Syria's Assad says Western strike could trigger regional war

[Chicog]

Russia Increases Syria Arms While Joining Push for Talks

By Terry Atlas - Oct 31, 2013 9:08 PM GMT+0300

• Russia has increased its weapons shipments to the Syrian government in the past year, complicating efforts to start peace talks, the U.S. ambassador to Syria said today.

Ambassador Robert Ford today called the Russian military aid “substantial” and in some cases “militarily extremely significant.” A second U.S. official, Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Countryman, said the Russian aid is now more important than the weapons provided to President Bashar al-Assad’s forces by Iran.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-31/russia-increases-syria-arms-while-joining-push-for-talks.html?

[boomerangutang]

A bit off-topic, but here's a connection between the Syrian imbroglio, and Antarctica.

As we know, China and Russia are the two UN permanent Security Committee members who continue to thwart meaningful reigning in of Syria's Assad.

Similarly, it's only China and Russia who are against declarations of Marine Sanctuaries in Antarctica. France proposed on, the US proposed another. UK reps and many others supported the initiatives to preserve wildness in Antarctica. The only two big shots who opposed protecting Antarctica,.....yup, that's right, were Russia and China.

[Robby nz]

Russia has increased its weapons shipments to the Syrian government in the past year, complicating efforts to start peace talks, the U.S. ambassador to Syria said today.

And how are the weapons shipments to the rebels going, who is providing them?

[Sing_Sling]

Russia has increased its weapons shipments to the Syrian government in the past year, complicating efforts to start peace talks, the U.S. ambassador to Syria said today.

And how are the weapons shipments to the rebels going, who is providing them?

That's different . . . clearly.

[Chicog]

A bit off-topic, but here's a connection between the Syrian imbroglio, and Antarctica.

As we know, China and Russia are the two UN permanent Security Committee members who continue to thwart meaningful reigning in of Syria's Assad.

Similarly, it's only China and Russia who are against declarations of Marine Sanctuaries in Antarctica. France proposed on, the US proposed another. UK reps and many others supported the initiatives to preserve wildness in Antarctica. The only two big shots who opposed protecting Antarctica,.....yup, that's right, were Russia and China.

Russia always vote with China and vice versa. It's an automatic reaction.

[Sing_Sling]

A bit off-topic, but here's a connection between the Syrian imbroglio, and Antarctica.

As we know, China and Russia are the two UN permanent Security Committee members who continue to thwart meaningful reigning in of Syria's Assad.

Similarly, it's only China and Russia who are against declarations of Marine Sanctuaries in Antarctica. France proposed on, the US proposed another. UK reps and many others supported the initiatives to preserve wildness in Antarctica. The only two big shots who opposed protecting Antarctica,.....yup, that's right, were Russia and China.

Russia always vote with China and vice versa. It's an automatic reaction.

I highly doubt it - can you back that up, please

[Chicog]

A bit off-topic, but here's a connection between the Syrian imbroglio, and Antarctica.

As we know, China and Russia are the two UN permanent Security Committee members who continue to thwart meaningful reigning in of Syria's Assad.

Similarly, it's only China and Russia who are against declarations of Marine Sanctuaries in Antarctica. France proposed on, the US proposed another. UK reps and many others supported the initiatives to preserve wildness in Antarctica. The only two big shots who opposed protecting Antarctica,.....yup, that's right, were Russia and China.

Russia always vote with China and vice versa. It's an automatic reaction.

I highly doubt it - can you back that up, please

Certainly. Go and check the voting on every UN resolution that's been attempted on Syria in the last two years.

[Sing_Sling]

A bit off-topic, but here's a connection between the Syrian imbroglio, and Antarctica.

As we know, China and Russia are the two UN permanent Security Committee members who continue to thwart meaningful reigning in of Syria's Assad.

Similarly, it's only China and Russia who are against declarations of Marine Sanctuaries in Antarctica. France proposed on, the US proposed another. UK reps and many others supported the initiatives to preserve wildness in Antarctica. The only two big shots who opposed protecting Antarctica,.....yup, that's right, were Russia and China.

Russia always vote with China and vice versa. It's an automatic reaction.

I highly doubt it - can you back that up, please

Certainly. Go and check the voting on every UN resolution that's been attempted on Syria in the last two years.

That's you backing up your claim? To tell me to go and research? Quality . . .

Edited November 4, 2013 by Sing_Sling

[Chicog]

If given you the answer, if you can't be arsed to confirm it that's your problem. Suffice to say both China and Russia share an interest in making sure that pro-democracy uprisings do not succeed.

[Exsexyman]

If given you the answer, if you can't be arsed to confirm it that's your problem. Suffice to say both China and Russia share an interest in making sure that pro-democracy uprisings do not succeed.

So in your view the Al Qaeda and assorted Islamic terrorists from all parts of the globe running Amok in Syria, are part of a 'Pro-democracy uprising?!!! Wow!

[boomerangutang]

Chicog is stating a claim according to his research. Or perhaps he surmises such, that's up to him. If someone else want to research that topic, that's their prerogative. Chicog shouldn't be compelled to do research for others.

China and Russia have been voting as a bloc recently. However, not long ago, they wouldn't give each other the time of day. Let's see how things play out, if we're around long enough. They could revert back to being enemies, if something ticks off one or the other. It's been an up and down relationship over the years. It's ironic that, though Communism started in Russia, now Russia has dumped it, and China keeps it going - though Communism's days in China are numbered. China still hangs photos of Chairman Mao everywhere, but it's doubtful that any Chinese citizen under 40 has any respect for the man - if they had an inkling of what he was really about.

[Chicog]

If given you the answer, if you can't be arsed to confirm it that's your problem. Suffice to say both China and Russia share an interest in making sure that pro-democracy uprisings do not succeed.

So in your view the Al Qaeda and assorted Islamic terrorists from all parts of the globe running Amok in Syria, are part of a 'Pro-democracy uprising?!!! Wow!

It certainly started as a pro-democracy uprising when it kicked off in Dera'a.

Perhaps if Russia and China hadn't veto'ed three resolutions it would have been resolved before it reached this level of anarchy.

[Sing_Sling]

If given you the answer, if you can't be arsed to confirm it that's your problem. Suffice to say both China and Russia share an interest in making sure that pro-democracy uprisings do not succeed.

So in your view the Al Qaeda and assorted Islamic terrorists from all parts of the globe running Amok in Syria, are part of a 'Pro-democracy uprising?!!! Wow!

It certainly started as a pro-democracy uprising when it kicked off in Dera'a.

Perhaps if Russia and China hadn't veto'ed three resolutions it would have been resolved before it reached this level of anarchy.

23 out of 26 times they didn't vote en block - you are wrong

[Credo]

I believe he is talking about voting on the Syrian/Assad issue.

[Chicog]

On which they are 3/3.

Certainly. Go and check the voting on every UN resolution that's been attempted on Syria in the last two years.

Edited November 5, 2013 by Chicog

[Sing_Sling]

On which they are 3/3.

Certainly. Go and check the voting on every UN resolution that's been attempted on Syria in the last two years.

Perhaps this has something to o with them being Syrian allies?

I wonder what the US/Israel discrepancy in voting is . . .

[Credo]

So Israel is now on the UN Security council?

[Chicog]

On which they are 3/3.

Certainly. Go and check the voting on every UN resolution that's been attempted on Syria in the last two years.

Perhaps this has something to o with them being Syrian allies?

I wonder what the US/Israel discrepancy in voting is . . .

I don't think China has much by way of interests in Syria; although yes Russia does have some arms trade and a crumbling Mediterranean naval base which may be factors, too.

But as I've already said, it's my opinion that the underlying driver is that neither China nor Russia are interested in seeing pro-democracy protests succeed, for what should be obvious reasons.

Are you disagreeing with this opinion, if so I'd be interested to hear your reasons why?

[Sing_Sling]

So Israel is now on the UN Security council?

No, do you think they should be?

On which they are 3/3.

Perhaps this has something to o with them being Syrian allies?

I wonder what the US/Israel discrepancy in voting is . . .

I don't think China has much by way of interests in Syria; although yes Russia does have some arms trade and a crumbling Mediterranean naval base which may be factors, too.

But as I've already said, it's my opinion that the underlying driver is that neither China nor Russia are interested in seeing pro-democracy protests succeed, for what should be obvious reasons.

Are you disagreeing with this opinion, if so I'd be interested to hear your reasons why?

Why don't you state what these 'obvious reasons' are, or should I go and research them myself as well?

[Chicog]

I'm sorry but if you are going to continue to be so lazy and/or obtuse, there is little point in continuing the discussion.

[Chicog]

First Published: 2013-11-05

Diplomatic efforts fail to coax Syria warring rivals to negotiating table Russia reiterates Moscow wants Iran to have seat at Geneva II table, despite threats from rebels that they will boycott if Tehran is invited. Middle East Online

By Nina Larson – GENEVA

Fate of Assad remains main sticking point

A long-awaited peace conference for war-torn Syria appeared set for further delays Tuesday as sharp divisions persisted between the rival camps over the conditions for their participation.

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=62409

[Sing_Sling]

I'm sorry but if you are going to continue to be so lazy and/or obtuse, there is little point in continuing the discussion.

I'm not the one making statements without backing them up and expecting others to do the fact-checkin - that is what is lazy and obtuse.

[Scott]

Please stay on topic.

[Chicog]

I'm sorry but if you are going to continue to be so lazy and/or obtuse, there is little point in continuing the discussion.

I'm not the one making statements without backing them up and expecting others to do the fact-checkin - that is what is lazy and obtuse.

If I need to back up a statement that obvious, you're talking to the wrong person. Go and try and play with someone who's interested.

[Chicog]

In Assad’s Damascus, Syrians fall prey to gun law

Reuters / 6 November 2013

Residents blame theft, violence on government militias

Syrian families leave the besieged town of Al Moadamiyeh, which is controlled by opposition fighters, in Damascus countryside. - Reuters

1/1

When armed men appeared at a home in the northern Damascus district of Rukn Al Din, they told the elderly woman who answered the door they were state security forces carrying out a routine inspection.

Then they made off with her valuables.

When the crime was reported, police refused to investigate - a sign, say residents, of the impunity of President Bashar Al Assad’s security forces and allied militias blamed for a wave of abductions, theft and property seizures.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/kt-article-display-1.asp?xfile=/data/middleeast/2013/November/middleeast_November56.xml&section=middleeast

[Chicog]

Wednesday, November 06, 2013

Iran Has 'Hundreds Of Troops' In Syria

November 05, 2013

Iranian lawmaker Javad Ghoddusi Karimi has reportedly confirmed there are "hundreds" of Iranian troops in Syria fighting on the side of embattled President Bashar al-Assad.

Iran's ISNA news agency reported on November 4 that Karimi, a member of parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, said that "Syrian commanders, backed by Iranian forces, are announcing the army's victories against rebel fighters."

http://www.rferl.org/content/iran-troops-syria/25159192.html?

[boomerangutang]

Not long ago, Iran was at war with Iraq. Now they're exacerbating problems in Syria. They give new meaning to 'bad neighbor.'

[simple1]

Not long ago, Iran was at war with Iraq. Now they're exacerbating problems in Syria. They give new meaning to 'bad neighbor.'

Are you referring to the Iraq Iran War, if so that was initiated by Iraq, who were given support by the US.

Edited November 7, 2013 by simple1

[Chicog]

Not long ago, Iran was at war with Iraq. Now they're exacerbating problems in Syria. They give new meaning to 'bad neighbor.'

Are you referring to the Iraq Iran War, if so that was initiated by Iraq, who were given support by the US.

Technically true, but done in response to Iranian attempts to destabilise Iraq and foment an insurgency, something they also repeated in the last few years.

[simple1]

Not long ago, Iran was at war with Iraq. Now they're exacerbating problems in Syria. They give new meaning to 'bad neighbor.'

Are you referring to the Iraq Iran War, if so that was initiated by Iraq, who were given support by the US.

Technically true, but done in response to Iranian attempts to destabilise Iraq and foment an insurgency, something they also repeated in the last few years.

Khomeini came to power in 1979 and in 1980 Iran was attacked by Iraq when they assumed Iran was at its weakest due to the purges and the resultant instability in the security forces. Some observers have the POV that the Iraqi attack was an attempt to contain Shia influence in Iraq, but many support the alternate view the strategic driver was for Saddam to annexe Khuzestan & the oil fields.

Is it not the Sunnis, assisted by KSA and the Gulf States that are supporting insurgency operations in Iraq, not Iran?

Edited November 7, 2013 by simple1