression correct, even though your usage here is wrong.



    He is free to attack other groups in support of Assad. Nothing illegal or immoral about bombing the IF/MB/JAN/FSA as well. Net gain to be honest.



    So I guess Obama is also a paid Russian troll. Saying "we won't talk unless Russia/Assad/Iran seriously and potentially cripplingly limit their operations" is a precondition. They know it won't be agreed to as a precondition for these talks, they simply don't want to take part in the talks which is why it is rumored Kerry had to threaten them.



    Run with AQ and people are going to rank your side below Hezbollah. Amazing.



    Fault of the terrorists who hide among them/the people that hang out around them. Seeing as the SOHR's Pallywood style accounting puts Putin at 1380 civilians killed (ignoring that 60% or so of those are adult men and probably not all non-combatants) to 2198 terrorists. Surprisingly despite using 1960-1970s bombing tech and not being anywhere near as concerned about Human Rights backlash as we in the west are; Putin has managed to kill far more terrorists than alleged civilians based on pro-Islamist sources.

    =========


    Thankfully little will and no public pressure in the US for that.



    So they aren't going to win.



    LOL.



    Not at all, and of course he down plays the whole these guys are allied with AQ/MB angle. The fact the opposition is full of Islamists and AQ supports/allies has to go unmentioned or else he would admit his cause was bankrupt and unpopular.
    Let's see your math...right now three different Syrian sources are giving between 1400-2100 killed civilians in just over 100 days...at this Russian rate we will have say approximately 8000 killed in a year.

    VS the Russian killed terrorist numbers of say 2000 plus as you state.......and you say that is a raving success rate in over 14,000 air sorties...

    The US led effort has killed a confirmed 25,000 and the number of civilians killed as "collateral damage" is far far far far far less that the current Russian killed rate of say 1400 on the low end. AND the US is punishing SOF members for accidently targeting a hospital...97 have been hit by Russia in over 100 days and no one is punished......

    Let's see all US led air s rikes are cleanly and clearly targeting IS.

    Let's see...right now by bellingcat 97% of those 14,000 sorties have been not against IS BUT against anyone who fights against Assad....

    AND when IS attacks anti Assad forces the Russian fly CAS for them...care to explain that??? OR when anti Assad forces attack IS the Russians also fly CAS for them........wonder why

    Care to explain the difference in more than a cut and past one sentence....

    Awaiting your response to this....
    How is that then a raving success by the Putin AF????

    BTW the Russian MoD much as you do....... criticized the US for flying fewer sorties.....BUT wait fewer sorties more killed more IS vs the Russian highly precise air strikes...claimed repeatedly by the Russian MoD led to far far fewer IS killed...wonder why is that is??
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 02-01-2016 at 08:53 AM.

  19. #39
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    mwe12...now that you have a clean and concise definition of "genocide and complicit"....

    Genocide.........???

    AND what about that so called Obama "red line" in the use of chemical attacks?

    Video...
    Footage
    #Assad used GAS vs. rebels in Muadamiyat during the #GenevaPeaceTalks yesterday
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1T4AWKtoHU
    Barrel bombs used and barrel bombs loaded with chlorine......were used as a mix.

    78 killed and over 100 injured....ALL civilians...not a single fighter among the group...BTW...

    AND that is not "genocide" by international law?

  20. #40
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Barrel bombs used and barrel bombs loaded with chlorine......were used as a mix.
    Nice to see Pallywood at work.

    AND that is not "genocide" by international law?
    Nope.

    AND when IS attacks anti Assad forces the Russian fly CAS for them...care to explain that??? OR when anti Assad forces attack IS the Russians also fly CAS for them........wonder why
    They are not flying CAS for ISIS. Russia is killing both ISIS and JAN/FSA/IF. Dropping bombs on one side or the other when they are fighting each other is totally above board. The trash taking itself out.

    Let's see all US led air s rikes are cleanly and clearly targeting IS.
    And Russia is clubbing all the anti-Assad groups with cluster bombs and 1000lb bombs, interesting division of labor. Nothing saying in the law saying that you have to use guided weapons. Rather cheaper from an accounting standpoint to level the building where terrorists are meeting with 1000lb bombs and ballistic missiles than to be all that worried over the fate of the person making coffee for them.

    Let's see...right now by bellingcat 97% of those 14,000 sorties have been not against IS BUT against anyone who fights against Assad....
    And the SOHR, another anti-regime source, puts it at 965 ISIS and 1233 non-ISIS terrorists, even if you assume all the alleged civilians were with JAN/IF/FSA/whoever that's still not 97%. It does sound better I guess if one is crying over poor-AQ to say Russia is picking on them and the Muslim Brotherhood.

    The US led effort has killed a confirmed 25,000 and the number of civilians killed as "collateral damage" is far far far far far less that the current Russian killed rate of say 1400 on the low end. AND the US is punishing SOF members for accidently targeting a hospital...97 have been hit by Russia in over 100 days and no one is punished......
    Different equipment, different doctrine on usage of heavy weapons in urban areas and different public back home. Just so happens in this case the terrorists are dealing with a nation which is prepared to flatten houses they are meeting in, regardless of the risk to people serving dinner.

    SO if the US President physically "knows all of this" and if you deny he does not then the US is in serious trouble......if he knows all of this AND yet undertakes nothing......absolutely nothing......no public statements, nor interviews on the subject, no international press conference, no UNSC demanded meetings on the subject, no direct phone calls to Putin other than the lame Kerry "asking" pretty please for Russian FM Lavrov to end the bombings.....
    The US has expressed alarm.

    Thankfully we as a nation are not required to do more, nor do the voters wish to ride to the aid of a band heavily made up of the same types of terrorists we lost civil liberties over. Wasn't public support when Assad allegedly used chemical weapons and sure isn't now with a Russian air group blasting terrorists.

    WHEN legally he falls under the 1948 Convention for "complicity" and is liable for war crimes....even if he does nothing...
    Nope. Our leadership would be fine legally if they star around eating ice cream and watched the VKS airstrikes and made explosion noises while watching the impact.

    mwe12... my friend and what is occurring in Syria "ain't genocide...get real my friend".....
    It's a civil war, where one side holds up among the civilian population and the other doesn't mind the bad press in getting at the rebels and their infrastructure, then throw in one-off massacres by both sides and this is not a genocide by any stretch. This isn't Rwanda or Nazi Germany. The term genocide gets so wildly overused it runs the risk of losing any meaning.

    Trolling is easy, critic is easy, cut and paste is easy...... being an American outside the US is great as it gives you a total different look on life other than the Trump view........
    I'll keep my American view on stuff thank you. You should probably come back and talk to some actual Americans, you are out of step with the public on everything from supporting AQ to wanting America to put Islamists into power. As I said, enjoy being on the losing side.

    So again if we revisit say JaN that you place in the same grouping as IS/AQ and want they all killed.....just as Putin/Assad does.....
    JAN is in that grouping.

    UP TO TODAY 1 Feb 2016 JaN has not killed a single American and has no US "blood on their hands".
    They are part of AQ. That's quite enough. Outed yourself for supporting a group which murdered three-thousand Americans.

    It's a shame and a disservice to the victims that we are not blasting those "crazy JAN kids" and their allies to bits.

    If you check your profile and comments..and compare it to his profile and comments..no basic difference is there....??
    Thanks but no thanks.

    AND yes I am getting monetized by the thousands of Euros....and just what does Russia pay you BTW??
    - explains a lot.

    BTW there I fly easily to the US...why I have proven my "loyalty" to the US more times than you have had birthdays......and that my friend sits deep in the computers....getting the computers to change that fact...very hard.
    In the future tell the customs people or airplane passengers how great of guys JAN are. Bottom line it's past a fringe position.

    Years of basically one-sided propaganda, which is still ongoing, about how great of guys these terrorist are (even the idiotic cat story) and covering up for their AQ links, and still the public doesn't want to help the take power or even take in economic migrants. Really a remarkable case of the intended beneficiary of the propaganda being so rotten that AJ and the MSM couldn't cover it from the public.
    Last edited by mwe12; 02-02-2016 at 02:07 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Syria in 2016 (January-March)
    By davidbfpo in forum Middle East
    Replies: 3135
    Last Post: 03-31-2016, 08:51 PM
  2. Foreign fighters in Iraq & Syria
    By davidbfpo in forum Middle East
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 12-08-2015, 08:52 PM
  3. Syria under Bashir Assad (closed end 2014)
    By SWJ Blog in forum Middle East
    Replies: 903
    Last Post: 12-31-2014, 11:08 PM
  4. Replies: 534
    Last Post: 09-20-2010, 01:18 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •