Syria's Assad says Western strike could trigger regional war

[F430murci]

USA and France are just not thinking this through. What's the end-game? Their best-ever hope is to take out Syrian heavy weapons and chemical delivery systems. OK -- let's assume that they do that and only kill Syrian military personnel. What then ? Assad is still in power, the rebels are splintered and will become more so when they see this action by the west -- too many chiefs with differing loyalties in the rebel side. The fighting will continue even if it's only with personal weapons, refugees will continue to be displaced and pour out into Turkey etc, More civilians will be killed in the fighting. Where's the win in all this ?????????

That was assuming a perfect strike, but if there are any co-lateral casualties amongst civilians or russian advisors --- then what?????

Meantime the politicans on capitol hill play poker instead of thinking about the people they are putting in serious harm's way.

Really -- it makes humanity look like a bunch of apes:!!!!!!!!!

Edited to add..

With apologies to the apes...

Relax, I am sure they have thought this through which is perhaps the primary question being posed by all congressmen to Bama during this vote. Dempsey also indicated that had a plan and strategy.

Some of the politicians that have swung over to Bama side (Boehner and Cantor for instance) would not have swung with a clear directive and strategy. Telling Assad and public of exact details of strategy is not exactly prudent.

Syntax aside - Such blind belief in politicians' motives is one of the main reasons we get into these kinds of messes - too many to enumerate here since WWII. The truth never served any politician well, and the truth is that there is no end-game to any strike into Syria -- not even if it DOES have UN security council approval. Military action has never worked out well - - look at the history of failed campaigns over the last 50 years or so. Can one successful outcome be named ?

It's time to lead from the front and be strong enough to walk away from the fight.

It is not a syntax issue with you. You are clearly anti war and many are anti war. That is a personal and philosophical belief. I respect that.

[simple1]

Putin is playing US hard. Him saying lets wait for more evidence and Russia may back just buys him time to finish shipping S-300 anti aircraft or anti-missile systems into Syria. Putin will never find conclusive evidence absent Assad publicly saying he did it.

Russia has intelligence in Syria and I would imagine that if rebels did it, we would be seeing much Russian intelligence confirming the same.

A recent report asserts that the shipping of the S-300 missile systems, that were expected to be delivered by July 2014, have been delayed until 2015-2016 because Damascus has failed to provide payment for them. Plus a shipment of twelve MiG-29M/M2 jets ordered in 2007, six of which were due to be delivered to Syria by the end of the year, will not be supplied before 2016-2017 because Damascus has only paid Moscow 30 percent of the agreed sum for the jets.

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Russia-suspends-delivery-of-S-300-missile-systems-to-Syria-325257

Russia sends missile cruiser to Eastern Mediterranean, expected to arrive in ten days

http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/Russia-sends-missile-cruiser-to-Mediterranean-325280

[F430murci]

USA and France are just not thinking this through. What's the end-game? Their best-ever hope is to take out Syrian heavy weapons and chemical delivery systems. OK -- let's assume that they do that and only kill Syrian military personnel. What then ? Assad is still in power, the rebels are splintered and will become more so when they see this action by the west -- too many chiefs with differing loyalties in the rebel side. The fighting will continue even if it's only with personal weapons, refugees will continue to be displaced and pour out into Turkey etc, More civilians will be killed in the fighting. Where's the win in all this ?????????

That was assuming a perfect strike, but if there are any co-lateral casualties amongst civilians or russian advisors --- then what?????

Meantime the politicans on capitol hill play poker instead of thinking about the people they are putting in serious harm's way.

Really -- it makes humanity look like a bunch of apes:!!!!!!!!!

The US doesn't see this as a win or lose scenario. The US sees it as a needed slap down of Assad's side, if it's true that the Syrian military used Chemical weapons. The US and every other observer knows the shit will continue to hit the fan in Syria. Uncle Sam's message, with limited strikes, is don't use chemi weapons. Period. That goes for all antagonists.

Were any Americans or French killed or injured in these chemical attacks ? If not - why is USA or France involved? Since when was USA the self-appointed international vigilante? I thought we had the UN to decide who gets "slapped down".

The UN sucks. None of its resolutions are binding on anyone. 5 countries on the Security Council have veto power. That includes the US, Russia and China. Are we ever going to get agreement among those three?

And SINCE WHEN did the US give up its sovereignty to anyone, much less the UN?

The UN is a joke. Only those who don't understand how things work keep bringing up the f'n UN.

I know. The UN is completely impotent to act as Russia and China would never vote for intervention no matter what the circumstances. Putin is just playing everyone and the scary part is if he sends those anti aircraft and missile systems to Assad providing Syria from protection against Israel planes. Play this one out and it has potential for really bad outcomes.

[F430murci]

Putin is playing US hard. Him saying lets wait for more evidence and Russia may back just buys him time to finish shipping S-300 anti aircraft or anti-missile systems into Syria. Putin will never find conclusive evidence absent Assad publicly saying he did it.

Russia has intelligence in Syria and I would imagine that if rebels did it, we would be seeing much Russian intelligence confirming the same.

A recent report asserts that the shipping of the S-300 missile systems, that were expected to be delivered by July 2014, have been delayed until 2015-2016 because Damascus has failed to provide payment for them. Plus a shipment of twelve MiG-29M/M2 jets ordered in 2007, six of which were due to be delivered to Syria by the end of the year, will not be supplied before 2016-2017 because Damascus has only paid Moscow 30 percent of the agreed sum for the jets.

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Russia-suspends-delivery-of-S-300-missile-systems-to-Syria-325257

Russia sends missile cruiser to Eastern Mediterranean, expected to arrive in ten days

http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/Russia-sends-missile-cruiser-to-Mediterranean-325280

Okay, taking Putin's word for it is one choice we have . . . This ain't about money to Putin at this point.

[JetsetBkk]

I don't believe Putin and/or Assad.

That's quite clear.

In Sweden, Obama just said: "I did not set a red line".

Squirm, squirm, squirm.

Liar, liar, liar.

He also said: "The only remaining dispute is who used them (CW) which is outside the parameters of the UN investigation."

At last, some truth.

Final question: If Congress doesn't approve the attack... blah, blah, mumble, mumble, no answer. He started off saying he would answer, but he didn't.

He kept on about 400 children subjected to gas. Yes, we know that bit, Obama. But the question is "Who did it?"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23924805

[Ulysses G.]

It's all part of the plan. The question is why?

Gen Wesley Clark on US plans to invade 7 countries in 5 years. The timelines have slid a few years, but nothing has changed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw

Haha, how many times are you guys going to post some whack videos over and and over. I suppose you think posting this paranoid conspiracist trash over and over it will somehow be true.

Haha, we need a separate "Syria

Conspiracy Thread" thread for you guys to post your rants, theories, nutty videos and info wars quotes.

So, you discount the video of General Wesley Clark

It is not a secret that he was fired given "early retirement" for almost starting WW3 or that the general who got rid of him said that he is a "nut." He said “We’re going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran" many years ago and it did not happen. The conspiracy theory crowd love him, but he is not taken seriously by anyone else.

[Scott]

Let's get back on the topic of Syria.

[JDGRUEN]

Over the past 2-3 pages numerous posters have fought the battle in Syria from several different angles. I predict that if obama sends in the missiles and bombs he will do so without the consent of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate will only barely pass a resolution of consent. With that paltry 'mandate' obama will charge ahead ... or something...

[Ulysses G.]

It has just been reported that John McCain says that he can not back the resolution on Syria as it now stands.

[NeverSure]

Well, if this thing goes down, you'll get your look at just what Russia is. First, I don't think they have the guts or stupidity to get involved, and if they do then we'll see if you're right.

And if Syria lobs any missiles at Israel, Israel will hit back hard. It hasn't been that long since Israel bombed inside Syria with no worries.

It's not arrogance. It's just the way it is.

Frankly - I don't believe that analysis. France has nuclear capability and is no slouch militarily, but doesn't get a mention, but Japan does. It also depends on how the expenditure is measured. A third world country that builds it's own kit can get a lot more bang for their buck.

That is 2012 only. France and others built their nukes and delivery systems years ago. Russia doesn't have a decent sub or aircraft carrier. Neither does France.

The US has stealth submarines, nuclear powered that can launch a variety of missiles from deep under water. It also has 11 or 12 Nimitz-class carrier groups. It also has stealth bombers, stealth fighters, stealth drones, and a missile that's so accurate it can be put through the window of a building from miles away, delivered by stealth. It has gps guided bombs that can be dropped 80 at a time from a stealth bomber which has a range of 10,000 miles plus mid-air refueling ability. It has a bunker buster bomb that can be delivered by stealth and blow a hole in the ground more than 100 meters deep.

IF this thing goes down, just sit back and watch.

[jamhar]

They've had a lot of time to plan and stage. Maybe use kids as shields, use a shell game for some of its tactical locations. It may get ugly in a hurry. People are use to the % civi causality rate from the drone attacks. Drone or manned attacks, you need eyes on the ground to guide the shots. and those eyes can be fooled and misdirected..

I'm hoping for the best, but i wouldn't be surprised if this goes south in a hurry.

And to be clear, just because it goes south, doesn't mean it should or shouldn't be done.

I'm just saying it could get messy and should be prepared for it.

[boomerangutang]

Three possible scenarios:

1::: US strikes with missiles for 2 to 3 days. That's it. No WWIII, No bunches of civilians killed, unless Assad and Iran and the Russkies make a false scenario of civilian casualties, and that's not difficult to stage.

2::: US strikes and follows up with tangible assistance to Rebels, concurrent with stemming (as much as possible) money and weapons to extremists. That's the scenario offered up by a major newspaper (sorry, I can't recall source).

3::: US does nothing - except the message is out that it is ready and willing to come down hard on anyone using CW.

[JDGRUEN]

This sounds like a great bunch of groups to prop up in Syria - just regular boy scouts trying to save their country / not!

Who Are the Syrian Rebels? A Basic Intelligence Briefing On the Assad Resistance

http://www.policymic.com/articles/42317/who-are-the-syrian-rebels-a-basic-intelligence-briefing-on-the-assad-resistance

[F430murci]

It has just been reported that John McCain says that he can not back the resolution on Syria as it now stands.

Haha, I guess he is having a flashback . . . Poor guy. You gotta hand it to US politics. They are one mixed up bunch or hormone (estrogen type) ego driven babies. Getting anyone to agree on anything is an exercise in futility as everyone wants the limelight and no one wants blame if something goes wrong.

The only one that has not and will not change their mind ever on any of this will be Putin. Too funny, the US politicians are a bunch of prima donna drama queens. Gotta love it.

-----

“In its current form, I do not,” McCain said Wednesday when asked if he supports the measure, the Associated Press reports.

McCain had previously said it would be “catastrophic” for Congress to turn down Obama’s request. While Obama won the support of House GOP leaders on Tuesday, McCain’s opposition could make it harder to bring other Republican foreign policy hawks aboard. On the flip side, it may make it easier for Obama to win support from war-weary Democrats.

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2013/09/04/rebuffing-obama-mccain-a-no-vote-on-syria/#ixzz2dw7QPJYn

[philw]

So is France knowingly and deliberately misrepresenting its findings in Syria so it can buddy up to the United States and to President Obama?

Correct. You are very astute.

It appears, to me anyway, that M. Hollande is reluctant to launch an attack without a "coalition", of at least two countries, including France.

Apres vous.

And you are very wrong, and cynical.

Of course people are cynical publicus, they would be very dull if they weren't. People are finally waking up, we have seen this scenario before, in Iraq. Our leaders rigged the evidence, lied about it and got caught out. Trust is the inevitable casualty, and cynicism is the inevitable result of that loss of trust. I'm afraid Obama, Kerry, Hollande etc just repeating over and over, "It was Assad what done it, we can't show you any independent evidence, you must trust us", just doesn't cut it any more. Especially when there is plenty of evidence of the Al Qaeda rebels in Syria possessing and using sarin gas. In any crime the first thing investigators ask is,'who had a motive?' There is only one answer to that question, given the timing of the attack, the 'rebels', who were suffering reverse upon reverse and were desperate for Western intervention to change this. Yet all this is studiously ignored by Western leaders, and sadly also by most of their stooges in the MSM. It just doesn't fit the agreed agenda. Does it not strike you as odd that after nearly a year the US administration can't get to the bottom of Benghazi, ( which did murder Americans), but after only a couple of weeks Obama and Kerry know with absolute certainty that the time has come to start dropping bombs on Syrians, who have never attacked the US? I know i do!

Opinion polls in the UK show that the general public are overwhelmingly against any Western attack on Syria, at least two thirds against. Reports from France suggest, if anything, the French public are even more overwhelmingly against. I don't know about the US, but i would guess that the majority are against. People are just tired of this seemingly constant need for the West to continuously get involved in wars,in the Middle East, and they don't trust and believe the motives given. At the weekend i was invited to a dinner party at a friend's house, there were about ten guests, two of whom were retired military officers, (UK). One was quite elderly, long retired, but who was an extremely senior officer in the RAF, not far short of the highest rank achievable. The other was quite a bit younger, a retired army officer, a colonel. I had not met either of them before. Inevitably the discussion turned to the events in Syria. it was very interesting to hear their opinions. Both of them agreed that there was enormous disquiet in the armed forces about the road they were being led down in Syria and the wider Middle East, not just amongst the lower ranks who are usually at the sharp end, but amongst the majority of senior officers as well. They have seen through the political rhetoric, and they just don't trust the political motives was the general gist of it. They were genuinely puzzled, and confused as to whose interests they were expected to fight for, and especially concerned about the pedigree of the rebels on the ground in Syria who the military would be expected to be supporting.

There are military websites where i have read postings from anonymous servicemen in Afghanistan saying much the same thing, but it was quite surprising to get it from 'the horse's mouth'. Here is a picture that was apparently posted on a military site, of course i am sure you will say it is a fake, and you may be right. But you may also be wrong. But whatever, it is very hard to disagree with the sentiments expressed, and in my opinion our leaders will ignore these sentiments at their peril.

https://securecdn.disqus.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/604/4703/original.jpg

Spot on.

And well said.

Thank you.

[Publicus]

USA and France are just not thinking this through. What's the end-game? Their best-ever hope is to take out Syrian heavy weapons and chemical delivery systems. OK -- let's assume that they do that and only kill Syrian military personnel. What then ? Assad is still in power, the rebels are splintered and will become more so when they see this action by the west -- too many chiefs with differing loyalties in the rebel side. The fighting will continue even if it's only with personal weapons, refugees will continue to be displaced and pour out into Turkey etc, More civilians will be killed in the fighting. Where's the win in all this ?????????

That was assuming a perfect strike, but if there are any co-lateral casualties amongst civilians or russian advisors --- then what?????

Meantime the politicans on capitol hill play poker instead of thinking about the people they are putting in serious harm's way.

Really -- it makes humanity look like a bunch of apes:!!!!!!!!!

Edited to add..

With apologies to the apes...

Some people are flippantly or cavalierly carrying on as if the United States had no strategy or has not thoroughly thought through a plan or approach to the Syria civil war.

Such people are in error and they only extend and perpetuate their error. The error needs to be pointed out as such and needs to be corrected, set straight.

For one thing, the U.S. military is 100% prepared and effectively poised to strike and to strike a first round of targets and a second round of targets. The U.S. military is 100% in the operation in every serious and professional way one can mention. The U.S. military does not hold back because one or two retired generals disagree. As far as the military is concerned, orders are orders. A professional military in an advanced democracy absolutely follows the lead and orders of the constitutionally superior authority, i.e., the commander in chief.

Last week Pentagon officials told The Wall Street Journal that the planned attack would deter and degrade President Bashar al-Assad's security forces. The key would be hitting various Damascus headquarters as well as some of the regime's six operable airports. These airports are the regime's nervous system, defected Air Force Colonel Hassan Hamada told Der Spiegel

.

Here's the news bulletin to those who are oblivious to the fact the U.S. has a strategy to bring the Syrian civil war to a successful conclusion. It's not easy and it won't happen overnight. But the strategy already is in place and being implemented. The planned strikes that are presently on hold are an integral part of the complete and thoroughly thought through strategy.

Actually, The US Has A Strategy In Syria — And It's Starting To Work

Obama said as much on Tuesday: "We have a broader strategy that will allow us to upgrade the capabilities of the opposition, allow Syria ultimately to free itself from the kinds of terrible civil war, death and activity that we've been seeing on the ground."

Furthermore, The New York Times reports that Obama told senators "the first 50-man cell of fighters, who have been trained by the C.I.A., was beginning to sneak into Syria."

Lastly, something must be done to stem the flow of money to dominant jihadist groups, which Weiss calls "a scandal, but an easily remedied one."

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-strategy-in-syria-2013-9#ixzz2dwEUEuTx

[Loptr]

It's all part of the plan. The question is why?

Gen Wesley Clark on US plans to invade 7 countries in 5 years. The timelines have slid a few years, but nothing has changed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw

Haha, how many times are you guys going to post some whack videos over and and over. I suppose you think posting this paranoid conspiracist trash over and over it will somehow be true.

Haha, we need a separate "Syria

Conspiracy Thread" thread for you guys to post your rants, theories, nutty videos and info wars quotes.

So, you discount the video of General Wesley Clark

It is not a secret that he was fired given "early retirement" for almost starting WW3 or that the general who got rid of him said that he is a "nut." He said “We’re going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran" many years ago and it did not happen. The conspiracy theory crowd love him, but he is not taken seriously by anyone else.

So what is more likely, that a US Army General with 34 years of service made up this story -or- that the story is accurate and he was canned for going off the reservation? If you think he made it up, the question is why jeopardize his career and reputation?

As far as the plan, it may be dated, but it looks like they have dusted it off and picked up right where they left off.

When I examine anything that has to do with the US government, I automatically go cynical as they have lied to everyone on the planet for decades. Why should we believe them now?

[jpinx]

USA and France are just not thinking this through. What's the end-game? Their best-ever hope is to take out Syrian heavy weapons and chemical delivery systems. OK -- let's assume that they do that and only kill Syrian military personnel. What then ? Assad is still in power, the rebels are splintered and will become more so when they see this action by the west -- too many chiefs with differing loyalties in the rebel side. The fighting will continue even if it's only with personal weapons, refugees will continue to be displaced and pour out into Turkey etc, More civilians will be killed in the fighting. Where's the win in all this ?????????

That was assuming a perfect strike, but if there are any co-lateral casualties amongst civilians or russian advisors --- then what?????

Meantime the politicans on capitol hill play poker instead of thinking about the people they are putting in serious harm's way.

Really -- it makes humanity look like a bunch of apes:!!!!!!!!!

Edited to add..

With apologies to the apes...

Some people are flippantly or cavalierly carrying on as if the United States had no strategy or has not thoroughly thought through a plan or approach to the Syria civil war.

Such people are in error and they only extend and perpetuate their error. The error needs to be pointed out as such and needs to be corrected, set straight.

For one thing, the U.S. military is 100% prepared and effectively poised to strike and to strike a first round of targets and a second round of targets. The U.S. military is 100% in the operation in every serious and professional way one can mention. The U.S. military does not hold back because one or two retired generals disagree. As far as the military is concerned, orders are orders. A professional military in an advanced democracy absolutely follows the lead and orders of the constitutionally superior authority, i.e., the commander in chief.

Last week Pentagon officials told The Wall Street Journal that the planned attack would deter and degrade President Bashar al-Assad's security forces. The key would be hitting various Damascus headquarters as well as some of the regime's six operable airports. These airports are the regime's nervous system, defected Air Force Colonel Hassan Hamada told Der Spiegel

.

Here's the news bulletin to those who are oblivious to the fact the U.S. has a strategy to bring the Syrian civil war to a successful conclusion. It's not easy and it won't happen overnight. But the strategy already is in place and being implemented. The planned strikes that are presently on hold are an integral part of the complete and thoroughly thought through strategy.

Actually, The US Has A Strategy In Syria — And It's Starting To Work

Obama said as much on Tuesday: "We have a broader strategy that will allow us to upgrade the capabilities of the opposition, allow Syria ultimately to free itself from the kinds of terrible civil war, death and activity that we've been seeing on the ground."

Furthermore, The New York Times reports that Obama told senators "the first 50-man cell of fighters, who have been trained by the C.I.A., was beginning to sneak into Syria."

Lastly, something must be done to stem the flow of money to dominant jihadist groups, which Weiss calls "a scandal, but an easily remedied one."

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-strategy-in-syria-2013-9#ixzz2dwEUEuTx

please ...... McCain plays poker during the session on Syria -- who's being flippant here ???. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Politicians are using this situation to improve their own stock, just because they can.....

Syria is just another Iraq, Afghanistan, where-ever -- and look how well justified the entry was, and how well planned the exit was for those campaigns. In democracies the military is led by the politicians, but there are plenty of military mutterings going on......

[NeverSure]

So, you discount the video of General Wesley Clark

It is not a secret that he was fired given "early retirement" for almost starting WW3 or that the general who got rid of him said that he is a "nut." He said “We’re going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran" many years ago and it did not happen. The conspiracy theory crowd love him, but he is not taken seriously by anyone else.

So what is more likely, that a US Army General with 34 years of service made up this story -or- that the story is accurate and he was canned for going off the reservation? If you think he made it up, the question is why jeopardize his career and reputation?

As far as the plan, it may be dated, but it looks like they have dusted it off and picked up right where they left off.

When I examine anything that has to do with the US government, I automatically go cynical as they have lied to everyone on the planet for decades. Why should we believe them now?

I don't know if you're familiar with American politics, but Clark is a nutcase. He tried to run for president and basically got laughed off the stage. He is of no interest to anyone but himself. And yes, he left the military as a nutcase.

He's a nobody with wacky ideas.

Now, if you could come up with some long time military leaders who hang out with him and agree with him on important matters, that would be noteworthy. Trouble is, you can't. He's a mouthpiece for himself only.

[Publicus]

This sounds like a great bunch of groups to prop up in Syria - just regular boy scouts trying to save their country / not!

Who Are the Syrian Rebels? A Basic Intelligence Briefing On the Assad Resistance

http://www.policymic.com/articles/42317/who-are-the-syrian-rebels-a-basic-intelligence-briefing-on-the-assad-resistance

Really, are you kidding?

Your link PolicyMic is a website for millennials, mostly college kids, who write for college course credits and who write nothing original. Neither are they professional journalists nor do they work for professional news organizations. They write about what they read somewhere or saw on tv or saw on the internet.

The essay at your link includes a photo of the writer that shows him to be about 18 years old, maybe 20 years old. One article there is written by a 14 year old.

How desperate can someone get to find someone who shares his point of view? Citing an 18 year old writing at a website where the article gets college course credit?!

I don't know, maybe some people who post at TVF actually send their own posts in for college course credits too.

[F430murci]

Putin is playing US hard. Him saying lets wait for more evidence and Russia may back just buys him time to finish shipping S-300 anti aircraft or anti-missile systems into Syria. Putin will never find conclusive evidence absent Assad publicly saying he did it.

Russia has intelligence in Syria and I would imagine that if rebels did it, we would be seeing much Russian intelligence confirming the same.

A recent report asserts that the shipping of the S-300 missile systems, that were expected to be delivered by July 2014, have been delayed until 2015-2016 because Damascus has failed to provide payment for them. Plus a shipment of twelve MiG-29M/M2 jets ordered in 2007, six of which were due to be delivered to Syria by the end of the year, will not be supplied before 2016-2017 because Damascus has only paid Moscow 30 percent of the agreed sum for the jets.

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Russia-suspends-delivery-of-S-300-missile-systems-to-Syria-325257

Russia sends missile cruiser to Eastern Mediterranean, expected to arrive in ten days

http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/Russia-sends-missile-cruiser-to-Mediterranean-325280

I thought I read something like this earlier when in Russia.

So Putin says the S-300s were paid for in June, but would not send because of balancing power. Now he says not paid for. Uhm, okay!

-----

Throughout the conflict Russia continued to "fulfill existing contracts" for "defensive" weapons like air and coastal defense systems, but it has stopped at shipping the advanced S-300 air defense system, which Syria had already purchased.

Putin himself said in June that Russia would not send Assad the S-300 because "we don't want to throw the region off-balance."

http://www.eastidahonews.com/2013/08/how-russia-might-respond-to-an-american-strike-in-syria/

[antfish]

Furthermore, The New York Times reports that Obama told senators "the first 50-man cell of fighters, who have been trained by the C.I.A., was beginning to sneak into Syria."

Lastly, something must be done to stem the flow of money to dominant jihadist groups, which Weiss calls "a scandal, but an easily remedied one."

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-strategy-in-syria-2013-9#ixzz2dwEUEuTx

So it is now official that those "rebels" who fight in Syria are CIA trained and send by the US?

[antfish]

Putin is playing US hard. Him saying lets wait for more evidence and Russia may back just buys him time to finish shipping S-300 anti aircraft or anti-missile systems into Syria. Putin will never find conclusive evidence absent Assad publicly saying he did it.

Russia has intelligence in Syria and I would imagine that if rebels did it, we would be seeing much Russian intelligence confirming the same.

A recent report asserts that the shipping of the S-300 missile systems, that were expected to be delivered by July 2014, have been delayed until 2015-2016 because Damascus has failed to provide payment for them. Plus a shipment of twelve MiG-29M/M2 jets ordered in 2007, six of which were due to be delivered to Syria by the end of the year, will not be supplied before 2016-2017 because Damascus has only paid Moscow 30 percent of the agreed sum for the jets.

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Russia-suspends-delivery-of-S-300-missile-systems-to-Syria-325257

Russia sends missile cruiser to Eastern Mediterranean, expected to arrive in ten days

http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/Russia-sends-missile-cruiser-to-Mediterranean-325280

I thought I read something like this earlier when in Russia.

So Putin says the S-300s were paid for in June, but would not send because of balancing power. Now he says not paid for. Uhm, okay!

-----

Throughout the conflict Russia continued to "fulfill existing contracts" for "defensive" weapons like air and coastal defense systems, but it has stopped at shipping the advanced S-300 air defense system, which Syria had already purchased.

Putin himself said in June that Russia would not send Assad the S-300 because "we don't want to throw the region off-balance."

http://www.eastidahonews.com/2013/08/how-russia-might-respond-to-an-american-strike-in-syria/

What wrong with defensive weapons? Nothing.

Those S-300 are some excellent tools.

[Publicus]

Furthermore, The New York Times reports that Obama told senators "the first 50-man cell of fighters, who have been trained by the C.I.A., was beginning to sneak into Syria."

Lastly, something must be done to stem the flow of money to dominant jihadist groups, which Weiss calls "a scandal, but an easily remedied one."

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-strategy-in-syria-2013-9#ixzz2dwEUEuTx

So it is now official that those "rebels" who fight in Syria are CIA trained and send by the US?

The news article says, "the first 50-man cell of fighters, who have been trained by the C.I.A., was beginning to sneak into Syria."

It says a 50-man group. It doesn't say anything about training Jihadists or al Quida et al, which the CIA does not do.

Maybe reading glasses would help.

[F430murci]

Furthermore, The New York Times reports that Obama told senators "the first 50-man cell of fighters, who have been trained by the C.I.A., was beginning to sneak into Syria."

Lastly, something must be done to stem the flow of money to dominant jihadist groups, which Weiss calls "a scandal, but an easily remedied one."

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-strategy-in-syria-2013-9#ixzz2dwEUEuTx

So it is now official that those "rebels" who fight in Syria are CIA trained and send by the US?

The news article says, "the first 50-man cell of fighters, who have been trained by the C.I.A., was beginning to sneak into Syria."

It says a 50-man group. It doesn't say anything about training Jihadists or al Quida et al, which the CIA does not do.

Maybe reading glasses would help.

Haha, why bother! Either a troll, senile, Chinese or just whack.

I keep seeing all of these complaints from congressmen about Bama not arming and backing the rebels over the last couple of years. Then we get conspiracy brigade arguing US has backed rebels. Do they know something US and rebels don't know?

[Exsexyman]

This sounds like a great bunch of groups to prop up in Syria - just regular boy scouts trying to save their country / not!

Who Are the Syrian Rebels? A Basic Intelligence Briefing On the Assad Resistance

http://www.policymic.com/articles/42317/who-are-the-syrian-rebels-a-basic-intelligence-briefing-on-the-assad-resistance

Really, are you kidding?

Your link PolicyMic is a website for millennials, mostly college kids, who write for college course credits and who write nothing original. Neither are they professional journalists nor do they work for professional news organizations. They write about what they read somewhere or saw on tv or saw on the internet.

The essay at your link includes a photo of the writer that shows him to be about 18 years old, maybe 20 years old. One article there is written by a 14 year old.

How desperate can someone get to find someone who shares his point of view? Citing an 18 year old writing at a website where the article gets college course credit?!

I don't know, maybe some people who post at TVF actually send their own posts in for college course credits too.

You are the one starting to sound increasingly desperate publicus, you are clearly in denial about the make up of the rebels in Syria. How about The New York Times, do they just write about what they read somewhere on the internet?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/world/middleeast/islamist-rebels-gains-in-syria-create-dilemma-for-us.html

"In Syria's largest city, Aleppo, rebels aligned with Al Qaeda control the power plant, run the bakeries and head a court that applies Islamic Law. Elsewhere they have seized government oilfields, put employees back to work and now profit from the crude they produce". "across Syria rebel held areas are dotted with Islamic courts, staffed by lawyers and clerics, and by fighting brigades led by extremists. Even the Supreme Military Council, the umbrella rebel organization, whose formation the West had hoped would sideline radical groups, is stocked with commanders who want to infuse Islamic law into a future Syrian government".

'Nowhere in rebel controlled Syria is there a secular fighting force to speak of".

So there you have it, is this what you want for the ordinary people of Syria, who lived in a secular society, could practice their religion of choice? Equal opportunity of education for both sexes. To have a system akin the the Taliban regime in Afghanistan imposed on them? Because that is what they will be getting if your hero has his way? Shameful.

Talking of President Obama and desperation, breaking news just now has Obama saying in a speech in Sweden that he didn't say a red line would be crossed, the world did! The world?!. Has he completely lost it? Doesn't have the moral courage to take responsibility for something he clearly did say! 'i didn't say it Miss, a big boy said it and ran away'! "The international community's credibility is on the line', he said. No Prez Obama, just your credibility, and you are blowing it by the hour!

[F430murci]

So it is now official that those "rebels" who fight in Syria are CIA trained and send by the US?

The news article says, "the first 50-man cell of fighters, who have been trained by the C.I.A., was beginning to sneak into Syria."

It says a 50-man group. It doesn't say anything about training Jihadists or al Quida et al, which the CIA does not do.

Maybe reading glasses would help.

Haha, why bother! Either a troll, senile, Chinese or just whack.

I keep seeing all of these complaints from congressmen about Bama not arming and backing the rebels over the last couple of years. Then we get conspiracy brigade arguing US has backed rebels. Do they know something US and rebels don't know?

But now it seems not to be some conspiracy theory anymore. The US/CIA trains fighters and those fighters sneak into Syria.

I hope it is starting. We need to arm the rebels to the teeth and Putin can do the same to Assad and let them just blow each other to smithereens. In fact, we need to send bigger weapons and let them use chemicals on each other. I am totally cool with that, except US or someone needs to help get the innocent women and children out of there and off the firing lines. My only beef in this whole deal is killing and torturing of innocent women, children and civilians. They need to be protected some how.

[JDGRUEN]

I just did a calculation on Iran's missile capability should Iran get a little crazy and decide to target the U.S. Fleet in the Eastern Mediterranean... And it goes like this ....

From a number of points near the Iraq border, Iran could send missiles to beyond the line of Cyprus about 1500 KM or so (up to 2500 KM depending on the analytic source doing the evaluating of Iran's missile capability. I am not sure of the accuracy of their missiles in this class, but two or three such missiles hitting and exploding with conventional warheads in the waters where the U.S. Fleet was firing missiles at Syria would certainly disrupt the Fleet's activities at the very least.

I am not rooting for Syria or Iran -- I just do not want to see any of my fellow Americans hurt or killed because of this stupid decision that is pending.

[F430murci]

I just did a calculation on Iran's missile capability should Iran get a little crazy and decide to target the U.S. Fleet in the Eastern Mediterranean... And it goes like this ....

From a number of points near the Iraq border, Iran could send missiles to beyond the line of Cyprus about 1500 KM or so (up to 2500 KM depending on the analytic source doing the evaluating of Iran's missile capability. I am not sure of the accuracy of their missiles in this class, but two or three such missiles hitting and exploding with conventional warheads in the waters where the U.S. Fleet was firing missiles at Syria would certainly disrupt the Fleet's activities at the very least.

I am not rooting for Syria or Iran -- I just do not want to see any of my fellow Americans hurt or killed because of this stupid decision that is pending.

They will be fine. Iran knows if they launch, before their missiles even get airborne, they will be turned into glass by Israel. No questions asked and will happen before anyone even gets a good fix on where Iran's missiles are going.

Iran lobbing missiles in the general direction of Israel just decreases their life expectancy to a few hours. Israel is not likely to sit around and wait for a bunch of detonations to find out if any of those missiles were nuclear.

[JDGRUEN]

Over the past 2-3 pages numerous posters have fought the battle in Syria from several different angles. I predict that if obama sends in the missiles and bombs he will do so without the consent of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate will only barely pass a resolution of consent. With that paltry 'mandate' obama will charge ahead ... or something...

He would have got a far bigger mandate for tackling Iran, the root cause of most problems in the region, but he keeps ducking that one, painting red lines as he goes.

Didn't you catch the latest ... obama said he didn't paint a red line ... the world did - or humanity did or somebody did... but he didn't ... hahahahahahahahha - the man is amazing ...