US, NATO vs. Russia War Will Be The End Of Humanity

a reply to: spy66
You mean this(?):
www.worldtribune.com - NATO data: Assad winning the war for Syrians’ hearts and minds...

The data, compiled by Western-sponsored activists and organizations,
showed that a majority of Syrians were alarmed by the Al Qaida takeover of
the Sunni revolt and preferred to return to Assad, Middle East Newsline reported.

Here was from an earlier time:
www.theguardian.com - Most Syrians back President Assad, but you'd never know from western media...

Thing is, we know people will support governments indiscriminately for these reasons:
1) Low pwersonal control
2) Dependence
3) Threat to system
4) Inescapability

So OF COURSE syrian people will tend to support Assad, even if Assad is corrupt and kills them. The rebel groups are more likely to NOT support Assad precisely because of the support they get from Qatar/Saudi Arabia--indirectly from US--and others (ISIS among them). Without the support they're dependent again and have lower control and less escapability.

See given a choice and the means people will want better. And on that path they're more likely to assist the rebels in attacking Assad.

What I'm attempting to get across is that support for Assad doesn't mean we shouldn't support the rebels. We have to identify whether Assad truly is guilty of crimes against his people. THAT will satisfy the UN. It's called hte Responsibility to Protect (RtoP/R2P). It used used during Libya:
www.un.org - United Nations Official Document: Resolution 1970 (2011)...

Can learn more about it here from the horse's mouth:
www.un.org - Background Information on the Responsibility to Protect...

EDIT: The question becomes also whether the support for rebels attacking Assad was legitimate or not? Regardless, Assad grossly killing his own population--even accidentally--shows he's not fit to be a leader. Yet we must also be skeptical of the agenda of the rebels. I'm not giving them a free pass.... Obviously Qatar/Saudi Arab were involved years ago. But did this precede the Arab Spring in 2011? Remember this was what caused a lot of the outrage against Assad. His response was merciless attacks, similar to Gaddafi. One must show these protests were supported by Qatar and other interests AND for malevolent reasons. And yet one cannot condone Assad's response either. It's high time for a review of Syria's history.

I did not support the war in Iraq because I felt highly uncertain about all of it. I don't want us to repeat that. I've often read that "The ME is a mess and maybe htey need someone like Saddam to balance the power." But even if it were true ME people need a brutal dictator to maintain government, it does not permit leaders to commit gross crimes against their people! It's wrong wherever it occurs. IF ME people are so lawless and prone to civil war they need psychological remedy--not brutal dictators.

I think we can all come up with various theories on who would ally with each other, but in the end no one truly knows. No one truly knows if WWIII will ever be. For my children's sake, I hope not.

a reply to: spy66

Thanks for th e information. BAd uncle sam bad boy. Now go to your room and wait till suppers over.
SOmehow the words military intelligence make sense now. They dont have any.

Anything in ANY COUNTRY dealing with intelligence has none apparently.

As to Assasination... when assad travels would b e the perfect time. WHoops w e accidentally launched a sam. or opps it "collided" with a drone or something.

a reply to: crimsongod21

keeping us around to help prop up their economy

Keeping us "around?" You gotta be kidding me. Here is how it's going to go down, if it ever did. China, Russia, someone attacks the U.S....approximately 7 minutes after that attack begins, roughly 200 TR3bs are going to leave that time and arrive the day before, dead center over their targets and inside of a few moments, targets destroyed, all of them. Well, the real important ones. I hope that doesn't have to happen. Keep us around...hahaha.