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.

 

Assad Lays Down His Conditions: "US Must Stop Aiding Terrorists", Israel Disposing Of WMDs; Accuse

page: 4
32
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Strakha
He has the attention of the world and is using it to make a point about how US allies like Saudi Arabia, Israel and Turkey are treated differently than other nations in the region who are non-aligned or opposed to the US. These nations are no saints themselves and if you want to take on the issues of WMD and human rights in the region you need to have consistency on the issue regardless of who is the violator. That said, I don't think this is about WMD or human rights and if he does get rid of his WMD he will still be taken out just like Saddam and Gaddafi were once they got rid of theirs. I'm sure he knows this too.


When Israel uses tactical nuclear weapons to kill 100,000 of its own rebelling citizenry against its hereditary totalitarian dictator.....

then maybe it's even.




posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 02:15 AM
link   
reply to post by abdel
 


What part of the civil war starting with Assad murdering Syrian civilian protestors isn't registering? Obviously not evryone in Syria is al-Qaeda or extremist. Which is the very reason the revoloution kickstarted. There's many many reports by moderate Syrians pleading for American help. It's not like Iraq or Afhanistan, it would be like Bosnia Kosovo.



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 02:41 AM
link   
Is the American use of the Chemical Weapons - Napalm, Agent Orange and White Phosphorus a more kind, gentle and humane way to kill?


On The Last Word, Laurence O’Donnell undermined the American case that we are “on the right side of the red line on chemical weapons” by presenting a short history of napalm and its deployment in American warfare. He begins with its invention at Harvard in 1942 and documenting its usage in World War II and Vietnam, before moving on to the more significant issue: the “inhumane” ways in which napalm can kill.

“Napalm attaches to human flesh in a way that’s impossible to remove,” he said. But “it kills in other ways too. You can be untouched by [a 100 pound napalm bomb] and be killed by a heat stroke. You can be killed by suffocation. You can be killed by breathing in carbon monoxide poisoning. You can be killed by dehydration.”

Link


www.youtube.com...



Agent Orange or Herbicide Orange (HO) is one of the herbicides and defoliants used by the U.S. military as part of its herbicidal warfare program, Operation Ranch Hand, during the Vietnam War from 1961 to 1971. Vietnam estimates 400,000 people were killed or maimed, and 500,000 children born with birth defects as a result of the use of contaminated batches of the compound.

The Red Cross of Vietnam estimates that up to 1 million people are disabled or have health problems due to Agent Orange. en.wikipedia.org...




On November 9, 2005 the Italian state-run broadcaster Radiotelevisione Italiana S.p.A. aired a documentary titled "Fallujah, The Hidden Massacre", alleging that the United States' used white phosphorus as a weapon in Fallujah causing insurgents and civilians to be killed or injured by chemical burns.[citation needed] The filmmakers further claimed that the United States used incendiary MK-77 bombs in violation of Protocol III of the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. According to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, quoted in the documentary, white phosphorus is permitted for use as an illumination device and as a weapon with regard to heat energy, but not permitted as an offensive weapon with regard to its toxic chemical properties.

en.wikipedia.org...

There's not much I can say about America's Human Rights record, only that it stinks.


edit on 13-9-2013 by NeverMind2013 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 03:23 AM
link   

miniatus
reply to post by GrantedBail
 


Seems unwise to be making demands whilst staring down the barrel of a gun wielded by someone with an itchy trigger finger.
edit on 9/12/2013 by miniatus because: (no reason given)


I do agree with what you say, but I also think Assad has a valid point. I suspect the russians have told him to say this and offered to support him.



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 03:26 AM
link   

NeverMind2013
Is the American use of the Chemical Weapons - Napalm, Agent Orange and White Phosphorus a more kind, gentle and humane way to kill?


On The Last Word, Laurence O’Donnell undermined the American case that we are “on the right side of the red line on chemical weapons” by presenting a short history of napalm and its deployment in American warfare. He begins with its invention at Harvard in 1942 and documenting its usage in World War II and Vietnam, before moving on to the more significant issue: the “inhumane” ways in which napalm can kill.

“Napalm attaches to human flesh in a way that’s impossible to remove,” he said. But “it kills in other ways too. You can be untouched by [a 100 pound napalm bomb] and be killed by a heat stroke. You can be killed by suffocation. You can be killed by breathing in carbon monoxide poisoning. You can be killed by dehydration.”

Link


www.youtube.com...



Agent Orange or Herbicide Orange (HO) is one of the herbicides and defoliants used by the U.S. military as part of its herbicidal warfare program, Operation Ranch Hand, during the Vietnam War from 1961 to 1971. Vietnam estimates 400,000 people were killed or maimed, and 500,000 children born with birth defects as a result of the use of contaminated batches of the compound.

The Red Cross of Vietnam estimates that up to 1 million people are disabled or have health problems due to Agent Orange. en.wikipedia.org...




On November 9, 2005 the Italian state-run broadcaster Radiotelevisione Italiana S.p.A. aired a documentary titled "Fallujah, The Hidden Massacre", alleging that the United States' used white phosphorus as a weapon in Fallujah causing insurgents and civilians to be killed or injured by chemical burns.[citation needed] The filmmakers further claimed that the United States used incendiary MK-77 bombs in violation of Protocol III of the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. According to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, quoted in the documentary, white phosphorus is permitted for use as an illumination device and as a weapon with regard to heat energy, but not permitted as an offensive weapon with regard to its toxic chemical properties.

en.wikipedia.org...

There's not much I can say about America's Human Rights record, only that it stinks.


edit on 13-9-2013 by NeverMind2013 because: (no reason given)



Totally agree. The US say the fact he has chemical weapons means he is prepared to use them, yet in every conflict the US has been involved in the last few decades we have seen them use chemical weapons. Total hypocrisy.



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 03:56 AM
link   

ShadellacZumbrum
reply to post by James1982
 


I see we have a sympathizer.

Maybe the U.S. is being a little aggressive. However, my point is, Assad is really Not in any position to be making any demands. His first demand, being that Israel dispose of all WMDs. You can stick that in your "AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN" pile and flush it. It is Unrealistic and I think he is really trying to instigate matters. He also has backing coming from several different countries, which may have emboldened him.


I can't be the first you have come across on ATS, surely? Mine is not exactly an uncommon opinion.


We need to stop with all this "image" nonsense and actually try to solve the problem. I've heard people on TV, and people here on ATS say that even though they think removal of chemical weapons from Syria is a good idea, they are against the agreement simply because it wasn't suggested by the US. That is the most petty thing I've ever heard. There are also people who think we should still strike Syria, even if they give up their chemical weapons, because it makes us look "bad" for not attacking. This is really just the most ridiculous stuff ever, it's like they think this is some sort of high school game. This is real life, serious stuff, ego and image have no place.

I'd also really like to see a better copy of his "demands"

The russian article in the OP has nothing to do with this list of demands he released, and the other link has a very badly formatted version of the list, which doesn't really seem to make sense. (no offense at all to the OP, I know when new info comes out sources are slim sometimes) One of the list of "demands" is an accusation that other mid east countries are trying to undermine Syria. That's not a demand, that's an accusation, why is it listed under the demands? Who even decided these were "demands" in the first place?

This is also there:

"'REBELS MAY USE CHEMICAL WEAPONS AGAINST ISRAEL AS PROVOCATION' "

That is not a demand either. I think someone is twisting Assad's words, if someone has a better link to these supposed demands please post it, if I find one I'll throw it up here as well.

I found an article on the LA times:

www.latimes.com...


"When we see the United States really wants stability in our region and stops threatening, striving to attack, and also ceases arms deliveries to terrorists, then we will believe that the necessary processes can be finalized,"


The language that was being used with "Assad making demands" makes him seem more like Dr Evil or one of the NK Kims. The quote above shows Assad as an intelligent, logical, and reasonable man.

Think about the following scenario:

The US explodes in civil war. The American Rebels are extremist christian fundamentalists seeking to employ a government of strict religious law. China is funding the rebels. In addition to funding the rebels, China is also eager to attack the US. In that scenario I imagine the US government acting far more brutal and extreme than Assad is currently.

Assad's government is the legitimate government of Syria. The rebels are being funded by the US government, something the US has no business doing. The US is openly aiding the overthrow of a sovereign nation (something they have already done several times in the mid east, although not openly) Then it has the nerve to try and take the moral high ground and judge Assad for something they don't even have proof of him doing.

I think Assad is totally righteous in the conditions he is proposing. You may think he is in no position to make such demands, I wouldn't be so sure of that. He has the backing of China and Russia. Obama has lost most of the world, and even the vast majority of the US population don't support him in this.
edit on 13-9-2013 by James1982 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Sounds reasonable to me. I mean why should he hand over the chemical weapons if US is still arming the rebels?

Good to see Assad not backing down to these cowards. If the rebels take over there will be grave atrocity's committed.



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Funny how is January the UN reported that the rebels used gas... or that Turkey in May 2013 caught Al Nursia rebels with cannisters of Sarin gas .....

I just can't believe people are buying the whole narrative ... people are so stupid!



St Udio
Errrrrr..... something got SPUN in a deliberate error to demonize Assad



ShadellacZumbrum


Now what is funny is that he had just agreed to turn all of his chemical weapons over to Russia,
however, that is apparently Not so, as he issues a threat of use with his demands.




 


I contest that rendering of the facts...
Assad said ...the 2nd line of the OP list~ [

...ASSAD: 'REBELS MAY USE CHEMICAL WEAPONS AGAINST ISRAEL AS PROVOCATION'



He clearly states that the FSA forces may use chemical weapons.... He does not accuse the AQ/al Nusra/Jihadists/Rebel Barbarians of past use of Sarin gas...but he is maintaining that his surrendering of the Syrian WMDs does not guarantee that the insurgents won't conduct a strike on Israel with their own sources of WMDs

i.e. :enemy forces staging a False Flag chemical weapons attack... the background on this is that there is rumors/reports that the Rebel Barbarians have Saudi/Qatar supplied agents already, and more over these Rebels are funded and armed by a host of nations including the USA/Saudi Arabia/Qater/Turkey/ Libya to cite a few who might stage a black-ops gas attack to provoke a wide-scale bombing of a negotiating Syria that is stsnding-down in the eyes of the world

edit on 13-9-2013 by fnpmitchreturns because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 10:33 AM
link   

miniatus
reply to post by GrantedBail
 


Seems unwise to be making demands whilst staring down the barrel of a gun wielded by someone with an itchy trigger finger.
edit on 9/12/2013 by miniatus because: (no reason given)


It's just part of the game, surrenders are rarely unconditional. He's going to get what he wants out of it. All politics is a game of give and take.



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Well Assad pretty much killed any progress this will have.Like Israel is gonna get rid of their nuclear weapons...Pretty ridiculous spectacle going on.If the U.S. attacks Assad will be whooped if He attacks Israel.



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 11:25 AM
link   

miniatus
reply to post by GrantedBail
 


Seems unwise to be making demands whilst staring down the barrel of a gun wielded by someone with an itchy trigger finger.
edit on 9/12/2013 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



Yea if the guy with the gun doesn't die laughing first. Syria making demands about US helping "terrorists" while they have been giving aid and comfort to Hezbollah. Just for one thing.

Real first rate comedy right there.



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 11:33 AM
link   

RevelationGeneration
Sounds reasonable to me. I mean why should he hand over the chemical weapons if US is still arming the rebels?

Good to see Assad not backing down to these cowards. If the rebels take over there will be grave atrocity's committed.


Oh make no mistake, Assad and others would like to gas the whole lot.....a hundred thousand or more if possible...before they take over and commit grave atrocity's.



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 11:36 AM
link   

miniatus
reply to post by GrantedBail
 


Seems unwise to be making demands whilst staring down the barrel of a gun wielded by someone with an itchy trigger finger.
edit on 9/12/2013 by miniatus because: (no reason given)


Why is it unwise?

The person with the gun has already decided the sentence. Do you go down looking like a coward? Or, do you go down looking like you fought to the end?

It's not a question, at this point, whether they are going to shoot you. The question is how do you want to be perceived when you die?

The irony:

Psychopaths are pointing fingers at one another, and we are debating which psycho is 'moar' right...They are all psychopaths, none of them are right, which one will cause the least destruction?



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Assad has a right to be pissed but making too many demands is unwise of him. He would be wise to tone down the rhetoric and try to comply with at least russian demands if not natos. If he keeps blaming israel which really is uncalled for, he will eventually dig his own grave. Jews dont like threats from anyone.

What I do agree with him though is blaming qatar, saudia arabia, turkey, usa for giving weapons to muslim extremists in an attempt to topple him. I also agree that he should have at least 30 days to comply with removing chemical weapons from his arsenal.



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 



What I do agree with him though is blaming qatar, saudia arabia, turkey, usa for giving weapons to muslim extremists in an attempt to topple him


Of course they are. Assad's pipeline cuts them out of the deal (and us too). And of course, that's why Obama is still itching to depose Assad, he just can't come out and say it politically. If he publicly explained how stopping the pipeline is in the US's best financial interests, he may just get more buy in, but even then, it's still a total stomp all over international law to do so, so of course, he's trying to find LEGITIMATE reasons to do an UNLAWFUL regime change.



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by peck420
 


The fact russia is on his side means he still has some hope left in his rule. If he becomes arrogant now he might as well declare defeat and shoot himself. People are giving him a second chance, but that is about it.

No time for heroism when you are an underdog in the fight.

If I were him I would pretend to be a "yes sir" man to russia, while continuing the cleansing of rebel fighters. Sooner or later he will win with this strategy.

The fact he asked for israel to turn over its WMD was moronic on his part.
edit on 13/9/13 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 03:01 PM
link   

EarthCitizen07
reply to post by peck420
 


The fact russia is on his side means he still has some hope left in his rule. If he becomes arrogant now he might as well declare defeat and shoot himself. People are giving him a second chance, but that is about it.

No time for heroism when you are an underdog in the fight.

If I were him I would pretend to be a "yes sir" man to russia, while continuing the cleansing of rebel fighters. Sooner or later he will win with this strategy.

The fact he asked for israel to turn over its WMD was moronic on his part.
edit on 13/9/13 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)


How is it moronic to ask Israel to turn over its WMD? Who has attacked its neighbors more? Syria or Israel? What's wrong with asking the entity that has already attacked you (unprovoked) on numerous occassions to give up WMDs? It is Israel that wants the US to attack Syria. It is Israel that wants Assad to give up his chemical weapons. It seems futile to ask a tyrranical regime like Israel to give up its WMDs, but what's wrong with showing the hypocrisy? How is it that Assad is an underdog? Without chemical weapons, US troops would already be patrolling the streets of Damascus. You are misunderstanding the situation. It is the United States that is in the weak position. The US has backed down from a strike. Obama went to Congress because it became evident that the strike would have been harder than anticipated and he didn't want to get the sole blame when US pilots (which would have to have been used by the way) died. Syria and Russia have used the pause to beef up Syrian and Russian defenses (S300 missiles, Yakhonts, Russian warships) in the region. Russia has been emboldened to go ahead with air defense and a new second reactor (more plutonium bombs) for Iran. It is now much harder for the US or Israel to attack Syria or Iran in the future. Russia will help Syria and Iran including with nuclear weapons if that becomes necessary.



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Jobeycool
Well Assad pretty much killed any progress this will have.Like Israel is gonna get rid of their nuclear weapons...Pretty ridiculous spectacle going on.If the U.S. attacks Assad will be whooped if He attacks Israel.

I think Assad was talking about chemical weapons. Israel has these. No one has asked Syria to get rid of their nuclear weapons. He wouldn't ask Israel to get rid of theirs.



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 03:13 PM
link   

mbkennel

Strakha
He has the attention of the world and is using it to make a point about how US allies like Saudi Arabia, Israel and Turkey are treated differently than other nations in the region who are non-aligned or opposed to the US. These nations are no saints themselves and if you want to take on the issues of WMD and human rights in the region you need to have consistency on the issue regardless of who is the violator. That said, I don't think this is about WMD or human rights and if he does get rid of his WMD he will still be taken out just like Saddam and Gaddafi were once they got rid of theirs. I'm sure he knows this too.


When Israel uses tactical nuclear weapons to kill 100,000 of its own rebelling citizenry against its hereditary totalitarian dictator.....

then maybe it's even.

When has a country killed 100,00 of its rebelling citizenry recently? In Syria the military is killing Islamist terrorists after a civil war was orchestrated by Israel and the United States just as it was in Egypt and Libya and attempted in Iran. Civilians die in civil wars. The Syrian military doesn't have the need or the time to target civilians. It is counterproductive. Hereditary totalitarian dictator? Why is it that no one complains when Israel is referred to as the Jewish State of Israel by the Israeli leaders themselves? Would you call the United States the Caucasian State of America? "We a need a two state solution with a Palestinian state living side by side with a Jewish state of Israel in peace." Such a statement is open racism/fascism. Israel has killed more Palestinian civilians (on purpose) than Assad is capable of doing if he actually decided to do so.



posted on Sep, 13 2013 @ 03:26 PM
link   

SexNinja
reply to post by abdel
 


What part of the civil war starting with Assad murdering Syrian civilian protestors isn't registering? Obviously not evryone in Syria is al-Qaeda or extremist. Which is the very reason the revoloution kickstarted. There's many many reports by moderate Syrians pleading for American help. It's not like Iraq or Afhanistan, it would be like Bosnia Kosovo.


Man, you are a fool. The civil war didn't start with the murder of civilian protesters. The civil war was orchestrated by the US and Israel. They used the killing of protestors to start a so called "spontaneous uprising". They were following the Libya and Egypt model. It worked for them there. This included thousands of fake facebook accounts to organize the people into rebellion. They tried this in Iran after Ahmadinejad's legitimate reelection. It is not like Bosnia or the illegal bombing of Serbia. The moderate Syrians are pleading for American help, but the Al Qaida are better fighters and get better weapons. Islamists are entrenched in Syria. If Assad goes Al Qaida will take over immediately. The moderates don't stand a chance against the Islamists. You are right. It is not like Iraq or Afghanistan. In those countries civil war lasted a long time after the legitimate governments were murdered. In Syria the Islamists will take over real quick if the US murders the legitimate leader of the sovereign state of Syria.




top topics



 
32
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join