Syria's Assad claims upper hand in war 'turning point'

[webfact]

Syria's Assad claims upper hand in war 'turning point'

DAMASCUS: -- Syria's President Bashar al-Assad has claimed the upper hand in what he called a "turning point" in the three-year long civil war.

President Assad made the comments in an address at Damascus University,

His forces have been steadily recapturing rebel-held towns near the Lebanese border for several months.

More than 150,000 people have been killed in the conflict, with millions forced to flee their homes.

"This is a turning point in the crisis," President Assad said.

He added that his army was winning what he called "the war against terror".

Government forces have secured the main north-south highway in Syria in recent months, and have cut off vital supply routes for rebel forces.

Full story: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27016020


-- BBC 2014-04-14

[Ulysses G.]

He may be right. Most likely he was the one who used chemical weapons again recently and with what is going on with the Russians and the Iranians elsewhere, he will probably get away with it.

[pkspeaker]

I don't think he's the one using them because he has no motive to do-so. these gas weapons have no strategic value. He has heavy artillery and an air force; if he needs to create mass-destruction in a specific area where rebels are dug in-that is the better way to do it.. if he uses gas, the rebels can just put on gas masks.

The rebels stand to gain alot everytime gas is used, they can use the issue to get more weapons from their backers or they can accuse the government of using them and lobby for us airstrikes as 'punishment'.

Every time gas is used .. it's when the rebels seem to be desperate, Assad's government has been making battlefield gains, so why would he need to use this type of weapon?

[Exsexyman]

I don't think he's the one using them because he has no motive to do-so. these gas weapons have no strategic value. He has heavy artillery and an air force; if he needs to create mass-destruction in a specific area where rebels are dug in-that is the better way to do it.. if he uses gas, the rebels can just put on gas masks.

The rebels stand to gain alot everytime gas is used, they can use the issue to get more weapons from their backers or they can accuse the government of using them and lobby for us airstrikes as 'punishment'.

Every time gas is used .. it's when the rebels seem to be desperate, Assad's government has been making battlefield gains, so why would he need to use this type of weapon?

Look no further than Turkey. The Western MSM recently made a big splash about Erdogan banning access to Youtube, but were all curiously reticent about the reason why! Turkey of course is a NATO member, albeit a relatively recent and junior one, in Hells Angels parlance they are akin to 'Prospects'! Doing the 'Big Boys' bidding. There is no way they would have independently planned false flag attacks from Syria without getting 'the nod' from NATO's leading 'Chapter'.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/turkey-youtube-ban-full-transcript-leaked-syria-war-conversation-between-erdogan-officials-1442161

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

[folium]

I don't think he's the one using them because he has no motive to do-so. these gas weapons have no strategic value. He has heavy artillery and an air force; if he needs to create mass-destruction in a specific area where rebels are dug in-that is the better way to do it.. if he uses gas, the rebels can just put on gas masks.

The rebels stand to gain alot everytime gas is used, they can use the issue to get more weapons from their backers or they can accuse the government of using them and lobby for us airstrikes as 'punishment'.

Every time gas is used .. it's when the rebels seem to be desperate, Assad's government has been making battlefield gains, so why would he need to use this type of weapon?

Look no further than Turkey. The Western MSM recently made a big splash about Erdogan banning access to Youtube, but were all curiously reticent about the reason why! Turkey of course is a NATO member, albeit a relatively recent and junior one, in Hells Angels parlance they are akin to 'Prospects'! Doing the 'Big Boys' bidding. There is no way they would have independently planned false flag attacks from Syria without getting 'the nod' from NATO's leading 'Chapter'.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/turkey-youtube-ban-full-transcript-leaked-syria-war-conversation-between-erdogan-officials-1442161

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

That's probably a bit of a stretch.

Even the most mainstream of MSM reported this

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/03/27/turkey-blocks-youtube/6958649/

The leak has far more to do with savage domestic in-fighting amongst Turkish politicians.

Also you are little harsh re Turkey and NATO. It joined in the first wave of enlargement in 1952 (NATO founded 1949), before Germany, Spain and the E. European States. It has almost 1 million troops, far greater numbers than any other NATO member ex-USA.