Putin orders tough action on Syria threats

[Pakboong]

I don't think there are any easy answers. But it was pretty much started by brutal dictators who've ruled Syria with an iron fist for decades. Syria, like many other countries in the ME, got caught up in the Arab Spring uprisings.

I did read this and it make sense. But who knows.

http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/us-russia-gas-pipeline-war-syria-could-destabilise-putin-103505758

As Orenstein explained, “in 2009, Qatar proposed to build a pipeline to send its gas northwest via Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Syria to Turkey… However, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad refused to sign the plan; Russia, which did not want to see its position in European gas markets undermined, put him under intense pressure not to”.

Russia’s Gazprom sells 80 per cent of its gas to Europe. So in 2010, Russia put its weight behind “an alternative Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline that would pump Iranian gas from the same field out via Syrian ports such as Latakia and under the Mediterranean.” The project would allow Moscow “to control gas imports to Europe from Iran, the Caspian Sea region, and Central Asia.”

In regard to your endless "evil dictator" references, I am providing a NYT position on Assad's alleged gas attack and one created by a blogger. If you read them both, you will come away with the New York Times version as a boiler plate response. Clearly, much more thought and research was put into the other.Just my opinion,but, if you are inclined to only accept "mainstream news" your opinion will always be censored. You read a lot and have high energy with your research. We all know what the mainstream view is as it is always the same. I think you could branch out a bit and consider other points of view.

http://www.brandonturbeville.com/2013/09/syria-chemical-weapons-victims-were.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/world/europe/syria-united-nations.html?_r=2

Edited December 12, 2015 by Pakboong

[LuckyNo4]

Actually it is not. Syria was quite a nice place at one time.

Did things change. They sure did. To be objective one must investigate why those changes happened.

I hear what you are saying, but the facts speak for themselves. Assad and his father murdered many of their own people. Freedom of speech was non-existent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashar_al-Assad#Human_rights

A 2007 law required internet cafes to record all the comments users post on chat forums.^%5B113%5D Websites such as Wikipedia Arabic, YouTube and Facebook were blocked intermittently between 2008 and February 2011.^{%5B114%5D%5B115%5D%5B116%5D}

Human Rights groups, such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, have detailed how the Assads regime's secret police routinely tortured, imprisoned, and killed political opponents, and those who speak out against the regime.^{%5B117%5D%5B118%5D} In addition some 600 Lebanese political prisoners are thought to be held in regime prisons since the Syrian occupation of Lebanon, with some held for as long as over 30 years.^%5B119%5D Since 2006 it expanded the use of travel bans against dissidents. In that regard, Syria is the worst offender among Arab states.^%5B120%5D The Syrian mukhabarat is Alawite dominated.^%5B121%5D

...................

It was reported that 200,000 political prisoners were in jail in Syria for opposing the Assad regime

His father:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafez_al-Assad

The final showdown, the Hama massacre, took place in February 1982^[96] when the government crushed the uprising.^[97] Helicopter gunships, bulldozers and artillery bombardment razed the city, killing thousands of people.^[97] The Ba'ath government withstood the uprising not because of popular support, but because the opposition was disorganized and had little urban support.^[97] Throughout the uprising, the Sunni middle class continued to support the Ba'ath Party because of its dislike of political Islam.^[97] After the uprising the government resumed its version of militaristic Leninism, reverting the liberalization introduced when Assad came to power.^[98] The Ba'ath Party was weakened by the uprising; democratic elections for delegates to the Regional and National Congresses were halted, and open discussion within the party ended.^[98] The uprising made Syria more totalitarian than ever, and strengthened Assad's position as undisputed leader of Syria.^[98]

Easy for us to sit here and say things were better before these Arab Spring uprisings. We didn't live there. They happened for a reason and it wasn't the fault of the west. Poor leadership.

Worth reading.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War

"They happened for a reason and it wasn't the fault of the west."

So the uprisings and this plan were just coincidence?

[konying]

Maybe he should focus on rebels and not civilians:

http://time.com/4129222/russia-airstrikes-syria-civilian-casualties-isis/

One airstrike hit a post office, part of a series of strikes that killed 17 civilians. At least four other attacks targeted hospitals. An airstrike on Sunday hit a marketplace, killing at least 30 people.

Russias military intervention in Syria is killing civilians at a high rate in rebel-held areas of the countrys northwest, even as the campaign has failed to produce a decisive shift in the larger civil war between regime of president Bashar Assad and his opponents.

Well at least he does not bomb hospitals , ehh?!

Which of the four hospitals that were targeted were not hit?

Which of the 4 did not house terrorists ? And which were totally terrorist free?

[Kasset Tak]

got to admit when old SADDAM and GADHAFI were ruling the roost, we never got any of this <deleted>, and a local said some time ago, when Saddam was in charge at least we could go to the market,now when you go you get a good chance of being blown up.

Yea! Back home I have a friend that is a Christian Iraqi. His family had a company with over 20 people working for them, but after Saddam was thrown out of power he lost 2 brothers in attacks by fundamental Muslims. He used to say:

"During Saddam it was sometimes bad but we, even as Christians had no problem and could do business and live in peace. Then the US came and we had to flee to Europe.".

Those who are seen as terrorists in the eyes of some might be regarded as freedom fighters by others.

[simple1]

Many governments have had popular uprisings and have stepped down without resorting to killing innocent civilians. Or peacefully met with the protesters to negotiate a settlement. Here's but one example.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/04/romanian-government-resigns-nightclub-fire-victor-ponta

Can't argue with the fact Syria was ruled by dictators only interested in their preservation. If that wasn't the fact, why not have free and fair elections and allow the people to choose their own leaders?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damascus_Spring

Officially a Republic, Syria has been governed by the Baath Party since 1963 and was under Emergency Law from 1963 until 2011; the head of state since 1970 has been a member of the Assad family.

Under Hafiz al-Asad, president of Syria from 1970 until his death in 2000, political activity had been strictly controlled, and from 1980 onwards effective opposition activity became almost impossible. Five principal security agencies served primarily to monitor political dissent: A state of emergency had existed since 1963, with military courts applying martial law and special courts trying political cases with little regard for human rights or due process. Prisoners were routinely tortured and held in appalling conditions.

From 1998 on, the level of repression diminished noticeably. Following the death of Hafiz al-Asad in June 2000 his son, Bashar, was installed as president of Syria.

I know I would not like living under these conditions. I'm sure you wouldn't either. Right???

From the above link, I think this sums it up quite nicely:

The Damascus Spring can be seen as having mobilised around a number of political demands, expressed in the "Manifesto of the 99" signed by prominent intellectuals. These were, principally, the cancellation of the state of emergency and abolition of martial law and special courts; the release of all political prisoners; the return without fear of prosecution of political exiles; and the right to form political parties and civil organisation. To these was often added the more precisely political demand that Article 8 of the Syrian constitution be repealed. This article provides that "the Arab Socialist Ba'th Party leads the state and society".

Nothing about outside influence. It was an internal matter created by the Syrian leaders.

Always interesting how some try to re-position, not you, the history of the Syrian Civil War. I know you are deeply interested in Syria so you may like to have a read of the URL below. You may also like to sign up for the daily news updates from Al Monitor who provide detailed updates & analysis on who is doing what to whom.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10716289/How-Bashar-al-Assad-created-the-feared-shabiha-militia-an-insider-speaks.html

[Scott]

got to admit when old SADDAM and GADHAFI were ruling the roost, we never got any of this <deleted>, and a local said some time ago, when Saddam was in charge at least we could go to the market,now when you go you get a good chance of being blown up.

Yea! Back home I have a friend that is a Christian Iraqi. His family had a company with over 20 people working for them, but after Saddam was thrown out of power he lost 2 brothers in attacks by fundamental Muslims. He used to say:

"During Saddam it was sometimes bad but we, even as Christians had no problem and could do business and live in peace. Then the US came and we had to flee to Europe.".

Those who are seen as terrorists in the eyes of some might be regarded as freedom fighters by others.

I had numerous employees in Northern Iraq, including 1 whose entire family, every last one of them, was killed in the Anfal campaign. In addition, all his neighbors were also killed. He was the only person left alive. Other had similar, although not quite as significant losses as that guy.

Many of the atrocities that occurred with ME dictators managed to stay well under the radar of the Western press. The same is the case with Syria.

Whether the area would be better off with or without them is a matter of speculation, but make no mistake, everyone was not holding hands and singing Kumbaya in those countries and they aren't in Syria either.

[does]

True, but it all started with the illegal invasion of Iraq.

does, on 12 Dec 2015 - 09:48, said:

No "maybe" but surely. And now: eagerly awaiting your explanation of what led up to Russia's militairy campaign in the region.

The current President of Syria invited his ally, Russia to assist him against the dearth of groups trying to depose him.

[SgtRock]

does, on 12 Dec 2015 - 16:26, said:

True, but it all started with the illegal invasion of Iraq.

SgtRock, on 12 Dec 2015 - 10:24, said:

does, on 12 Dec 2015 - 09:48, said:does, on 12 Dec 2015 - 09:48, said:

No "maybe" but surely. And now: eagerly awaiting your explanation of what led up to Russia's militairy campaign in the region.

The current President of Syria invited his ally, Russia to assist him against the dearth of groups trying to depose him.

Where does the illegal invasion of Iraq come into your original question ?

[craigt3365]

craigt3365, on 12 Dec 2015 - 12:44, said:

SgtRock, on 12 Dec 2015 - 12:27, said:

I get that you are totally against war. That is your position and good for you. I have no issues with your position. I do get the feeling, from reading various posts, not only in this thread, but also in other threads. That you are particularly naïve when it comes to the ways of the world, especially in certain Countries.

This is not a criticism but merely an observation.

Yes, 100% against war...of any sort. Not sure about naive. Biased? Absolutely. Just like everybody else. I've not lived in the US for many years. And have been to over 85 countries. Spending many months in countries like China, Argentina, Chile, India, etc. Only been to the ME a bit, but have been to 4 countries there so far. I like slow travel.

In a few months, I'll be spending quite a bit of time in the 'Stans. Should be interesting!

Not sure why you would be going to any Stan if you are so Anti war.

You probably wont last long before you have a nervous breakdown

I was on the border of Rwanda and DRC when fighting broke out. Saw tracer bullets fly by the hotel, could easily see small arms fire and blasts nearby all night. The hotel staff made us stay on the floor of our rooms. No sleeping in the bed. Courtyard was filled with NGOs fleeing and setting up temporary HQ. I fled with thousands of others the next day as tanks headed towards the border.

I was in Tahrir Square about 2 months after the uprising started there. Stayed about 4 blocks from the square. Went in several times as the food on offer was great! Though did have to scamper a bit when the police started pushing people around. Was in China during SARS. Etc, etc , etc.

It's all part of travel. Though for some, could be a bit unsettling.

I also visited Vietnam, Cambodia, Germany, France, etc. All places where many wars have taken place. So not sure what you are talking about.

But, back to the topic....

[Asiantravel]

Well Assad was never a brutal dictator...he was a friendly socialist, with good healthcare, education, freedom of religion and equal rights for women.

Actually the same like in Afghanistan before the USA supported the freedom fighters.....Strange the bad Soviets called them religious fanatics and Terrorists.....Later the freedom fighters called themself Taliban.

That's a joke about Assad, right???

Not necessarily ajoke. Democracy is just not for everyone and what works in some countries dont work in others. Lets ask if Syria was better off now or pre 2011? Same with Iraq is it better now or with Sadam.

also the same with Libya.

Gaddafi wrote, “They want to do to Libya what they did to Iraq and what they are itching to do to Iran. They want to take back the oil, which was nationalized by these country’s revolutions. They want to re-establish military bases that were shut down by the revolutions and to install client regimes that will subordinate the country’s wealth and labor to imperialist corporate interests. All else is lies and deception.”

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-884508

Edited December 12, 2015 by Asiantravel

[craigt3365]

Well Assad was never a brutal dictator...he was a friendly socialist, with good healthcare, education, freedom of religion and equal rights for women.

Actually the same like in Afghanistan before the USA supported the freedom fighters.....Strange the bad Soviets called them religious fanatics and Terrorists.....Later the freedom fighters called themself Taliban.

That's a joke about Assad, right???

Not necessarily ajoke. Democracy is just not for everyone and what works in some countries dont work in others. Lets ask if Syria was better off now or pre 2011? Same with Iraq is it better now or with Sadam.

also the same with Libya.

Gaddafi wrote, “They want to do to Libya what they did to Iraq and what they are itching to do to Iran. They want to take back the oil, which was nationalized by these country’s revolutions. They want to re-establish military bases that were shut down by the revolutions and to install client regimes that will subordinate the country’s wealth and labor to imperialist corporate interests. All else is lies and deception.”

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-884508

I'll pass:

The opinions expressed in this piece are solely those of the iReporter. CNN cannot confirm all of the claims in this iReport and has been unable to reach the original submitter. Share your thoughts on this story in the comments below or upload your view to iReport.

[Kasset Tak]

got to admit when old SADDAM and GADHAFI were ruling the roost, we never got any of this <deleted>, and a local said some time ago, when Saddam was in charge at least we could go to the market,now when you go you get a good chance of being blown up.

Yea! Back home I have a friend that is a Christian Iraqi. His family had a company with over 20 people working for them, but after Saddam was thrown out of power he lost 2 brothers in attacks by fundamental Muslims. He used to say:

"During Saddam it was sometimes bad but we, even as Christians had no problem and could do business and live in peace. Then the US came and we had to flee to Europe.".

Those who are seen as terrorists in the eyes of some might be regarded as freedom fighters by others.

I had numerous employees in Northern Iraq, including 1 whose entire family, every last one of them, was killed in the Anfal campaign. In addition, all his neighbors were also killed. He was the only person left alive. Other had similar, although not quite as significant losses as that guy.

Many of the atrocities that occurred with ME dictators managed to stay well under the radar of the Western press. The same is the case with Syria.

Whether the area would be better off with or without them is a matter of speculation, but make no mistake, everyone was not holding hands and singing Kumbaya in those countries and they aren't in Syria either.

I know that Saddam was doing a lot of really bad things especially against the Kurds and other minorities. But as I said "Those who are seen as terrorists in the eyes of some might be regarded as freedom fighters by others.". The Al-Anfal campaign began during the Iran-Iraq war and part of why it happened was that the Kurds were fighting the Iraqi army and helping the Iranians.

The Kurds where fighting for a free Kurdistan during the time of Saddam, they are still fighting for a free Kurdistan and they are doing a good job fighting ISIS in Iraq as freedom fighters. But there is two sides of a coin, Kurds (PKK) are fighting for a free Kurdistan in Turkey so the Kurds (PKK) are declared as terrorists by Turkey. So now when the Kurds are not attacked by Saddam they have been attacked by the Turkish armed forces both in Iraq and Turkey...

The problem with Iraq, Syria and most of the middle east is that there are many minorities that are split in to different countries that are not natural to their history and ethnicity and many are fighting for their freedom. Without the iron-fist of Saddam ruling Iraq all these groups in Iraq started fighting each other and ISIS came to life as a part of that. So today the only thing that keeps the rest of the ethnic groups from killing each other is actually that they are fighting against ISIS...

Edited December 12, 2015 by Kasset Tak

[car720]

noitom, on 12 Dec 2015 - 10:21, said:

We need a global media organization - Reuters, Bloomberg, AlJazeera, BBC....to spell out clearly and "objectively" what the situation is in Syria and Iraq

The first casualty of war is truth.

If you want a clear and concise objective, it is not going to come from any news source.

and the press don't make any money from the truth.

[Publicus]

Quote

The final showdown, the Hama massacre, took place in February 1982^[96] when the government crushed the uprising.^[97] Helicopter gunships, bulldozers and artillery bombardment razed the city, killing thousands of people.^[97] The Ba'ath government withstood the uprising not because of popular support, but because the opposition was disorganized and had little urban support.^[97] Throughout the uprising, the Sunni middle class continued to support the Ba'ath Party because of its dislike of political Islam.^[97] After the uprising the government resumed its version of militaristic Leninism, reverting the liberalization introduced when Assad came to power.^[98] The Ba'ath Party was weakened by the uprising; democratic elections for delegates to the Regional and National Congresses were halted, and open discussion within the party ended.^[98] The uprising made Syria more totalitarian than ever, and strengthened Assad's position as undisputed leader of Syria.^[98]

@ CraigT

I did not want to clog up the thread pasting all your last post.

I just wanted to comment on your quote above.

Can you tell me any Government that would not crush an uprising by whatever means necessary ?

Would it really be surprising to ditch liberalism after a brutal uprising ?

I get that you are totally against war. That is your position and good for you. I have no issues with your position. I do get the feeling, from reading various posts, not only in this thread, but also in other threads. That you are particularly naïve when it comes to the ways of the world, especially in certain Countries.

This is not a criticism but merely an observation.

I do get the feeling, from reading various posts, not only in this thread, but also in other threads. That you are particularly naïve when it comes to the ways of the world, especially in certain Countries.

The poster to which the remarks are directed provided a polite subdued and effective reply which is within character. So perhaps now it is time to be a bit more direct.

Assad must go and eventually he will be disposed of. But Assad is only one among dozens.

The rightwing out there at the margins believe anyone who opposes the right wing in their support of dictatorship must be naive, i.e., foolish, silly, dumb. For the far out right to say 'naive' is a tactic of the more calculating among the right dictators who would consider themselves to be benevolent rather than harsh.

The more dictators that disappear and the faster they disappear the better. Dictatorship is a direct threat to democracy, freedom, liberalism and there aren't any two ways about it. Putin, the House of Saud, the ayatollahs, CCP Dictators in Beijing etc etc want and must have stability. But stability under dictatorship only. Since the advent of democracy, no dictatorship or one party state has contributed anything positive to the human condition. Not to the quality of life and not to the standard of living.

Countries with the worst UN Human Development Index are the dictatorships. Conversely, the countries with the highest index ratings are the democracies.

http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi-table

Edited December 12, 2015 by Publicus

[Chicog]

Quote

The final showdown, the Hama massacre, took place in February 1982^[96] when the government crushed the uprising.^[97] Helicopter gunships, bulldozers and artillery bombardment razed the city, killing thousands of people.^[97] The Ba'ath government withstood the uprising not because of popular support, but because the opposition was disorganized and had little urban support.^[97] Throughout the uprising, the Sunni middle class continued to support the Ba'ath Party because of its dislike of political Islam.^[97] After the uprising the government resumed its version of militaristic Leninism, reverting the liberalization introduced when Assad came to power.^[98] The Ba'ath Party was weakened by the uprising; democratic elections for delegates to the Regional and National Congresses were halted, and open discussion within the party ended.^[98] The uprising made Syria more totalitarian than ever, and strengthened Assad's position as undisputed leader of Syria.^[98]

@ CraigT

I did not want to clog up the thread pasting all your last post.

I just wanted to comment on your quote above.

Can you tell me any Government that would not crush an uprising by whatever means necessary ?

Would it really be surprising to ditch liberalism after a brutal uprising ?

I get that you are totally against war. That is your position and good for you. I have no issues with your position. I do get the feeling, from reading various posts, not only in this thread, but also in other threads. That you are particularly naïve when it comes to the ways of the world, especially in certain Countries.

This is not a criticism but merely an observation.

It states the obvious that there are dictators who will do anything to stay in power.

But the UN Security council should be stepping in to stop them using weapons of war against civilian populations.

In this case that didn't work, because Vlad the Impaler wanted his Mediterranean naval base and his weapons orders.

[Publicus]

craigt3365, on 12 Dec 2015 - 12:44, said:

SgtRock, on 12 Dec 2015 - 12:27, said:

I get that you are totally against war. That is your position and good for you. I have no issues with your position. I do get the feeling, from reading various posts, not only in this thread, but also in other threads. That you are particularly naïve when it comes to the ways of the world, especially in certain Countries.

This is not a criticism but merely an observation.

Yes, 100% against war...of any sort. Not sure about naive. Biased? Absolutely. Just like everybody else. I've not lived in the US for many years. And have been to over 85 countries. Spending many months in countries like China, Argentina, Chile, India, etc. Only been to the ME a bit, but have been to 4 countries there so far. I like slow travel.

In a few months, I'll be spending quite a bit of time in the 'Stans. Should be interesting!

Not sure why you would be going to any Stan if you are so Anti war.

You probably wont last long before you have a nervous breakdown

Still no clue yet.

You're not only barking up the wrong tree, you're in the wrong forest.

Dog poo.

Rightwing strongman superman stuff again and again.

Which is why a main weapon of the liberal progressives is the pooper scooper.

[Publicus]

Well Assad was never a brutal dictator...he was a friendly socialist, with good healthcare, education, freedom of religion and equal rights for women.

Actually the same like in Afghanistan before the USA supported the freedom fighters.....Strange the bad Soviets called them religious fanatics and Terrorists.....Later the freedom fighters called themself Taliban.

That's a joke about Assad, right???

Not necessarily ajoke. Democracy is just not for everyone and what works in some countries dont work in others. Lets ask if Syria was better off now or pre 2011? Same with Iraq is it better now or with Sadam.

also the same with Libya.

Gaddafi wrote, “They want to do to Libya what they did to Iraq and what they are itching to do to Iran. They want to take back the oil, which was nationalized by these country’s revolutions. They want to re-establish military bases that were shut down by the revolutions and to install client regimes that will subordinate the country’s wealth and labor to imperialist corporate interests. All else is lies and deception.”

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-884508

Nothing like being a dictator until your time's up. Adovcating dictators and dictatorship must be fun too, guessing at how much the right's heroes might be worth.

Gaddafi's $200 billion didn't save him ending up face down in a ditch with a bullet through his head.

Here anyway are some pretty reasonably based calculations.

According to Los Angeles Times the late Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi had “secretly salted away more than $200 billion in bank accounts, real estate and corporate investments around the world before he was killed.”

http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/politician/president/muammar-gaddafi-net-worth/

Bashar al-Assad has amassed fortune of up to £950m, analysts estimate

Syrian president's assets are thought to be held in Russia, Hong Kong and offshore tax havens to spread risk of seizure risk of seizure

e http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jul/19/bashar-al-assad-950m-fortune Putin is worth $200 billion

Hedge fund manager Bill Browder, once the largest foreign investor in Russia, estimates Russian President Vladimir Putin's wealth at $200 billion — which would make him by far the richest man in the world.

"After 14 years in power of Russia, and the amount of money that the country has made, and the amount of money that hasn't been spent on schools and roads and hospitals and so on — all that money is in property, Swiss bank accounts, shares, [and] hedge funds managed for Putin and his cronies."

http://www.businessinsider.com/russias-former-largest-foreign-investor-putin-is-worth-200-billion-2015-2

[Publicus]

Since the glory days of the extreme right, circa 1920-1945, it has been virtually impossible for it to gain then seize power again.

Regardless of which country one looks at, and regardless of the kind of local flavor of democracy it has, the wild extremes are structurally excluded. This is both deliberate and wise. There is an exception to every rule or principle (except that one), but since 1945 no coup or civilian strongman leader has ignited the world in yet another global holocaust.

Putin is trying with all his might and Assad is busy bringing him coffee, but Putin still can't manage to do it, nor will he manage it. Trump will never get to any position where he could do his thing either. Republican party elders and leaders, to include of course the money men, write the rules because it's their show. These are people in the political center-right. They are not marginal rightwingers, the vast majority of 'em. It is no accident Trump doesn't have the broad popular support nor can he call up the army to install him.

Good on the good guys for it, many generations of 'em.

When the wolf is at the door one makes sure the door is closed up tight. If the wolf doesn't go away, then you reach for the big stick. In this case it is, if it needs to be, the party's quadrennial national convention.

[Harsh Jones]

Nothing like being a dictator until your time's up. Adovcating dictators and dictatorship must be fun too, guessing at how much the right's heroes might be worth.

Gaddafi's $200 billion didn't save him ending up face down in a ditch with a bullet through his head.

Here anyway are some pretty reasonably based calculations.

According to Los Angeles Times the late Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi had “secretly salted away more than $200 billion in bank accounts, real estate and corporate investments around the world before he was killed.”

http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/politician/president/muammar-gaddafi-net-worth/

Bashar al-Assad has amassed fortune of up to £950m, analysts estimate

Syrian president's assets are thought to be held in Russia, Hong Kong and offshore tax havens to spread risk of seizure risk of seizure

e http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jul/19/bashar-al-assad-950m-fortunePutin is worth $200 billion

Hedge fund manager Bill Browder, once the largest foreign investor in Russia, estimates Russian President Vladimir Putin's wealth at $200 billion — which would make him by far the richest man in the world.

"After 14 years in power of Russia, and the amount of money that the country has made, and the amount of money that hasn't been spent on schools and roads and hospitals and so on — all that money is in property, Swiss bank accounts, shares, [and] hedge funds managed for Putin and his cronies."

http://www.businessinsider.com/russias-former-largest-foreign-investor-putin-is-worth-200-billion-2015-2

Capitalism lifts all boats. Sure Putin is rich. But his policies created value.

Look at the western asset stripping years before Putin.

[Publicus]

Free and fair elections are just not possible in some Countries. That is why election monitoring teams are deployed over all certain parts of the world. You cannot compare the mindset of Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, SA etc with the mindset of Romania. I will play a little bit of Devils advocate here. Do you really think the Romanian Government resigned over a nightclub fire ? Much more to that story than has been released for public consumption.craigt3

The point that I was trying to make. probably failing miserably, is that not all Countries are able to function under what we '' Westerners '' call democracy. I would go as far as to remonstrate that what we '' Westerners '' deem to be Democracy is actually nowhere near Democracy.

I, perhaps even we, are currently living under a Military Regime. Is it anywhere near what is reported in some sections of the media ? I cannot say that I have even noticed. However, I am also equally sure that some undesirables have learned the hard way.

Political prisoners and Political exiles are sometimes polite ways of describing hard core bad boys. Political demands under the threat of violence are hardly the way to win sympathy for your cause. Mindsets are different all over the world and some mindsets have not progressed much from the stone ages.

Please do not misunderstand me. I am not advocating that Dictatorship is the way forward. I am merely suggesting that for some Countries it is the only way.

Free and fair elections are just not possible in some Countries.

That pretty much explains so many fahlang walking around 24/7 with smiles on their face.

The more countries the merrier I'd guess.

[Richard W]

Syria was quite a nice place at one time.

It may have been a generally nice place if there was no danger of the government thinking you were an opponent. However, one was well advised to be careful what one said. That isn't nice. Unfortunately, I now see no prospect of things becoming nicer than they were in that regard.

[Scott]

Numerous off-topic posts have been removed. The topic isn't about democracy in the US or Greece. It's about Putin and Syria.

Please stay on topic.

[F4UCorsair]

Maybe he should focus on rebels and not civilians:

http://time.com/4129222/russia-airstrikes-syria-civilian-casualties-isis/

One airstrike hit a post office, part of a series of strikes that killed 17 civilians. At least four other attacks targeted hospitals. An airstrike on Sunday hit a marketplace, killing at least 30 people.

Russias military intervention in Syria is killing civilians at a high rate in rebel-held areas of the countrys northwest, even as the campaign has failed to produce a decisive shift in the larger civil war between regime of president Bashar Assad and his opponents.

Comes from that 1 person agency from London?

The first casualty of war is the truth!

I don't know who's right, or who's wrong, but I do know they'll all be lying.

[retarius]

"What they've got to do is stop propping up the Assad regime, stop bombing opposition groups who are opposed to the Assad regime, stop dropping unguided munitions on innocent villages and groups who've been fighting Assad, and get behind the political process that is now under way of leading that country to a more pluralist government and a future without Assad," said Fallon, who was speaking at a press conference in the Pentagon alongside U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter.

No, Fallon you silly man....if you want peace and stability, back Assad...but sorry, no pipeline and no assistance in isolating or provoking the Russians. The 'innocent opposition' set of a series of car bombs in Homs yesterday, many innocent civilians and killed and injured....do so-called innocent oppositions set off car bombs or is it terrorists who set car bombs to kill civilians

[craigt3365]

"What they've got to do is stop propping up the Assad regime, stop bombing opposition groups who are opposed to the Assad regime, stop dropping unguided munitions on innocent villages and groups who've been fighting Assad, and get behind the political process that is now under way of leading that country to a more pluralist government and a future without Assad," said Fallon, who was speaking at a press conference in the Pentagon alongside U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter.

No, Fallon you silly man....if you want peace and stability, back Assad...but sorry, no pipeline and no assistance in isolating or provoking the Russians. The 'innocent opposition' set of a series of car bombs in Homs yesterday, many innocent civilians and killed and injured....do so-called innocent oppositions set off car bombs or is it terrorists who set car bombs to kill civilians

No pipeline would mean provoking the Russians. That's one of their main issues and one of the main reasons they've been providing weapons to Assad for many years.

The car bomb was done by ISIL. Get your facts straight. ISIL is not an "innocent" opposition.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/12/deadly-car-bomb-attack-rocks-syria-homs-151212151627732.html

[Publicus]

Nothing like being a dictator until your time's up. Adovcating dictators and dictatorship must be fun too, guessing at how much the right's heroes might be worth.

Gaddafi's $200 billion didn't save him ending up face down in a ditch with a bullet through his head.

Here anyway are some pretty reasonably based calculations.

According to Los Angeles Times the late Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi had “secretly salted away more than $200 billion in bank accounts, real estate and corporate investments around the world before he was killed.”

http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/politician/president/muammar-gaddafi-net-worth/

Bashar al-Assad has amassed fortune of up to £950m, analysts estimate

Syrian president's assets are thought to be held in Russia, Hong Kong and offshore tax havens to spread risk of seizure risk of seizure

e http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jul/19/bashar-al-assad-950m-fortunePutin is worth $200 billion

Hedge fund manager Bill Browder, once the largest foreign investor in Russia, estimates Russian President Vladimir Putin's wealth at $200 billion — which would make him by far the richest man in the world.

"After 14 years in power of Russia, and the amount of money that the country has made, and the amount of money that hasn't been spent on schools and roads and hospitals and so on — all that money is in property, Swiss bank accounts, shares, [and] hedge funds managed for Putin and his cronies."

http://www.businessinsider.com/russias-former-largest-foreign-investor-putin-is-worth-200-billion-2015-2

Capitalism lifts all boats. Sure Putin is rich. But his policies created value.

Look at the western asset stripping years before Putin.

The economy of the Chekist Putin is a wreck with no improvement forecast and we get a chart of Putin's sexual history instead.

GDP is minus 5 percent. Inflation is 20%. Interest rates are mid teens. Tuff man Putin used to budget based on oil at $100 a barrel but he's going now into his second year of budgeting for oil at $50 a barrel. That's but one indication of the shock that has hit the Russian economy with sanctions seriously aggravating the whole of it.

No more tomatoes either since Putin cut them out of imports from Turkey.

Ruble is a rubble. Assad is Putin's only foreign friend for life which for Assad may not be much longer. Putin turned his pal Erdogan into a bitter enemy as only Putin can do.

So now we get another Zero Hinge Hedge type of off the wall chart that has nothing to do with anything.

Be sure btw to let everyone know when Putin has finally won his war in Syria. Putin doesn't know it yet but he'll spend Christmas 2016 in Syria bombing rebels too. His only route of escape is to sign something in Geneva before too much longer.

[gemguy]

Many governments have had popular uprisings and have stepped down without resorting to killing innocent civilians. Or peacefully met with the protesters to negotiate a settlement. Here's but one example.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/04/romanian-government-resigns-nightclub-fire-victor-ponta

Can't argue with the fact Syria was ruled by dictators only interested in their preservation. If that wasn't the fact, why not have free and fair elections and allow the people to choose their own leaders?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damascus_Spring

Officially a Republic, Syria has been governed by the Baath Party since 1963 and was under Emergency Law from 1963 until 2011; the head of state since 1970 has been a member of the Assad family.

Under Hafiz al-Asad, president of Syria from 1970 until his death in 2000, political activity had been strictly controlled, and from 1980 onwards effective opposition activity became almost impossible. Five principal security agencies served primarily to monitor political dissent: A state of emergency had existed since 1963, with military courts applying martial law and special courts trying political cases with little regard for human rights or due process. Prisoners were routinely tortured and held in appalling conditions.

From 1998 on, the level of repression diminished noticeably. Following the death of Hafiz al-Asad in June 2000 his son, Bashar, was installed as president of Syria.

I know I would not like living under these conditions. I'm sure you wouldn't either. Right???

From the above link, I think this sums it up quite nicely:

The Damascus Spring can be seen as having mobilised around a number of political demands, expressed in the "Manifesto of the 99" signed by prominent intellectuals. These were, principally, the cancellation of the state of emergency and abolition of martial law and special courts; the release of all political prisoners; the return without fear of prosecution of political exiles; and the right to form political parties and civil organisation. To these was often added the more precisely political demand that Article 8 of the Syrian constitution be repealed. This article provides that "the Arab Socialist Ba'th Party leads the state and society".

Nothing about outside influence. It was an internal matter created by the Syrian leaders.

Always interesting how some try to re-position, not you, the history of the Syrian Civil War. I know you are deeply interested in Syria so you may like to have a read of the URL below. You may also like to sign up for the daily news updates from Al Monitor who provide detailed updates & analysis on who is doing what to whom.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10716289/How-Bashar-al-Assad-created-the-feared-shabiha-militia-an-insider-speaks.html

I sometimes wonder why Dictators such as Assad are not assassinated by way of outside sources...which they could do..... but then I come to realize that would not generate a whole lot of money as civil wars and all that is entailed are very profitable indeed.

Although we all know the entities behind the scenes that want to profit from bringing down the Assad regime have their reasons ( some are justified in some respects while some are just plain sinister ) I would support the removal of Assad and hopefully a better administration can be appointed or installed or hopefully elected by the people.

As to whether the country of Syria and or all its citizens will be better off in every aspect is yet to be seen but it has got to be better overall than the current Status Quo firmly established for the last 50 years in Syria.....if a democracy of sorts is established or ...forced upon them in some respects.

The article that you posted is just the tip of the ice berg, so to speak, revealing just how precarious life is for anyone in Syria living under a brutal regime such as the one orchestrated by Assad and his minions and henchmen and his military machine that suppresses the citizens at large with impunity.

More or less a catch 22 situation where if nothing is done and the deaths and suffering within the country continue unabated perpetrated by a brutal dictatorship.... or.....fight to liberate the country and also suffer a whole lot of dead people while doing so and a whole lot of strife and suffering on part of the Citizens.

Big problem is...the area is awash in military hardware and weaponry resulting in half a dozen armed groups all claiming to be the answer to replacing Assad while some of them, notably the ISIS and the likes of them and their style of governance will have you supporting Assad as being the lesser of 2 evils while Russia is taking sides with Assad ( although we know why and their agenda ) and attempting to eliminate the opposition that has proven to be worse in many ways than the Assad regime.

So...which side should you take?....The opposition side that could and or would run the country just as deviously and brutally if they gain power or support Assad, that would be or believed to be, in comparison, considered less brutal ????......than what we have witnessed perpetrated by the opposition such as ISIS and how they want to run the country if they win the civil war and become the "new order" ...as seen and demonstrated in the areas they do control.

Either way there is going to be a whole lot of turmoil and continued death until someone, so to speak, reigns supreme and the civil war ends....and then all the more turmoil and continued death while who ever wins holds on to power the same way Assad has held on to power all these years....and maybe worse.

Cheers

[Bedront]

Breaking news from Reuters.

Published today by Nuber One newspaper in Singapore, The Straits Times.

Russia says fired warning shots at Turkish ship in Aegean to avoid collision.

http://www.straitstimes.com/world/middle-east/russia-says-fired-warning-shots-at-turkish-ship-in-aegean-to-avoid-collision

MOSCOW (REUTERS, AFP) - The Russian Defence Ministry said on Sunday (Dec 13) one of its warships, the destroyer Smetlivy, had been forced to fire warning shots at a Turkish vessel in the Aegean Sea to avoid a collision and that it had summoned the Turkish military attache over the incident.

The Interfax news agency said that the Turkish vessel, which the ministry did not name, had failed to respond to earlier warnings, but had sharply changed course after shots were fired before passing within 500 metres of the Russian warship.

"The crew of the Russian patrol ship Smetlivy which was located 22 kilometres from the Greek island of Lemnos in the northern part of the Aegean Sea avoided collision with a Turkish seiner," the defence ministry said.

At 0603 GMT (2.03pm Singapore time), the Russian warship, which was at anchor, spotted a Turkish fishing boat some 1,000 metres away, the defence ministry said, adding the boat had been approaching it from the right. "Despite numerous attempts by the Smetlivy, the crew of the Turkish seiner would not engage in radio contact and did not respond to special visual signals," the ministry added.

Moscow said the crew had to fire small arms in the direction of the boat at "a guaranteed survivability distance" when there were some 600 metres between the two vessels "to prevent the collision of the ships."

"Immediately after that the Turkish vessel drastically changed course and continued its movement past the Smetlivy at the distance of 540 metres without engaging in contact with the Russian crew," the ministry said.

[STMx]

It's beginning of the end of Russia.

[konying]

It's beginning of the end of Russia.

Yes.. Turkey with it's useless army will do the job, haha

Edited December 13, 2015 by konying