TA-ANALYSIS: Russia Condemns US For Accusations Of Syrian Terrorism Ties

Why can't we just cut help to everyone and become isolated, then start working on the problems that are affecting Americans?

Muaddib says to dgtempe: "you loving and backing the agenda of communists and socialists"

Joe McCarthy? Is that you? Changed your name, huh? Had me fooled for a while.

Prince_Machiavelli says:
Why can't we just cut help to everyone and become isolated, then start working on the problems that are affecting Americans?

Not a bad idea. Do you think other countries could actually handle their own business without the US telling them what to do or forcing them to do what it wants? Wow!! What a concept. Makes me dizzy to think about it.

The scary part is that all the evil now directed outwards could be redirected to within the borders of the HomeLand, FatherLand, MotherLand, DubyaLand!

[edit on 1/24/2005 by dubiousone]

Originally posted by dubiousone

Joe McCarthy? Is that you? Changed your name, huh? Had me fooled for a while.

What the heck are you talking about dubious?...

Perhaps you should know that I am a Cuban-American, in case you haven't seen it in other threads....

[edit on 24-1-2005 by Muaddib]

Syria and it's ties to terrorism are hardly earth-shattering news... It's been pretty much common knowledge for decades... The Russians just don't like losing arms customers.... I'm sure the French and Germans are likewise a little miffed about it....

Joe McCarthy was son-of-a-bitch, er, I mean, demagogue, who in the 1950s held inquisition type hearings abusing his power all around the country in an effort to villify, destroy, crucify any American who he, McCarthy, felt was a communist or socialist or sympathizer of either line of political thought.

No offense intended. When you accuse someone like dgtempe of "loving and backing the agenda of socialists and communists" it immediately brings to mind the likes of senator Joe McCarthy.

You were beginning to sound like the evil former senator of the early 1950s. I am partial to dgtempe's orientation as shown by her posts on ATSNN and see no justification for attacking her that way.

[edit on 1/24/2005 by dubiousone]

Originally posted by Gazrok
The Russians just don't like losing arms customers...

Well, you could be right on this Gazrok. Interestingly, at least in this particular article, which seems to stray from the topic at hand, the Russians do not offer any explanation of why they feel that Syria has no ties to terrorism, and why the US administration's assessment of Syria is wrong. All they really say is that the accusations threaten security in the Middle East, that Syria is a key player, and that talks need to resume. Not a very convincing argument eh? On the other hand, our intel on WMD's in Iraq was real convincing too.

Originally posted by dubiousone
Joe McCarthy was son-of-a-bitch, er, I mean, demagogue, who in the 1950s held inquisition type hearings abusing his power all around the country in an effort to villify, destroy, crucify any American who he, McCarthy, felt was a communist or socialist or sympathizer of either line of political thought.

No offense intended. When you accuse someone like dgtempe of "loving and backing the agenda of socialists and communists" it immediately brings to mind the likes of senator Joe McCarthy.

You were beginning to sound like the evil former senator of the early 1950s. I am partial to dgtempe's orientation as shown by her posts on ATSNN and see no justification for attacking her that way.

First of all, i know who he was, but i don't know how you made the connection between him and me, do you want me to make a connection between you and Stalin? I mean, he used to be a liberal, he had trouble with authorities figures, and he was embracing the same ideas of socialism and communism that have been infiltrating the US for quite a long time throught such groups as ANWSER and UCLA. You must be the reincarnation of Stalin with the same ideas he had before he became a dictator and an assasin....

Are you going to tell me that the communist party doesn't exist in the US?....do you have proof that there is actually no connection between such organizations as ANWSER, or UCLA, and communist organizations such as the Worker's party?...that these groups and all these "peaceful demonstrations" are not paid for by communists organizations?...

Since when slandering is telling the truth?.... i know you did not specifically said that i was slandering her, but that's pretty much what you meant. I did not call her a communist, but the ideas she is embracing are the same ideas that even castro and so many other dictators used, and are still using, to attract people to their cause of communism. A lot of liberals have no idea of this connection but it does exist, and there is ample evidence of it.

Second of all, she accused all people who support Bush of slandering the left and not listening to claims which mostly have been originally made by such groups as UCLA, and A.N.S.W.E.R. International, so how exactly am i not saying the truth?.....

Back to the subject at hand, Russia supposedly is an ally and friend of the US. There has been evidence presented here that the Russians helped Saddam hide, move, and even get rid of the wmd that they themselves provided to Iraq.

Before the war started Saddam owed 200 billion dollars to Russia, and owed more money to the same countries that were against the coalition war, from illegal weapons, banned weapons and material the Russians sold to Saddam right up to 2002.

Now the Russians, with the Chinese and others, are helping such countries as Syria and Iran get ready for a possible attack if they do not comply to the same mandates that every nation agreed with not to pursue nuclear weapons programs, which they have done for quite sometime, and it does seem highly likely that it is in response to the US and other countries accusing Iran and Syria of sponsoring terrorism and pursuing wmd programs....

Is the Russian government really our allies and friends?.... i doubt it.

---edited for errors---


[edit on 24-1-2005 by Muaddib]

Interesting there muaddib. And I remember the report about the Russians helping Iraq lose the WMD's. So what I want to know is, if the US government had evidence that Russia got the WMD's out of Iraq, then why was it we went to war anyway? The supposed objective was accomplished, right? Combine that evidence with the Iraqi weapons report disclosure, and it seems to me there was a pretty solid case that there were no WMD's in Iraq, even before we went in. Much less the intent to use them on the USA.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Interesting there muaddib. And I remember the report about the Russians helping Iraq lose the WMD's. So what I want to know is, if the US government had evidence that Russia got the WMD's out of Iraq, then why was it we went to war anyway? The supposed objective was accomplished, right? Combine that evidence with the Iraqi weapons report disclosure, and it seems to me there was a pretty solid case that there were no WMD's in Iraq, even before we went in. Much less the intent to use them on the USA.

The anwser is simple, this was part of the "Sarindar" plan which so many former high ranking Russian military defectors have talked about for some time, as well as some experts in Russian studies who have presented this evidence and which other members and i have posted in these forums.

Ion Mihai Pacepa, identified as "the highest-ranking intelligence officer ever to have defected from the former Soviet bloc," thinks he knows what happened to the Iraqi stockpiles of WMD. An insider's view, and an analysis to remember as more is disclosed by our investigators currently working in Iraq.

As a former Romanian spy chief who used to take orders from the Soviet KGB, it is perfectly obvious to me that Russia is behind the evanescence of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. After all, Russia helped Saddam get his hands on them in the first place.

The Soviet Union and all its bloc states always had a standard operating procedure for deep sixing weapons of mass destruction — in Romanian it was codenamed "Sarindar," meaning "emergency exit." I implemented it in Libya. It was for ridding Third World despots of all trace of their chemical weapons if the Western imperialists ever got near them. We wanted to make sure they would never be traced back to us, and we also wanted to frustrate the West by not giving them anything they could make propaganda with.

Excerpted from.
www.petrifiedtruth.com...

Under the Sarindar plan the Russians would help Saddam, and "any third world country despot" to hide, move and even get rid of all traces of their wmd programs, but they would keep all the documents to pick up these programs once more after the US, or any western country that found evidence of these wmd programs, left the country. We simply did not want Saddam to get those programs back in line, so this is "one of the reasons" we ousted his regime.

Do notice that even though we did not find "stockpiles of wmd" we did find more than enough evidence that proved that Saddam had banned materials, and even weapons and military technology that Iraq was not supposed to have as per the UN sanctions. There were tons of documents found which dealt with building wmd programs, and there were scud missiles and other missiles which Iraq was not supposed to have and which they fired at the coalition in Kuwait at the beginning of the war.

There is way too much evidence that points that Saddam did have wmd programs, and most probably had such stockpiles. the evidence that this is true is long and points to the fact that the "US and the administration did not make up any claims concerning these wmd or Saddams pursuit to have stockpiles of wmd."

---edited for errors---



[edit on 24-1-2005 by Muaddib]

Ok, well thanks for the info. But I am still not convinced. Two main reasons.

1) The article you link to uses this article from the Washington Times as its source. It is an OP/ED piece, and not reported as factual news. So the Russians will sell you all the WMD's you want, and then agree to remove them if you get into trouble with the West? And then for a price will resell them to you if you manage to survive a war with the West? And all without the Russians getting publicly involved, or agreeing to back you up in the event of a war? I am sorry man, I just have a hard time swallowing all that.

www.washtimes.com...

2) Also, Saddam knew that the American Army was coming in hard, to obliterate his regime. He knew that many many of his troops and innocent civilians were going to die, and the country would likely be taken over. So what I have a hard time believing is that if he did have WMD's, that he would have gotten rid of them with such a vast, impending threat at his doorstep. Would you give up your biggest, most deadly weapons in the face of the biggest threat you ever faced? Not likely. Chances are that anything he had was either wiped out by the first gulf war, and/or dismantled during the post war IAEA inspections that lasted for a while.

But if all this is true, could the Russians have convinced Saddam to lose the WMD's and promised to help defend Iraq? A promise which they did not deliver on?

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Ok, well thanks for the info. But I am still not convinced. Two main reasons.

1) The article you link to uses this article from the Washington Times as its source. It is an OP/ED piece, and not reported as factual news. So the Russians will sell you all the WMD's you want, and then agree to remove them if you get into trouble with the West? And then for a price will resell them to you if you manage to survive a war with the West? And all without the Russians getting publicly involved, or agreeing to back you up in the event of a war? I am sorry man, I just have a hard time swallowing all that.

www.washtimes.com...

2) Also, Saddam knew that the American Army was coming in hard, to obliterate his regime. He knew that many many of his troops and innocent civilians were going to die, and the country would likely be taken over. So what I have a hard time believing is that if he did have WMD's, that he would have gotten rid of them with such a vast, impending threat at his doorstep. Would you give up your biggest, most deadly weapons in the face of the biggest threat you ever faced? Not likely. Chances are that anything he had was either wiped out by the first gulf war, and/or dismantled during the post war IAEA inspections that lasted for a while.

But if all this is true, could the Russians have convinced Saddam to lose the WMD's and promised to help defend Iraq? A promise which they did not deliver on?

There are other links with information from other sources which I have posted before, that was just one link.

There are some discrepancies in your scenario, first of all if Saddam did not have any wmd programs why would he risk going against the sanctions and having just some banned stuff? Why would he have all the documents needed for wmd programs?... to collect dust?

Why was he playing hide and seek with the weapons inspectors. If he did destroy many wmd as he said they did why would he do this without the UN making a report as to what was being destroyed? Part of the agreement of the UN sanctions was that whatever was to be destroyed Saddam/Iraq had to notify the UN.

Why were there discrepancies between the explosives, explosives which are used for wmd, that the new Iraqi interim government and IAEA reported? There was a difference of several tons of explosives which seemed to suggest that Saddam added explosives to his cache.

Saddam could very well have believed that if they were able to hide their wmd the coalition would not try to oust him since we wouldn't have the proof of the stockpiles of wmd.

Now, about the Russians not making this public.....why in the world would they do that?

Russia is one of the countries that was caught in the Oil for food program scandal. Through this program many countries in the UN were selling banned materials, technology and banned weapons to Saddam/Iraq, and this was not made public. When they were supposed just to exchange oil from Iraq for food..... Of course they won't announce these deals. Why would the Russians make this public if it went against the same sanctions that the Russians and other countries in the UN agreed on?

Other interviews and comments from former Russian high ranking military personnel include the following.

Question from chat room: Does Russia still see the U.S. as an enemy?

Col. Stanislav Lunev: Unfortunately, the Russian government considers the United States as its main potential military adversary. The increase in Russian intelligence activity against America is directly connected to this point of view, and this view is much more popular than it was in the beginning of the '90s.

Question from chat room: How can Russia continue with what I consider deceptive spying and still ask the USA to support it financially?

Col. Stanislav Lunev: It's not Russia itself that is hostile to the United States. The Russian people like America and consider America an example for their democratic reforms and creation of a free market economy. It?s the Russian government that is hostile. This is a government which actually spends all the billions of dollars it receives from the United States on its corrupt Russian elite that have private accounts in Western banks.

The Russian government tries to explain to the Russian people that Russians are living so badly, not because of a corrupted Russian government, but because an enemy would like to destroy Russia like it's already destroyed the former Soviet Union, destroyed Yugoslavia and would like to destroy Mother Russia, too. "

Excerpted from.
www.cnn.com...

As to the reason why the Russian government is still doing this and considers the US and the west as an enemy still there is the following.

Nagorno-Karabag: A Case Study in "Perestroika"
by Dennis R. Papazian, Ph.D.
Dr. Dennis R. Papazian is a professor of Soviet history, the founder/director of the Armenian Research Center at The University of Michigan, Dearborn, and a member of the faculty of the Center for Russian and East European Studies at The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. This paper is a preliminary draft/study written for oral delivery at the annual conference of the AAASS in Washington, DC, Friday, October 19, 1990."


"More recently, Anatoliy Golitsyn, a Soviet defector of high status, has suggested that the Soviet Union is capable of disinformation on such a massive scale that even the Borkenau system is no longer viable.2 In a book first published in 1984, and of necessity written before then, Golitsyn argues that the leadership of the whole Communist bloc came to an agreement in 1958 in which it established a long range program, a master plan, which it would realize through a large scale deception of the West, a monumental scam.
.................
The final phase of the master plan, according to Golitsyn, is a disinformation and deception campaign of such magnitude that it would be "beyond the imagination of Marx, or the practical reach of Lenin, and unthinkable to Stalin. Among such previously unthinkable stratagems are the introduction of false liberalization in Eastern Europe and, probably, the Soviet Union, and the exhibition of spurious independence on the part of the regimes in Romania, Czechoslovakia, and Poland."7 "

Excerpted from.
www.umd.umich.edu...


It is of importance to note that this soviet defector along with others predicted the "sham collapse of communism" in Russia at least since 1984, and even before that.

Why are pretty much the same people in power that were in the country when the world knew it was a communist state? Why did the Russian government pardoned and kept in their payroll the same military officers that were part of the 1991 coup? One of this same military officers is one who Saddam gave medals to right before the war and who was still under orders from the Kremlin. i have posted evidence of this in a recent thread also.

If anyone still thinks that there is freedom in Russia and free enterprise abounds perhaps you should look at what has been happening in Russia lately.



[edit on 25-1-2005 by Muaddib]

Ok then, so to bring all this back around to the topic at hand, basically, the Russians are massive liars, according to your sources. Could another possible motive for them to pressure the US over its Syrian terrorism accusations then be that those Iraqi WMD's ended up in Syria? Or Iran even? And they're afraid of having them discovered and traced back to Russia?

Seems to me then we ought to have some spy satellites up right about now picking up the Russians removing any WMD traces from Syria and Iran as well then, seeing as the heat is on. Also makes me wonder if China could be involved, with all the recent talk of joint China-Russia military exercises. Maybe there's more to those exercises than meets the casual eye. Like the transfer to China some or all of those Iraqi WMD's. Heh, this is a conspiracy board, sorry just had to go there.

Also, another thing. Once the coalition is out of Iraq, what is to stop the Russians from providing the same setup to the new elected government? Or will that be, heh, our job?

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Ok then, so to bring all this back around to the topic at hand, basically, the Russians are massive liars, according to your sources. Could another possible motive for them to pressure the US over its Syrian terrorism accusations then be that those Iraqi WMD's ended up in Syria? Or Iran even? And they're afraid of having them discovered and traced back to Russia?
..................

Yes, that is another point i brought up in another thread, the Russians do this pretty much to hide any possible trace that would point at them giving such wmd to dictatorships in the middle east and abroad. These accusations from Russia to the US are most probably a ruse. First, it gives them time to do whatever plans they have for Syria, and second it gives more reasons for the international community to doubt the US once more.

Now, i really doubt we would give any wmd to the new govenrment of Iraq. It is still a quagmire over there and many extremist factions are trying to get control of Iraq. Any wmd given to the Iraqi government would almost most certainly end up in the hands of extremists.

Ok, well thanks for all your input on this Muaddib. Seeing as we seem to be the only ones talking in this thread anymore and expressing our views, I'll take any further questions to U2U, and let this thread die in peace.