It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

This is what happens when you play both sides.

page: 1
28
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+9 more 
posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 01:01 PM
link   
ISIS is the creation of the Syrian Rebels. We know this, and yet we continue to support them. In my eyes, that makes the USA responsible for the Syrian mess.


WASHINGTON (AP) — Russia's recent military buildup in Syria has perplexed the Obama administration and left it in a quandary as to how to respond, complicating Washington's efforts to both combat Islamic State extremists and assist moderate rebels trying to oust Syrian President Bashar Assad.


Full article here.

The excerpt above seems to be playing down USA's hand in creating these monsters. What is a "moderate" rebel? If they were moderate, they wouldn't be selling US provided resources to ISIS.

So this is what happens when you play both sides. America is now stuck: keep funding the rebels and the world will come to realize that ISIS is America's dog, or join in with Russia and leave Assad alone.

When proof finally surfaces that ISIS is America's creation, all hell is going to break loose, and Russia is going to lead the fight.

This is what happens when you play both sides. When will the people learn? A house divided against itself will not stand.
edit on 16-9-2015 by BELIEVERpriest because: added point




posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Russia I believe already knows they are just waiting for the USA to implode on its own.

This move to Syria by Russia is a calculated move, a very good one too. The whole mess is over natural gas and a pipeline if you ask me and I'm not to happy with our leaders that thought this was the right diplomatic, humanitarian way to do it.

Puts me in a rather difficult position lately for I am American and I love my country.



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

And then you read stories like this ....

Russia proposed more than three years ago that Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, could step down as part of a peace deal, according to a senior negotiator involved in back-channel discussions at the time.

Former Finnish president and Nobel peace prize laureate Martti Ahtisaari said western powers failed to seize on the proposal. Since it was made, in 2012, tens of thousands of people have been killed and millions uprooted, causing the world’s gravest refugee crisis since the second world war.

Ahtisaari held talks with envoys from the five permanent members of the UN security council in February 2012. He said that during those discussions, the Russian ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, laid out a three-point plan, which included a proposal for Assad to cede power at some point after peace talks had started between the regime and the opposition.

But he said that the US, Britain and France were so convinced that the Syrian dictator was about to fall, they ignored the proposal.

“It was an opportunity lost in 2012,” Ahtisaari said in an interview.
russia-insider.com...



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

So why don't the Russians repeat the offer now?



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 03:17 PM
link   
a reply to: AnteBellum
I agree. Russia made this move to put pressure on USA. I'm American too, but its to the point that I can no longer defend the actions of our gov't. Seems like once again there are no good guys in this fight. It's sad.



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 03:19 PM
link   
I lay the world at the feet of our current POTUS :RENEGADE.
HIS advisors ignored his military commands and when THEY denied him THEY WERE expelled.
Russia is attempting to "Firm up" it's positions in the face of this amature China smells the blood as well as the rest of our enemies,so they are going for broke before we elect a hawk.
edit on 16-9-2015 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 03:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: the2ofusr1

So why don't the Russians repeat the offer now?


Because now Russia has America by the balls. They can do whatever they want now and we have to walk on egg shells to maintain the appearance that we are trying to destroy ISIS.



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 03:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: the2ofusr1

So why don't the Russians repeat the offer now?


Why should they? America doesn't negotiate with terrorists... why should any nation be expected to negotiate with terrorists America is responsible for?



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 03:23 PM
link   
I've been saying it. The pipeline is the hook. Russia wants to control all natural gas production. Now that Obama has "made peace" with Iran, a Russian client, the way is clear for Russia to clean house and the only remaining obstacle to that pipeline and that control is Israel.



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
So why don't the Russians repeat the offer now?

Because it is no longer a viable solution.

When the fight was between Assad and the FSA, it was much cleaner business. Both were secular, both were willing to negotiate, both had (surprisingly) similar ideals.

It wasn't until the foreign fundamentalists arrived that things really went south (relative to the conflict pre-fundamentalist). Now that one of those organizations is, arguably, the single most powerful group in Syria, there isn't really any solution that doesn't involve either:
A) A complete reunification of native Syrian forces, with external backing. Possible, but highly unlikely.
B) An external power willing to place a large number of their resources and manpower in Syria until the issues are resolved (think 20+ years). Extremely unlikely.
C) A combined global effort to bring some semblance of peace back to the region. Have you seen the effectiveness of the UN lately? Extremely unlikely.

Regardless of who started what, and who backed who, the current reality is that Syria is in a complete mess, and will most likely, barring the extremely unlikely, be a fundamentalist controlled country in the very near future. Which doesn't help any of the interested, external powers...who are more eager to be contrarian than they are to accept that they were wrong and fix this.



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Assad has gone on record numerous times stating he is not stepping down and will not step down. This during the so called info in the Russia insider article.
edit on 16-9-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

It originates from the Guardian and has been reposted and commented on ,on different sites www.informationclearinghouse.info...



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 03:35 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Oh yea and while their at it maybe help create a Minsk 3 .....Like the refugees flooding Europe ,some boats leave port and never return . But maybe that was part of the bigger plan for F the EU Nuland and the rest of the crazy neo-cons



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 04:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: the2ofusr1

So why don't the Russians repeat the offer now?


Because circumstances are different now and it doesn't suit them any more.



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest


Because now Russia has America by the balls. They can do whatever they want now and we have to walk on egg shells to maintain the appearance that we are trying to destroy ISIS.


Wrong on two counts.

a reply to: burdman30ott6


Why should they? America doesn't negotiate with terrorists... why should any nation be expected to negotiate with terrorists America is responsible for?


One right, one wrong.

a reply to: peck420


Because it is no longer a viable solution.

When the fight was between Assad and the FSA, it was much cleaner business. Both were secular, both were willing to negotiate, both had (surprisingly) similar ideals.

It wasn't until the foreign fundamentalists arrived that things really went south (relative to the conflict pre-fundamentalist). Now that one of those organizations is, arguably, the single most powerful group in Syria, there isn't really any solution that doesn't involve either:
A) A complete reunification of native Syrian forces, with external backing. Possible, but highly unlikely.
B) An external power willing to place a large number of their resources and manpower in Syria until the issues are resolved (think 20+ years). Extremely unlikely.
C) A combined global effort to bring some semblance of peace back to the region. Have you seen the effectiveness of the UN lately? Extremely unlikely.


Well played! All of that factors in, of course.

a reply to: Xcathdra


Assad has gone on record numerous times stating he is not stepping down and will not step down. This during the so called info in the Russia insider article.


Bingo! The simple fact is that Russia just doesn't have that kind of influence over Assad any more than the US has influence over Netanyahu.... they just want you to think they do.

a reply to: the2ofusr1


Oh yea and while their at it maybe help create a Minsk 3 .....Like the refugees flooding Europe ,some boats leave port and never return . But maybe that was part of the bigger plan for F the EU Nuland and the rest of the crazy neo-cons


Erm, thank you for playing.



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

I am glad that people are starting to ask questions.

Syria should never have gotten this out if hand. It is the policy if funding rebel groups and attempting to starve Assad that has been responsible for the debacle.

It's a strange occurrence when Russia is leading the way in common sense, but it is exactly what has happened with Syria. Putin is actually correct in supporting Assad in order to overcome ISIS .



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 06:50 PM
link   
Listen the MSM keeps obfuscating this. this situation with the Russians in Syria is not difficult, dangerous, mysterious or or complex. let me break this down for everyone because up to now the world seems confused. simply look at it.

The Russians have a problem with muslims in Chechnya. the muslims in Chechnya are basically the main contributor to ISIS ranks in Syria. now assad [Syria] is a long standing Russian ally.

LISTEN> RUSSIA's ENEMY in Syria, is ISIS. voilla! assad is Russia's ally. ISIS [Chechnya muslim rebels] is Russia's enemy.

USA, being completely oblivious to any sanity, understanding or function in regard to international relations [until recently with china/ASEAN], but ever-intent on its manifesting war doctrine passed down through military and intelligence bureaucrats and the monies and powers that push the buttons, doesn't yet understand ISIS or Russia. For example, the US intelligence community recently suggested, through general betrayus [petreaus or something], that al queda could be used [supported and funded] to combat ISIS. the very next day [last week] Al queda announced it was at war with ISIS. Remember that during the war in Iraq, betrayus' graat strategy was to fund and support the sunnis to combat al queda in Iraq. of course those sunnis are now ISIS [a sunni group locate din sunni areas]. so in short, the USA is so used to manipulating and supporting all forms of evil, they simply cannot see Russia's simple position here.

soon, if sanity could prevail, I would assume USA and russia could unite [modestly] against ISIS if usa would just drop the neocon bull# and agree to let assad keep power as Russia's ally [against Chechnya muslim rebels].
edit on 16-9-2015 by bangster because: meaning



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 06:52 PM
link   
a reply to: bangster

I am what I say I am



posted on Sep, 16 2015 @ 09:48 PM
link   
Check this video it's true, USA is to blame for IS. Well, according to US General Wesley Clarke..

USA plans to destabilized a total of 7 countries within 5 years, and it's happening right before our eyes!

Syria being one of the countries and IS is the USA arm at carrying out the on slaughter.




edit on 16-9-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-9-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-9-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 02:34 AM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Last Sunday, on a Russian television show, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that the US goals in Syria differ from their publicly stated intentions.

Furthermore, he specifically stated that the US is fully aware of ISIL positions, yet refrains from attacking them.

Growing numbers are becoming aware of what many already know: the US is supporting/protecting/creating ISIL.

But Lavrov's statements are significant because they are public, and come from a ranking government official.
It may be that the discussion of US complicity will be brought to the table in Official political and diplomatic, rather than internet, forums.

The webpage is in Russian.




(Translated via Google Translator)

Russia has information that the US know the specific location point of the "Islamic State" (extremist organization banned in Russia), but did not give an order to strike on the positions "of the IG," said Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

In the program "Sunday times" on the "First Channel" Lavrov said that the US government "was not originally a very carefully created a coalition, or conspired to it so that it is not the goals that have been declared."

According to the Foreign Minister, the coalition was created spontaneously, "just a few days it was announced that it includes a number of countries have begun any punches."
Lavrov said that the analysis of aviation operations in countries included in the coalition, "creates a strange impression," - as if in addition to fighting "the IG" "there is something else in the problems of the coalition."

The Minister said: "I hope not to disappoint anyone, saying that some of our colleagues from the incoming coalition of countries say they have is information on where exactly, on what positions are these or other subdivision" IG ", and the commander of the Coalition (the United States ) does not give consent to the striking. "


www.pnp.ru...

We have seen US spooks "playing both sides" for the entire lifetimes of most of us.
These days, there is too much information and communication on a global scale, and truth in the air,
for geopolitical posturing to not be obvious.




top topics



 
28
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join