Syria: Nato Defends Military Strikes Option

reply to post by Lady_Tuatha


What's going on with this thread? I had to attempt 3 times to add something to and earlier post and I just saw someone try to post a video , it flashed on then just disappeared , did not leave a trace, so whats happening?

Wrabbit2000
just logic alone. ( ?? )

I hear ya but...

When we start hearing and reading reports of possible large scale or even medium scale usage and spread then we are talking about logistics that only a trained force could deploy as accurately as this possibly was. No rebel force could have carried out what is being discussed.

There is just too much infighting amongst themselves.

'Logic alone' eh.

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

To be honest, Slayer? I'm still getting my mind around the weak proof being offered that it was Syrians who did it. Trajectory of shells no one actually saw fly and some dispute whether the remains even had Sarin on them...make for more questions than answers. Sarin WAS used...no question on that, it seems. By whom, how much and for what purpose (since nothing tactical is evident for motive)

I don't try to ignore anything here..but that's still the whole point. There is still 100%, absolutely NO logic or beneficial reason for Assad to have done it. It was entirely and without exception a benefit to the Rebels. Start to finish and slam dunk.

If Assad's people fired them? They didn't even hit or kill anyone worth the effort for a conventional attack, let alone a world changing attack with taboo weapons. Just ..no sense at all. It's easier to believe the Rebels fired from positions just off the fence line of military locations. As crazy as it sounds? It makes more sense than the official version by basic logic...just logic alone. ( ?? )

It was and has remained beneficial to Assad try to stall a rebel build ups with small scale gas attacks. We have seen a few such attacks at the same time as other rebel build ups this time he just got caught. The rebels do not have these capabilities yet. And if they did they would not have wasted them on hitting a target that maybe the West would discover they would hit a medical camp with a foreign NGOs. Of course even they know the West would most likely toss a few missles at Assad and that the balance of power would not shift anyway. So they would be wasting an asset they could use on Assad himself. Now maybe you could claim the rebels created a false target for Assad creating a build up that was not as big as they made it seem to get him to act again because we know the Assads forces were talking about the build up and what should be done about.

reply to post by SLAYER69


I'll say it's an interesting thing to watch. It's also hard not to recall at least a fair % of the FSA really IS made up of the Officer and Enlisted corps of Assad's professional military...not farmers or taxi drivers before the fighting, pressed into service as a civilian fighter.

I think in this war, as much or perhaps even more than most in recent memory? Truth was definitely the first casualty of the fighting. It died way back in the peaceful protests in Homs and nothing better came to replace it's loss, apparently.

I think it makes the whole thing ...obvious if taken at face value, yet complex beyond reason if not. Who knows what precisely to believe when both sides have backing from one of the two most accomplished centers of propaganda in recent human history. (Us and the Russians)

reply to post by MrSpad


I don't get how becoming a world war criminal benefits him...

You'll lose me every time on that one.

Pinkorchid
reply to post by Lady_Tuatha

 

What's going on with this thread? I had to attempt 3 times to add something to and earlier post and I just saw someone try to post a video , it flashed on then just disappeared , did not leave a trace, so whats happening?

edit on 18-9-2013 by Pinkorchid because: (no reason given)

I dont know but Sky news changed the headline from the original headline they had and which I used of 'Syria - Gas Attack Evidence Implicates Rebels', then the title of the thread changed, not sure if it automatically updated because the source headline changed or if a mod changed it to match.

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by MrSpad

 

I don't get how becoming a world war criminal benefits him...

You'll lose me every time on that one.

This is the same guy who decided to shoot unarmed protestors instead of stepping down. He is already a war crimminal and when your globaly hated and most of your country wants your head on a pike using a weapon that most of the world considers wrong is not that big of a deal. The war has gone on for 2 years. Massacres have happened, fighting has spilled over the border, Turkey had a plane shot down etc. and nobody in world did anything beyond talk. Knowing the US is not going to put boots on the ground after the last two wars the most your going to face is some airstrikes. Honestly Assad did not have much to lose. The Russians on the other hand did. And that is why they are taking away his weapons.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Well there's always a little help from your friends:-

WASHINGTON -- Eric Harroun, a 30-year-old former U.S. soldier, has been charged by federal authorities in Virginia with conspiring to use a rocket propelled grenade while fighting with the al-Nusrah Front in Syria. Harroun has posted YouTube videos and Facebook posts that showed him working alongside the group, which is commonly referred to as "al Qaeda in Iraq."

www.huffingtonpost.com...

And :-

The CIA has been delivering light machine guns and other small arms to Syrian rebels for several weeks, following President Barack Obama's decision to arm the rebels.

www.cbsnews.com...

Do you think the CIA didn't teach them "How To Use", those weapons?

reply to post by MrSpad


There's quite a bit more history than that:-

The growing desire to distribute even more killing machines, while deducting the bill from the victims’ resources, reached a new peak on Monday as the warmongers gathered in Brussels, aiming to lift the EU arms embargo on the pretext that the Syrian rebels are the ‘moderate opposition’ and this would instigate a resolution to the proxy-war in Syria.

Of course this profit-driven, inefficacious foreign policy isn’t new to us. The Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, which lasted from 1979 to 1989, prompted the provision of military capabilities to the Mujahideen rebels throughout the decade of war. In fact, President Reagan addressed the Mujahideen rebels as ‘freedom fighters’ on numerous occasions. Former CIA director Robert Gates cited in his memoirs that military capability assistance to the Mujahideen rebels started as early as June 1979. While President Carter’s national security adviser admitted in an interview in 1998 that supporting Mujahideen rebels militarily began even before the Soviet invasion.

Again the American shall we say special Government , sticking its nose in again.


kurdistantribune.com...

reply to post by Pinkorchid


No offense but every time there is any type of conflict in the Middle East you'd be extremely hard pressed not to find RPGs and/or AK-47s and now AK-74s. I'd also equally be surprised if many people who choose to fight didn't already know how to use said weapons since they are so prolific in the region. Chemical weapons on the other hand are a bit harder to come by

NO?

As far as the 'Former' US Soldier. Once he has left the service how he chooses to throw his life away is completely up to him...

Pinkorchid
Again the American shall we say special Government , sticking its nose in again.

One decade the US were the good guys helping the poor mujaheddin fight off the Evil Atheistic Soviet infidels and now in this present decade we are the 'Great Satan'

Meh, whats in a name?

reply to post by MrSpad


I think the main disagreement is a basic one. You and others see Assad and the Rebels in some evenly split fight to the death for control of Syria. I recall reading the notices for calls to action to depose and remove Assad ....just about 2 YEARS ago now and as the first minor protests were sparking in Homs. CNN was reporting protests as such a coincidence to Tunisia and Egypt ...while the People's Liberation Front web properties and others not so well known, were putting out the 5-Alarm call for anyone who could, to join them in Syria and bring the 'Arab Spring' to Damascus.

This was LONG before any massacres, atrocities or use of Chemical weapons. Who started this thing is self evident by the words of the parties involved. Their own words. Assad has been fighting a defensive action to stay alive since Day 1.

As the recent incident with Chemicals showed ..and seems lost on everyone calling Assad such an evil guy. IF he were so inclined, the Rebels are not ghosts. Their main areas of operation and centers of control are known and they have no defense but harsh language against Missiles. Assad could end the whole war in a matter of days...if METHOD didn't matter to him.

Now, since this war began? I have only seen ONE side I absolutely KNOW has Sarin, and Sarin specifically, use it AND be caught with more OF it in neighboring nations. That's the Rebels. Assad could have deep sixed that crap (Sarin) into storage long ago, where it sits today for all we know. It's damn sure one of the weakest weapons HE has.....despite being one of the most powerful the Rebels could imagine.

So why use a bunch of Sarin....kill absolutely no one who really matters, achieving nothing militarily? Again, it's a Super-Weapon to the Rebels. They have nothing better. It's a 'meh..' kinda thing to Assad, as he DOES have FAR worse than that he could use ..and WOULD ..if he was so inclined. The fact he doesn't, is the single best argument to why this may not have been him and I am not 100% sold, even now.

After all, we point to things like trajectory as proof. Number of rounds fired and such. Well.. If it were a professionally handled set up to withstand general scrutiny from the world? Just what would we expect to see? Some Pinto turned into a cheap chemical VBIED? It would look convincing. VERY convincing. In fact, logic may be the only thing an outsider sees that wouldn't fit for such a set up.

Just a thought.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Its all about , who's paying what how and where for some whoring military types, not about ethics or thousands dying , its how much profit can we make on this war. So they sell themselves to the highest bidder.

Pinkorchid
Its all about , who's paying what how and where for some whoring military types, not about ethics or thousands dying , its how much profit can we make on this war. So they sell themselves to the highest bidder.

Fair enough

Now just how many millions have been made off of and killed from Russian/Chinese RPGs, AK-47s, AK-74s Russian tanks, BMPs, helicopters boots, belt buckles and socks eh?

Not to mention SCUD missiles, did the sale of Russian S-300s ever go through? AND...

This somehow lessons the fact that Russia was also supplying weapons to Syria while publicly calling for all Nations to stop fueling the Syrian situation?

First off, let me say that I think all parties should stop supplying either side and let the Syrians themselves deal with their internal problems. Second, I'm not denying the West has been party to supplying the Rebels, But, having said that, It is blatantly obvious Russia has been hypocritical in this situation.

Russia Rejects U.S. Allegations on Arms Deliveries to Syria

“We are completing right now the implementation of contracts that were signed and paid for a long time ago,” Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said after talks in the Iranian capital of Tehran. “All these contracts concern exclusively anti-aircraft defense.”

“We are not delivering to Syria, or anywhere else, items that could be used against peaceful demonstrators,” Lavrov went on. “In this we differ from the United States, which regularly delivers riot control equipment to the region, including a recent delivery to a Persian Gulf country. But for some reason the Americans consider this to be fine."

reply to post by SLAYER69

First off, let me say that I think all parties should stop supplying either side and let the Syrians themselves deal with their internal problems. Second, I'm not denying the West has been party to supplying the Rebels, But, having said that, It is blatantly obvious Russia has been hypocritical in this situation.

We have reached consensus , with out a shot being fired

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by MrSpad

 

I think the main disagreement is a basic one. You and others see Assad and the Rebels in some evenly split fight to the death for control of Syria. I recall reading the notices for calls to action to depose and remove Assad ....just about 2 YEARS ago now and as the first minor protests were sparking in Homs. CNN was reporting protests as such a coincidence to Tunisia and Egypt ...while the People's Liberation Front web properties and others not so well known, were putting out the 5-Alarm call for anyone who could, to join them in Syria and bring the 'Arab Spring' to Damascus.

This was LONG before any massacres, atrocities or use of Chemical weapons. Who started this thing is self evident by the words of the parties involved. Their own words. Assad has been fighting a defensive action to stay alive since Day 1.

As the recent incident with Chemicals showed ..and seems lost on everyone calling Assad such an evil guy. IF he were so inclined, the Rebels are not ghosts. Their main areas of operation and centers of control are known and they have no defense but harsh language against Missiles. Assad could end the whole war in a matter of days...if METHOD didn't matter to him.

Now, since this war began? I have only seen ONE side I absolutely KNOW has Sarin, and Sarin specifically, use it AND be caught with more OF it in neighboring nations. That's the Rebels. Assad could have deep sixed that crap (Sarin) into storage long ago, where it sits today for all we know. It's damn sure one of the weakest weapons HE has.....despite being one of the most powerful the Rebels could imagine.

So why use a bunch of Sarin....kill absolutely no one who really matters, achieving nothing militarily? Again, it's a Super-Weapon to the Rebels. They have nothing better. It's a 'meh..' kinda thing to Assad, as he DOES have FAR worse than that he could use ..and WOULD ..if he was so inclined. The fact he doesn't, is the single best argument to why this may not have been him and I am not 100% sold, even now.

After all, we point to things like trajectory as proof. Number of rounds fired and such. Well.. If it were a professionally handled set up to withstand general scrutiny from the world? Just what would we expect to see? Some Pinto turned into a cheap chemical VBIED? It would look convincing. VERY convincing. In fact, logic may be the only thing an outsider sees that wouldn't fit for such a set up.

Just a thought.

Assad started off on the offensive in this war. He had an Army of over 200K with an additional 200K in reserve. If this had been about taking out a few armed rebels it would have been over in a week. Instead it was about turning those troops on unarmed people and the military revolted. As for the use of chemical weapons no doubt if the Russian thought for a second that it was the rebels we would have no deal, they would stall for more evidence. As it is the Russians have made a move to make sure it does not happen again and ruin their nice little profit. As for Assad using gas on rebel HQs that would not be a good use of such a weapon. First you raise the odds on getting caught second the rebels do not have and great command and control as it is. You would want to hit troop concentartions and the only time you going to find that is when the rebels are planning and offensive just as they were. The rebels using gas on themselves in the hope that the west who has done everything possible to stay out of the conflict might fire a few missles makes no logical sense.

reply to post by MrSpad


We'll agree to disagree. (Or I will, anyway) You and I have apparently watched the same event. We've both watched it from the start, by what you're saying and before the media even knew it was worth reporting on at all. Yet, we've seen two radically different things in perception. I can't honestly work my mind around to understanding where a couple of your positions even start from, let alone how they get to what you present. So... Better to leave off here I suppose.

Time will tell, eventually, what happened here. Until then?