Hollande tells UN on Syria: ‘Enough is enough’

[webfact]

Hollande tells UN on Syria: ‘Enough is enough’

 

 

NEW YORK: -- During a speech at the UN General Assembly French President Francois Hollande has blamed the Syrian government for the collapse of a US-Russia backed ceasefire.

 

Describing Syria as ‘a stain’ on the world community he told leaders: “I have one thing to say here: It is enough. As in last February, this latest cease-fire has only held for a few days.

 

The regime is responsible for the failure. And it cannot exonerate itself by the violations that others commit.

 

I would tell Syria’s foreign supporters, that everybody knows here, they need to compel the regime to accept peace, if not they will also bare responsibility alongside the regime for the division and chaos in Syria.

 

In addition to urging world powers to broker a solution to the near-six year Syrian civil war, he also described Aleppo as a ‘‘martyred city’‘.

 

 

-- © Copyright Euronews 2016-09-21

[SgtRock]

8 minutes ago, webfact said:

The regime is responsible for the failure. And it cannot exonerate itself by the violations that others commit.

 

What an own goal by Hollande, the man has now completely lost the plot.

 

In the fullness of time, the clusterfcuk's that France has committed in Syria will come to light.

 

Not that you will need to worry, you will be gone next year.

[Kerryd]

France was one of the first countries to recognize the unelected, self-appointed "rebels" in Libya as the "legitimate" government of that country while pressing the UN to use military force against Qaddafi. No coincidence that France (and Italy) get a lot of their oil from Libya. In fact, after Qaddafi was overthrown one of the first major announcements was that the main French and Italian oil companies had the refineries and pumping stations back in production. Priorities you know. 

 

France was also quick to (initially) claim the unelected, self-appointed "rebels" in Syria as the legitimate government of that country in 2012 but this time it wasn't quite as widely supported. No surprise there as Syria exported most of it's oil to Europe as well. (The reluctance for many countries to readily accept those rebels as the "legitimate" government probably had to do with the large number of terrorists that made up their ranks and the majority of their fighting strength. Western countries started supplying the rebels with arms and ammunition early on but when they realized that most of it was being handed directly to those terrorists, or being immediately sold on the black market, the support for those "rebels" dropped.)

 

What really shows you the true motives behind the actions in Syria and Libya is the way in which France, the US, the UN and pretty much everyone else totally ignore what is happening in places like Rwanda. Oh right, I forgot. Rwanda doesn't export oil so the atrocities being committed there can safely be ignored it seems. Ineffective, poorly manned and poorly controlled "Peacekeeping" missions in places like the Sudan, Congo and Mali highlight just how ineffective (and uncommitted) the UN actually is. 

 

(Not to mention that the "rebels" in Syria have proven that they are not above committing atrocities themselves if they think it will help their cause. Like staging gas attacks on their own people in the hopes of drawing the West into the fight. Those "rebels" were also the same ones that were attacking and kidnapping UN Peacekeepers on the Golan Heights in 2013 and 2014 and of course, a large portion of those "rebels" were made up of Al Qaeda and al-Nusra terrorists as well as those who later formed ISIS.)

 

There are too many different "sides" in this fight that trying to keep track of who is "friendly" and who isn't is almost a full time occupation. Add to that the fact that most of them are indistinguishable from each other and it can be rather difficult to determine who did what to who, when and/or why.

 

[jaidam]

 Assad is a living legend, just like the other Arab strongmen before him - Saddam, Moammar et al. They kept relative stability in countries with no classical education, the youth only learning scripts of some hateful ideology, and of course they mostly go ballistic after puberty. The secret to their success is brutality. The citizens of these countries only understand force, which is exactly what is needed to maintain a semblance of stability. The west must apologize for trying to overthrow Assad and throw all their weight behind making sure he and his family remain at the helm for decades to come.

 

Just imagine how much safer the world would be today if the Saddams, Moammars and other legendary strongmen(including some European ones) were still controlling their countries.

[craigt3365]

40 minutes ago, jaidam said:

 Just imagine how much safer the world would be today if the Saddams, Moammars and other legendary strongmen(including some European ones) were still controlling their countries.

Easy to imagine.  People would be repressed and tortured/killed for going against the dictators.  No freedom of speech, and still living in poverty.  Wonderful.

 

Easy for us not living there to say things like this.  There was a big reason for the Arab Spring uprisings.  They (the people) were tired of this.  And for good reason.  They deserve better.  Sadly, the world isn't doing the right thing and working together to deal with these dictators.  Too many vested interests.

 

But Hollande is right.  Enough is enough.  Install a no fly zone.  Get the belligerents out.

 

I like what the UN said about this:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-37424871

Quote

"Many groups have killed many innocents, but none more so than the government of Syria which continues to barrel bomb neighbourhoods and systematically torture thousands of detainees."

 

I still find it amazing some don't understand this.

[williamgeorgeallen]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Easy to imagine.  People would be repressed and tortured/killed for going against the dictators.  No freedom of speech, and still living in poverty.  Wonderful.

 

Easy for us not living there to say things like this.  There was a big reason for the Arab Spring uprisings.  They (the people) were tired of this.  And for good reason.  They deserve better.  Sadly, the world isn't doing the right thing and working together to deal with these dictators.  Too many vested interests.

 

But Hollande is right.  Enough is enough.  Install a no fly zone.  Get the belligerents out.

 

I like what the UN said about this:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-37424871

 

I still find it amazing some don't understand this.

round 2 today. i would still rather live under a dictator than in a war zone.

[nahkit]

5 hours ago, Kerryd said:

France was one of the first countries to recognize the unelected, self-appointed "rebels" in Libya as the "legitimate" government of that country while pressing the UN to use military force against Qaddafi. No coincidence that France (and Italy) get a lot of their oil from Libya. In fact, after Qaddafi was overthrown one of the first major announcements was that the main French and Italian oil companies had the refineries and pumping stations back in production. Priorities you know. 

 

France was also quick to (initially) claim the unelected, self-appointed "rebels" in Syria as the legitimate government of that country in 2012 but this time it wasn't quite as widely supported. No surprise there as Syria exported most of it's oil to Europe as well. (The reluctance for many countries to readily accept those rebels as the "legitimate" government probably had to do with the large number of terrorists that made up their ranks and the majority of their fighting strength. Western countries started supplying the rebels with arms and ammunition early on but when they realized that most of it was being handed directly to those terrorists, or being immediately sold on the black market, the support for those "rebels" dropped.)

 

What really shows you the true motives behind the actions in Syria and Libya is the way in which France, the US, the UN and pretty much everyone else totally ignore what is happening in places like Rwanda. Oh right, I forgot. Rwanda doesn't export oil so the atrocities being committed there can safely be ignored it seems. Ineffective, poorly manned and poorly controlled "Peacekeeping" missions in places like the Sudan, Congo and Mali highlight just how ineffective (and uncommitted) the UN actually is. 

 

(Not to mention that the "rebels" in Syria have proven that they are not above committing atrocities themselves if they think it will help their cause. Like staging gas attacks on their own people in the hopes of drawing the West into the fight. Those "rebels" were also the same ones that were attacking and kidnapping UN Peacekeepers on the Golan Heights in 2013 and 2014 and of course, a large portion of those "rebels" were made up of Al Qaeda and al-Nusra terrorists as well as those who later formed ISIS.)

 

There are too many different "sides" in this fight that trying to keep track of who is "friendly" and who isn't is almost a full time occupation. Add to that the fact that most of them are indistinguishable from each other and it can be rather difficult to determine who did what to who, when and/or why.

 

What a pile of rubbish. Libya had their first ever elections once they got rid of Gaddafi. 

 

As for getting the refineries back on line as soon as possible, what problem do you have with that?

 

The oil company I worked for employed over 3,000 libyans - would you have preferred them to ignore the reconstruction of the oil fields and tell them all to find other jobs?

 

Where do you think the money came from to fund schools, build hospitals, maintain roads, provide low-cost housing? Around 70% of government income comes from the oil industry and you have a problem with the oil companies trying to get production back on line?

 

 

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

round 2 today. i would still rather live under a dictator than in a war zone.

How about not having to live in either?  Sadly, it means the world powers will have to cooperate.  Hard, but not impossible.

[Tallagada]

1 hour ago, nahkit said:

What a pile of rubbish. Libya had their first ever elections once they got rid of Gaddafi. 

 

As for getting the refineries back on line as soon as possible, what problem do you have with that?

 

The oil company I worked for employed over 3,000 libyans - would you have preferred them to ignore the reconstruction of the oil fields and tell them all to find other jobs?

 

Where do you think the money came from to fund schools, build hospitals, maintain roads, provide low-cost housing? Around 70% of government income comes from the oil industry and you have a problem with the oil companies trying to get production back on line?

 

 

What you say is completly out of context.

Guess who received 33% of the oil exploitation right after ghadaffi was out?

Total Company

 

Now look at Lybia while under Ghaddafi and look at Lybia today, we clearly see the benefits of having a ton of sh!t there instead of a government...

[dunroaming]

Assad is buoyed up by having the backing of Putin.  Without that things may well be different.  No easy answers to Syria but the latest bombing of the aid convoy illustrates just how fragile it is. 

[Grouse]

 

What has happened to the super power, the USA?

 

Just no will? Or no nerve?

 

I agree with Hollande; enough.

 

Just declare a no fly zone and back it up. The coalition is there. Let's see how tough Putin really is. 

[simple1]

9 hours ago, jaidam said:

 Assad is a living legend, just like the other Arab strongmen before him - Saddam, Moammar et al. They kept relative stability in countries with no classical education, the youth only learning scripts of some hateful ideology, and of course they mostly go ballistic after puberty. The secret to their success is brutality. The citizens of these countries only understand force, which is exactly what is needed to maintain a semblance of stability. The west must apologize for trying to overthrow Assad and throw all their weight behind making sure he and his family remain at the helm for decades to come.

 

Just imagine how much safer the world would be today if the Saddams, Moammars and other legendary strongmen(including some European ones) were still controlling their countries.

 

The people you admire so much were the catalyst, among other factors, leading to the breakdown of their societies. I say "enough is enough!" of you & others to the right of centre constantly posting support for reviled dictators, including you constantly alluding praise for one of the most evil people in the 20th century.

[dunroaming]

It is pretty much agreed that Russia was behind the bombing of the aid convoy.  What does that say about Putin?

[nahkit]

3 hours ago, Tallagada said:

What you say is completly out of context.

Guess who received 33% of the oil exploitation right after ghadaffi was out?

Total Company

 

Now look at Lybia while under Ghaddafi and look at Lybia today, we clearly see the benefits of having a ton of sh!t there instead of a government...

 

3 hours ago, Tallagada said:

What you say is completly out of context.

Guess who received 33% of the oil exploitation right after ghadaffi was out?

Total Company

 

Now look at Lybia while under Ghaddafi and look at Lybia today, we clearly see the benefits of having a ton of sh!t there instead of a government...

How is what I wrote out of context?

 

Total, Eni, Conoco Philips to name a few were all there during the time of Gaddafi, they didn't just show up after the war. 

 

There was no re-allocation of exploration rights following his demise.

 

There was never a government there under Gaddafi, what he said went and nobody else counted. The Libyan people elected their first ever government and it was hijacked by militias.

 

If you want to look for the bad guys start by looking at who funded these militias. I'll give you a clue - the problems started when members of the muslim brotherhood party lost their seats following new elections.

[dunroaming]

Another bombing of a hospital in Syria now.  No question of it being a mistake, this was targeted.  Looks like Syria is fast becoming split between Assad and his pal Putin and the allied forces.  This is getting even dirtier than it was before

[craigt3365]

4 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Another bombing of a hospital in Syria now.  No question of it being a mistake, this was targeted.  Looks like Syria is fast becoming split between Assad and his pal Putin and the allied forces.  This is getting even dirtier than it was before

I'll try to find a better source, but a report just came out saying the bombing of the UN convoy was in retaliation for the coalition bombing of the Syrian troops.  The report said the Syrian troops were not in uniform.

 

Congrats to Syria and Russia for bombing a UN aid convoy.  Sick people.

[NickJ]

The goal seemed to be to get the Governments of the West to start the topple. Old Dick Cheney and gang were among the first to establish ties with the Kurds for there resources. 

The West,  and all of it. Are responsible for what's going on.

These middle easterners were better off under the boot of there existing, at the time Governments

The whole world is paying the price. Aided by the Goody Two Shoes of the existing powers.

There used to be small fires. Controled burning. Now....we're all sparking up.

Edited September 21, 2016 by NickJ
None

[Basil B]

It was a fit up...

 

While the civilised world was trying to get aid to to those in need Russia was helping Assad to rearm and regroup...

 

Remember Russia still claims they were not behind the downing of MH17.

[craigt3365]

8 minutes ago, NickJ said:

The goal seemed to be to get the Governments of the West to start the topple. Old Dick Cheney and gang were among the first to establish ties with the Kurds for there resources. 

The West,  and all of it. Are responsible for what's going on.

These middle easterners were better off under the boot of there existing, at the time Governments

The whole world is paying the price. Aided by the Goody Two Shoes of the existing powers.

There used to be small fires. Controled burning. Now....we're all sparking up.

Impossible to blame the West for 100% of the problems.  Without the brutal dictators, Arab Spring would not have happened.

 

It's a sick comment to say average and peaceful citizens of a country should put up with a brutal dictator.  They just want to have a nice life and raise their families.  Syria would be over now if it wasn't for outsiders supplying weapons to a variety of warring factions.  Primarily Russia, Saudi Arabia and Iran.

[NickJ]

Yeah...well most living there did. Who says the West has to sacrifice everything it's built. To save people that turn around and say....Hey. Thanks for the know how...The West is trembling at taking care of its own. Mix that with the tree hugger ideology and let's all go down with the drunk guy we tried to save.

[NickJ]

Protect your own house first. That's Globalization. 

Or lose it.

[nkg]

2 hours ago, simple1 said:

 

The people you admire so much were the catalyst, among other factors, leading to the breakdown of their societies. I say "enough is enough!" of you & others to the right of centre constantly posting support for reviled dictators, including you constantly alluding praise for one of the most evil people in the 20th century.

 

Liberals like yourself like to demand that we get involved in the affairs of other countries. "He is a brutal dictator" or "innocent people are suffering", you say. But time and time again, Western military involvement leads to disaster. Of course, liberals never ever admit their role in the decision to go to war. "Right-wing warmongers" were to blame.

 

If we learnt to stay out of civil wars, and stopped trying to overthrow dictators, the world would be a much more peaceful place.

Edited September 21, 2016 by nkg
grammar

[Scott]

Having worked in quite a few conflict zones, I am always skeptical of cease-fires.   On way, way too many occasions this has been used to regroup, rearm and reposition for even more and worse fighting.

 

Even the humanitarian aid that is to be delivered has a certain % that will go directly to various warring groups as a sort of 'tax.'   No food for them and then there is no delivery, or worse.  

 

As I recall, for food convoys going into Bosnia, 10% had to go to the Bosnian-Serb military that controlled the routes into the cities, such as Sarajevo.   In some situations there are multiple checkpoints manned by different groups who all get their agreed upon cut.  

[dunroaming]

2 hours ago, nkg said:

 

Liberals like yourself like to demand that we get involved in the affairs of other countries. "He is a brutal dictator" or "innocent people are suffering", you say. But time and time again, Western military involvement leads to disaster. Of course, liberals never ever admit their role in the decision to go to war. "Right-wing warmongers" were to blame.

 

If we learnt to stay out of civil wars, and stopped trying to overthrow dictators, the world would be a much more peaceful place.

 

Agree as long as they are not oil rich countries.  Then the goalposts are moved considerably.

[simple1]

6 hours ago, nkg said:

 

Liberals like yourself like to demand that we get involved in the affairs of other countries. "He is a brutal dictator" or "innocent people are suffering", you say. But time and time again, Western military involvement leads to disaster. Of course, liberals never ever admit their role in the decision to go to war. "Right-wing warmongers" were to blame.

 

If we learnt to stay out of civil wars, and stopped trying to overthrow dictators, the world would be a much more peaceful place.

 

Non involvement with countering the likes of Daesh or Assad to carry on with their horrendous cruelties and the flow on effect of destabilising regional countries? - I don't agree.

 

One of the primary causes of the current refugee crisis in the EU was complacency by Western governments - non involvement??? No

 

Edited September 21, 2016 by simple1

[craigt3365]

10 hours ago, Scott said:

Having worked in quite a few conflict zones, I am always skeptical of cease-fires.   On way, way too many occasions this has been used to regroup, rearm and reposition for even more and worse fighting.

 

Even the humanitarian aid that is to be delivered has a certain % that will go directly to various warring groups as a sort of 'tax.'   No food for them and then there is no delivery, or worse.  

 

As I recall, for food convoys going into Bosnia, 10% had to go to the Bosnian-Serb military that controlled the routes into the cities, such as Sarajevo.   In some situations there are multiple checkpoints manned by different groups who all get their agreed upon cut.  

I was recently near the Afghanistan border and visited a weekend market while in Tajikistan.  They were selling UN aid food packets donated by Japan.

 

Sadly, a lot of our money is wasted like this.

[Scott]

I have never been in a country where Aid is distributed where it wasn't for sale in the shops.  

 

One of the problems with aid is that logistics make it difficult to get what is needed in the amounts that are needed to the right places.   I have seen aid shipments which consisted only of sugar and cooking oil for example.   In order to buy food staples, the people will sell or trade the aid for other food.   Enterprising shop owners will wait until the next time aid gets through and there is no sugar or cooking oil and it then appears in the shops for sale.  

 

 

[craigt3365]

Seems more fingers pointing at Russia and Syria for bombing the UN aid convoy.  While it was at a warehouse for the Syrian Arab Red Cross.  Very interesting reading.  Time to install a no fly zone.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-37430824

Quote

US officials told the BBC that two Russian SU-24 ground attack aircraft were in the sky above the convoy at the precise moment it was hit, and that the strike was too sophisticated to have been carried out by the Syrian air force.

 

Read Russia's changing response to what happened....

[Grouse]

Well, this is all very interesting but not really relevant.

 

Hollande is correct; enough is enough.

 

I don't understand why the USA and close allies don't just declare a no fly zone over all of northern Syria. F22s and Typhoons are more than a match for anything the Russians can use.

[craigt3365]

43 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Well, this is all very interesting but not really relevant.

 

Hollande is correct; enough is enough.

 

I don't understand why the USA and close allies don't just declare a no fly zone over all of northern Syria. F22s and Typhoons are more than a match for anything the Russians can use.

Isn't this more of a European problem?  Seems the EU needs to get tougher with this.