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.

 

US, France, UK, Turkey, Italy prepare for military intervention in Syria

page: 5
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 


A man who dropped nerve gas on a town and killed thousands of people isn't evil?

Wow.

And just what Nation Was that supplied nerve gas to Saddam?

Source
CounterPunch
Source Archive

So in truth this doesn't make Saddam looked Evil, Was he Evil because he used it? sure you could say that but then again.

Who supplied him the Nerve Gas?
It was all thanks to Roland Reagen & the elites.

Please do read the links i just posted.
edit on 23-2-2012 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-2-2012 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xertious
ITs a civil war, we should not get involved. That said, I think we should get in there just for the sake of relieving political tensions. We go in there supporting the people against assad. Russia and China will be pissed, but rather than them being pissed at us for threatening intervention.
Also the possible coming change in leadership in Russia will not be the end of the support for Syria, the leader of the opposition has said that there is popular support for syria to be left alone, being an old ally. People also don't want western influence to spread anymore east. They didn't stop us in Libya because they thought we'd fail, and since we suceeded they think its more important to stop western influence spreading anymore where we might suceed.

The whole situation in the middle east is due to western influence anyway. I think change came too early for nations that weren't ready for it. They see how many freedoms we have and they want it. For those in power, of course they're going to fight back to keep their powerbase.

If people are going to fight back against a leader who is shelling them, to put it in internet terms, owning them. Why should we get involved. Arming the other side is only going to cause more bloodshed. We don't really know whats going on in there, al we have is onesided activities of the government fighting the opposition. Where are the news footage and media coverage of what the opposition is doing to the government. IF they're doing nothing wrong they will have no reason to shell them, even if you do go insane, you have n reason to randomly start shelling your wn citizens.


The entire Arab Spring is a sad joke on freedom. There is no arab spring but a plan to conquer through chaos.... the western economies are collapsing due to debt just like the empires before them.... WWIII will be the result of the last gasps of a dying American-Saxon empire



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wildbob77
So we plan to oust the current regime and then replace it with an Islamic militant regime.

That's what has happened in Lybia, Egypt.

Why would Syria be any different.


I agree with you Syria will be just Libya, only worse.
And some people on dont seem to get that message.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 



I am very much aware of that, but for you sit there and proclaim that he somehow absolved of responsibility is crazy. I don't want war anymore than most of you do, but I don't support Assad. I'm not going to pick a devil in a fight. It's not a game. WW3 isn't a game like you people seem to treat it.

It's some kind of perverse entertainment for your guys.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

And no the base isn't empty it does have a few defensible portal ships near the base, so any attack either by the rebels, NATO would start a WW3.


Seriously, you think any planned military action by the NATO/US or a Coalition is going to target the Russian naval base at Tartus? Do you not think that if military intervention was planned then that naval base would be off the target set? The targets, if military intervention was planned, would be strictly Syrian forces. The floating workshop and platforms would be clearly off the target list. I thought that would be plainly obvious?



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   
What if we got an israeli politician in syria? Does israel expand? wow crazy idea, just shooting some what if scieneros



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   
What if we got an israeli politician in syria? Does israel expand? wow crazy idea, just shooting some what if scieneros



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Ah funny you mentioned Kosovo and Bosnia


Stop waffling and changing the subject. The subject in discussion was how the Russian and Chinese are going to supply heavy hardware to Syria. In order to do so they have a logistical nightmare. No direct over flights to the region. The same problem that they faced in Kosovo. The same for the use of the Bosphorus with all the restrictions. The armchair warriors never think when making these sweeping statements. The only logistical route for Russia would be through the Mediterranean (Gibraltar Strait) to get all this heavy hardware to Syria. A long and timely process that is just the fantasy of the armchair warriors. Neither Russia or China are coming to the military aid of Syria if Western and Arab nations consider a military intervention.
edit on 23-2-2012 by tommyjo because: Additional info added



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by tommyjo
 


It's easy, From Khazakastan to Turkmenistan both of which are a member of CSTO, to Iran to Iraq to Syria. Iraq government is much under the control of Iran being the Shia religion. No need for overflight permissions. Trucks and Rails will do just good.

Another route, although little slow, from Caspian sea to Iran and then 200 kms in Iraq before two hours end, you are already in Syria.

edit on 23-2-2012 by victor7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 


Considering all the weaponry purchased from Western and Eastern countries such as America, Russia, China, France, England, Italy, and more..... and considering the size of many of the armies in the Middle East such as those in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Turkey, Iraq, Pakistan....... why aren't Middle Eastern countries taking the lead on this? Why is it Nato or America or other European countries are called on? All the braggadocio about invading Israel and or defending Islam from Westerners, why can't they support their own neighbors against a harsh regime killing its citizens? Paper Tigers? Inflated Egos with no backbone to back up their own bravado? No wonder Israel has won all its wars with them.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:45 PM
link   
The Zionists want their war and they will use their media arm to promote it.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   
The "countries" arranging a coalition are not countries any longer - they are just the spokespersons of major multinational corporations who have become so large that the banks are being dictated to by them.

The multinationals have conquered most of the middle eastern countries and now they are preparing to carve up Syria and Iran.

Syria and Iran could be looked upon as non-countries with so much variabilty in their defined borders over time.

And so really all we are seeing is another world war in all but name.

I found it interesting that representitives of the major oil corporations in USA met up the day before the bombing of Pearl Harbour.

Nothing changes.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   
www.israelnationalnews.com...

Egyptian politician threatens war with Israel and US............within three months.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by tommyjo

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Ah funny you mentioned Kosovo and Bosnia


Stop waffling and changing the subject. The subject in discussion was how the Russian and Chinese are going to supply heavy hardware to Syria. In order to do so they have a logistical nightmare. No direct over flights to the region. The same problem that they faced in Kosovo. The same for the use of the Bosphorus with all the restrictions. The armchair warriors never think when making these sweeping statements. The only logistical route for Russia would be through the Mediterranean (Gibraltar Strait) to get all this heavy hardware to Syria. A long and timely process that is just the fantasy of the armchair warriors. Neither Russia or China are coming to the military aid of Syria if Western and Arab nations consider a military intervention.
edit on 23-2-2012 by tommyjo because: Additional info added
LOL..My father is in Moscow working the past couple of weeks, i wouldn't bet on Russia not responding to any aggression from the USA/UK,etc..The news right now in Russia is saying that they are prepared to do what they have to do when and if the time comes. I support that %100, the policies of the United States and the UK have caused these problems in the middle east to boil over in the middle east, a proverbial laundry list of f-ups that are now coming to a head.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   
WW3 is what we will be facing if we decide to engage Syria/Iran. This time it may not work out the way we would like it too.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by discharged77
 


www.cnn.com...

Bad omen's like these are sure pointing towards the WW3. West sure does knows how make God angry.

edit on 23-2-2012 by victor7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   
A week or two ago, the Ex-Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd, stated that we were involved with other countries in Syria. He didn't elaborate, but i assume that it is safe to say that you can add Australia to your list.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Firstly, let me say Egypt cant afford to go to war, or they would have to borrow money from their benefactor the US to do so....non starter.....
Secondly, Syria, is going to belong partly to Isreal when this plays out....Isreal will retain all control of the Golan, and maybe even some other choice realestate....Thats their stake in stirring the pot.....
Plus they intend to get more from lebanon(water)and even maybe tthe Sinai if the egyptians want to get frisky.
I have no doubts that destabilisation is in their long term interests.....
Syria is merely a stepping stone to get Iran to make a move.
Iran is in lockstep with assads goverment, and they have together managed the hizbollah and other groups.
Armed the plaestinians and generally worked against isreal....
They will not desert Syria, and i expect to see a surprise attack from Iran against the west if intervention is attempted by NATO.
Syria has very good anti shipping missiles, and coastline to deploy them.
The nato forces arrayed against both nations had better silence the opposition in one of them very qickly....they cannot have war on too many fronts.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Firstly, let me say Egypt cant afford to go to war, or they would have to borrow money from their benefactor the US to do so....non starter.....
Secondly, Syria, is going to belong partly to Isreal when this plays out....Isreal will retain all control of the Golan, and maybe even some other choice realestate....Thats their stake in stirring the pot.....
Plus they intend to get more from lebanon(water)and even maybe tthe Sinai if the egyptians want to get frisky.
I have no doubts that destabilisation is in their long term interests.....
Syria is merely a stepping stone to get Iran to make a move.
Iran is in lockstep with assads goverment, and they have together managed the hizbollah and other groups.
Armed the plaestinians and generally worked against isreal....
They will not desert Syria, and i expect to see a surprise attack from Iran against the west if intervention is attempted by NATO.
Syria has very good anti shipping missiles, and coastline to deploy them.
The nato forces arrayed against both nations had better silence the opposition in one of them very qickly....they cannot have war on too many fronts.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 09:25 PM
link   
The reason why it is taking so long on Syria (besides Russia and China) is IRAN. We want to see how Tehran sends supplies to their main ally in distress. We want them to provoke them just enough to react irrationally and make a stupid mistake to add to the list of reasons to get public support for a real war. You think we really want to take Syria? Iran is the main objective. Either, we will no-fly zone and sponsor the terrorism to take Syria the same way we took Libya, or we will jump straight to Iran and Syria will crumble on its own after that.




top topics



 
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join