Syria's Assad says Western strike could trigger regional war

[boomerangutang]

Someone mentioned earlier about possibly destroying jihadists in Syria - at some later date - perhaps when the rebels prevail and the toxic smoke starts to waft away. No easy task, for many reasons. {1} Jihadists meld with regular people, sometimes even dressing as women. {2} They're like snakes: striking (with their 'repeat after me, or die' dictates), and then slithering away.

There are videos online which show, in real time, US attack helicopters attacking jihadist' camps in the Afghan desert. One in particular is at night, so all is shown thru infra-red night vision lens. It's like a combination of a turkey shoot and a pinata party. Individual combatants are ID'd when they're show to be running/cowering and holding what looks like a weapon. They show as white on a black background. Then gunner calls HQ to briefly describe target. When HQ gives the 'ok,' 50 mm incendiary bombs are shot at target from the airship. The last thing seen are large white explosions.

[Chicog]

And Obama's "red line" was drawn in August 2012, the chemical attacks came almost a year later.

1 year is very little time to plan, find and use chem weapon. Only if some secret services would help you

Syria has had chemical weapons since Hafedh was in charge, although he didn't actually use them; conventional weapons and bulldozers were enough for the Hama massacre.

[Chicog]

I don't think the jihadi forces can be in full control of places for any long period. It will be just a matter of time before the US bombs the jihadis in Syria.

If it is proven that Turkey and some Gulf states provide any kind of aid to the jihadi forces, the US should cut all aid to those countries.

The way things look, the best option is for Assad and his government to stay in power, BUT free and fair elections should be called for within 2 years.

OK consider it proven. And some of the US aid is getting to them as well.

Get rid of Assad first, then the Jihadis can go and continue the fight in Iraq where all of the above really want them.

So, you think that if/when the Assad regime's gone in the near future, the jihadis will just leave Syria and move on to Iraq ?!

They are fighting a sectarian war in Syria, so when that's over, it's not a big leap to suggest they'd go a bit further north and move on to the next one, is it?

[boomerangutang]

There are so many jihadists in that region. Some may move elsewhere, when they feel that there's not enough action to keep their adrenaline going. Yet others will likely remain in Syria to force their 'holier-than-thou' edicts on the populace.

If Amway could get the jihadists to sign up and sell laundry soap instead of Sharia crapcakes, there would be a lot of money made by top dogs in the MLM pyramid.

[Chicog]

Seriously. Put a bit more water in it.

[Scott]

One post deleted. Please stop bickering and direct your comments to the topic and not other posters.

[simple1]

@ABCer. To attempt to get this topic back on track and not have it closed down, I have tried below to respond to some of your comments. You’re welcome to respond, but please do not come back and say its all drivel and just propaganda of one form or the other – respond with your obervations supported by reports from recognised professional media organisations or some other form of attributable content.

At the URL below it endeavours to capture the number of deaths within the Free Syrian Army (SFA) and Syrian government forces. Roughly double the number of deaths for the FSA; that makes sense due to the superior fire power of the government forces and militia such as air power, tanks and heavy artillery. It is estimated that civilian deaths in the rebel held areas are high, again due to fire power aimed at urban centres and the Assad militia death squad activities in ethnic cleansing. I’m sure the extremists from the Al Qaeda aligned fighting battalions are carrying out the same activities

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Syrian_civil_war

Chemical warfare has allegedly carried out by the Syrian government forces due to physical evidence of munitions used such as missiles and the shell calibre from artillery shells that the SFA do not have. In addition it has been pointed out the August 21st chemical attack could have only been implemented by the Syrian army as the launch areas were from territory they held; it would have been impossible for the rebels to locate the artillery and missiles in army held areas.

For the moment the move to democratise government is facing major challenges by the Islamic extremists. In Egypt (Sunni) it was stopped in its tracts when Morsi started to implement Islamist policies and was subsequently overthrown by the army. In Iraq (majority Shiite) it is very borderline development due to a sharp increase in mainly Sunni extremist led car and suicide bombing trying to destabilise the government.

It is a fact that the US, excepting Iraq and Egypt, currently favours Sunni dictatorships for regional strategic issues and for the moment the US/NATO are heavily investing in supporting the governments & armed forces of Turkey, Jordon, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States to counterbalance the spread of Shiite extremism, supported by Iran. As some have mentioned in this topic, in effect a new regional Cold War by some major powers and their proxies

[Scott]

Off-topic post deleted.

[Chicog]

Interesting timing....

MOSCOW, Sept 22 | Sun Sep 22, 2013 6:21am EDT

(Reuters) - Russia on Sunday criticised what it said were Western attempts to use a Syrian chemical arms disarmament deal to seek a U.N. resolution threatening force against President Bashar al-Assad's government.

"They see in the U.S.-Russian deal not a chance to save the planet from significant quantities of chemical weapons in Syria, but as a chance to do what Russia and China will not allow, namely to push through a resolution involving (the threat of)force against the regime and shielding the opposition," Interfax news agency cited Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov as saying.

Lavrov also said Russia, which has used its veto to block Western efforts to use the U.N. Security Council's clout to pressure Assad's government, was ready to send troops to Syria to ensure the safety of U.N. chemical weapons inspectors.

Mortar round hits Russian embassy in Syria

(AFP) / 22 September 2013

A mortar round hit the compound of the Russian embassy in the Syrian capital Damascus on Sunday, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.

There were no immediate reports of injuries in the attack, which struck inside the compound but did not appear to hit the embassy’s main building.

Rebel forces arrayed in parts of the outskirts of the capital regularly fire rockets and mortar rounds into Damascus, including the area around the embassy in the centre of the city.

But the attack is the first time that they have hit the embassy compound, the Observatory said.

Russia is a staunch ally of the regime of Syrian President Bashar Al Assad, providing him with diplomatic backing as well as weapons.

It was a key force behind a deal under which Damascus will hand over its chemical weapons stocks for destruction, which headed off a US plan to take military action against the regime.

[ABCer]

@ABCer. To attempt to get this topic back on track and not have it closed down, I have tried below to respond to some of your comments. You’re welcome to respond, but please do not come back and say its all drivel and just propaganda of one form or the other – respond with your obervations supported by reports from recognised professional media organisations or some other form of attributable content.

At the URL below it endeavours to capture the number of deaths within the Free Syrian Army (SFA) and Syrian government forces. Roughly double the number of deaths for the FSA; that makes sense due to the superior fire power of the government forces and militia such as air power, tanks and heavy artillery. It is estimated that civilian deaths in the rebel held areas are high, again due to fire power aimed at urban centres and the Assad militia death squad activities in ethnic cleansing. I’m sure the extremists from the Al Qaeda aligned fighting battalions are carrying out the same activities

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Syrian_civil_war

Chemical warfare has allegedly carried out by the Syrian government forces due to physical evidence of munitions used such as missiles and the shell calibre from artillery shells that the SFA do not have. In addition it has been pointed out the August 21st chemical attack could have only been implemented by the Syrian army as the launch areas were from territory they held; it would have been impossible for the rebels to locate the artillery and missiles in army held areas.

For the moment the move to democratise government is facing major challenges by the Islamic extremists. In Egypt (Sunni) it was stopped in its tracts when Morsi started to implement Islamist policies and was subsequently overthrown by the army. In Iraq (majority Shiite) it is very borderline development due to a sharp increase in mainly Sunni extremist led car and suicide bombing trying to destabilise the government.

It is a fact that the US, excepting Iraq and Egypt, currently favours Sunni dictatorships for regional strategic issues and for the moment the US/NATO are heavily investing in supporting the governments & armed forces of Turkey, Jordon, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States to counterbalance the spread of Shiite extremism, supported by Iran. As some have mentioned in this topic, in effect a new regional Cold War by some major powers and their proxies

@simple1, I never resort to bickering and personal attacks unless provoked by same. Thanks for your response and contributing information. 'Drivel' is not in my vocabulary. Now, back to the question at hand.

First, you will notice that there are numerous mentions of use of child soldiers, suicide attackers. This can hardly be attributed to Assad. At the same time it increases the accusations against him. Suiciders are a mark of extremists he is fighting against. Whether they are Sunni or Shiite is not important. The high numbers of 'foreign' fighters against him proves that he is fighting against imported professional 'rebels' whose aim was, is and will be to destabilize the regime and take over one more country in the region. From what we've seen in the past this would be bad news for us all - Americans, Russians, Israelis, Europeans, even Chinese.

Under these circumstances to go and bomb the sh*t out of Assad is madness.

One more factor not to be overlooked. The innocent people are dying in huge numbers. Most of the world points finger at Assad. But we all know too well that the 'professional extremists revolutionaries' do not care about innocence, do use local women, children and old non-combatants as shields. Hence more fingers point at Assad.

All said above does not make me Assad's supporter. He is doomed, he will have to go. But not before the country is stabilized and the transition of power can be arranged safely. Once again, under these circumstances using military force against him would be stupid (buying the provocation by 'rebels') or a conscious act of destabilization of yet another country in Middle East.

This is my opinion. I believe I'm being rational. I may be wrong, but that doesn't mean some rude underdogs can call me mad, drunk or a fool.

And allow me to stubbornly believe that use of chemicals was a provocation.

[Publicus]

Well, Chicog, let us agree on disagreeing. I think I have made my position clear enough.

I do not have any 'hard facts' to support my 'madcap theories' and I am totally unaffected by 'anti US propaganda'. Not even by US propaganda.

Unlike many others I do not believe in what is written by any politicians. Or mass media. I only believe in common sense. My own common sense.

My common sense tells me this:

1. Of those 100,000 dead in Syria (your figure) how many killed by Assad compared to Rebels? I do not know. If you do - you only know what you are told.

2. You say Sunni democracy suits everyone except Iran, Iraq, Russia and PRC. Let us say the four are bad (I am not their supporter). But the others, are they good? More importantly, will they all support US or Obama? Methinks not.

3. You say you live in Middle East. Nothing wrong with this. Do you really believe Sunni democracy is going to be better than today's Assad? Like in Afghanistan? Like in Iraq? Like in Iran? Like in Egypt? Like in Libya? Are you sure?

4. Assad used chemicals on his own people? I do not know. If you do - you only know what you are told. Who is affected by propaganda you or I?

5. You say Syrians (Sunni) are fighting Assad. I am afraid they are running away and/or getting killed. I may be right(?) But you know - only what you are told.

All I say - doubt everything. Do not believe any propaganda wherever it comes from. And do not rush into bombings. Because if you do - those dead will be on the hands of intervening country. Didn't this happen before? Many times?

Who said that US Gov't has the Licence to kill? Who said that US democracy is a model to copy? Who said that US has the right to police the world? Who said that US soldiers must go and get killed in other countries?

By now you can say that my name is Usama Bin Laden. Or that I am Putin's apologist. Or that I am an anti US propagandist. Or whatever... But I think there are many US people, even politicians saying the same things.

I'd put a bit more water in it mate.

I was always taught that it is pointless to argue with drunks or fools.

I am always calling on members here to argue and discuss opinions in a civil manner. You, in particular, were asked twice to no avail.

I wonder if anybody here mentioned to you that the picture you chose for avatar represents you perfectly. Retract your lips. Uncurl your hair. Listen to your mum and you will almost make a humanoid. Don't try to kiss me anywhere.

The accompanying friend who likes your bouts of insults can visit the same beauty salon you go to. US is safe with two advocates like you. We, the neutral bystanders will just have to take a step back and watch the bombings so that the whole world can see Obama's balls! New concept in geopolitics!

Never suspected such a degree of Neanderthal's features in a modern Homo less Sapiens. I'm sure being ashamed of your own obtuse thinking is out of the question. With friends like the two of you US needs no enemies.

Oh, yes, try to work a bit more on your call-name. It does sound like a cross between a chicken and a hog, judging by your manners.

This is an ad hominem post much more than it is anything more than that.

It gives minimal attention to the thread topic to focus mostly on the poster.

Its existence encourages more of the same.

Fortunately, the targeted poster has the intelligence and judgement to ignore the ad hominem posts. If it were otherwise, the situation could be worse than it already is.

So I don't know why the ad hominem posting at this thread is allowed to continue.

[F430murci]

Well, Chicog, let us agree on disagreeing. I think I have made my position clear enough.

I do not have any 'hard facts' to support my 'madcap theories' and I am totally unaffected by 'anti US propaganda'. Not even by US propaganda.

Unlike many others I do not believe in what is written by any politicians. Or mass media. I only believe in common sense. My own common sense.

My common sense tells me this:

1. Of those 100,000 dead in Syria (your figure) how many killed by Assad compared to Rebels? I do not know. If you do - you only know what you are told.

2. You say Sunni democracy suits everyone except Iran, Iraq, Russia and PRC. Let us say the four are bad (I am not their supporter). But the others, are they good? More importantly, will they all support US or Obama? Methinks not.

3. You say you live in Middle East. Nothing wrong with this. Do you really believe Sunni democracy is going to be better than today's Assad? Like in Afghanistan? Like in Iraq? Like in Iran? Like in Egypt? Like in Libya? Are you sure?

4. Assad used chemicals on his own people? I do not know. If you do - you only know what you are told. Who is affected by propaganda you or I?

5. You say Syrians (Sunni) are fighting Assad. I am afraid they are running away and/or getting killed. I may be right(?) But you know - only what you are told.

All I say - doubt everything. Do not believe any propaganda wherever it comes from. And do not rush into bombings. Because if you do - those dead will be on the hands of intervening country. Didn't this happen before? Many times?

Who said that US Gov't has the Licence to kill? Who said that US democracy is a model to copy? Who said that US has the right to police the world? Who said that US soldiers must go and get killed in other countries?

By now you can say that my name is Usama Bin Laden. Or that I am Putin's apologist. Or that I am an anti US propagandist. Or whatever... But I think there are many US people, even politicians saying the same things.

I'd put a bit more water in it mate.

I was always taught that it is pointless to argue with drunks or fools.

I am always calling on members here to argue and discuss opinions in a civil manner. You, in particular, were asked twice to no avail.

I wonder if anybody here mentioned to you that the picture you chose for avatar represents you perfectly. Retract your lips. Uncurl your hair. Listen to your mum and you will almost make a humanoid. Don't try to kiss me anywhere.

The accompanying friend who likes your bouts of insults can visit the same beauty salon you go to. US is safe with two advocates like you. We, the neutral bystanders will just have to take a step back and watch the bombings so that the whole world can see Obama's balls! New concept in geopolitics!

Never suspected such a degree of Neanderthal's features in a modern Homo less Sapiens. I'm sure being ashamed of your own obtuse thinking is out of the question. With friends like the two of you US needs no enemies.

Oh, yes, try to work a bit more on your call-name. It does sound like a cross between a chicken and a hog, judging by your manners.

This is an ad hominem post much more than it is anything more than that.

It gives minimal attention to the thread topic to focus mostly on the poster.

Its existence encourages more of the same.

Fortunately, the targeted poster has the intelligence and judgement to ignore the ad hominem posts. If it were otherwise, the situation could be worse than it already is.

So I don't know why the ad hominem posting at this thread is allowed to continue.

What in the world is that dude talking about? The Neanderthal homo less sapien thing was quiet nutzo.

[Chicog]

As I said earlier, it's pointless arguing with drunks or fools.

If the Shi'a starting fighting Assad, his number really is up!

[Scott]

And with that little exchange finished, we will go back to the topic at hand....Syria.

[simple1]

@ABCer. To attempt to get this topic back on track and not have it closed down, I have tried below to respond to some of your comments. You’re welcome to respond, but please do not come back and say its all drivel and just propaganda of one form or the other – respond with your obervations supported by reports from recognised professional media organisations or some other form of attributable content.

At the URL below it endeavours to capture the number of deaths within the Free Syrian Army (SFA) and Syrian government forces. Roughly double the number of deaths for the FSA; that makes sense due to the superior fire power of the government forces and militia such as air power, tanks and heavy artillery. It is estimated that civilian deaths in the rebel held areas are high, again due to fire power aimed at urban centres and the Assad militia death squad activities in ethnic cleansing. I’m sure the extremists from the Al Qaeda aligned fighting battalions are carrying out the same activities

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Syrian_civil_war

Chemical warfare has allegedly carried out by the Syrian government forces due to physical evidence of munitions used such as missiles and the shell calibre from artillery shells that the SFA do not have. In addition it has been pointed out the August 21st chemical attack could have only been implemented by the Syrian army as the launch areas were from territory they held; it would have been impossible for the rebels to locate the artillery and missiles in army held areas.

For the moment the move to democratise government is facing major challenges by the Islamic extremists. In Egypt (Sunni) it was stopped in its tracts when Morsi started to implement Islamist policies and was subsequently overthrown by the army. In Iraq (majority Shiite) it is very borderline development due to a sharp increase in mainly Sunni extremist led car and suicide bombing trying to destabilise the government.

It is a fact that the US, excepting Iraq and Egypt, currently favours Sunni dictatorships for regional strategic issues and for the moment the US/NATO are heavily investing in supporting the governments & armed forces of Turkey, Jordon, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States to counterbalance the spread of Shiite extremism, supported by Iran. As some have mentioned in this topic, in effect a new regional Cold War by some major powers and their proxies

@simple1, I never resort to bickering and personal attacks unless provoked by same. Thanks for your response and contributing information. 'Drivel' is not in my vocabulary. Now, back to the question at hand.

First, you will notice that there are numerous mentions of use of child soldiers, suicide attackers. This can hardly be attributed to Assad. At the same time it increases the accusations against him. Suiciders are a mark of extremists he is fighting against. Whether they are Sunni or Shiite is not important. The high numbers of 'foreign' fighters against him proves that he is fighting against imported professional 'rebels' whose aim was, is and will be to destabilize the regime and take over one more country in the region. From what we've seen in the past this would be bad news for us all - Americans, Russians, Israelis, Europeans, even Chinese.

Under these circumstances to go and bomb the sh*t out of Assad is madness.

One more factor not to be overlooked. The innocent people are dying in huge numbers. Most of the world points finger at Assad. But we all know too well that the 'professional extremists revolutionaries' do not care about innocence, do use local women, children and old non-combatants as shields. Hence more fingers point at Assad.

All said above does not make me Assad's supporter. He is doomed, he will have to go. But not before the country is stabilized and the transition of power can be arranged safely. Once again, under these circumstances using military force against him would be stupid (buying the provocation by 'rebels') or a conscious act of destabilization of yet another country in Middle East.

This is my opinion. I believe I'm being rational. I may be wrong, but that doesn't mean some rude underdogs can call me mad, drunk or a fool.

And allow me to stubbornly believe that use of chemicals was a provocation.

You should also take into consideration that the Assad regime is extensively using children as human shields as documented in the UN reports below. From reports the practice is more prevalent by the Syrian Army and the militias. The Assad militias are notorous for entering Sunni towns and villages & murdering civilians, including children, en masse.The report also states that the Assad regime is still torturing children held in detention. Overall it appears that the Assad regime is 'outscoring' the rebels in the abuse of civilians.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18405800

I find it surprising that people, against all the evidence presented, still adhere to the view that the use of chemical weapons on 21 August was a provocation by the rebels.

I have a bad feeling that unless Assad is removed from power in the near future that the Syrian civil war will reignite another civil war in Lebanon & possibly conflict in Jordon. It has already added fuel to the fire in Iraq

[JDGRUEN]

@ABCer. To attempt to get this topic back on track and not have it closed down, I have tried below to respond to some of your comments. You’re welcome to respond, but please do not come back and say its all drivel and just propaganda of one form or the other – respond with your obervations supported by reports from recognised professional media organisations or some other form of attributable content.

At the URL below it endeavours to capture the number of deaths within the Free Syrian Army (SFA) and Syrian government forces. Roughly double the number of deaths for the FSA; that makes sense due to the superior fire power of the government forces and militia such as air power, tanks and heavy artillery. It is estimated that civilian deaths in the rebel held areas are high, again due to fire power aimed at urban centres and the Assad militia death squad activities in ethnic cleansing. I’m sure the extremists from the Al Qaeda aligned fighting battalions are carrying out the same activities

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Syrian_civil_war

Chemical warfare has allegedly carried out by the Syrian government forces due to physical evidence of munitions used such as missiles and the shell calibre from artillery shells that the SFA do not have. In addition it has been pointed out the August 21st chemical attack could have only been implemented by the Syrian army as the launch areas were from territory they held; it would have been impossible for the rebels to locate the artillery and missiles in army held areas.

For the moment the move to democratise government is facing major challenges by the Islamic extremists. In Egypt (Sunni) it was stopped in its tracts when Morsi started to implement Islamist policies and was subsequently overthrown by the army. In Iraq (majority Shiite) it is very borderline development due to a sharp increase in mainly Sunni extremist led car and suicide bombing trying to destabilise the government.

It is a fact that the US, excepting Iraq and Egypt, currently favours Sunni dictatorships for regional strategic issues and for the moment the US/NATO are heavily investing in supporting the governments & armed forces of Turkey, Jordon, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States to counterbalance the spread of Shiite extremism, supported by Iran. As some have mentioned in this topic, in effect a new regional Cold War by some major powers and their proxies

@simple1, I never resort to bickering and personal attacks unless provoked by same. Thanks for your response and contributing information. 'Drivel' is not in my vocabulary. Now, back to the question at hand.

First, you will notice that there are numerous mentions of use of child soldiers, suicide attackers. This can hardly be attributed to Assad. At the same time it increases the accusations against him. Suiciders are a mark of extremists he is fighting against. Whether they are Sunni or Shiite is not important. The high numbers of 'foreign' fighters against him proves that he is fighting against imported professional 'rebels' whose aim was, is and will be to destabilize the regime and take over one more country in the region. From what we've seen in the past this would be bad news for us all - Americans, Russians, Israelis, Europeans, even Chinese.

Under these circumstances to go and bomb the sh*t out of Assad is madness.

One more factor not to be overlooked. The innocent people are dying in huge numbers. Most of the world points finger at Assad. But we all know too well that the 'professional extremists revolutionaries' do not care about innocence, do use local women, children and old non-combatants as shields. Hence more fingers point at Assad.

All said above does not make me Assad's supporter. He is doomed, he will have to go. But not before the country is stabilized and the transition of power can be arranged safely. Once again, under these circumstances using military force against him would be stupid (buying the provocation by 'rebels') or a conscious act of destabilization of yet another country in Middle East.

This is my opinion. I believe I'm being rational. I may be wrong, but that doesn't mean some rude underdogs can call me mad, drunk or a fool.

And allow me to stubbornly believe that use of chemicals was a provocation.

You should also take into consideration that the Assad regime is extensively using children as human shields as documented in the UN reports below. From reports the practice is more prevalent by the Syrian Army and the militias. The Assad militias are notorous for entering Sunni towns and villages & murdering civilians, including children, en masse.The report also states that the Assad regime is still torturing children held in detention. Overall it appears that the Assad regime is 'outscoring' the rebels in the abuse of civilians.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18405800

I find it surprising that people, against all the evidence presented, still adhere to the view that the use of chemical weapons on 21 August was a provocation by the rebels.

I have a bad feeling that unless Assad is removed from power in the near future that the Syrian civil war will reignite another civil war in Lebanon & possibly conflict in Jordon. It has already added fuel to the fire in Iraq

Bad feelings are one thing - but what evidence - proof do you have ... links please? ...

[JDGRUEN]

Well, the Jihadists of the "Religion of Peace" are at it again! Now, I don't believe that these cats are part of the Assad governement, but are these the "really bad guys", the "somewhat bad guys", or the "moderate bad guys" ??

"Islamic Terrorist Attack In Kenyan Upscale Mall; Muslims Allowed To Leave, Non-Muslims Shot"

"Islamic terrorists attacked an upscale shopping mall this morning in Nairobi, Kenya. Muslims who could recite an Islamic prayer were allowed to leave, and the non-Muslims ordered to stay were shot. Including the children. Reports, so far, say at least 22 people have been killed and 50 wounded by 10 Islamic gunmen using Ak-47s and grenades."

The real bad guys. Haha, they are all bad guys and Assad us perhaps one of the worst the world has ever known. Drop the politics and prejudice and look at the truth.

No quarrel that Assad is bad and has been bad ... but to be replaced with Al Qaeda and their cousins and eventually by the Muslim Brotherhood ... and somehow that is an improvement ?

[boomerangutang]

Bad feelings are one thing - but what evidence - proof do you have ... links please?

It's another way of prefacing an opinion. There can't be 'proof' of an event which hasn't yet happened. However, fighting spilling over borders of Lebanon and Syria is indicative of worse unfolding there. Also, it's the nature of conflicts that, when they enlarge, they tend to increasingly involve neighboring regions. More weapons, more refugees, more jihadists from the region traveling to join the action ....all can exacerbate an already worsening scene.

Personally, I care more for the welfare of local plants and animals (what little is left) than for angry people fighting. When was the last time a wild turtle or deer graced that region? Maybe 150 years ago?

[simple1]

@ABCer. To attempt to get this topic back on track and not have it closed down, I have tried below to respond to some of your comments. You’re welcome to respond, but please do not come back and say its all drivel and just propaganda of one form or the other – respond with your obervations supported by reports from recognised professional media organisations or some other form of attributable content.

At the URL below it endeavours to capture the number of deaths within the Free Syrian Army (SFA) and Syrian government forces. Roughly double the number of deaths for the FSA; that makes sense due to the superior fire power of the government forces and militia such as air power, tanks and heavy artillery. It is estimated that civilian deaths in the rebel held areas are high, again due to fire power aimed at urban centres and the Assad militia death squad activities in ethnic cleansing. I’m sure the extremists from the Al Qaeda aligned fighting battalions are carrying out the same activities

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Syrian_civil_war

Chemical warfare has allegedly carried out by the Syrian government forces due to physical evidence of munitions used such as missiles and the shell calibre from artillery shells that the SFA do not have. In addition it has been pointed out the August 21st chemical attack could have only been implemented by the Syrian army as the launch areas were from territory they held; it would have been impossible for the rebels to locate the artillery and missiles in army held areas.

For the moment the move to democratise government is facing major challenges by the Islamic extremists. In Egypt (Sunni) it was stopped in its tracts when Morsi started to implement Islamist policies and was subsequently overthrown by the army. In Iraq (majority Shiite) it is very borderline development due to a sharp increase in mainly Sunni extremist led car and suicide bombing trying to destabilise the government.

It is a fact that the US, excepting Iraq and Egypt, currently favours Sunni dictatorships for regional strategic issues and for the moment the US/NATO are heavily investing in supporting the governments & armed forces of Turkey, Jordon, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States to counterbalance the spread of Shiite extremism, supported by Iran. As some have mentioned in this topic, in effect a new regional Cold War by some major powers and their proxies

@simple1, I never resort to bickering and personal attacks unless provoked by same. Thanks for your response and contributing information. 'Drivel' is not in my vocabulary. Now, back to the question at hand.

First, you will notice that there are numerous mentions of use of child soldiers, suicide attackers. This can hardly be attributed to Assad. At the same time it increases the accusations against him. Suiciders are a mark of extremists he is fighting against. Whether they are Sunni or Shiite is not important. The high numbers of 'foreign' fighters against him proves that he is fighting against imported professional 'rebels' whose aim was, is and will be to destabilize the regime and take over one more country in the region. From what we've seen in the past this would be bad news for us all - Americans, Russians, Israelis, Europeans, even Chinese.

Under these circumstances to go and bomb the sh*t out of Assad is madness.

One more factor not to be overlooked. The innocent people are dying in huge numbers. Most of the world points finger at Assad. But we all know too well that the 'professional extremists revolutionaries' do not care about innocence, do use local women, children and old non-combatants as shields. Hence more fingers point at Assad.

All said above does not make me Assad's supporter. He is doomed, he will have to go. But not before the country is stabilized and the transition of power can be arranged safely. Once again, under these circumstances using military force against him would be stupid (buying the provocation by 'rebels') or a conscious act of destabilization of yet another country in Middle East.

This is my opinion. I believe I'm being rational. I may be wrong, but that doesn't mean some rude underdogs can call me mad, drunk or a fool.

And allow me to stubbornly believe that use of chemicals was a provocation.

You should also take into consideration that the Assad regime is extensively using children as human shields as documented in the UN reports below. From reports the practice is more prevalent by the Syrian Army and the militias. The Assad militias are notorous for entering Sunni towns and villages & murdering civilians, including children, en masse.The report also states that the Assad regime is still torturing children held in detention. Overall it appears that the Assad regime is 'outscoring' the rebels in the abuse of civilians.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18405800

I find it surprising that people, against all the evidence presented, still adhere to the view that the use of chemical weapons on 21 August was a provocation by the rebels.

I have a bad feeling that unless Assad is removed from power in the near future that the Syrian civil war will reignite another civil war in Lebanon & possibly conflict in Jordon. It has already added fuel to the fire in Iraq

Bad feelings are one thing - but what evidence - proof do you have ... links please? ...

An example; the recent recommencement of Shiite car bombings in Sunni locations and vice versa. Mix in the estimated 750k Syrian refugees in Lebanon fleeing the civil war that will destabilise Lebanon. Syria has a very long history of interference in Lebanon and previously occupied by the Syrian Army, plus intelligence forces carrying out assassinations in Lebanon of regime opponents. Stir in Hezbollah should they again commence operations outside of their currently held territory within Lebanon.

http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-lebanon-bombings-20130824,0,316269.story

An analysis of the potential for another Lebanese civil war at:

http://mideast.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/08/27/lebanon_confronts_civil_war

[ABCer]

@simple1. Not much to argue against your last post. Looked at your references. Only see and agree that the conflict is spreading out. No proof that

Assad used chemical weapons;

Assad army uses non-combatants as a human shield;

Assad uses terror tactics on his own people;

On the other hand

Assad had his chemical weapons for decades. Never used them;

Assad army has managed to push back the rebels substantially. No logical reason for him to mobilize the world against him by using WMD;

Assad will go only when the country is stabilized and the foreign 'revolutionaries' are out.

Under the circumstances it would have been a far better idea to have International Forces in Syria to clear out imported rebels and supervise a kind of meaningful elections of a new Gov't.

I feel that a mix of US, Russian and Chinese special commando type forces would help to cool the situation. There is no proof this is practically achievable, but a call for such a course would be a significant improvement from the present West/East confrontation and calls to bombings. This is of course a wishful thinking.

US will never agree to this, which is a pity. Their troops would have a better knowledge of Russian and Chinese capabilities. Maybe even get some respect for each other. And a calm Syria would be an added bonus.

The alternative - more deaths and another destabilized country. The much talked about 'stalemate' in Syria is only in escalation of killings not in ceasefire.

Unfortunately I am not advising to US, Russia or China.

[Chicog]

Unfortunately I am not advising to US, Russia or China.  

FORTUNATELY you are not advising to US, Russia or China.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Sing_Sling]

 

Unfortunately I am not advising to US, Russia or China.

FORTUNATELY you are not advising to US, Russia or China.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I'm sure you can justify your statement?

[Chicog]

 

Unfortunately I am not advising to US, Russia or China.

FORTUNATELY you are not advising to US, Russia or China.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I'm sure you can justify your statement?

Really?

Suggesting ground troops in a Middle East country would solve the situation?

And you think I need to "justify my statement"?

Can I suggest you read a bit of history about how the, say, last two tries have worked out?

[simple1]

@simple1. Not much to argue against your last post. Looked at your references. Only see and agree that the conflict is spreading out. No proof that

Assad used chemical weapons;

Assad army uses non-combatants as a human shield;

Assad uses terror tactics on his own people;

On the other hand

Assad had his chemical weapons for decades. Never used them;

Assad army has managed to push back the rebels substantially. No logical reason for him to mobilize the world against him by using WMD;

Assad will go only when the country is stabilized and the foreign 'revolutionaries' are out.

Under the circumstances it would have been a far better idea to have International Forces in Syria to clear out imported rebels and supervise a kind of meaningful elections of a new Gov't.

I feel that a mix of US, Russian and Chinese special commando type forces would help to cool the situation. There is no proof this is practically achievable, but a call for such a course would be a significant improvement from the present West/East confrontation and calls to bombings. This is of course a wishful thinking.

US will never agree to this, which is a pity. Their troops would have a better knowledge of Russian and Chinese capabilities. Maybe even get some respect for each other. And a calm Syria would be an added bonus.

The alternative - more deaths and another destabilized country. The much talked about 'stalemate' in Syria is only in escalation of killings not in ceasefire.

Unfortunately I am not advising to US, Russia or China.

At the time of the 21 August chemical attack by Assad, elements of the FSA were fighting in some suburbs of Damascus, so had not been "pushed back". Just do not understand why you dismiss the extensive record of human rights abuses by the Assad regime of the Syrian people and the use of human shields as reported by the BBC. According to Human Rights Watch, Assad failed to improve Syria’s human rights record during his rule and Syria's human rights situation remains among the worst in the world. Examples below

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Syria

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18405800

http://www.examiner.com/article/syria-assad-s-torture-chambers

http://avaazimages.s3.amazonaws.com/DetentionCentresinSyria.pdf

As repeatedly stated one of the main reasons why Syria is in such as mess today is that Assad would not permit elections in 2011, as at best he would only get about 25% of the popular vote from the Shiites, Christians and some other small minorities. Assad will not step down as the ruler of Syria nor permit elections. Analysis of Assad comments regarding the tenure of his regime:-

Jouejati of the National Defense University said, “Assad has said all along that he will set the region on fire before he falls, and if he can’t crush the rebellion outright I think his Plan B is to carve out an Alawite stronghold along the coast stretching from Homs to Damascus, which would suit his Iranian allies as a continuing conduit to [Lebanese] Hezbollah. So I fear that each day this crisis continues, the sectarian fissures will deepen and widen, and the less likely it will be that Syria is ever again a unified state.”

http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily/bashar-al-assad-a-tyrant-in-full-20130909

Could be completely wrong, but in my opinion there is no way that the UN would agree to even have Russian troops providing protection in Syria during the dismantling & shipment of chemical weapons for destruction, yet another foiling tactic by Syria and its allies.

[Sing_Sling]

 

Unfortunately I am not advising to US, Russia or China.

FORTUNATELY you are not advising to US, Russia or China.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I'm sure you can justify your statement?

Really?

Suggesting ground troops in a Middle East country would solve the situation?

And you think I need to "justify my statement"?

Can I suggest you read a bit of history about how the, say, last two tries have worked out?

Oh dear, yet another specialist advising others to 'read'. I guess throw-away one-liners are much the same.

People are ging-ho to bomb the place back to the Stone Age yet think that just getting rid of Assad will make for a fine country with beaches and palm trees.

The best solution? No idea. It will take people far more intelligent than you or me to figure that out - but bombing isn't a solution . . . even eentsy-teensy pinpricks

[Scott]

Stay on the topic. Continued off-topic bickering will result in suspensions.

[Chicog]

Oh dear, yet another specialist advising others to 'read'. I guess throw-away one-liners are much the same.

People are ging-ho to bomb the place back to the Stone Age yet think that just getting rid of Assad will make for a fine country with beaches and palm trees.

The best solution? No idea. It will take people far more intelligent than you or me to figure that out - but bombing isn't a solution . . . even eentsy-teensy pinpricks

If you'd actually bothered to read, you'd understand why it would be simply ludicrous to put peacekeeping troops on the ground in Syria, and why anyone who suggests that needs their head examined. They'd be nothing but a target for both sides.

The bottom line is that this is only going to end in Assad's departure whether you like it or not. The only alternative is that he kills more Syrians than Hitler killed jews. I think it's better to find whatever way is best to hasten his end. Decent arms for the rebel majority would be a good start.

Ultimately, I think what's going to happen is that the Sunni will take over, and Russia will have to buy their way back in to favour - and it's going to cost them a packet after what they've done.

I don't think Assad will use chemical weapons again, it was quite a desperate act and it has done him no real favours. If he does it again - and it would probably a last desperate act and might even be aimed at Israel - a few tomahawks will head his way, and Russia will probably keep quiet about it.

But unless something drastic happens, none of this is going to happen overnight, so you might as well wait for the next installment.

[Publicus]

 

Unfortunately I am not advising to US, Russia or China.

FORTUNATELY you are not advising to US, Russia or China.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I'm sure you can justify your statement?

It's a prima facie case.

I've read the guy's posts and I can clearly see that on the face of it, he's wrong.

One can investigate a prima facie case, but one can also justify dismissing it in a summary fashion.

In this instance, the latter is the better course of action.

Without a doubt.

[FDog]

Next instalment will be that the rebels are proved to have used chemical weapons, they will triumph over Assad. Terrorists will take over the rebels and cause even worse havoc.

End game, the west wishing Assad was back in power as it is now a complete mess with more people being tortured and killed than before.

[Chicog]

Next instalment will be that the rebels are proved to have used chemical weapons, they will triumph over Assad. Terrorists will take over the rebels and cause even worse havoc.

End game, the west wishing Assad was back in power as it is now a complete mess with more people being tortured and killed than before.

The Russians have already tried to "prove" that the rebel majority have "used chemical weapons".

The evidence did not stand up to scrutiny.

In case you failed to notice, Assad is *in* power, but since the majority of the country want him gone, that probably will not last.

A brokered peace deal is all well and good, but free and fair elections would put the Sunni in charge, and the first thing they would do is kick out the Russians who've supported Assad - so of course Russia will make sure that doesn't happen.

Every "deal" Russia brokers is an attempt at delaying the inevitable.