Iran vows it will not allow Assad to fall

page: 5
34
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 07:55 AM
link   
The USA wouldn't let Sadi Arabia fail either....Or Saddam back when we supported him, or the Shah of Iran, or Mubarack.

We ally with awful rulers that have horrible human rights violations as well.

If Syria goes, Iran knows they are next for dinner anyway.




posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs
Lines in the sand have become a bit more clearer ontop of what we already presumed. Sometimes i just dont understand global politics...Is it just a big game of chicken until someone gets run over?




Game of "chicken"? Maybe. If you look closely, you just might agree that it more closely resembles a game of "Schoolyard Bully".

The (modern) western-powers-that-be have been meddling in the area for a century (+/ -). They believe they own the middle east and the resources, regardless of the indigenous citizens. To those ends, western troops and propaganda efforts are aimed at securing control of the land and justifying their crimes and war crimes. Every time we wave the stars-n-bars (flag), we are aiding and abetting crimes against humanity.

China, Russia and Europe should build their own "Monroe Doctrine" and throw us completely out the area. Problem solved.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:09 AM
link   
reply to post by jcarpenter
 


I understand your analogy. Rather then taking sides i wanted to point out that it seems that neither side will step down from their position. It seems to happen over and over again, eventually a nation is not going to swerve out of the way and a collision will be inevitablle.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 04:09 PM
link   
All big bad wolves huff and puff...

Iran can only huff and puff, that's all they ever do.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by pacifier2012
All big bad wolves huff and puff...

Iran can only huff and puff, that's all they ever do.


As opposed to starting illegal wars?



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   
"illegal wars". I always LMAO when i see this term. Illegal as far as what?



Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by pacifier2012
All big bad wolves huff and puff...

Iran can only huff and puff, that's all they ever do.


As opposed to starting illegal wars?



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


...as opposed to not based on lies or legal according to the UN Security Council.


LYAO as much as you want, but trying doing some research instead.
edit on 8-8-2012 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Their Days Are Numbered...Big Time!

The mournful, inspired prediction (a burden to be lifted up) concerning Damascus [capital of Syria, and Israel’s bulwark against Assyria]. Behold, Damascus will cease to be a city and will become a heap of ruins. Isaiah 17:1



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by MDDoxs
 


Silly isn't it? Although its slightly better than the previous model of 'lie down and let us stomp on you' we had going before.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 08:26 PM
link   
S&F bro


Great Post


edit on 8-8-2012 by iIuminaIi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


listen the US israel and the rest are playing a dangerous game in the middle east.
syria is a sovereign nation and the west should not be trying for another regime change for the benefit of a corrupt oil industry.
you talk about innocent victims but you dont show the same concern for palestinian children killed by israeli soldiers or all the innocent people kiled by US airstrikes and ground forces in iraq.
i really hope russia and china put their money where their mouth is.
edit on 8-8-2012 by erictcartman because: typo



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   
LMAO!!!! SO just because the security council aka some countries "approve war" then its legal? Ummm okay...whatever. Ask those folks who war is being waged against if just because the security council authorizes it that it means its legal and right.

Yeah...im STILL LMAO'ing.



Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


...as opposed to not based on lies or legal according to the UN Security Council.


LYAO as much as you want, but trying doing some research instead.
edit on 8-8-2012 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


the point you seem unable to grasp is when america sets itself up as the worlds policeman,we expect the US to abide by international law, not take the attitude of do as i say not as i do.
america is in for the shock of its life if it tries to pull the same s*it in syria that it pulled in iraq and libya,china has the potential and means to wipe the floor with you if it gets involved in this.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   
The point im trying to make is that just because a "world body or organization" deems a war authorized doesnt make it LEGAL which is why i posted a response in the first place.

There will be NO US intervention in Syria. Those who keep clamoring/hoping for it are WRONG. No? Okay...i'll be back as i always to do to say i told ya so. Remember, im 100% right on predictions/events on here (thus far).



Originally posted by erictcartman
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


the point you seem unable to grasp is when america sets itself up as the worlds policeman,we expect the US to abide by international law, not take the attitude of do as i say not as i do.
america is in for the shock of its life if it tries to pull the same s*it in syria that it pulled in iraq and libya,china has the potential and means to wipe the floor with you if it gets involved in this.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
LMAO!!!! SO just because the security council aka some countries "approve war" then its legal? Ummm okay...whatever. Ask those folks who war is being waged against if just because the security council authorizes it that it means its legal and right.

Yeah...im STILL LMAO'ing.



Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


...as opposed to not based on lies or legal according to the UN Security Council.


LYAO as much as you want, but trying doing some research instead.
edit on 8-8-2012 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)


Legal and right are two different things, you might want to specify which you are referring to in the future. Just like Justice and the Law are two different things. Keep LYAO, I do the same thing when people have troubles with elementary definitions.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
The point im trying to make is that just because a "world body or organization" deems a war authorized doesnt make it LEGAL which is why i posted a response in the first place.

There will be NO US intervention in Syria. Those who keep clamoring/hoping for it are WRONG. No? Okay...i'll be back as i always to do to say i told ya so. Remember, im 100% right on predictions/events on here (thus far).



Originally posted by erictcartman
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


the point you seem unable to grasp is when america sets itself up as the worlds policeman,we expect the US to abide by international law, not take the attitude of do as i say not as i do.
america is in for the shock of its life if it tries to pull the same s*it in syria that it pulled in iraq and libya,china has the potential and means to wipe the floor with you if it gets involved in this.


PS- the US is already intervening in Syria...sorry to ruin your 100% record.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


Originally posted by princeofpeace
"illegal wars". I always LMAO when i see this term. Illegal as far as what?



Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by pacifier2012
All big bad wolves huff and puff...

Iran can only huff and puff, that's all they ever do.


As opposed to starting illegal wars?


That would be "as far as" the Geneva Convention.

Article 2 states that signatories are bound by the convention both in war, armed conflicts where war has not been declared and in an occupation of another country's territory.

The Geneva Convention was set up in part at least to prevent another preemptive /unilateral military strike against a soveign country taking place again in the world following the allied victory against the axis (and that's the WW2 Axis)

Funny you don't hear them mention that international agreement on the evening news these days. The US, Britain, the countries of the EU, and in fact all of the rest of the US allies are a signatory to the Geneva Convention.

Washington announced back in 2002 they were not going to follow the Convention's rules on the treatment of prisoners any longer. Really the first formal announcement by Washington of their new 'either you are with us or against us' foreign policy.

BTW The US Department of Defense’s own guidelines are also violated since they demand adherence to the Geneva Conventions. A 1994 Defense Department directive declares the following:

It is DoD [Department of Defense] policy that: (1) The US Military Services shall comply with the principles, spirit, and intent of the international law of war, both customary and codified, to include the Geneva Conventions... suspected or alleged violations ... of the international law of war are promptly reported to the appropriate authorities and investigated...




edit on 8-8-2012 by Tallone because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 11:27 PM
link   
Everything in the main stream media about Syria is a complete fabrication. Do not believe one word of it.

Bashar al-Assad is NOT the crazed dictator the the west are making him out to be.

The Free Syrian army are a bunch of terrorists gangs mainly made up of al-qaeda.

I hope al-assad can regain control of his country and deal with these terrorists pretending to be Syrian freedom fighters.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by erictcartman
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


the point you seem unable to grasp is when america sets itself up as the worlds policeman,we expect the US to abide by international law, not take the attitude of do as i say not as i do.
america is in for the shock of its life if it tries to pull the same s*it in syria that it pulled in iraq and libya,china has the potential and means to wipe the floor with you if it gets involved in this.


And how pray tell will China pull of this little feat of magic? By trying to fire over Russia? Russia will not allow The Chinese to fire anything over them or their airspace. Chinas navy is also not up to the task. The only thing China could do is attack Taiwan and SK then. If it is any engagement outside of China They will lose.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:50 AM
link   
reply to post by yuppa
 

Hate to interjection
www.fas.org...
i couldn't help myself.......from being completely off-topic
edit on 9-8-2012 by all2human because: (no reason given)





new topics




 
34
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join