The Syrian Crisis

[Armand2REP]

^^

Tank destroyed on July-27-2012 and uploaded on YouTube on July-27-2012?

Syria must be quite ahead with internet facilities in the middle of a Civil War.

Mobile access from Turkey is available.

 

[pmaitra]

Mobile access from Turkey is available.

So, along with weapons, Turkey is providing mobile access to these Al-Qaida terrorists as well? Why not?

Thank you for providing us with this insightful information. Do tell us more.

 

[Armand2REP]

Aleppo is only 40km from the border and FSA controls everything between it. Getting close enough to a mobile tower to upload a video can be done without leaving the country. Has nothing to do with what Turkey provides as it is a public network.

 

[Scalieback]

Your question:

Your answer:

You answered your own question.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum

Wrogn way to use that quote as clearly there is an answer and you're taking two seperate issues such as the fall of a rotten and despotic empire to creating what in all likelihood is Islamic, pro-Jihad states that are against the west.

Clearly the west had something to gain from aiding those fighting the soviets ie the fall of that empire. There is absolutely nothing to be gained from creating more states which hate the west. That is QED and I won't trivialise it by making it bold and in colour

 

[pmaitra]

Wrogn way to use that quote as clearly there is an answer and you're taking two seperate issues such as the fall of a rotten and despotic empire to creating what in all likelihood is Islamic, pro-Jihad states that are against the west.

I was speculating why the West, including UK, might want to support the Al-Qaida and Islamic Jihadis.

That 'might' in red is a preterite of a modal verb. This means, I am not talking about reality, but about possibility. Hope that clarifies everything.

My usage of Q.E.D. is perfectly fine. You are a great guy and I trust a much better soldier than I am, but Latin is not your forté.

Clearly the west had something to gain from aiding those fighting the soviets ie the fall of that empire. There is absolutely nothing to be gained from creating more states which hate the west. That is QED and I won't trivialise it by making it bold and in colour

I agree completely.

 

[Scalieback]

Your memory appears to be short:

Not as short or as biased as your own

Or you would not forget the Latin America, Congo, Angola, entire North Africa, South Africa, French Indonesia , Arab world and Afstan where CIA and MI6 have been playing dirty tricks in the name of cold war but actually for economic colonialism. Petrice Lumumba may sound strange to you !

That he got the backing because he was anti soviet? Even though he was as corrupt as they come? Different world, all about stopping Soviet influence and much bigger budgets btw.

Perhaps you have forgotten those largest Polish, Ukrainian, Serb, Slavs, Georgian, kashmiri and Chechen gangs that your country (MI6) had been sheltering to organise insurgencies and sabotage in those regions.

Always have had a penchant for supporting the undedog the Brits. Heyho

The British built their empire on nothing but doing all this destabilising the world. Perhaps one needs to remind you that no part of globe where the British ruled is stable even today.

You might as well say everywhere is unstable then. What an idiotic thing to say

Btw, the Romans invented divide and rule. We just happened to modernise it a tad

 

[Scalieback]

^^

Tank destroyed on July-27-2012 and uploaded on YouTube on July-27-2012?

Syria must be quite ahead with internet facilities in the middle of a Civil War.

I saw that on Al Jazeera yesterday. Doesn't take much to rip it from a news feed and post it.

Welcome to the 21st century. War has been on our tv sets since at least Vietnam. This is quite a famous quote from '82: BBC News - Brian Hanrahan: 'I counted them out' By that I mean what happens thousands of miles away is on your tv the next day if not earlier.

 

[Scalieback]

I was speculating why the West, including UK, might want to support the Al-Qaida and Islamic Jihadis.

What? Have you lost your marbles? Why on earth would we (by that I use the royal one ) want to promote organisations that want to see the end of our freedoms?

That 'might' in red is a preterite of a modal verb. This means, I am not talking about reality, but about possibility. Hope that clarifies everything.

I understand the inference but it's like saying India wants pakistan to have not only Kashmir, but the whole of the sub continent. Why 'might' you want that?

My usage of Q.E.D. is perfectly fine. You are a great guy and I trust a much better soldier than I am, but Latin is not your forté.

It was, just reposting as usual

 

[pmaitra]

What? Have you lost your marbles? Why on earth would we (by that I use the royal one ) want to promote organisations that want to see the end of our freedoms?

I had lost my marbles, but I found them later inside my 'tin foil hat' [sic.], which I had discarded under my drawer on an inferred recommendation from you.

BTW, your question was already answered.

I understand the inference but it's like saying India wants pakistan to have not only Kashmir, but the whole of the sub continent. Why 'might' you want that?

No, Syria is not a case of border dispute like India-Pakistan, so it is a non sequitur.

It was, just reposting as usual

That's quit nice of you. :thumb:

 

[Armand2REP]

I saw that on Al Jazeera yesterday. Doesn't take much to rip it from a news feed and post it.

Do share because it isn't on the AJ news feed or blog. Not to mention it would have the logo on it.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Did Syria Receive Its Chemical Weapons from Saddam? - Global - The Atlantic Wire

 

[W.G.Ewald]

No, Syria Doesn't Have Saddam's Chemical Weapons | Danger Room | Wired.com

 

[pmaitra]

Crisis in Syria emboldens country's Kurds

What is happening in Syria cannot be taken in isolation. The protracted upheaval in one of the Middle East's biggest, most powerful and most influential countries is affecting the entire region and, most critically, its immediate neighbours.
[HR][/HR]
Some in Turkey also believe that a desperate President Assad has deliberately abandoned, or handed over, the northern regions to the PYD in order to create tensions with Turkey and also divide the already fractious opposition movements in Syria.

Source: BBC News - Crisis in Syria emboldens country's Kurds

 

[pmaitra]

Turkey's pursuit of Kurdish rebels: Pretext for NATO intervention in Syria?

Dr Franklin Lamb, director of Americans Concerned for Middle East Peace, told RT that it increasingly seems that Ankara is going to make good on its pledge to cross the border into Syria in pursuit of the Kurdish rebels.

Lamb stressed that Erdogan had earlier hinted that he may invoke Article 5 of the NATO charter, which considers an attack on one member of the bloc to be an attack on all. "If Syria pursues across the border [with Turkey] one can imagine that the Turks will say to their NATO partners 'look, this is attack on all of us, we've got to go in.' And that might give some excuse."

Source: http://www.rt.com/news/turkey-syria-kurdish-rebels-176/

 

[pmaitra]

2 Western Photographers Freed From Syria Captivity

Two Western photojournalists in Syria were held captive for a week by Islamic militants before being rescued by Syrian rebels, one of the men said Friday.

Jeroen Oerlemans, a prominent Dutch photographer, told Business News Radio of the Netherlands that he is not sure which group held him and John Cantlie of Britain, but said he is sure they were not Syrian.

"They all claimed they came from countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh and Chechnya, and they said there was some vague 'emir' at the head of the group," he said in a seven-minute interview from Turkey, where the men were resting after their ordeal. Oerlemans was also recovering from two gunshot wounds suffered during an escape attempt.

Source: 2 Western Photographers Freed From Syria Captivity - ABC News

Commentary:

• Pakistan, the typical thakedar of Jihad, is exporting terrorists, a product it produces en masse.
• Apparently, fearing media backlash, FSA terrorists have convinced their importer Jihadis to let these two journalists go.

 

[pmaitra]

Syria: destruction and a dearth of diplomacy

Outside powers, the US and Russia in particular, must consider restarting talks if the ruination of a country is to be avoided

President Obama's decision last year to call for the fall of the Assad regime, in which he was followed by Britain and other allies, was, it can be argued, a mistake. The reasons were understandable. First, the regime was behaving appallingly. Second, the US did not want to be behind the curve in another phase of the Arab spring, particularly as the Damascus government was, unlike the Mubarak government in Egypt, one which it had always disliked and which was tied to regional foes of America in the shape of Iran and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Third, Israel welcomed anything that would undermine Syria and discomfit Iran, and so did Saudi Arabia and some other Gulf states. Fourth, Obama and his advisers probably believed that Assad had gone beyond the point where he could be part of any solution. Yet it was one thing to believe that Bashar al-Assad and his relatives and associates would at some point have to go, and another thing to say so in an irrevocably public way.

The unfortunate result has been to cut off any possibility of negotiations between the antagonists as well as to slam the door to close co-operation between the US and Russia, the two countries which could, if they acted together, conceivably make a difference to the outcome in Syria. It can be argued, of course, that the Syrian government has repudiated all suggestions that it should engage with those it terms terrorists, and that it undermined the Annan plan from the start. But time, and desperation, could have changed that. The Assad government is in a different, and worse, situation now than it was few months ago. Yet why would the regime ever agree to talks if its own liquidation is bound to be the first item on the agenda? Equally, why would insurgent groups contemplate any compromise when they feel the western powers, as well as many regional governments, are behind them? Finally, why should Russia go along with a policy of regime change in Syria when it would be open to a charge of dumping an ally, and would be making itself complicit in a scheme, as Vladimir Putin almost certainly sees it, to reduce Russia's own influence and reputation in the Middle East?

Because nobody can move diplomatically, the fires of war have been stoked up to the point where they threaten the ruination of a country of 24 million people. Now Aleppo, a handsome and historic city which had been largely spared until now, may be about to be smashed up. The conflict is, one can be certain, also rending Syria's social fabric. Not only relations between sects and faiths, but those between the classes, as a militarised rural peasantry joins, and often leads, the fighting. The possibility that extremists, al-Qaida and others, will try to move in, is obvious. The grim news from Iraq, where a new wave of bombings has taken many lives, suggests that Sunni extremists may now envisage a common front aimed at restoring Sunni dominance in both countries. All this bodes ill for the future, including any post-Assad future.

There are still those, like the small and brave non-violent Syrian opposition, who think there is another way, as a statement after a recent Sant'Egidio meeting in Rome reminds us. There are two options for outside powers now. One is to stand by as Syria burns, with some governments sustaining the rebels with arms supplies, and waiting for defections, assassinations, or mutinies in the armed forces to bring down the regime. If we could be sure it would happen quickly, that would be one thing. But what if Assad continues to hold on? For weeks, for months, even longer? That is why the second option, a return to diplomacy and, in particular, a new start by America and Russia in dealing with this terrible problem, cries out for consideration. Are they too entrenched, or too haplessly caught up in the consequences of their own decisions, to even try? If so, they will bear a heavy responsibility.

Source, The Guardian, UK: Syria: destruction and a dearth of diplomacy | Editorial | Comment is free | The Guardian

 

[Scalieback]

BTW, your question was already answered.

Not really. We had something to gain with the fall of the sov empire, or so we thought. As Stan Laurel used to say 'that's another fine mess' Brit and US intel agencies stir up enough hatred in and around the Med? To what end? Create more anti-western states?

No, Syria is not a case of border dispute like India-Pakistan, so it is a non sequitur.

Don't try and twist it. It was a perfectly good simile. What do we have to gain? If India let Pakistan roll it's tanks etc over all of the sub continent, what do you have to gain?

You need to stop reading Pravda now that the tin foil hat is off

That's quit nice of you. :thumb:

I try

 

[Scalieback]

Do share because it isn't on the AJ news feed or blog. Not to mention it would have the logo on it.

Oh dear, Frenchie's at it again

I said I saw it. It doesn't mean they are still showing it. It doesn't mean that they were the original source. You yourself said mobile feeds can go via Turkey.

 

[pmaitra]

Not really. We had something to gain with the fall of the sov empire, or so we thought. As Stan Laurel used to say 'that's another fine mess' Brit and US intel agencies stir up enough hatred in and around the Med? To what end? Create more anti-western states?

Again, Q.E.D..

Don't try and twist it. It was a perfectly good simile. What do we have to gain? If India let Pakistan roll it's tanks etc over all of the sub continent, what do you have to gain?

Simile? Awwww. All right Geoffrey Chaucer, I'll grant you this one. Happy?

You need to stop reading Pravda now that the tin foil hat is off

You mean Daily Telegraph, UK?

I try

I would always encourage you to. :thumb:

 

[Scalieback]

Again, Q.E.D..

That's just boring now. Why on earth would we want to create more states that dislike us. Give a proper response, just this once.....

Simile? Awwww. All right Geoffrey Chaucer, I'll grant you this one. Happy?

Canterbury Tales? No thanks

You mean Daily Telegraph, UK?

The Telepgraph says western int agencies started the arab spring? Source?

I would always encourage you to. :thumb:

Nah, I've upset Frenchie now He'll go off into one in a mo ...... At least he's not going by the national trait