Lavrov Guarantees 'No External Intervention' in Syria

Lavrov Guarantees 'No External Intervention' in Syria

en.rian.ru

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Thursday that the UN Security Council would not allow a mandate on the intervention into Syria.

"There will be no external intervention by the [UN] Security Council, I guarantee you," Lavrov told journalists in Kazakhstan's capital of Astana.

Western countries have been attempting to make the UN Security Council take tough measures against the Syrian government, where according to UN statistics some 9,000 have been killed during clashes betwe

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.reuters.com
english.farsnews.com
www.dailystar.co.uk

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
New 'massacre' reported in Syria's Hama province
British SAS & MI6 spies are on the ground in Syria. French, Turkish and Americans expected to join.
Syria agrees to let in UN humanitarian aid

No external intervention...What exaclty does that mean?
IMO, Russia and China (who have both vetoed intervention into Syria) don't want intervention because;

so as not to repeat the "Libyan scenario."

Funny thing though, the Russians and Chinese are opposed to intervention, of course, the western countries are not, they WANT another Libya situation! Its excellent for business

And it just so happens that there ARE already 'boots' on the ground in Syria!
Check it:
British SAS & MI6 spies are on the ground in Syria. French, Turkish and Americans expected to join
British Forces Plan Secret Operation in Syria
SAS SET UP SAFE CAMPS IN SYRIA


Looks like someone is getting a head start on the fun and games! Will western countries just bypass the UN, since its going to take a long time to convice the Russians and the Chinese to intervene, especially after the whole Libya thing?

**(added)Answer, Most likely yes (found this after i posted the thread.. CRAZY NEWS)

But Russia’s objections might not protect Assad for long. Washington’s envoy to the UN, Susan Rice, said on Wednesday that the most likely solution to the crisis was that Western powers and their allies would act on Syria without UN approval. Rice did not specify what actions she meant, but with little scope left for sanctions, her words brought closer the prospect of unilateral military action against the Assad regime.

What's Behind Russia's Stance on Syria?


What?! The rest of the UN won't play with them, so the wests are gonna go play withthemselves.. lol I may just do a thread on this extra info!**

I bet CIA and other agencies are already on the ground too, its just they havent been caught yet as the SAS and MI6 apparently has. Here is another piece of related news(Thx Redneck13) just to add a little more worry to the mix:

Syria businessmen abroad set up fund for rebels

"This fund has been established to support all components of the revolution in Syria, and to establish a strong relationship with businessmen inside and outside Syria and to protect civilians," Wael Merza, secretary general of the opposition Syrian National Council, told reporters in the Qatari capital.

AND

Merza said that half of the $300 million had already been spent, some of which were contributions to the rebel Free Syrian Army.

"The majority of support given (to the rebels) will be on the technical side," Merza said. "It's also logistical support to our people on the ground."

Thats something else...Scary to think whats just around the corner here... How long until we are bombing Syria with NATO jets for 'freedom' and oil and resources, and power, and money... oops i meant democracy..oops i mean Western oppresion and economic slavery.. yay for world progress

Thoughts?!

en.rian.ru
(visit the link for the full news article)

This statement is nothing new. Lavrov has said before that UN Security council will not grant anything to the US/NATO to attack Syria.

Obviously , limited special forces are in Syria. I want to know what exactly Russia has to hide that is in Syria. Something isnt right.

I think we should intervene in Syria. If Russia wants to declare war , then let them. About time we get this over with.

reply to post by milkyway12


Russia won't declare any war but will make it 'extremely expensive' for those who declare war on its allies.

reply to post by victor7


I disagree. I think our fleets may engage off the coast of Syria and we will engage Russian missile batteries. I highly doubt Total War will ever be declared.

I am fairly certain , as long as Russia doesnt Launch nukes , NATO / America will not Launch nukes. No matter if a full scale invasion took place of Poland again.

Maybe this:
archive.newsmax.com...
Spetsnaz may have moved the WMDs the US gave to Saddam to Syria.if this is true would it explain why the US has such an interest in going in and Russia wants to stop it very badly.

reply to post by milkyway12


What's Behind Russia's Stance on Syria?

“The Kremlin’s deeply held view of sovereignty as an unlimited right for political regimes to do as they please inside their states is one of the cornerstones of Russian foreign policy, and it has been especially dominant since the war in Libya,” wrote Moscow-based radio Kommersant FM commentator in a column for RIA Novosti earlier this week.

“[President Vladimir] Putin feels that the West duped Russia into de facto sanctioning international intervention in Libya, and seemingly vowed never to let it happen again,” he added.

“Russia has some interests in Syria, but they are not particularly insignificant,” he added, dismissing with a laugh the strategic importance of the Tartus naval base.

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by victor7

 

I disagree. I think our fleets may engage off the coast of Syria and we will engage Russian missile batteries. I highly doubt Total War will ever be declared.

I am fairly certain , as long as Russia doesnt Launch nukes , NATO / America will not Launch nukes. No matter if a full scale invasion took place of Poland again.

edit on 7-6-2012 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)

If US comes down to a "totally naked" act of outside UN approved attack on Syria then Russia WILL do the following:

a) Shut down the NDN supply line that gets 80% of needs to the US/NATO troops in Afghanistan. The Pakistani supply line is already shut off.

b) If US still persists, then Russia will do to US what it did to USSR in Afghanistan. Russia will start arming and supplying Pakistan with weapons that will be given to AQ and Taliban and this will further make life hell for US/NATO troops in that country.

c) Ships packed with weapons from Southern Russia via Caspian Sea to Iran. A road trip to Pakistan and then lots of action in Afghanistan. China can and WILL do the same. Pakistan has nukes and is not afraid of using them, so US cannot attack Pakistan as even if there is regime change in Islamabad, the Paki nukes will already be in the hands of Mullahs ready to use them around the world.

d) While alone Russia lacks the grit to take on the NATO, but with China on the side, the equation changes quite a bit.

US has better chances of peace and stability if it throws focus on its internal matters rather than poking its nose into those of other nations.

I think that if they want into Syria.....Russia wont be able to stop them. When TPTB are told they cant do something, they do it anyway.

reply to post by victor7


This is not totally a US venture, if anything the US is reluctant to put boots anywhere near Syria. That doesn't mean that they wont support logistics.

But because Libya went the way it did, Im sure they would have to take a more visible role.

reply to post by victor7


I often dream of someone finally doing the right thing and blowing the united states back to the stone age. If this happened I would dance in the streets for an entire week.

reply to post by Nspekta


No external intervention.
it means,, its tribal,, who cares,, we want the Naval Base,,
and Ameracanisky,, cant have it.
with the god, this and ,,opps,,there is no god,, ,,god,,
dont be silly,,commrade" take a drink,,,

missles flying all over the "middle east",,,,,,,,,,,, and now one
knows
who's,,
what,,,
where,,,and
why,,

they are there,,
Ras Putin. i think so,,,

Originally posted by albertabound
reply to post by victor7

 

I often dream of someone finally doing the right thing and blowing the united states back to the stone age. If this happened I would dance in the streets for an entire week.

Right thing would be to contain the US regarding the 10% bad habbits it has developed like poking its 'financially bankrupt' nose in other nations affairs. 90% of the US habbits are pretty neat, something everything nation should try to mimic and follow. Hence no need to blow up.

Trust me, world with US not in the lead would be a horror show of sorts.

reply to post by albertabound


Dream on.
2nd Line.

Furthermore, your words reveal your lack of spiritual and intellectual maturity.

Yet, because you are a member here, I still have faith that you are not an altogether
lost cause as of yet.

I will give you one more chance, and one more chance only.

In the meantime, be careful where you place your feet. Regards, Wildmanimal

Victor , Russia is already Arming Insurgents , Victor , China is already providing intel to Pakistan , so is Russia. However , the insurgents are so ineffective , the equipment isnt making a difference , nor is the Intel.

Victor , the US has already taken into effect that the NDN supply line will be cut off , how this will be dealt with is absolutely classified. I have no clue how they will deal with it.

America isnt stupid and in no way relies on Russia for support , nor China in regards to national security.

Russia and China can be land locked within days , without NATO.

---------

War with Russia and China is ALWAYS planned. We already had a strategy in effect to deal with these issues.

Victor , Russia / China does not have the Technological power or techological numbers to deal with the United States.

Please move on from the USSR , you are not a communist nation any more. You are not a power house any more. The only thing Russia has going for it are Nukes.

-------

However , in my belief. God will decide the winner. We may be the most powerful nation and a 3rd world country the next. We own the moment at the moment , and we should act like it , while being humble and helpful. Power rises and falls. However , Russia will not be taking it , unless of course God sees fit.

reply to post by milkyway12


The only thing you have said correctly is that Russia has not much to speak of currently other than the nukes.

Russia and China can be landlocked in days? Well, do not give a reason to arm Yakhonts and Onyx missiles with nukes and unleash at a dozen on a single target. 11 Aircraft Carriers of US would engage around 150 of these 'lethal beauties' and all 11 ACs will be SUNK!!!!!!! So much for your landlock designs.

Btw, regarding technological numbers, try to do some research and find out how much of top quality weapons of Russians origin can be bought for $100B. China has $2Trillion in official reserves and $1Trillion in Swiss Banks. Even 10% use of these funds will be very tough to handle for the US and NATO.

reply to post by milkyway12


You are the type of war monger that thinks that the U.S constitution is worth defending and that Obama was not born in this country. Do you not realize that the intervention in Syria is not to "keep Russia and China out" but to save lives?? You are so obsessed with U.S dominance over the world its embarrassing.

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by milkyway12

 

...Do you not realize that the intervention in Syria is not to "keep Russia and China out" but to save lives??...

No it isn't. It never is. "Saving lives" might be the tag line for selling it to the public but these kind of interventions are only ever political and/or military in nature.

If it was about "saving lives" then vast chunks of the military budgets of the west would be spent far more productively to develop more infrastructure and support agriculture, education and development instead.

How often do you see the US or UK mobilise their armies to provide assistance in famine-wracked countries? Somalia is being destroyed by famine that is aggravated by local warlords preventing assistance reaching them and imprisoning people who are trying to escape.

Tens of thousands of Somalis have died of malnutrition-related causes; three million Somalis are in urgent need of aid and more than 10 million are at risk. The United Nations declared a famine, using scientific criteria of death and malnutrition rates.
topics.nytimes.com... ts/f/famine/index.html

If it was just about "saving lives" then Somalia would have seen the full brunt of combined western forces already, along with several other countries.

Originally posted by albertabound
reply to post by victor7

 

I often dream of someone finally doing the right thing and blowing the united states back to the stone age. If this happened I would dance in the streets for an entire week.

You're right, Russia is clearly the good guy here ensuring the continued death of Syrian citizens to keep its' naval base. 14,000 dead and rising, tell you what you send your family there if you think the situation is great as it is. No?