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.
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.
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
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
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.
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
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)