It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


So, Obama, you have 65 allies in your coalition hey?

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 04:30 AM
I just stumbled upon this interesting claim from Obama in the below video (at the beginning)

So, Obama, who are the 65 nations that you claim are aligned with you in Syria?

So I asked Wikipedia and it told me this

Main article: Military intervention against ISIL § International coalitions against ISIL
On 5 September, 15 September and 3 December 2014, different sets of countries came together to discuss concerted action against ISIL. Present at all three meetings were the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Canada, Turkey, Italy and Denmark.

The coalition of 5 September (10 countries) decided to support anti-ISIL forces in Iraq and Syria.[111]
A coalition of 3 December 2014 (59 countries) agreed on a many-sided strategy against ISIL, including cutting off ISIL’s financing and funding and exposing ISIL’s true nature.[112]

So. he has 10 nations helping him ruin Syria and the others who form the 59 member coalition are interested in sanctions only.

Spinning the truth much Obama?

edit on 14-10-2015 by markosity1973 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 04:48 AM
a reply to: markosity1973

Damn you're right, it's 66!!! So stupid...

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 04:52 AM
a reply to: Peeple

He's claiming that 65 nations are supporting his efforts in Syria. 65 nations support financial sanctions against ISIS. There are only 10 who actively support his military role.

Rather interesting since he is the one who helped arm them, don't you think?

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 05:03 AM
a reply to: markosity1973

Not true, there are f.e. germanischen weapons and military Trainers, French etc.

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 05:14 AM

lic of Albania


Sultanate of Oman


Republic of Iceland


United States of America

There are Obama's 65 nations (see source for complete list)

And here is what they say about fighting in Syria

. Participants noted with growing concern the suffering of the Syrian people. They urged all Syrian parties to the conflict to respect international humanitarian law and to facilitate humanitarian access to those in need, in accordance with UN Security Council resolutions 2139 and 2165. They took note of the recent UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry’s report, Rule of Terror: Living under ISIS in Syria, which documents atrocities including "war crimes and crimes against humanity" being committed by ISIL/Daesh against the civilian population in Syria. Participants further confirmed their commitment to supporting the Syrian people in their efforts to confront ISIL/Daesh, and to a political transition process based on the principles of the Geneva Communiqué. They also welcomed UN Special Envoy Staffan De Mistura’s efforts towards a political process. A number of participants specifically noted the need for effective ground forces to ultimately defeat ISIL/Daesh, and, in this regard, commended the actions of the moderate opposition forces fighting against ISIL/Daesh in Syria. These participants also called for increased support to these moderate opposition forces, which are fighting on multiple fronts against ISIL/Daesh, Al Nusrah Front, and the Syrian regime.


Not everyone agrees that ground forces and military action is the way forward. Only 'a number' support the arming of rebel groups.

Not everything is as Obama claims.

Everyone wants ISIS gone, no brainer there, but for Obama to claim that 65 nations support his actions over there is a blatant lie.
edit on 14-10-2015 by markosity1973 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 05:26 AM
a reply to: markosity1973

but for Obama to claim that 65 nations support his actions over there is a blatant lie.

Well, not so much a lie as it is a blending of propaganda with facts: US Military totalitarian authority exists by way of US military bases existing in 63 countries. There is US military personnel in over 150 countries.

So, it's an assumed relationship that "if I have bases in your country, then by proxy, your country supports my actions militarily in any given global theatre of war".

One mans lie is another mans false truth.

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 05:35 AM
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Yep and that is the subtlety of the beast.

'Because you won't oppose me, you agree with me' is the assumption being made here.

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 05:38 AM
a reply to: markosity1973

I think this is what Russia and Iran and many others are thinking and working towards .

As far as ‘the East’s role as well as its position is concerned, on the one hand, Russian air-strikes have IS on the run, on the other hand, Iran is also being gradually brought into a mediator’s position to end the conflict. Suddenly, ‘the West’ seems to have ‘discovered’ the potential role Iran can play in this behalf.

While Iran was not even close to playing a mediator’s role in the UN-sponsored Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 conferences held in 2012 and 2014 respectively to find a peaceful resolution of the crisis in Syria, the Iran-nuke deal seems to have enhanced its international prestige as it has now been “encouraged” by the UN Secretary General to convince Assad to bring a peaceful resolution to end the war.

Francois Nicoullaud, France’s former ambassador to Tehran, was also reported to have said that Iran’s role in a diplomatic solution for Syria was no longer disputed.

“The Russians are bombing, but we now need to occupy the land and the Iranians will play a valuable role,” he said, indicating the nuclear deal had been a catalyst.

“Iran as a key player in resolving the Syrian crisis is clear in the minds of everyone. The Syrian army is out of breath,” he further added.

While Assad and his army may tend to disagree with Francois’s assumption about the Syrian Army’s position as it has already launched a fresh-ground attack against IS and gained significant success, his remarks also clearly fail to appreciate fully Iran’s own interests in Syria and how the Islamic Republic’s interests put it, as one of the leading countries, in the camp that opposes ‘the West.’

A military solution of Syrian crisis, said Iran’s foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif in his last Monday meeting with Ban Ki-moon, is out of question. It needs to be solved through a political settlement. His four-point peace formula, therefore, includes a national unity government, ceasefire, anti-terrorism effort and constitutional reform.

Notwithstanding Zarif’s formula for peace, it must be taken into full consideration that Iran, just like Russia, is not ready to agree to any proposal that includes a minus-Assad clause. With Russia and Syrian army reportedly making huge strides against IS, the West’s, as also Saudi Arabia and Turkey’s, insistence on a minus-Assad formula seems to be losing its ground.

The axix of evil do not want Asaud to have any part other then stepping down . The proxy war will keep loosing ground with Russia providing the air cover .Once Turkey is sidelined the IS pockets will be cut off and will end . I think once that is done ,Russia will move towards Iraq and help them . Just how that will be worked out with the west is anyone's guess at this point but I suspect having Syria snatched away from the IS campaign ,Iraq has little to offer in the bigger plan for the oil and gas into Europe . imo

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 05:45 AM
a reply to: the2ofusr1

I just posted this in another thread.

I think you might be correct - Moscow is working with Iran and Iran has been supplying arms to Assad all since the start.

Let's see what Putin says on Assad after the war is over then,,,,,

Putin and Obama have the same end plan - Assad needs to go. The difference is that Russia sees supporting the Syrian army whom just happens to be controlled by Assad at this point needs to be supported so that when ISIS is defeated Syria stands a chance of an orderly transition to a new government,

Obama on the other hand wants to blow the crap out of the government and leave a nasty power vacuum, Just like in Libya, and Afghanistan and Iraq......

So support the current govt then bye bye Assad with reforms after ISIS, or blow the whole country up, destroy the government and all social infrastructure in the hopes that maybe this time an Islamic militant group will not arise and make life 100 times worse for the average citizen.

Maybe Putin is not such a bad bet after all............

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 06:41 AM
a reply to: markosity1973

Think Jesuit type of operations . We know that even the US has it's suspects inside the deep state .Putin has worked to sideline these people within his own country . I feel that Syria also had these types of operatives .We sometimes know full well and express it in condemnation of whole countries because of these dirty covert operations coming from such countries . I am not sure how much we actually appreciate that even electing someone like a JFK or a Putin how much they can bring about what we the people want . So maybe Obama may actually be a good guy ,but because of all the actors working to control the situations there becomes a conflict .

This whole IS / moderate rebel thing is bringing to light those covert operations that even Obama has little power to control .Putin is a master and has some very good people he is working with . I am quite confident that he above anyone at this point and time has the best chance to bring this boiling pot to a simmer ..

top topics


log in