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.

 

"NATO is harbouring the Islamic State"

page: 4
77
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 03:54 AM
link   
Turkey are not panicking! They are part of nato remember. And they support and protect deash lol.. Funny dat




posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 03:36 PM
link   
I am making note that as far as I know, at this moment, the only country which still has permission from Assad to be in Syria fighting IS is Russia. Putin and Assad are working on a huge gas/oil deal which includes off-shore drilling but it cannot commence until IS is gone.

None of these NATO countries, either already present or about to be, are sanctioned to be there. The NATO countries are publicly "saying" they want to help Syria be rid of IS but they will not work with or support Assad.

Putin has been having discussions recently with some of these NATO countries (U.S., France, Italy, Germany, UK) which have a military presence in Syria or are about to, but as to what they are discussing privately I do not know.

It bothers me that these other countries have invaded Syria with their military, or are about to, to do away with IS but have not been given public permission by Assad. What kinds of discussions are Putin and Assad having about this?

Are these NATO countries privately negotiating deals concerning the gas/oil wealth Syria has through Putin who then negotiates with Assad? I'm curious.
edit on 1-12-2015 by tweetie because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 03:45 PM
link   
a reply to: tweetie




I am making note that as far as I know, at this moment, the only country which still has permission from Assad to be in Syria fighting IS is Russia.


Because Syria will never say they are allowing the US to be there, just as the US won't tell anyone they are being allowed as that would wouldn't be something they could deny if found out.

Syria has already said any military action taken in Syria would be met with a harsh response from them. So since none of that has happened against the US jets shows they have no problem with them being there fighting ISIS.



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: tweetie




None of these NATO countries, either already present or about to be, are sanctioned to be there. The NATO countries are publicly "saying" they want to help Syria be rid of IS but they will not work with or support Assad.


You do know those countries aren't bound to involve the whole of NATO in what the individual countries do on their own.



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 03:55 PM
link   
NATO is a criminal enterprise. It breaks international law at is own discretion and justifies it and then condemns others


They live by might is right
They’re hypocrites


They’re ZI-TO
NATO
NAZI



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 04:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: tweetie




I am making note that as far as I know, at this moment, the only country which still has permission from Assad to be in Syria fighting IS is Russia.


Because Syria will never say they are allowing the US to be there, just as the US won't tell anyone they are being allowed as that would wouldn't be something they could deny if found out.

Syria has already said any military action taken in Syria would be met with a harsh response from them. So since none of that has happened against the US jets shows they have no problem with them being there fighting ISIS.


Then doesn't it stand to reason that these NATO countries have privately brokered, or are in the process of privately brokering, oil/gas deals with Syria/Assad as well? For example, Cameron is chomping at the bit to get his country's governmental process to give approval to send military. France had no problem OK-ing it because of the attack in Paris. Merkel is going through her government's channels. There has to be an incentive for them.



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: tweetie




None of these NATO countries, either already present or about to be, are sanctioned to be there. The NATO countries are publicly "saying" they want to help Syria be rid of IS but they will not work with or support Assad.


You do know those countries aren't bound to involve the whole of NATO in what the individual countries do on their own.


Yes, I understand that.



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Reply to Willtell: Yes, thank you, I understand that. I got the picture long ago.
I wouldn't mind if NATO disintegrated.
edit on 1-12-2015 by tweetie because: added words



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 06:11 PM
link   
This is exactly what happens when you arm radicals. After the collapse of Libya in 2011, extremist elements inside the country were formally recognized as the official governing body of the country; by the US and other NATO allies.

It didn't take long before the countries leading terrorist was working with the CIA and others in preparing rebels to enter the battlefield in Syria via Turkey, with money and assistance from NATO.

ISIS has been built, whether directly or indirectly, it's their baby. Funny thing is, the guy in the article below spells it out pretty clear.

Source

"The Western governments are bringing this upon themselves. The longer they leave this door open for this torture and this massacre to carry on, the more young men will drop what they have in this life and search for the afterlife," Najjar said.

"If the West and other countries do not move fast it will no longer be just guys like me - normal everyday guys that might do anything from have a cigarette to go out on the town - it will be the real extreme guys who will take it to another level."



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 06:26 PM
link   
I want to add this to what I initially said:

When President Hollande went on his travel spree after the Paris attacks and he met with President Putin they both answered questions from the press after their private meeting. Hollande talked about sending air support to Syria to fight IS but made sure to reiterate that France was not supporting or working with Assad. Right as he said that last part, President Putin had a strong, visible reaction to that statement. His whole body jerked in irritation but didn't say anything, he just continued listening to Hollande. His true feeling was evident.

Here's what bothers me. Putin openly supports Assad and that's good, imo. These other countries say they are going into Syria to fight IS but also say they don't support Assad. Putin has been meeting privately with these same NATO countries even though they say they don't support Assad which visibly bothers him. That's why I ask if they are being secretly promised access to Syria's oil/gas wealth. Maybe Putin was told by whomever he reports to he had to offer these NATO countries opportunities even though it bothers him to do so because they are against Assad.

I hope I made myself clear via this and my recent posts above. I read subtle clues when people talk and I read between the lines when I read material. A lot can be learned that way.




top topics



 
77
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join