Putin 'Blood On Hands Of Both Syria Sides' Don't Arm Syria "Organ Eating Rebels"

Russians are pretty clear about what their plans for Syria are. Putin stated that Russia will continue to supply weapons to Assad. But he raised a good question, Is it humanitarian to arm the heart eating rebels? I don't think so.


Putin warns West not to arm organ-eating Syrian rebels

"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."

He's talking about these people....

They should feed those rebels better.....they are starving.....

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.

LOL.

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.

reply to post by whatsecret


Putin is making more sense than our own elected officials! I have to wonder during John McCain's visit with the rebels, he didn't sit down and have a warm dinner plate of a beating heart. For him to come back and tell us we should be supporting these rebels shows his genuine love for war.

John, you need to retire and live off all the money you've taken from the American taxpayers as a career politician. 76 years-old and your still milking the American taxpayer.

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.

Can't believe they took that guys heart out and then stuck it in his mouth. What is wrong with people? Russia still isn't clear on what they will do now that the US has already gone against advisement and sent troops and arms to support rebels. He seems awfully calm but don't know the date of the speech.

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.

LOL.

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.

Nope. Russian will not defend Syria. It already has evacuated its little port they had their...speaking of which, one would think that a nation would do better to defend its interest, especially when military assets are on ground.
Russia as usual is all bark and no bite.
NOW!!! don't get me wrong, I don't actually like the fact the we are arming these people who eat the hearts of their enemies, then again with what assad put them through, I actually don't blame them, can you imagine what that man went through? I just had a newborn and if I somebody came in and start bombing and blasting and releasing chemical agents, raped my wife, grenaded my newborn, shot up my kids, YOU CAN BEAT I'LL SNAP AND FIND EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE AND EAT EACH AND EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEIR HEARTS OUT.
But to each its own.
I have started to notice a trend here, If the US backed assad, people on ATS would be, OMG!!11 help the FSA!!...but since we backed the FSA, people on ATS are, OMG!!11 help assad!!!
birds of a feather flock together.

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)

oh! my favorite Canadian!! come on, its not like its our weapons there gonna use, they most likely will be purchased over there and spread amongst the ranks. Can't have anybody dirtying up our M4s now....

Check out RT interview Putin..

Here's some of what he said..

Russian President Vladimir Putin talks NSA, Syria, Iran, Drones and Terrorism

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.

reply to post by whatsecret


Sooooo in other words, the US has been pulling the strings and beating the enemy in 5 moves at chess?
sweet

reply to post by Arnie123


Depends on which beer goggles you put on, the one with obl as Americas new buddy, international law a joke or a Govt defending it's nation in a war over a Syrian pipeline,It is not difficult to notice that the rebellion in Syria began to grow almost at the same time as the signing of a memorandum in Bushehr on June 25, 2011 on the construction of a new Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline.
www.voltairenet.org...
eerily similar to Libya
www.youtube.com...

reply to post by all2human

Like Pakistan, it all involves a flippin pipeline huh? tsk tsk...

reply to post by Arnie123


The West's gas supplying allies in the Persian Gulf weren't happy with it ,nor is the would-be number one gas transporter Turkey,because it would be out of the game .Imo the goal here is to bust Russia's gas monopoly in Europe; and unchain Turkey from its dependence on Iran's gas, allow Israel's energy resources to flow to Europe by land and to cause a crushing Blow to Russia and China, and obviously Syria,Iran and Iraq.

No one should be involved in Syria. Not Russia. Not the USA. Not the Saudis. Not the Egyptians. But unfortunately EVERYONE is taking sides and it's going to be a freak'n mess. I doubt it'll stay contained in that area. This situation makes me nervous.

reply to post by FlyersFan

Many are not aware that Russia and Syria have a standing defence treaty, as do Russia and China
See reference:
The treaty of amity and cooperation, containing 15 articles and signed between Syria and Russia on October 8,1980 just after Camp David Treaty that has been signed on March 26, 1979 is the highest level document which has been signed between Russia and Syria. According to the article 5 of said treaty the parties shall promptly contact each other.in case the peace and security of one of the parties has been threatened for the purpose of eliminating that threat and re-establish the peace. that treaty was a guarantee treaty for Syria. According to the secret protocol of the treaty Russia guaranteed to help Syria with all its power in case of an attack by Israel.
www.academia.edu...

reply to post by all2human


You know, it seems to me, that all of this money and arms could be directed to offing the most serious threats to the world. They live in big houses and are accompanied by large groups of armed people -

Just imagine - all over the world .......

Or, Jesus could come and save us little people.

Which is more likely?

I'm thinking Russia doesn't want Assad to survive either and they probably now have a grozny based militant group pushing for their slice of Syrian ownership.
They wont win if the Americans go in with the jets.

reply to post by Agit8dChop


But, who will definetely die? The little people? The people who had lives, and businesses, and houses, and families?

Which country is next? Turkey? US? Saudi Arabia?

reply to post by Happy1


All of this certainly sounds like a bunch of armed thugs, invading countries, and doing the most damage.

Who is financing this?

Look at Libya, Egypt.

Are they starting this in South America also? Look at Brazil.

World depopulation. Brought to you by TPTB, and the UN.

reply to post by Happy1

I don't think it matters..

If the USA doesn't win and gain control of Syria.. who's next wont matter. It will engulf everyone!