Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

More support for Putin during G20

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   
www.independent.ie...





European Union leaders, usually strong allies of the United States, described the August 21 attack near Damascus, which killed an estimated 1,400 people, as "abhorrent" but added: "There is no military solution to the Syrian conflict."





"Military action would have a negative impact on the global economy, especially on the oil price - it will cause a hike in the oil price," Chinese Vice Finance Minister Zhu Guangyao told a briefing.





Any G20 decision on Syria would not be binding but Putin would like to see a consensus to avert military action in what would be a significant - but unlikely - personal triumph.


Putin has not been convinced it seems, neither is Europe or China, or Obama had no real hard evidence to begin with.
That sarin is used is well known by now, but not by whom, i just hope this G20 will at least bring forward renewed talks and the will to solve this without violence.




posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by earthling42
 


{quote] That sarin is used is well known by now, but not by whom, i just hope this G20 will at least bring forward renewed talks and the will to solve this without violence.

Do you really believe that is the intention of the POTUS at this point?? Seriously??



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
I fail to see how this constitutes support 'for Putin'. Isn't it the Syrian government's position that there is no evidence that they used Sarin? Putin is simply supporting the position of their close ally, Syria. As Assad has said, if Sarin was used it was by the rebels. There is no evidence it was the government. Putin (not surprisingly) is simply reiterating that. So shouldn't the thread title actually read, 'More support for Assad during G20'?



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 01:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Chrisfishenstein
 


Where do i say that?



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Putin is up to something though , I can see it all over his face .

Still , he`s basically laughed at the westerners all the way through this crap



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by jtma508
 


See it like this, he has stated this if they were able to proof assad did it, he would support an intervention, but if not he will see it as agression if the US attacks.
I agree fully with this.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 01:52 PM
link   
That's all I ever hear in regards to this subject on CNN. We promise that chemical weapons were used.

I don't think anyone with an ounce of brain is suggesting otherwise, we just want to know who did it before we can decide whom to support.

My 2 cents, Al-Queda/FSA/Rebels/Saudi Arabia/USA are more involved then the US wants people to know...that is why they keep bringing up that chemical weapons were used without EVER STATING WHO USED THEM!

They would like to blame Assad. It would work for their interests, but, release the proof! Saying you have 100% doesn't work here on ATS without pics or documents to back it up, why do people believe it when the government says it?



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by AthiestJesus
Putin is up to something though , I can see it all over his face .

Still , he`s basically laughed at the westerners all the way through this crap


And rightly so if you ask me.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 
here is a thought, what if the reason to go into Syria is not to hit Syria, but the rebels that have gotten out of hand,
"no one thought they would use Chemicals to draw the US /West in to it, but now that they have what to do about it?"
"we will sell the idea that Syria need to be punish , then hit them that used the chemicals is our Intel still good?"
yes for the past two three weeks, we know where and whom "
"good now we just need to sell this but I want full backing or make it seem as if i am seeking it"
"Putin-" ?
"what about him we got an agreement , closed door , that's all you to know"
"when do we say go?"
" after the 9th when they are all back, now if you shall excuse me , I am off to the G20"

edit on 5-9-2013 by bekod because: line edit



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by superman2012
 
here is a thought, what if the reason to go into Syria is not to hit Syria, but the rebels that have gotten out of hand,
"no one thought they would use Chemicals to draw the US /West in to it, but now that they have what to do about it?"
"we will sell the idea that Syria need to be punish , then hit them that used the chemicals is our Intel still good?"
yes for the past two three weeks, we know where and whom "
"good now we just need to sell this but I want full backing or make it seem as if i am seeking it"
"Putin-" ?
"what about him we got an agreement , closed door , that's all you to know"
"when do we say go?"
" after the 9th when they are all back, now if you shall excuse me , I am off to the G20"

edit on 5-9-2013 by bekod because: line edit


I think if we were being sold the fact that we would be attacking the religious fanatics then it wouldnt be such a hard sell. Im sure our nations would be jumping up and down in support.
But thats not the product that is for sale.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by OneManArmy
 
you missed the point it is called saving face and covering up the fact that US backed the wrong side, US can not admit they backed the rebels that used Chemical's now can they? To blame Assad is much more of a easy sell, or so they think.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


Personally, I would even go so far as to say that even IF somehow the claim that Assad ordered the attack was confirmed, what good would a "limited" strike killing potentially thousands more civilians do? The place is a mess over there between basically Al Qaeda and Assad. Why do we have to clean it up?
edit on 5-9-2013 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by OneManArmy
 
you missed the point it is called saving face and covering up the fact that US backed the wrong side, US can not admit they backed the rebels that used Chemical's now can they? To blame Assad is much more of a easy sell, or so they think.



The unbound ineptitude and total underestimation of humanity within the us citizens assumed by the PTB makes me agree with you wholeheartedly.

I think yes they are so stupid that they would take the impossible path instead of the easy path, just to save face.

If you ask me, its far too late for saving face.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by superman2012
 
here is a thought, what if the reason to go into Syria is not to hit Syria, but the rebels that have gotten out of hand,
"no one thought they would use Chemicals to draw the US /West in to it, but now that they have what to do about it?"
"we will sell the idea that Syria need to be punish , then hit them that used the chemicals is our Intel still good?"
yes for the past two three weeks, we know where and whom "
"good now we just need to sell this but I want full backing or make it seem as if i am seeking it"
"Putin-" ?
"what about him we got an agreement , closed door , that's all you to know"
"when do we say go?"
" after the 9th when they are all back, now if you shall excuse me , I am off to the G20"

edit on 5-9-2013 by bekod because: line edit


If they know it is the rebels, are the US leaders going to be charged in a court of law for supplying arms to the rebels and continually backing them even though they broke the Geneva Protocol? I already think it is laughable that the US and the general public support the FSA even though they are infiltrated with Al-Queda (remember 9/11?). If people are that stupid, they deserve what they get...



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wookiep
reply to post by superman2012
 


Personally, I would even go so far as to say that even IF somehow the claim that Assad ordered the attack was confirmed, what good would a "limited" strike killing potentially thousands more civilians do? The place is a mess over there between basically Al Qaeda and Assad. Why do we have to clean it up?
edit on 5-9-2013 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)


Right. All they are fighting over now, is HOW people should die. Not if.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 04:38 PM
link   
How often do they have G-20's because there is a G-20 in Australia in November this year...



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by jtma508
 


I believe Russia has their own intel and their evidence supportes that it was the rebels (canisters used contained sarin and appeared to be rebel devices ratger than gov systems).



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by bekod
 


If that were the case then our first step to thwart them would be to cut off aid. We haven't and we even upped the arms given to them after the first gas attacks.



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by DaRAGE
 


Maybe that is about preparations?
Next year the G20 summit is held in Brisbane.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Sep, 5 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by earthling42
 


OMG you're right. It's next year. I totally thought it was this year.





new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join