It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
"You will not deny that one does not really need to support the people who not only kill their enemies, but open up their bodies, eat their intestines in front of the public and cameras. Are these the people you want to support?," Putin told a news conference. "Is it them who you want to supply with weapons? Then this probably has little relation to humanitarian values that have been preached in Europe for hundreds of years."
Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by whatsecret
I heard him say that today during the press conference. He is NOT down with what the West has in mind. That was my take. And that was in response to a pissy ass question by the BBC.
With everything I have inside of me I hope the Russians defend Syria. If they don't I will never have one ounce of hope again.
Originally posted by all2human
It needed to be said, more guns in Syria is not the answer esp to a group with Al-Qaeda in it's ranks, interesting times.edit on 16-6-2013 by all2human because: (no reason given)
This is no joke, though, this is very serious. I’ll give you another example. On the one hand, some Western countries support some organizations that are at war with Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, but these same Western countries fight these same organisations in Mali. They’re not even the same organisations – they are the same people. Some have left Syria and come to Mali. The West is fighting them in Mali, but once they cross the border into Syria, they get support from the West. What is the logic in all of this? Where will it take us? You need to understand, this is not just rhetoric.
They (Iran) are extremely crafty in this, and they do it to tackle their domestic political issues. When there is an external enemy, it united the nation. But I guess the United States have been employing the same technique. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, there have been no external threats that would allow Washington to dominate in the West. There must be a threat so that the US can protect their allies from it. This position yields political and economic benefits. If everyone relies on one country for protection, then this country is entitled to some preferences. So it’s very important to possess this status of a global defender to be able to resolve issues even beyond the realm of foreign policy and security issues. I think the US has been using Iran for this very purpose, that is to unite their allies in the face of a real or fake threat.