Syria's Assad says Western strike could trigger regional war

[Exsexyman]

I am just waiting for the Obama apologists, (they know who they are), to come on here and attempt to defend this latest atrocity. Here we have christian nuns desperately trying to protect young children, (orphans) from the onslaught from these Islamist nutters , probably armed by Mr Obama and his cohorts. It is absolutely sickening to be honest. But hey, the ends justify the means! Right! Does Obama have christian values?

I speak as one who swallowed all the hype when Obama was first elected, i freely admit what a fool i was. But at least i am honest enough to admit it! As i said in my previous post, i always thought that America was a christian country, not necessarily in the strict religious sense, i am not religious at all. I am talking about christian values. How on earth are the Republicans in the bible belt going to sell this to their core supporters? Here we have christian nuns, desperately trying to protect children,(orphans), from an onslaught by Islamic fundamentalists, holed up on a mountain at the mercy of these 'rebels' who are supported and armed by our politicians. Surely in the name of common decency and humanity this cannot be right. Is there no shame?

Who is Barack Obama? Where did he come from? Who's agenda is he working for? He is clearly very charismatic, he has fooled a lot of people, but a bit of research throws up a lot of questions about him.. All the liberals voted for him, believing that he was a new broom, his actions as President show that he has nothing but contempt for them and their views.And the really sad thing is that they just lap it up, as evidenced by some of his supporters on this forum. They are in total denial. Any poster on here that points out in an intellectual way, the clear hypocrisy of his actions compared to his rhetoric is immediately dismissed as a 'hater'.

The bottom line is this. For whatever reason, the current President of the United States is hell bent on ignoring the wishes of the people he is serving, and is going to launch an attack on Syria, in support of Islamic militants, Al Qaeda terrorists, in an attempt to overthrow a secular government and replace it with an Islamic fundamentalist regime. One can only speculate as to why, and whose interests he is serving.

[lannarebirth]

I am just waiting for the Obama apologists, (they know who they are), to come on here and attempt to defend this latest atrocity. Here we have christian nuns desperately trying to protect young children, (orphans) from the onslaught from these Islamist nutters , probably armed by Mr Obama and his cohorts. It is absolutely sickening to be honest. But hey, the ends justify the means! Right! Does Obama have christian values?

I speak as one who swallowed all the hype when Obama was first elected, i freely admit what a fool i was. But at least i am honest enough to admit it! As i said in my previous post, i always thought that America was a christian country, not necessarily in the strict religious sense, i am not religious at all. I am talking about christian values. How on earth are the Republicans in the bible belt going to sell this to their core supporters? Here we have christian nuns, desperately trying to protect children,(orphans), from an onslaught by Islamic fundamentalists, holed up on a mountain at the mercy of these 'rebels' who are supported and armed by our politicians. Surely in the name of common decency and humanity this cannot be right. Is there no shame?

Who is Barack Obama? Where did he come from? Who's agenda is he working for? He is clearly very charismatic, he has fooled a lot of people, but a bit of research throws up a lot of questions about him.. All the liberals voted for him, believing that he was a new broom, his actions as President show that he has nothing but contempt for them and their views.And the really sad thing is that they just lap it up, as evidenced by some of his supporters on this forum. They are in total denial. Any poster on here that points out in an intellectual way, the clear hypocrisy of his actions compared to his rhetoric is immediately dismissed as a 'hater'.

The bottom line is this. For whatever reason, the current President of the United States is hell bent on ignoring the wishes of the people he is serving, and is going to launch an attack on Syria, in support of Islamic militants, Al Qaeda terrorists, in an attempt to overthrow a secular government and replace it with an Islamic fundamentalist regime. One can only speculate as to why, and whose interests he is serving.

The answer to your question is Zbigniew Brzezinski. He has a lifelong loathing of Russia and the former Soviet Union and he seeks direct confrontation, if need be to bring about its demise. He will use any proxy, no matter how sketchy to help fulfill these ends. He is a raving lunatic in my estimation and has a death wish for America.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts deleted. The thread is starting to stray off course. You are welcomed to express your opinion on the subject, but please keep your comments centered on the issue of the thread, which is Syria and a possible attack.

[hawker9000]

Colbert on Syria.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/09/04/colbert-on-syria-if-america-cared-about-shooting-people-wed-be-invading-chicago/

Syrians are volunteering to act as human shields.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23966147#FBM281451

Let me guess ? When the bombs are dropped and civilians are murdered, they can be labelled as suicide shields by the US media

If they do so willingly, as the article & BBC report suggest, then call 'em whatever you want, they're essentially combatants, or at least sympathizers, as far as I'm concerned. All civilian deaths are regrettable, but less so if out of sympathy for the thug-murderer Assad, they place themselves in harm's way. They do that, and they're part of the problem, and accomplices after-the-fact to Assad's atrocities. If they do so unwillingly or unaware of the risk they're actually taking, then they're yet more victims of the Assad regime.

PS - Why is it there seems to be more discussion of "bombing", as if it's some given, here on TV than anywhere else? (But it does get a bit more academic when human shields come into the picture, because then it doesn't matter as much that the strike planners do all possible to avoid civilian casualties when Assad does all possible to cause civilian casualties.

There has been a lot of talk of bombing. There has also been a carrier group moved into the area. Here is just one reference, and also stealth bombers have several advantages and a long, long range:

"...I don’t think it’s an accident that the aircraft carrier is moving over in the region," he (McCain) told reporters, suggesting that a series of remote strikes by cruise missiles was likely not to be the only use of force the president would end up enjoying..." LINK

An aircraft carrier doesn't need to launch a strike to be "useful". It has sophisticated command & control capabilities onboard, and can put up early warning aircraft for area surveillance and for enemy aircraft and inbound threat detection (and never has to leave international airspace to do this). A carrier can also put up electronic warfare aircraft to degrade any possible inbound threats, and offensive EW capabilities if needed. The carrier itself has more extensive sensor capabilities than the destroyers. The list goes on, but in short, it's not just about the carrier's capacity for launching bomb strikes. Not by a long shot. McCain may well be, no, he's right about the options for extended use of force, but as good as that might make him feel, it's actually a big sticking point for many others in Congress who're worried about precisely that.

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been deleted. The thread is about Syria. It is not about US Partisan politics.

[lomatopo]

The administration seems to trying several different tactics to sway Congress, including waiving the always scary Al-Qaeda "flag", by planting stories like this:

Al-Qaeda’s Proxies Among Syria’s Rebels Scared by Threat of U.S. Strikes

al-Qaeda affiliated groups that have long sided with the rebels are worried that the U.S. and its allies might use the pretext of strikes against the regime to degrade their own abilities.

Read more: http://world.time.com/2013/09/05/al-qaedas-proxies-among-syrias-rebels-scared-by-threat-of-u-s-strikes/#ixzz2e4UNoxvO

Meanwhile,

Kerry portrait of Syria rebels at odds with intelligence reports

(Reuters) - Secretary of State John Kerry's public assertions that moderate Syrian opposition groups are growing in influence appear to be at odds with estimates by U.S. and European intelligence sources and nongovernmental experts, who say Islamic extremists remain by far the fiercest and best-organized rebel elements.

At congressional hearings this week, while making the case for President Barack Obama's plan for limited military action in Syria, Kerry asserted that the armed opposition to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad "has increasingly become more defined by its moderation, more defined by the breadth of its membership, and more defined by its adherence to some, you know, democratic process and to an all-inclusive, minority-protecting constitution.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/05/us-syria-crisis-usa-rebels-idUSBRE98405L20130905

Hard to believe this is the same guy who testified before Congress 42 years ago?

Some of his testimony:

...In our opinion, and from our experience, there is nothing in South Vietnam, nothing which could happen that realistically threatens the United States of America. And to attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom, which those misfits supposedly abuse, is to us the height of criminal hypocrisy, and it is that kind of hypocrisy which we feel has torn this country apart....

We found that not only was it a civil war, an effort by a people who had for years been seeking their liberation from any colonial influence whatsoever, but also we found that the Vietnamese whom we had enthusiastically molded after our own image were hard put to take up the fight against the threat we were supposedly saving them from.

[simple1]

I am just waiting for the Obama apologists, (they know who they are), to come on here and attempt to defend this latest atrocity. Here we have christian nuns desperately trying to protect young children, (orphans) from the onslaught from these Islamist nutters , probably armed by Mr Obama and his cohorts. It is absolutely sickening to be honest. But hey, the ends justify the means! Right! Does Obama have christian values?

I speak as one who swallowed all the hype when Obama was first elected, i freely admit what a fool i was. But at least i am honest enough to admit it! As i said in my previous post, i always thought that America was a christian country, not necessarily in the strict religious sense, i am not religious at all. I am talking about christian values. How on earth are the Republicans in the bible belt going to sell this to their core supporters? Here we have christian nuns, desperately trying to protect children,(orphans), from an onslaught by Islamic fundamentalists, holed up on a mountain at the mercy of these 'rebels' who are supported and armed by our politicians. Surely in the name of common decency and humanity this cannot be right. Is there no shame?

Who is Barack Obama? Where did he come from? Who's agenda is he working for? He is clearly very charismatic, he has fooled a lot of people, but a bit of research throws up a lot of questions about him.. All the liberals voted for him, believing that he was a new broom, his actions as President show that he has nothing but contempt for them and their views.And the really sad thing is that they just lap it up, as evidenced by some of his supporters on this forum. They are in total denial. Any poster on here that points out in an intellectual way, the clear hypocrisy of his actions compared to his rhetoric is immediately dismissed as a 'hater'.

The bottom line is this. For whatever reason, the current President of the United States is hell bent on ignoring the wishes of the people he is serving, and is going to launch an attack on Syria, in support of Islamic militants, Al Qaeda terrorists, in an attempt to overthrow a secular government and replace it with an Islamic fundamentalist regime. One can only speculate as to why, and whose interests he is serving.

The US has long been supporting Sunni majority dictatorships that support Islamic extremist operations outside of their territory to keep stability in their countries & minimise the influence of Shiite dictatorships. As posted above analysts have concluded that the end game justifies US support for the Sunnis as:

"The upsurge in Shia identity and confidence seen here would certainly cause serious concern in the Salafi-jihadist community in the Muslim world, including the senior leadership of al-Qaeda. As a result, it is very likely that al-Qaeda might focus its efforts on targeting Iranian interests throughout the Middle East and Persian Gulf while simultaneously cutting back on anti-American and anti-Western operations".

This does not excuse the murder of Christian civilians. Syrian Christians support the Alawite minority dictatorship in Syria as it's in their best interest. Syrian Christians are not excluded from the Syrian Army and will be fighting with the Alawites; at this stage no one knows what involvement, if any, they have had in atrocities committed by the Syrian Army.

Edited September 6, 2013 by simple1

[JDGRUEN]

Syria is a mess ... Islamic Radicals everywhere beheading enemies ...

New York Times ... Brutality of Syrian Rebels Posing Dilemma in West

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/world/middleeast/brutality-of-syrian-rebels-pose-dilemma-in-west.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp&

Edited September 6, 2013 by JDGRUEN

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been deleted. This is the World News. The thread is about Western strikes on Syria. Continued posting of US partisan politics will result in suspensions.

[boomerangutang]

This is news just coming in.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/syria-al-qaeda-linked-rebels-target-christians-111350473.html#Td7pxJl

But Mr Kerry stood up a day ago and swore that there was no Al Qaeda in Syria whilst giving testimony. Surely he cannot be a liar? Can he? I always understood that America was a christian country, how on earth can they justify aligning themselves with these sorts of people? Just a few short years ago we were all being warned that Al Qaeda were a threat to all of us, now they are apparently our allies, who deserve our arms and military support. It's all very confusing!

Wake up! It's not about Al Qaeda. It's about Iran (and Russia)...

It is about Al Qaeda, their off-shoots, and all the other factions/countries/thugs in the region. There is precedent for more extremist factions to take over from less extreme factions. Nearly every M.E. country has history of such. Even if Al Qaeda are not physically in Syria at this time (which I doubt) they'll certainly be there when the smoke is clearing, to try and wrestle control from whomever is still standing on the rubble.

I was leaning to limited surgical strikes (to punish Assad for using Chemi) but now am pulling back, and here's one reason why:

It's easy for baddies to revert to abducting Americans or Israelis. If they can't get military, they'll snatch bizmen or tourists. Right away, the stakes (and tensions) shoot sky-high. Escalation becomes inevitable, and the whole mess devolves further.

[rijb]

Colbert on Syria.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/09/04/colbert-on-syria-if-america-cared-about-shooting-people-wed-be-invading-chicago/

Syrians are volunteering to act as human shields.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23966147#FBM281451

Let me guess ? When the bombs are dropped and civilians are murdered, they can be labelled as suicide shields by the US media

How would you label the Sarin gas victims? Invisible shields?

[midas]

And then I read this...............................

The usual conspiracy theory nonsense - featuring Wesley Clark and implicating the British, even though they have decided against joining the strike.

You can call it whatever you like. But if this President authorises force against another country and in doing so bypasses the United Nations Security Council, bypasses Congress and all before the weapons inspectors have even delivered their findings and knowing that by doing all this it will only strengthen the rebels even further……………… all supposedly just for humanitarian reasons?

Come on...............It would be easier to believe in the tooth fairy

[NeverSure]

And then I read this...............................

The usual conspiracy theory nonsense - featuring Wesley Clark and implicating the British, even though they have decided against joining the strike.

You can call it whatever you like. But if this President authorises force against another country and in doing so bypasses the United Nations Security Council, bypasses Congress and all before the weapons inspectors have even delivered their findings and knowing that by doing all this it will only strengthen the rebels even further……………… all supposedly just for humanitarian reasons?

Come on...............It would be easier to believe in the tooth fairy

Well, I'd give you a big "like" for this if you'd not reference the UN. How many time does it have to be said that the UN ain't shit? NONE of their resolutions are binding on anyone.

Obama doesn't legally need Congress' approval, but he wants it because he backed down and wants cover. Can't say I blame him after Great Britain voted "no."

But I don't yet know who used the poison gas, and I also don't think it's the job of the US to spank one side in a country's civil war in any event.

I also don't know which side is the lesser of two evils, or why the US would support either side. I just don't get it.

Congress is now in a pickle made by Obama. If they don't back him they may feel they make the US look weak, and its "red lines" crossable. If they do back Obama, things may only get worse.

How'd we get into this mess?

[Ulysses G.]

How'd we get into this mess?

Someone made a foolish remark about red lines that can not be crossed.

[boomerangutang]

How'd we get into this mess?

Someone made a foolish remark about red lines that can not be crossed.

We're not in to the mess yet, but getting closer minute by minute.

[lannarebirth]

Senator McCain meets his constituents:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzH7BxFEzDs#t=92

[newsummerday]

_{9/11 will be within few days.}

_{Just interesting: will the USA start support Al Qaeda on this day or later?}

Edited September 6, 2013 by newsummerday

[rijb]

_{9/11 will be within few days.}

_{Just interesting: will the USA start support Al Qaeda on this day or later?}

What kind of support? We knock down our own buildings? No drones for awhile? Moral support? Money? Weapons? Discount coupons for Walmart?

[uptheos]

I think Obama has given Assad all the time he needs to move his chemical weapons into schools, mosques and densely populated areas.......what a nice guy Obama is.....wonder if there's anything else he needs to let Assad know about?

[hawker9000]

Well, to all of you that have been saying "bombing", I guess I owe a tip of the hat. Suddenly tonight the media are talking bombing and showing pictures of B-52s, etc. 'Guess troops will be next. D**n - how DOES Obama get away with this? What a way to start a war. STILL think the road is becoming increasingly rocky as far as many members of Congress are concerned. Monday in DC is going to be a very interesting day.

Interesting video making the rounds showing rebels executing 7 captured Syrian soldiers. (Just google 'syrian rebel execution video' - and observe the graphic warning). Saw one media version that didn't show the actual gunfire (blacked out), but did provide a translation of what the rebel leading was saying as he prepared to start firing: 'sounded very muslim-driven.

Edited September 6, 2013 by hawker9000

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies deleted.

[Chicog]

I think Obama has given Assad all the time he needs to move his chemical weapons into schools, mosques and densely populated areas.......what a nice guy Obama is.....wonder if there's anything else he needs to let Assad know about?

He can't move the presidential palace there though, can he?

[uptheos]

I think Obama has given Assad all the time he needs to move his chemical weapons into schools, mosques and densely populated areas.......what a nice guy Obama is.....wonder if there's anything else he needs to let Assad know about?

He can't move the presidential palace there though, can he?

So, you reckon he'll lob a missile on Assad's head, whilst he quietly asleep in the palace?

[mania]

He can't move the presidential palace there though, can he?

No more than you can move the White House I guess

Why are either targets now?

Or are you saying this is all just another circle jerk in a long line

"Will it go round in circles

Will it fly high like a bird up in the sky

I've got a story, ain't got no moral

Let the bad guy win every once in a while"

[hawker9000]

I'm having my doubts about that video. Not that I'm a ghoul for such stuff, but I can't find any copies online that aren't the "blackout" version, which doesn't actually show the killings, and therefore isn't totally convincing evidence of any. It could all have just been staged. If someone has found something different, please share it.

[newsummerday]

_{9/11 will be within few days.}

_{Just interesting: will the USA start support Al Qaeda on this day or later?}

What kind of support? We knock down our own buildings? No drones for awhile? Moral support? Money? Weapons? Discount coupons for Walmart?

I mean rocket strike on Assad now.

The strike which will support Al Qaeda to win the next country...

I was in Tennessee on 9/11 and was watching TV together with all office staff. My American friends were absolutely shocked and I tried to support them at that time.

At that time nobody could imagine : America and Al Qaeda are allies........

[uptheos]

I'm having my doubts about that video. Not that I'm a ghoul for such stuff, but I can't find any copies online that aren't the "blackout" version, which doesn't actually show the killings, and therefore isn't totally convincing evidence of any. It could all have just been staged. If someone has found something different, please share it.

There's a lot of things that could be staged!

[canman]

I see Assad has refered to Obama as weak in a recent french interview.

Obama is so angry he plans to ask congress for permission to come up with a good comeback.

[hawker9000]

Maybe Obama & Assad could just duke it out, mano a mano... Or swords or pistols at dawn or something. We could even paint a red line in the sand for them. Do the rest of us really need to be involved?

[lomatopo]

Ah yes, the old "military advisor" role. Now where have we heard that one before? So much for no boots on the ground.

U.S. considers wider training of Syrian rebels

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration is considering a plan to use U.S. military trainers to help increase the capabilities of the Syrian rebels, in a move that would greatly expand the current CIA training being done quietly in Jordan, U.S. officials told the Associated Press on Thursday. Any training would take place outside Syria, and one possible location would be Jordan.

The talk of expanded military training comes as President Obama appears to have achieved little headway against a wall of skepticism on Capitol Hill.

Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20130906_U_S__considers_wider_training_of_Syrian_rebels.html#sXm2rOsXmO8Keefq.99