Syria, Russia, and Iran to provide alternative for war.

reply to post by CirqueDeTruth


Russia once again has got cold feet, they are frightened to stand up to bully Obama, chances are now Russia will be the next Obama puts his muslim brothers into.

Everyone except Obama seem to be doing what the POTUS is supposed to be doing.

Mr. Nobel Peace Prize jumped right to 'I want to bomb them'.
But right now democrats in Congress are coming up with an alternate plan that includes
diplomacy and discussions. That should have been done first. And now we have
Syria, Russia and Iran coming up with something to talk about ....

Everyone is doing what Obama should have done ...
He doesn't know what the hell he's doing.
It's dangerous.

reply to post by FlyersFan


Yes reckless for sure. I just saw part of an interview with Assad. Media of course spins it, 'Assad said he will fight back with all he has'. As General Scales said, 'of course he will, duh'. Assad has to go but the media love to make him sound confrontational when he is truly saying....we have to fight back - there are others in the region who will be trying to take advantage of this chaos. That doesn't mean he wouldn't for his own good too but there will be consequence for scattering more weapons and creating further chaos.

I agree, the chem. weapons issue is not going away, even without Assad, the US themselves say they cannot trust nor control all of the forces within Syria, i say let the Russians deal with this as the have offered(see link) Syria is their ally and should not be expected to negotiate with terrorists, this is not the US''s problem..yet nor should it ever be.
www.cbc.ca...

reply to post by Dianec


It would be a big first step to showing the world that the involved countries are paying attention and doing their job with some degree of diplomacy and flexibility. they should learn to be a bit more co-operative within reason to each other, and then to get the job done, move together and sort out NK, they are the oddest balls on the planet at this time....

reply to post by flipflop


I know. That North Korea thread really drove home what atrocities occur there. I don't know why those things are so easily put out of mind only to shock me again when it's brought to attention. I think it's so horrid it must be a coping thing - helpless to do anything. That's one intervention I would back in a heartbeat with or without China's cooperation. Why China hasn't been pressured to do more is likely because we don't have pictures of a kid getting punched in the face who looks like a skeleton. No motive either - would hurt relationships associated with big money, and they don't care about people if it actually has a monetary price tag for the rich.

Didn't intend for it to turn into a rant there. Just don't know how else to express my dismay.

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by Dianec

 

Why take it to the last hour? WHY have they been involved with the Bloodshed?

Iran has troops on the ground in Syria.

Russia has supplied Assad the weapons.

Accountability? Yeah. They also have to held to the fire.

Yea and what about talk of war crimes.

Originally posted by Dianec
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

Yes reckless for sure. I just saw part of an interview with Assad. Media of course spins it, 'Assad said he will fight back with all he has'. As General Scales said, 'of course he will, duh'. Assad has to go but the media love to make him sound confrontational when he is truly saying....we have to fight back - there are others in the region who will be trying to take advantage of this chaos. That doesn't mean he wouldn't for his own good too but there will be consequence for scattering more weapons and creating further chaos.

It is very funny to hear Assad remonstrating about someone trying to take advantage of the chaos. That and creating chaos been his forte.

reply to post by Logarock


Yes it's hypocritical. He's one of the worst in society but unfortunately he and General Scales (ret US Army) are correct. Even if we dont want to hear him tell us this, others are doing so who are thinking objectively.

If experts were not also skeptical of what harm an attack could cause (one of the biggest arguments now), coupled with Assad potentially agreeing to remove himself from power it wouldnt mean anything. From him alone - nada. From experts all around the globe - it means something.

reply to post by Dianec


This is the same reasoning with which we have justified supporting dictators around the globe for years. As for Assad he has made much of the impetus for the civil unrest in his country possible as many of his same ilk have. All they are trying to do here is replace an old face with a fresh one. Naturally Iran will pull for a new candidate that will be Hezbollah friendly.

None the less if I were part of this work out, I would insist that Hezbollah would have to leave Lebanon and that Lebanon would be free from Syrian meddling from here on out.

reply to post by Logarock


Yes your right in questioning who wiill replace Assad. I also believe it will be more of the same. Especially since they have no idea how politicking works.

I'm not sure what attitude your saying has led to these dictators being in control. Listening to experts who understand strategy and what war causes? If we bomb him out someone is going to step in anyway. And we aren't even saying we're going to do this. We are saying to leave him in power and teach a lesson. Again - do it all the way or nothing. Or...let the tyrant remove himself and get the weapons secure. It doesn't mean it will make it better, and there is likely something in it for Russia and Iran but given our short term solutions it seems the best choice is to let Russia take the reigns in here. What do you propose as a better solution give the choices we have?

reply to post by Dianec


Leave the thing to a 3rd party nation or several under close UN supervision. If the shoe were on the other foot they would insist. As far as experts be sure there is disagreement on most facets of this problem.

Letting Russia supervise this would be a comedy for any number of reasons. And Iran......seriously.

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by Dianec

 

Leave the thing to a 3rd party nation or several under close UN supervision. If the shoe were on the other foot they would insist. As far as experts be sure there is disagreement on most facets of this problem.

Letting Russia supervise this would be a comedy for any number of reasons. And Iran......seriously.

It does seem safer to have an impartial 3rd party take care of this but it doesnt appear to be an option yet. I have suspicions of Russia/Iran motivation too - but IMO better option than the US doing it.

reply to post by Logarock

It is very funny to hear Assad remonstrating about someone trying to take advantage of the chaos. That and creating chaos been his forte.

All the chaos is to Russia's advantage.

Assume the gas pipeline deal between Iran-Iraq-Syria is the issue in the window.

Now focus on an energy company in Russia called Gazprom

Open Joint Stock Company Gazprom (Открытое Акционерное Общество «Газпром», OAO Gazprom Russian: ОАО «Газпром», IPA: [ɡɐsˈprom]) is the largest extractor of natural gas and one of the largest companies in the world. ....................

Gazprom's activities accounted for 8% of Russia's gross domestic product in 2011.

The company possesses subsidiaries in many various industry sectors, including finance, media and aviation. In addition, it controls a majority of stakes in various companies.

Delaying and stalling the Syria pipelines is to Russia's advantage.

Gazprom supplies much of Europe's gas.

The Syrian pipeline is competition.

There's trillions of dollars involved.

and just look at Gazprom's vested interests worldwide..

They even have an Israeli connection (N.T.V. Global Network (Israel) Ltd.)

And surprise !! They're big in the U.K. of all places !!

Gazprom UK Ltd (100%)- investment company
Gazprom Marketing and Trading Limited (GM&T) (100%) - energy trading
HydroWingas (25%) - gas trading
Interconnector (UK) Limited (10%) - operator of the Interconnector pipeline
Sibur International (100%) - petrochemicals
WINGAS Storage UK Ltd. (33%) - underground gas storage reconstruction[4]

Gazprom's stock trades on the London Stock Exchange too !!

And the U.S. OTC: GZPFY

Russian energy company Gazprom has several hundred subsidiaries and affiliated companies owned and controlled directly or indirectly. The subsidiaries and affiliated companies are listed by countries. The list is incomplete.

List of Gazprom subsidiaries

SOME of he 'Western' powers that be (including Saudi Arabia) *hate* it because it doesn't use the U.S. Dollar.


Gazprom website

Be interesting to see how the nobel prize winner justifies giving the Saudis their assistance now. Does he fold or go full on 'rogue state' in front of the whole world.

I never thought i'd live to see the day the president of Russia makes the US and UK administrations look both dishonest and incompetent.

Somebody send Kerry some big floppy shoes, red nose and a spinning tie. If your gonna be a clown may as well look the part. There are no face-palms adequate to repel embarrassment of this magnitude.

Update: Just saw the 'Regime Change' statement from Susan Rice. Rogue State it is.

Originally posted by Dianec
reply to post by Logarock

 

Yes your right in questioning who wiill replace Assad. I also believe it will be more of the same. Especially since they have no idea how politicking works.

I'm not sure what attitude your saying has led to these dictators being in control. Listening to experts who understand strategy and what war causes?

I am talking about the heavy handed approach to folks that "have no idea how politicking works". This sort of approach to nation building and regime support that assures that at some point civil and economic disparity creates a powder keg of discontent and fertile ground for revolutionary and extreme sorts to function with the support of the people. It breeds a class status based civil rights reality and economic social product to insure that power and influence are maintained at the expense of the people at large.

reply to post by xuenchen

SOME of the 'Western' powers that be (including Saudi Arabia) *hate* it because it doesn't use the U.S. Dollar.

Your theory falls apart here ...

from 2009

Gazprom’s planned $2 billion bond is the first by a Russian company in dollars since July and may pave the way for other companies to sell foreign debt.

Russia’s largest company already broke a nine-month stalemate on bond sales with its 500 million Swiss francs ($435 million) of notes this month. Gazprom’s new bonds would be the first from a Russian company in dollars since state-run pipeline operator OAO Transneft sold $1.65 billion of five- and 10-year debt on July 31, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

reply to post by xuenchen


So how does chaos help assure the money keeps flowing? Wouldn't it be that control of Syria or even being the one to take charge of reorganization would be a better situation for Russia. Your info does shed light on why Russia wants to quiet this all down but I still sense there is more. They must know who will be elected because anyone contrary to their purpose won't be let in.

I always saw the reason for Russia's need to do this as: one of last allies who is also a cash cow for weapons sales; their naval installation in Syria. With Iran: don't want more Israel alliance in their back yard. Now I can add one more to the list. Maybe the chaos has been funded by Russia to set things up for their takeover? It's too confussing at times. Just beginning to get a glimpse into the corruption in high places and how blind I have been.

PS: If we go forth regardless of offers it may be for some control of this natural gas - or something more sinister. Or just because we don't want Russia to have control. It appears Obama still intends to sell his stance today and tomorrow. Has bought up all kinds of air time with our money.

reply to post by talklikeapirat


But sales a mostly in Euros and Rubles.

Bond sales are for borrowing, not product sales.

Their sales are equal to hundreds of billions of dollars.

reply to post by sonnny1


Syria as a county and it's government are not an terror organisation, thus there are no bans on helping and selling weapons to Syria.

That is different with the torrorist groups which are backed by the west and sponsored with money from the saudi's to try to topple the syrian government.