Syria: Not as important as Libya.

**Butterfly** · 07-12-2011, 06:22 PM

Originally Posted by OhOh

if you cant accept that there will always be differing opinions on a subject, from whatever source, you are the one with blinkers on.

he is a right wing fascist, what else do you expect ? if it was Germany in 1933, he would be part of the young SS, like a good little obedient tool

**OhOh** · 07-12-2011, 06:23 PM

The difference between him and western leaders is that when he "appears" many supporters cheer his name and thoughts.

Whereas when "western" leaders appear they sanitise the air space, to ensure their safety, travel in heavily armed convoys, to ensure their safety, meet behind a wall of razor wire, to ensure their safety or occasionally stand on a stage in the middle of cheering grunts to reap their applause.

**harrybarracuda** · 07-12-2011, 06:51 PM

Originally Posted by OhOh

We are not going to agree on this issue harry. I hope you are satisfied when another illegal war ensues and 100,000 of innocent civilians get slaughtered by the crusader coalition, all in the name of humanitarian aid.

if you cant accept that there will always be differing opinions on a subject, from whatever source, you are the one with blinkers on.

From whom did you copy this "crusader coalition" cliche? Peter Tatchell?

Do you not realise that the Crusades were wars on MUSLIMS, initially to liberate access to Jerusalem?

In this case, it's about SAVING the muslims. Generally speaking Libya is now peaceful, it's stabilising and it's oil revenues are already on the up, allowing it to form and operate a government. The only real risk to Libya is another power grab from another group of megalomaniacs, as has happened in Egypt.

If you stopped spouting inappropriate, glib catchphrases, maybe you'd make some sense.

There is plenty of evidence tangible and otherwise, to show Assad's troops murdering civilians and we know he is trying to cover it up by banning the international media.

I would really like to hear why you think NATO would even consider getting involved in a Syrian civil war? It would seem Assad is doing a perfectly good job of pissing off all of his peers on his own.

From reports inside the country, it is quite obvious that most of the armed opposition are former Syrian military, and they are probably receiving a lot of weapons and support from the GCC and Turkey, as I stated earlier.

Although this mirrors the removal of the murderous Libyan lunatic, this will probably all end up getting handled by Syria's neighbours. They need no motivation or support from NATO or anyone else.

Assad is killing Sunnis - that's enough.

The only downside is how will Syria, Iran and Hezbollah try and spin it when the end draws near? Probably a few big attacks on Israel to provoke a response and try and draw their "muslim brothers" into the conflict, which is ironic since the Shi'a spend most of their time telling other sects that they aren't "proper muslims".

But what about Russia, I hear you say?

Well I think this might just speak for relations between the Russians and the Sunni at the moment. I don't think Russia wants to get caught firing on Sunnis, militia or otherwise. That would cost them a shitload of business, certainly a lot more than they get out of Syria.

First Published: 2011-12-06

Russia downgrades ties with Qatar after attack on diplomats

Tensions simmer between Doha, Moscow as Russia downgrades ties, plans to recall ambassador once his treatment is completed.

Middle East Online

Waiting for official apology

MOSCOW - Russia is downgrading its relations with the Gulf state of Qatar following an airport attack on its ambassador, the foreign ministry said on Monday.

¬Ambassador Vladimir Titorenko suffered an assault at Doha Airport on November 29, on his return from a mission to Jordan. While passing through customs control he was attacked by customs security, who made an attempt to confiscate his diplomatic pouch.

Titorenko resisted and was beaten, together with two other Russian diplomats who were there to welcome the ambassador.

"As a result of their aggressive behaviour, the Qatar side's actions damaged the ambassador's health," the ministry said.

Russia demanded an official apology from the Arab state for the November 29 incident, noting that senior Doha officials had been "informed about the decision to downgrade relations with Qatar."

The statement added that the ambassador would be recalled to Russia "once he completes treatment".

Earlier, the ambassador told RIA Novosti that at first he had been hoping the incident had occurred due to the incompetence of customs and security officers, who simply were not familiar with the Vienna Convention that allows diplomats to bring in diplomatic mail without having it x-rayed.

On top of that, the Russian diplomatic mission in Qatar has specially-issued permission not to subject its diplomatic mail to x-ray, but customs officers disregarded this exemption.

Moscow’s relations with Doha became somewhat strained in the course of the Arab Spring gripping Middle Eastern and North African countries. The previous week, Russia officially criticized Qatar for its role in the Libyan uprising, which violated the arms embargo imposed on the country by the UN Security Council.

“We know how the arms embargo was applied in Libya. The opposition was receiving arms, with such countries as France and Qatar publicly stating that they have supplied those arms,” said Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at a press conference in Moscow on the same day Titorenko was attacked at Doha Airport.

An unnamed Russian diplomat gave comments to RIA Novosti, linking the incident with the Russian position on the unrest in Syria.

Qatar has been consistently supporting sanctions against Syrian regime of President Bashar al-Assad, whereas Russia is acting against sanctioning Syria on all diplomatic levels, including the UN Security Council.

The source said Titorenko had been actively explaining the Russian position at press conferences and in articles he has written exposing the nature of the conflict in Syria. Thus, the Russian ambassador’s activity displeased certain figures and led to the attack, concludes the source.

¬The incident with the Russian diplomat may be viewed as an extension of the “aggressive stance” Qatar has adopted after it became the rotational head of the Arab League, says James Corbett, the editor of the independent news website corbettreport.com.

“It must have been done intentionally,” Corbett said. “This is a major diplomatic incident not to be smoothed over easily. One can imagine this might have a lasting impact on the relations between the two countries.”

Washington may be involved in shaping Qatar’s policy, believes the editor. The US interest in the region is $60-70 billion worth of investments in the Qatari energy industry.

“The US is probably playing its diplomatic angle to put pressure on Qatar to wield its power in the Arab League in a way it is beneficial to the Anglo-American interests,” remarks Corbett.

**OhOh** · 07-12-2011, 07:30 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Generally speaking Libya is now peaceful

According to some reports, some show ongoing violence.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

evidence tangible and otherwise

We all ready disagree on the "evidence" which purports to support both sides.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

NATO would even consider getting involved in a Syrian civil war

NATO, in the form of Turkey, is already involved - on the ground TODAY. The other NATO forces tried to impose a "no fly zone" for "humanitarian reasons" in the UN.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

most of the armed opposition are former Syrian military

Allegedly.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

getting handled by Syria's neighbours. They need no motivation or support from NATO or anyone else

Syria's neighbours include Iraq, currently an occupied country - by a NATO force, Turkey, a NATO country, currently providing arms, training and secure bases for mecenary forces, Israel, funded and aligned with NATO and lebanon, currently being armed, trained and safe haven for the ME despots you so kindly admire/ are being paid by in your employment.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

While passing through customs control he was attacked by customs security, who made an attempt to confiscate his diplomatic pouch.

Titorenko resisted and was beaten, together with two other Russian diplomats who were there to welcome the ambassador.

Having myself lived and worked in the ME I am aware of the "wonderful" treatment handed out to the ex-pats who are "employed" by the locals to ensure the oil keeps flowing.

**harrybarracuda** · 07-12-2011, 07:43 PM

According to some reports, some show ongoing violence.

For sure there is still some armed conflict between tribes jockeying for position. That will subside as the groups involved are brought into government.

We all ready disagree on the "evidence" which purports to support both sides.

I haven't seen any evidence to support your claims that "armed gangs" are "terrorising the country". And if they are, I would have thought you would support the idea of humanitarian zones where innocent civilians could be protected? Or would you only allow them if protected by Syrian troops?

NATO, in the form of Turkey, is already involved - on the ground TODAY. The other NATO forces tried to impose a "no fly zone" for "humanitarian reasons" in the UN.

Can you provide a link to this? Because if anyone imposes a No-Fly zone it will be the Arab league.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

most of the armed opposition are former Syrian military

Allegedly.

According to people on the ground, yes. But if in fact they are simply "armed gangs", then let the world's reporters in there and the truth will come out? (Which is why Assad will never let it happen).

Syria's neighbours include Iraq, currently an occupied country - by a NATO force, Turkey, a NATO country, currently providing arms, training and secure bases for mecenary forces, Israel, funded and aligned with NATO and lebanon, currently being armed, trained and safe haven for the ME despots you so kindly admire/ are being paid by in your employment.

Ah so the truth is coming out. I work for despots, but Gaddafi and Assad are the good guys, eh?

Having myself lived and worked in the ME I am aware of the "wonderful" treatment handed out to the ex-pats who are "employed" by the locals to ensure the oil keeps flowing.

[/QUOTE]

Not quite sure what your quote marks are for in this paragraph. I've never had a problem with customs (OK they nicked some dodgy DVDs off me once, fair cop).

And "employed"? Is that different to the word 'employed'?

**harrybarracuda** · 07-12-2011, 07:52 PM

Bit more background on Russia's military (and financial) interests:

During the Soviet period, Syria ran up a debt to Moscow for arms of more than $13 billion. In 2005, $10 billion of that was written off on the condition that Damascus kept buying new arms from Moscow. The current arms order-book is generally reported as worth about $3.5 billion. With enemies of long-standing on each one of Syria's land borders, it is perfectly obvious that Syria must now depend on the sea for its lifeline. It is obvious too that the Kremlin intends to remind everyone that it should stay open.

Deliveries from Russia include the Bastion coastal missile system equipped with the Yakhont supersonic cruise missile for attacking ships as large as aircraft carriers. The range of the Yakhont is 300 kilometers. On Monday, Interfax quoted an unidentified military source in Moscow as saying 72 had been delivered to Damascus.
According to a presentation a year ago by Igor Korotchenko, editor of National Defense magazine in Moscow, one of the operational purposes of the Bastion system is to protect the Russian squadron at Tartus, the base itself, and the coastline 300 kilometers to north and south - that's the entire Syrian waterfront. Russia's naval commander Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky said in said in August of 2010 that by 2012, the Tartus naval base will be able to accommodate cruisers and aircraft carriers for as long as the Kremlin wants to leave them there.

According to Korotchenko, "To speak plainly, modern shipborne air defenses cannot intercept such missiles." To speak even more plainly, Syria under Assad isn't Libya under Gaddafi or Yugoslavia under Slobodan Milosevic.

Among the major Russia-Syria arms contracts already delivered are 36 Panzir-1S air defense missile systems and upgrades of the Syrian Army T-72 tanks. Still to come are 24 MiG-29M/M2 fighters and 8 battalions of Buk M2E air defense systems. This makes Syria the front-line for an inventory of Russia-made weapons on which Russia itself depends for defense. A challenge to these arms in Syria would have been an indirect threat to the Russian defense establishment; now with the Tartus deployment, the threat is direct and strategic.

**harrybarracuda** · 07-12-2011, 07:58 PM

And China's rather interesting take on events:

Dark clouds of war shrouding Syria
English.news.cn 2011-11-28 16:43:46 FeedbackPrintRSS

Dark clouds of war shrouding Syria
The Arab League (AL) decided Sunday to impose sanctions against Syria, as the country failed to sign a protocol before the deadline of Friday over the visit of an AL observer mission. (Xinhua/Yin Bogu)

By Li Hongmei

BEIJING, Nov. 28 (Xinhuanet) -- In response to the incumbent president Bashar al-Assad’s failure to halt a violent crackdown on eight-months of unrest against his rule, and in an unprecedented move against an Arab nation, the Arab League has voted to impose economic sanctions on Syria.

On Sunday, Damascus slammed the sanctions as a betrayal of Arab solidarity and insisted a foreign conspiracy was behind the revolt, all but alluding to more bloodshed could follow.

This has not only sent thousands of pro-government Syrians to street rallying against the sanctions which are interpreted as the clearest sign to leave Syria in the cold and more vulnerable to the outside assault, but has raised fears of civil war -- a worst-case scenario in a country that is a geographical and political keystone in the heart of the Middle East.

Syria borders five countries with whom it shares religious and ethnic minorities. And its web of allegiances extends to Lebanon's powerful Hezbollah movement and Iran's Shiite theocracy. Chaos in Syria could send unsettling ripples across the region.

As a latest sign of Western intervention, the nuclear aircraft-carrier USS George HW Bush has reportedly anchored off Syria. The ship is capable of carrying up to 70 aircraft, including 48 attack jets. The aircraft-carrier is escorted by a group of vessels which contains a destroyer.

As the deadline set by Arab league to allow observers into the country meets with no response from Damascus, the possibility of a direct military intervention in Syria seems to be augmented.

In this connection, experts are giving both a pessimistic and comparatively moderate prospect of the latest developments near the Syrian sea border. Many believe the U.S. redeployment of its carrier from the Persian Gulf to the Syrian shores is part of preparations for a military operation against Syria.

After all, these activities are reminiscent of a similar initiative when a group of NATO vessels were concentrated near Libya. Washington wants to collect a maximum dividend from the series of revolutions in the Middle East and North Africa. With this aim in mind, Washington is likely to start a military intervention even without UN approval.

But some observers also pointed out the reinforcement of the US aircraft-carrier fleet in the Mediterranean is more likely to be a bluff. Washington is building up muscle in the region, which is something of a strong political intimidation, but far from signaling an imminent military pressure, as the moderate observers analyzed.

Meanwhile, whipping-up tension around Syria is taking place along different lines as well. The day before The George Bush was redeployed near the Syrian coastline, the Al-Arabiya Saudi TV channel reported that three Russian Navy ships entered Syrian territorial waters, although the information is as yet to be confirmed by the Russian Defense Ministry.

However, Russia has voiced its opposition to any move to target Syria as the next Libya, say, foreign military interventions into the country, with whom Russia would consistently kept arms deals with. There is a Russian naval base in the Syrian port of Tartus, which is the only Russian military base abroad at present.

It is also reported that, due to increasing tensions in the eastern Mediterranean, Russia has sent its "Admiral Kuznetsov", the only aircraft carrier on active duty, and it is now on the way to the burning ocean zone off Syria. This also gives rise to some speculations that the possible encounter between USS George HW Bush and Russia’s Admiral Kuznetsov off the Syrian shores could finally ignite the tinderbox, threatening the already brittle tranquility in the region.

It is still a mooted point whether Russia could look back from the plow and come to a halt at the critical juncture.

America and Turkey are urging their citizens to leave Syria. The US released a statement last week urging its citizens to “depart immediately while commercial transportation is available.”

France is urging the creation of a secure zone to protect civilians “that would allow aid groups and observers into Syria” and it is seeking support from the US, UN and the Arab League. The imposition of a no-fly zone over Syria by the Arab League with US logistical support, is also being discussed, according to the Jordan-based Al Bawaba news website. A strong sense of déjà vu prevails, with the specter of a Libyan scenario repeating itself.

Rumors about the no-fly zone over Syria came in the wake of the UN resolution last Tuesday which condemned human rights abuses by the Syrian regime.

The Sarkozy administration, having reaped a string of “firsts” in Libya attack, has once again become the first Western nation to suggest an international intervention on the ground in Syria with its calls for a "secured zone to protect civilians", and first to endorse the exiled opposition Syrian National Council.

With Libya now in the rearview mirror, Syria appears to be the next stop. There is already criticism saying the “secure zone” proposal is a French fig leaf, and it could be a pretext for intervention, in an echo of the NATO bombing campaign in Libya. It is might as well taken as an attempt by France to regain some prestige on the international arena.

On this analysis, things would possibly turn out to be that: Bashar al-Assad is irreversibly to go, and a tacit agreement involving all the concerned parties will be finally clinched on the verge of bloodshed or, if al-Assad would never yield to the mounting pressure to step down, Western allies would replicate what they did in Libya, and Russia then would make an about-face from its current standpoint, Syria would be grilled over flames of war, with its people more suffering.

What's more, once the Syrian regime is overthrown, a Pandora’s box might be opened.

While one is always happy to see the end of a “brutal dictatorship,” how to end the regime should come from the people themselves. Being forced upon a speeded-up solution from outside is by no means welcome by Syrians as a good omen for a “civilian” Syria.

**OhOh** · 07-12-2011, 08:02 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

According to some reports, some show ongoing violence.

For sure there is still some armed conflict between tribes jockeying for position. That will subside as the groups involved are brought into government.

The armed groups fighting against the then government of Libya were taken up by the crusader coaliton and suceeded in toppling the then government. Will you be backing a similar move by any non crusader coaliton force until they get "their" chosen government in Libya?

We all ready disagree on the "evidence" which purports to support both sides.

I haven't seen any evidence to support your claims that "armed gangs" are "terrorising the country". And if they are, I would have thought you would support the idea of humanitarian zones where innocent civilians could be protected? Or would you only allow them if protected by Syrian troops?

The best place for all civilians is at their homes protected by the local forces, police not army, if the local force can do it. If they are unable to hold the fort then stronger local forces should be brought in. Not shipped off to some razor wire concentration camp, where they can sit and plot, as the Gazians have been.

NATO, in the form of Turkey, is already involved - on the ground TODAY. The other NATO forces tried to impose a "no fly zone" for "humanitarian reasons" in the UN.

Can you provide a link to this? Because if anyone imposes a No-Fly zone it will be the Arab league.

UN website, UK MSM, Chinese and Russian propaganda sites, Syrian government sites, UK government sites.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

most of the armed opposition are former Syrian military

Allegedly.

According to people on the ground, yes. But if in fact they are simply "armed gangs", then let the world's reporters in there and the truth will come out? (Which is why Assad will never let it happen).

The worlds reporters are in there, you just don't believe there reports.

Syria's neighbours include Iraq, currently an occupied country - by a NATO force, Turkey, a NATO country, currently providing arms, training and secure bases for mecenary forces, Israel, funded and aligned with NATO and lebanon, currently being armed, trained and safe haven for the ME despots you so kindly admire/ are being paid by in your employment.

Ah so the truth is coming out. I work for despots, but Gaddafi and Assad are the good guys, eh?

It was generalisation Harry I have no idea of your particular circumstances. If you don't believe that the ME rulers think all ex-pats are slave labour then .......

Having myself lived and worked in the ME I am aware of the "wonderful" treatment handed out to the ex-pats who are "employed" by the locals to ensure the oil keeps flowing.

edited to change colour.

**harrybarracuda** · 07-12-2011, 08:20 PM

Very hard to read, OhOh, did you have to pick blue on blue?

The aremed groups fighting against the then government of Libya were taken up by the crusader coaliton and suceeded in toppling the tehn government. Will you be backing a similar move by any non crusader coaliton force until they get "their" chosen government in LIbys?

Blah blah blah crusader coalition blah blah blah, change the fucking record mate. Again: This coalition actually liberated Muslims, so comparing it to the crusades is entirely the wrong word. Plus the crusades were an abject failure.

And who do you mean by "non-crusader coalition"? Or did you invent that one yourself?

The then "government" of Libya was a tyrannical, unelected dictator, kept in power the same way as Assad - by a network of relatives and cronies in the military and security services.

It's going to be hard for Libya to suddenly forge democracy, and there is always a risk of it descending into theocracy of course, but I expect the first elections to be divided along tribal lines.

UN website, UK MSM, Chinese and Russian propaganda sites, Syrian government sites, UK government sites.

I said can you provide a link to

The other NATO forces tried to impose a "no fly zone" for "humanitarian reasons" in the UN.

because I assumed you'd read one rather than made it up.

If it was in the UN it must be documented.

The worlds reporters are in there, you just don't believe there reports.

A handful have been in there, and the ones that haven't been escorted around by Assad all say the same thing: Assad's war machine is terrorising and killing civilians.

It was generalisation Harry I have no idea of your particular surcumstances. If you don't believe that the ME rulers think all ex-pats are slave labour then .......

No I don't believe it. They think that all un- or semi-skilled Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Malaysians, Philipinos, Nepalese, etc. are slave labour, but then at the salaries they get and the wages they earn, they virtually are.

Gaddafi himself was no stranger to this, and there are plenty of Western companies employing low-paid foreign labour to increase profits, so what's your point that's relevant to this thread?

For skilled or educated roles, expats work alongside locals in many disciplines, engineering, aviation, manufacturing, healthcare, etc., and in a few cases in the higher echelons of government as policy advisers, etc.

Obviously that's open to some interpretation, but I don't think that's relevant here. I'm sure there's a Russian, British, French and Chinese person working somewhere in Syria's government, a buck's a buck after all.

**OhOh** · 07-12-2011, 08:31 PM

^ You should have seen the Teal colour.

Google is your friend in this case for links .

**harrybarracuda** · 07-12-2011, 08:51 PM

Originally Posted by OhOh

^ You should have seen the Teal colour.

Google is your friend in this case for links .

So you can't find a definitive link that shows "The other NATO forces tried to impose a "no fly zone" for "humanitarian reasons" in the UN."

Which doesn't surprise me, because to my knowledge no-one in NATO has called for one.

So unless you can actually prove this is a fact, and it should be easy, we can disregard it.

What else are you making up?

**OhOh** · 07-12-2011, 09:01 PM

I am not sure what you would define as a fact harry. As for fabricating evidence some countries are past masters at this art as well you know.

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.as...&Cr=syria&Cr1=

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10403.doc.htm

"Article 41

The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations."

As we have seen in Libya this is very stretchable when required.

As we have seen since this resolution was dismissed the US, the EU, Turkey and the AL have imposed illegal finacial and trading sanctions with regards to Syria.

**harrybarracuda** · 07-12-2011, 09:15 PM

Originally Posted by OhOh

I am not sure what you would define as a fact harry. As for fabricating evidence some countries are past masters at this art as well you know.

Russia and China veto draft Security Council resolution on Syria

Security Council Fails to Adopt Draft Resolution Condemning Syria

Where is the mention of the "no fly zone" you mentioned?

There is a later resolution here, and it doesn't mention "No Fly Zones", either.

UN Passes Tough Syria Resolution

03 Dec 2011

Font Size: a / A

UN human rights chief, Navi Pillay

BBC

The UN Human Rights Council has strongly condemned the violence in Syria and is to appoint a special investigator on the crackdown on anti-government protesters.
A council report on the violence is to be sent to the UN Secretary General, reports the BBC.

The UN estimates 4,000 people have been killed during a crackdown on anti-government protests.
The UK ambassador said it was the toughest resolution ever passed by the Geneva-based council.

Earlier, UN human rights chief, Navi Pillay called for "urgent" action to protect civilians in Syria.
But Syria's ambassador in Geneva told the council a solution to his country's problems could not be found by the international community.

Any UN intervention would simply deepen the crisis, he warned.
The resolution was approved at an emergency meeting of the council by 37 votes in favour to four against, with six abstentions.

Those voting against included Russia and China, who have resisted moves for a UN Security Council resolution on Syria, for fear it could lead to a military intervention such as the one in Libya.
"The positions [adopted] in the document, which include the veiled hint of the possibility of foreign military intervention under the pretext of defending the Syrian people, are unacceptable to the Russian side," Russia's foreign ministry said in a statement, quoted by the AFP news agency.

The resolution demands the suspension of security forces suspected of violations and the release of prisoners of conscience.
However, some human rights groups are disappointed the council did not make a clearer call for referring Syria to the International Criminal Court (ICC), as Ms Pillay had wanted.

A report for the UN earlier this week said security forces had committed crimes against humanity in Syria.
"The Syrian authorities' continual ruthless repression, if not stopped now, can drive the country into a full-fledged civil war," Ms Pillay warned.

"In light of the manifest failure of the Syrian authorities to protect their citizens, the international community needs to take urgent and effective measures to protect the Syrian people," she told the council.
SMs Pillay said at least 4,000 people had been killed, including 307 children, and tens of thousands arrested in the unrest.

Correspondents say there is unusual unity among council member states, with Arab nations, Europe and the US all backing pressure on Assad.
The US ambassador, Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe told Reuters news agency the resolution "set the stage" for further action by the UN and other institutions.

Asked if this included the ICC, she replied: "Absolutely, including the ICC if the Security Council chooses to refer this matter."
Meanwhile, there has been no let-up in anti-government demonstrations in Syria, the BBC's Jim Muir reports from neighbouring Lebanon.

Protesters - who regularly take to the streets after Friday prayers - have dubbed the latest protest "the Friday of the no-fly zone", a reference to the safe haven they hope the outside world will impose. Activists say at least six people have died.
Heavy shooting was reported near the border with Lebanon in the town of Talkalakh. Activists said at least two people were wounded on the Lebanese side of the border, including an 11-year-old girl.

Seven soldiers were also killed, after army defectors attacked an intelligence base in Idlib, a spokesman for the group told the BBC.
In Damascus, meanwhile, thousands of loyalists held rallies in support of Assad, our correspondent reports.

So you made it up when you said "The other NATO forces tried to impose a "no fly zone" for "humanitarian reasons" in the UN."

The most vocal group calling for a no fly zone are the Syrian opposition themselves, probably because they saw how it stopped Gadaffi bombing and strafing his own people.

Added: It's worth noting that there is a big difference between calling for a UN-enforced "No Fly Zone", which simply stops Assad from using military aircraft against his own people, and Resolution 1973/2011, which gave member states authority to "take all necessary measures" to protect "civilians and civilian populated areas" - and specifically imposed a no-fly zone which excluded humanitarian aid flights.

**OhOh** · 07-12-2011, 09:18 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

So you made it up when

Look at article 41 harry.

"These may include complete or partial...... interruption air,....... ". I am not a lawyer but even I can see how that can be "stretched" to include the proposed no fly zone.

The draft was EU(NATO) sponsored.

"Syrian opposition" conjured up no doubt by the same conjurers who founded the TNC terrorists.

**harrybarracuda** · 07-12-2011, 09:24 PM

Originally Posted by OhOh

I am not sure what you would define as a fact harry. As for fabricating evidence some countries are past masters at this art as well you know.

Russia and China veto draft Security Council resolution on Syria

Security Council Fails to Adopt Draft Resolution Condemning Syria

"Article 41

The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations."

As we have seen in Libya this is very stretchable when required.

As we have seen since this resolution was dismissed the US, the EU, Turkey and the AL have imposed illegal finacial and trading sanctions with regards to Syria.

They aren't illegal simply because you've painted them yellow.

And again, the Security Council has yet to rule on further steps - your own quote states: "The Security Council MAY decide"..... and specially excludes armed forces.

These are simply sanctions designed to put pressure on Assad to stop terrorising and killing his people.

Syria signed up to recognise UN powers as legitimate when it joined the organisation.

I repeat - I don't think NATO will get involved in this, and you have offered little but anecdotal evidence that Turkish involvement constitutes NATO military action. I'd go so far as to say you're making that up too, or posting questionable information at best.

**harrybarracuda** · 07-12-2011, 09:28 PM

It will be interesting to see how much pressure the Arab League can or is willing to apply. It doesn't seem to be having much effect in Yemen, other than pushing Saleh out and giving him immunity, leaving much of his unpopular government in power.

**OhOh** · 07-12-2011, 09:46 PM

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Turkish involvement constitutes NATO military action

Turkey is part of NATO. It is protected by all other NATO countries. Unless the, admittedly slim, evidence is disputed by the Turkish government, which hasn't occured yet, or the Turkish forces at the incident place shot at the terrorists, then they are "supporting" the terrorists.

**Takeovers** · 07-12-2011, 10:47 PM

I am not aware of any turkish action at this time regarding the syrian government.

There was an incident involving Turkeys conflict with the kurdish minority that took place inside Syria. But that had nothing to do with the present syrian problems.

And if Turkey decides to take sides with military force it would not be a NATO action unless the NATO states had made a prior decision to back that action as an action of NATO.

Edit: Must have been half asleep, typing Iraq instead of Syria. Text now changed.

**OhOh** · 07-12-2011, 11:11 PM

Syrian Arab news agency - SANA - Syria : Syria news ::

"ANKARA, (SANA) - Turkish citizens and observers condemned the involvement of the government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan in targeting Syria through harboring terrorists who are infiltrating into the Syrian territories, which has been clearly exposed by the recent operation by the Syrian authorities in which they foiled an infiltration attempt of the kind.

They said that article 90 of the Turkish Constitution provides for prosecuting those who seek to change a political system by force with the punishment of high treason, wondering how Turkey supports those who committed treason.

On the other hand, a number of Turkish observers saw in the policy of the Development and Justice Party government a pursuit towards fragmenting the region according to U.S. agendas and dominating it through ready-made governments to break any stances or forces against Israel or the US.

The Turkish observers denounced the stances taken by their government which has turned into a U.S.-Zionist pincer against Muslims in general and the people of the Middle East in particular, expressing surprise over the government's escalated policy against Syria which raised more concern of a dark future awaiting their country.

In an interview to the Syrian TV, Deputy Chairman of Turkish Saadet Party Mustafa Yilmaz said that the Turkish government is making a big mistake by harboring armed men operating against Syria, adding that there might be differences and conflicts between Syria and Turkey, but these can be resolved through dialogue.

Yilmaz expressed astonishment at the Western countries' policy in dealing with the Syrian crisis and their desire to interfere in Syria's internal affairs, while they have refrained from taking measures to impose economic sanctions towards Israel to stop its crimes.

The Turks described the Turkish sanctions against Syria as "very shameful and greatly unfair"."

Of course this is not on Sky News so some may have a problem with it being true facts.

**OhOh** · 07-12-2011, 11:15 PM

Syrian Arab news agency - SANA - Syria : Syria news ::

"IDLEB/HAMA, (SANA) - Authorities on Wednesday foiled an attempt by an armed terrorist group to block the international road between Mourk in Hama province, central Syria, and Heesh in the northern province of Idleb.

The Authorities chased the group, killed a number of its members and injured others.

7 Explosive Devices Dismantled in Hama

Military engineering units in Hama on Wednesday dismantled seven explosive devices planted by armed terrorist groups in Hama and Mhardeh area.

An official source in the province told SANA correspondent that two explosive devices, 12 kg and 15 kg, were dismantled in the area between al-Salamiyeh Bridge and the Large Prison roundabout in Hama.

"The other five explosive devices , 25 kg each, were planted on Mhardeh-Hama road", said the source, adding that an explosive device exploded on Mhardeh road with no damages reported.

In another context, the source pointed out that the authorities clashed with one of the terrorists in Mhardeh area as he was shooting at citizens and killed him."

But hey this is not the US being blown up in Iraq or Afghanistan and is not on Sky News so these stories cannot be taken as fact.

**OhOh** · 07-12-2011, 11:19 PM

http://www.sana.sy/eng/21/2011/12/07/386705.htm

"DAMASCUS, (SANA)_ Foreign and Expatriates Ministry Spokesman, Dr. Jihad Maqdisi, regretted and voiced astonishment over U.S. State Department spokesman Mark Toner's statements and his misquoting from President Bashar al-Assad's to be later broadcast ABC interview.

Maqdisi described Toner's statements as "nonprofessional", and "inexact", saying that ''It is regrettable and not normal that the US State Department falsifies Mr. President Bashar al-Assad's statements.''

Earlier on the day, Toner made statements and hypothetical conclusions about President al-Assad's not-yet broadcast ABC Interview.

"

By implication ABC, a US national TV service, passes it's interviews to the US State Department for approval/edit prior to broadcast.

**OhOh** · 07-12-2011, 11:28 PM

Syrian Arab news agency - SANA - Syria : Syria news ::

"MOSCOW, (SANA) – Advisor of Political Affairs in the Russian State Duma, Rajab Safarov, criticized on Saturday the double-standard policies of the western countries as they violate the sovereignty of countries under the pretext of human rights.

In an interview with SANA correspondent in Moscow, Svarov pointed out that the western double-standard policy has reached its height with regards to Syria, adding that the Arab League has been subjugated by the western countries to serve their interests.

He said that the Arab League stance against Syria is not logical, adding that the Arab League has no right to interfere in the internal affairs of independent countries.

Savarov described Russia's stance in support of Syria as "totally correct", clarifying that Russia will not allow the West to attack Syria under the blessings of the Arab League"

Not reported by Sky News so not a reliable "fact" to some.

**OhOh** · 07-12-2011, 11:35 PM

Originally Posted by Takeovers

it would not be a NATO action unless the NATO states had made a prior decision to back that action as an action of NATO

When NATO wants to go to war it pressurises all the NATO states to join the action, admittedly there is no formal requirement.

When a NATO country is attacked by a sovereign state or an identifiable non state entity all NATO countries are obliged by treaty to assist.

**Takeovers** · 08-12-2011, 01:28 AM

Originally Posted by OhOh

When NATO wants to go to war it pressurises all the NATO states to join the action, admittedly there is no formal requirement.

You talk about NATO as some external force independent of its member states.

Originally Posted by OhOh

When a NATO country is attacked by a sovereign state or an identifiable non state entity all NATO countries are obliged by treaty to assist.

That is the basic idea of NATO. But that would require Syria to mount an unprovoked attack on Turkey. A member state cannot cause an automatic NATO response if it attacks a neighbour and that neighbour strikes back. So if Turkey gets involved in Syria NATO would not automatically be obliged to step in.

**OhOh** · 08-12-2011, 02:48 AM

Originally Posted by Takeovers

Syria to mount an unprovoked attack on Turkey

Have you any knowledge of history? An unprovoked attack eh, lets look at the game play and let a few of our stuffed media folks run with ..... No. 3 fits the situation, let it run.

Thread: Syria: Not as important as Libya.

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions