The Syrian Crisis

[pmaitra]

Obama: preparing to attack Syria?

There are ominous signs that the US is preparing for military intervention against Syria. As in Iraq, it is of course the pretext of WMD - this time the potential movement of Syrian chemical and biological weopons - that is being deployed to rationalise US aggression. The New York Times quotes Obama as saying:
...

Very interesting article. Read more: Musings of a Durotrigan: Obama: preparing to attack Syria?

 

[W.G.Ewald]

"Power flows from the barrel of the gun?"

Chairman Mao

Every Communist must grasp the truth, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

"Problems of War and Strategy" (November 6, 1938), Selected Works, Vol. II, p. 224.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Obama: preparing to attack Syria?

Very interesting article. Read more: Musings of a Durotrigan: Obama: preparing to attack Syria?

How could Obama possibly benefit from attacking Syria?

There are ominous signs that the US is preparing for military intervention against Syria. As in Iraq, it is of course the pretext of WMD - this time the potential movement of Syrian chemical and biological weopons - that is being deployed to rationalise US aggression. The New York Times quotes Obama as saying:

 

[asianobserve]

Are you sure these are rebels?

Those are not rebels. The pic is just a visual reference of the weapon in the article.

 

[asianobserve]

How could Obama possibly benefit from attacking Syria?

The Americans should let the French do it. But if Iran will launch a full invasion of Syria to relieve its ally in distress then that's the time the US is needed. (France cannot take on Iran in Syria alone.)

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Obama: preparing to attack Syria?

Very interesting article. Read more: Musings of a Durotrigan: Obama: preparing to attack Syria?

I do not believe that the US will intervene in Syria under any circumstances, although Obama is compelled to make statements as he has recently to attempt to forestall Syria's use of chemical weapons. I have pointed out elsewhere that the US, having destroyed its own stockpiles of chemical weapons (almost 30X those of Syria) which dated to WWI, has the technical capability to dispose of the problem safely if given the opportunity.

 

[pmaitra]

The Americans should let the French do it. But if Iran will launch a full invasion of Syria to relieve its ally in distress then that's the time the US is needed. (France cannot take on Iran in Syria alone.)

Your statement is best described as drivel.

Could you please explain if Iranian Army enters Syria to help the Syrian Army, how is than an 'invasion?'

The only invaders are the Turkish and imported Arab mercenaries here.

We heard similar bovine droppings earlier too when the Soviet Army entered Afghanistan to help the Afghan Army fight against Pakistani and Arab Jihadis, including Osama bin Laden, who were funded by the Saudis and CIA. They teach that in US textbooks as 'Soviet-Afghan War,' when in reality, the Soviets and Afghans were allied. Do they teach the same drivel in your country as well?

 

[pmaitra]

I do not believe that the US will intervene in Syria under any circumstances, although Obama is compelled to make statements as he has recently to attempt to forestall Syria's use of chemical weapons. I have pointed out elsewhere that the US, having destroyed its own stockpiles of chemical weapons (almost 30X those of Syria) which dated to WWI, has the technical capability to dispose of the problem safely if given the opportunity.

IMHO, the threat of a Chemical Weapons Usage by Syria has greatly increased with foreign intervention. Syria is suffering from an insurgency that is only partially domestic, and armed and funded externally to a very large extent. Not only that, many of the combatants are not even Syrian. They are entering Syria from Turkey. Turkey is using the umbrella of NATO to carry out sabotage in a neighbouring country in complete transgression of international laws. More than 23,000 Syrians have lost their lives, and given the flow of funds and weapons from Turkey, Saudi, Qatar, US, and elsewhere, the rebels have consistently rebuffed any attempts to negotiate. Turkey is at the forefront of this insurgency. Under such circumstances, Turkey is a legitimate target for Syria to use its Chemical Weapons.

Personally, I feel Assad has shown great restraint in not using its Chemical Weapons. This war has been imposed upon him, and no matter what he does, he is well within his rights to defend his country, and the primary responsibility lies with Turkey.

Obama, for a change, could spend some time reading the US Constitution. The same applies to the US military generals, especially that obnoxiously outspoken Leon Panetta. The sooner the US goes back to the fundamentals, i.e., a non-interventionist foreign policy, the better will it be for the US. Sadly, these days, the US Constitution is forgotten in the midst of a lot of seemingly patriotic ruckus.

Please don't take this personally, but any act by anybody, no matter how dangerous, or how brave, deserves zero credit, if it does not uphold the constitution. A person is a citizen first, and soldier second.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

The same applies to the US military generals, especially that obnoxiously outspoken Leon Panetta.

L

eon Edward Panetta is the 23rd and current United States Secretary of Defense, serving in the administration of President Barack Obama since 2011. Prior to taking office, he served as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency...In 1956, he entered Santa Clara University, and in 1960 he graduated magna cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science. He also received a Juris Doctor in 1963 from the Santa Clara University School of Law. In 1964, he joined the United States Army as a Second Lieutenant, where he served as an officer in Army Military Intelligence.[8] There he received the Army Commendation Medal, and was discharged in 1966 as a First Lieutenant.[9]

Wikipedia

 

[asianobserve]

Your statement is best described as drivel.

Could you please explain if Iranian Army enters Syria to help the Syrian Army, how is than an 'invasion?'

Well, it depends on who are you talking. I believe that majority of Syrians no longer want Assad. So to them an Iranian intervention to prop up Assad will be an invasion...

 

[Razor]

Syria envoy says Assad Resignation is up for discussion

Syria's deputy prime minister has said the government is prepared to discuss the exit of Bashar al-Assad, but that the president's resignation cannot be a pre-condition for talks.

Source: BBC

 

[pmaitra]

Well, it depends on who are you talking. I believe that majority of Syrians no longer want Assad. So to them an Iranian intervention to prop up Assad will be an invasion...

Your beliefs and the recent election of Assad do not concur. Beliefs are exactly that, beliefs. Do the majority of Syrians want a regime that is dominated by Turkish puppets, imported Arab mercenaries, Al-Qaida and Salafi elements, etc.? You would be correct if you speak for the majority of Syrians, and I doubt that you do.

 

[pmaitra]

L Wikipedia

Thank you Sir.

I saw that when I wrote my post. He has a Bachelor's Degree in Political Science. His recent comments do not reflect his instruction w.r.t. this degree, but reflects his employment with the CIA.

 

[asianobserve]

Your beliefs and the recent election of Assad do not concur.

Wow. I never knew you can be that naive... (pardon my French) That country is not exactly India. The Assad family has been ruling that country of generations and you really think that they have a free and fair elections?

 

[asianobserve]

Anyway, here's a graphic religio-ethnic make up of Syria -

Last time I heard the Assads are Alawites, and they are only 13% of the population? And after 40 years of absolute domination over the rest of the ethnic groups and Assad still overwhelmingly won the election... You must be the most loyal Assadite if you insist that Assad's electoral win was free and fair and should be respected.

 

[pmaitra]

Wow. I never knew you can be that naive... (pardon my French) That country is not exactly India. The Assad family has been ruling that country of generations and you really think that they have a free and fair elections?

You mean 'naïve?' Well, you are entitled to your perception, and what you wrote is not French, so please do not beg my pardon.

The Assad Family has ruled for generations? How many generations? It is Bashal al-Assad now, and it was his father, Hafez al-Assad before him. That's it.

Do read up a little before commenting.

Syria - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Even so, does it prove he did not win the elections?

 

[pmaitra]

Last time I heard the Assads are Alawites, and they are only 13% of the population? And after 40 years of absolute domination over the rest of the ethnic groups and Assad still overwhelmingly won the election... You must be the most loyal Assadite if you insist that Assad's electoral win was free and fair and should be respected.

Last time you heard - well, when was the last time you actually studied the government of Syria?

There are many Sunnis in prominent positions, including Bashar al-Assad's in-laws.

What more do you have to offer?

 

[asianobserve]

There are many Sunnis in prominent positions, including Bashar al-Assad's in-laws.

You seem to have a very sunny appreciation of Assad. But why is that country in a bloody civil war?

 

[pmaitra]

You seem to have a very sunny appreciation of Assad. But why is that country in a bloody civil war?

That's a pitiable reply.

To answer your question, all I have to say is, read the thread, especially the article I posted from the Guardian, UK.

 

[asianobserve]

That's a pitiable reply.

That's your opinion. I know Russia is trying to move heaven and earth to prop up Mr. Assad. It will craft all justifications for its position and you will toe them willingly. Anyway, you can also said the same thing against me. But let's see how this matter will develop. Ultimately, it will be the events on the ground that will settle the raging argument on this thread.