|
Please guys, stay on topic.
This thread is about the situation in Iraq and Syria. |
On June 27 2012 08:15 Probe1 wrote: What do you mean worst comes to worst. The US and Russia are not going to have a nuclear exchange over Syria. ..
First Russia has to actually find a nuke that works.
Wait, what?
|
On June 28 2012 05:53 Pika Chu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2012 08:15 Probe1 wrote: What do you mean worst comes to worst. The US and Russia are not going to have a nuclear exchange over Syria. ..
First Russia has to actually find a nuke that works. Wait, what?
Exactly my thoughts, what?
|
|
If SANA itself says that it only wounded three persons, then it probably was just a single bomb.
|
|
On June 29 2012 09:09 Blanke wrote:The whole world is riding a train to hell, and NATO is the conductor. In-depth Analysis of NATO's role behind Syria: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=31650If the next two months are anything like June for Syria, then I fear the worst for global security.
You also know that is a site filled with conspiracy theory's right?
|
On June 28 2012 06:10 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2012 05:53 Pika Chu wrote:On June 27 2012 08:15 Probe1 wrote: What do you mean worst comes to worst. The US and Russia are not going to have a nuclear exchange over Syria. ..
First Russia has to actually find a nuke that works. Wait, what? Exactly my thoughts, what? The poster above me said something stupid like it'll be world war 3. So I took the next natural step and said nuclear exchange. It was sardonic and not to be taken seriously.
Edit: Much like what Blanke posted. Whenever a conflict happens people get all Tom Clancy on the shit and imagine every single armed conflict will result in a Call of Duty plot.
|
On June 29 2012 09:09 Blanke wrote:The whole world is riding a train to hell, and NATO is the conductor. In-depth Analysis of NATO's role behind Syria: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=31650If the next two months are anything like June for Syria, then I fear the worst for global security.
It was fun to go to that site and read all the conspiracy theories. Kudos for the link!
|
How do you even find sites like that...
|
They print them on the inseam of aluminum foil boxes.
|
On June 27 2012 08:09 Steveling wrote: Syria is now officially in a state of war.
ReutersIndia twitted 26minutes ago " Assad says Syria at war as battle reaches capital ".
The response from Turkey to their military plane shootdown by syria 2 days ago, by midnightwatcher's blog "Rules Of Engagement ‘Have Changed’: Furious Turkey Mobilizes Tanks, Troops To Syrian Border".
Turkish officials have stated that they are considering stop supplying Syria with electricity.
I'm expecting this to be broadcasted by all media in some minutes.
Do you guys realise how big this is? If turkey invades syria, facts point to us that russia will not just watch it happen. They need one of their last or maybe even the last arabic country under their influence. But nato(read america) will want to have a say in this. If worse comes to worst, god help us.
Don't be silly.
Turkey won't invade Syria.
Russia isn't going to get involved in some silly war over a piss poor Arab nation, there is far too much to lose and not nearly enough to gain.
People need to stop the internet warrior call of duty-esque international relations theory going on in here, my goodness.
|
That's far easier to say 2 days after the declaration and casus belli. While I agree with the second half of your post it is still too soon to tell what Turkey will and won't do and how Syria will respond.
Although I will grant you 'international relations theorycrafting' is the funniest phrase in this thread.
|
Turkey doesnt even need to go to war, they just need to declare a no fly zone over Syria and that will be that. Without tanks and bombers the Syrian army will crumble just like the Libyan army did. Poorly paid conscripts without tanks or cannons or helicopters are going to get destroyed by Qatari financed jihadi, i mean freedom fighters.
|
ISTANBUL — Eighty-five Syrian soldiers, including one general and at least 14 lower-ranking officers, fled into southern Turkey’s Hatay Province on Monday, Turkish news agencies reported. It was one of the largest mass military defections since the Syrian conflict began 16 months ago.
A Turkish broadcaster, T.R.T. Haber, said the defectors entered the town of Reyhanli as part of a group of 293 refugees “fleeing atrocities in Syria.” It said the defectors were placed in the Apaydin refugee camp, where there are already about 2,000 former members of the Syrian military who have abandoned allegiance to President Bashar al-Assad. The civilians in the group were sent to another camp along the shared border with Syria.
Turkey’s Anatolia news agency said the 14 lower-ranking officers included a colonel and a lieutenant colonel.
The once-close relationship between Turkey and Syria has badly frayed with Mr. Assad’s harsh repression of an uprising that began last year in March as a peaceful political protest and has since evolved into an armed insurgency.
Turkey’s government is now allowing the insurgent Free Syrian Army to operate from bases inside the Turkish border and is housing more than 35,000 Syrian civilians who have sought refuge from the conflict. The Turks also have sent antiaircraft batteries to the border in response to the June 22 downing of a Turkish military plane by Syrian gunners. On Monday, Turkey’s Defense Ministry said it scrambled warplanes from its Incirlik air base in southern Turkey when three Syrian military helicopters were seen approaching the border.
Source
|
On June 29 2012 09:23 Probe1 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2012 06:10 Art.FeeL wrote:On June 28 2012 05:53 Pika Chu wrote:On June 27 2012 08:15 Probe1 wrote: What do you mean worst comes to worst. The US and Russia are not going to have a nuclear exchange over Syria. ..
First Russia has to actually find a nuke that works. Wait, what? Exactly my thoughts, what? The poster above me said something stupid like it'll be world war 3. So I took the next natural step and said nuclear exchange. It was sardonic and not to be taken seriously. Edit: Much like what Blanke posted. Whenever a conflict happens people get all Tom Clancy on the shit and imagine every single armed conflict will result in a Call of Duty plot.
You just don't understand, the US is to blame for everything. You can read all about in Pravda, they were getting the troof out every day from 1946 until now. Or you can always go to Russia Today if you like your recycled Cold War agitprop in video form!
But just a little more seriously, you can't find a single opinion like what Blanke linked to that wasn't originally some propaganda KGB-tested and Politburo-approved. It's pretty sad that people think they've figured out the secret workings of the world when all they're doing is regurgitating stuff a bunch of Russians cooked up back in 1953, whether it's been dressed up for more modern times by globalresearch or Noam Chomsky.
|
On July 03 2012 14:28 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2012 09:23 Probe1 wrote:On June 28 2012 06:10 Art.FeeL wrote:On June 28 2012 05:53 Pika Chu wrote:On June 27 2012 08:15 Probe1 wrote: What do you mean worst comes to worst. The US and Russia are not going to have a nuclear exchange over Syria. ..
First Russia has to actually find a nuke that works. Wait, what? Exactly my thoughts, what? The poster above me said something stupid like it'll be world war 3. So I took the next natural step and said nuclear exchange. It was sardonic and not to be taken seriously. Edit: Much like what Blanke posted. Whenever a conflict happens people get all Tom Clancy on the shit and imagine every single armed conflict will result in a Call of Duty plot. You just don't understand, the US is to blame for everything. You can read all about in Pravda, they were getting the troof out every day from 1946 until now. Or you can always go to Russia Today if you like your recycled Cold War agitprop in video form! But just a little more seriously, you can't find a single opinion like what Blanke linked to that wasn't originally some propaganda KGB-tested and Politburo-approved. It's pretty sad that people think they've figured out the secret workings of the world when all they're doing is regurgitating stuff a bunch of Russians cooked up back in 1953, whether it's been dressed up for more modern times by globalresearch or Noam Chomsky.
To be fair the US is to blame for a lot of things. Acting like it isn't is dishonest and this attitude of yours (making it sound like the US never does anything (morally) wrong) is just silly. That said I only rag on the US when there's actual proof of foul play, something that's lacking in the case of Syria.
|
On July 03 2012 16:44 HellRoxYa wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 14:28 DeepElemBlues wrote:On June 29 2012 09:23 Probe1 wrote:On June 28 2012 06:10 Art.FeeL wrote:On June 28 2012 05:53 Pika Chu wrote:On June 27 2012 08:15 Probe1 wrote: What do you mean worst comes to worst. The US and Russia are not going to have a nuclear exchange over Syria. ..
First Russia has to actually find a nuke that works. Wait, what? Exactly my thoughts, what? The poster above me said something stupid like it'll be world war 3. So I took the next natural step and said nuclear exchange. It was sardonic and not to be taken seriously. Edit: Much like what Blanke posted. Whenever a conflict happens people get all Tom Clancy on the shit and imagine every single armed conflict will result in a Call of Duty plot. You just don't understand, the US is to blame for everything. You can read all about in Pravda, they were getting the troof out every day from 1946 until now. Or you can always go to Russia Today if you like your recycled Cold War agitprop in video form! But just a little more seriously, you can't find a single opinion like what Blanke linked to that wasn't originally some propaganda KGB-tested and Politburo-approved. It's pretty sad that people think they've figured out the secret workings of the world when all they're doing is regurgitating stuff a bunch of Russians cooked up back in 1953, whether it's been dressed up for more modern times by globalresearch or Noam Chomsky. To be fair the US is to blame for a lot of things. Acting like it isn't is dishonest and this attitude of yours (making it sound like the US never does anything (morally) wrong) is just silly. That said I only rag on the US when there's actual proof of foul play, something that's lacking in the case of Syria. That just means CIA is getting better and better at their job :D
|
On July 03 2012 16:44 HellRoxYa wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 14:28 DeepElemBlues wrote:On June 29 2012 09:23 Probe1 wrote:On June 28 2012 06:10 Art.FeeL wrote:On June 28 2012 05:53 Pika Chu wrote:On June 27 2012 08:15 Probe1 wrote: What do you mean worst comes to worst. The US and Russia are not going to have a nuclear exchange over Syria. ..
First Russia has to actually find a nuke that works. Wait, what? Exactly my thoughts, what? The poster above me said something stupid like it'll be world war 3. So I took the next natural step and said nuclear exchange. It was sardonic and not to be taken seriously. Edit: Much like what Blanke posted. Whenever a conflict happens people get all Tom Clancy on the shit and imagine every single armed conflict will result in a Call of Duty plot. You just don't understand, the US is to blame for everything. You can read all about in Pravda, they were getting the troof out every day from 1946 until now. Or you can always go to Russia Today if you like your recycled Cold War agitprop in video form! But just a little more seriously, you can't find a single opinion like what Blanke linked to that wasn't originally some propaganda KGB-tested and Politburo-approved. It's pretty sad that people think they've figured out the secret workings of the world when all they're doing is regurgitating stuff a bunch of Russians cooked up back in 1953, whether it's been dressed up for more modern times by globalresearch or Noam Chomsky. To be fair the US is to blame for a lot of things. Acting like it isn't is dishonest and this attitude of yours (making it sound like the US never does anything (morally) wrong) is just silly. That said I only rag on the US when there's actual proof of foul play, something that's lacking in the case of Syria.
Wasn't acting it wasn't, sorry. Acting like you are is why Americans don't give two whoops in hell about world opinion.
|
On July 04 2012 00:51 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 16:44 HellRoxYa wrote:On July 03 2012 14:28 DeepElemBlues wrote:On June 29 2012 09:23 Probe1 wrote:On June 28 2012 06:10 Art.FeeL wrote:On June 28 2012 05:53 Pika Chu wrote:On June 27 2012 08:15 Probe1 wrote: What do you mean worst comes to worst. The US and Russia are not going to have a nuclear exchange over Syria. ..
First Russia has to actually find a nuke that works. Wait, what? Exactly my thoughts, what? The poster above me said something stupid like it'll be world war 3. So I took the next natural step and said nuclear exchange. It was sardonic and not to be taken seriously. Edit: Much like what Blanke posted. Whenever a conflict happens people get all Tom Clancy on the shit and imagine every single armed conflict will result in a Call of Duty plot. You just don't understand, the US is to blame for everything. You can read all about in Pravda, they were getting the troof out every day from 1946 until now. Or you can always go to Russia Today if you like your recycled Cold War agitprop in video form! But just a little more seriously, you can't find a single opinion like what Blanke linked to that wasn't originally some propaganda KGB-tested and Politburo-approved. It's pretty sad that people think they've figured out the secret workings of the world when all they're doing is regurgitating stuff a bunch of Russians cooked up back in 1953, whether it's been dressed up for more modern times by globalresearch or Noam Chomsky. To be fair the US is to blame for a lot of things. Acting like it isn't is dishonest and this attitude of yours (making it sound like the US never does anything (morally) wrong) is just silly. That said I only rag on the US when there's actual proof of foul play, something that's lacking in the case of Syria. Wasn't acting it wasn't, sorry. Acting like you are is why Americans don't give two whoops in hell about world opinion.
No, the reason is that Americans, like all people on earth, are not educated enough to understand foreign affairs. The myth about the US being a beacon for stupidity comes from the misconception that its people are the wealthiest on earth and that wealth directly correlates with education; leading to a certain "disappointment" in regards to their intellect when it is clear that they are as dumb as their German or Turkish counterparts. Omnipresence of American culture also carries this image overseas when stupidity usually remains in closed borders.
With that being said, the US are to blame for many things, simply because they take part in a lot of things (and because they won the Cold War after all), and use their military power as an economical boost, especially in the Middle-East. An easy example is the CIA and their dirty work, from Operation Phoenix in Vietnam to Operation Condor in South America. They are, however, rarely alone in what they do. We can criticize them for meddling in the business of others, but not for being responsible for everything they touched.
Time has led me to believe that American mediocrity is not a specificity of that country, but rather proof that no amount of wealth and power will make human beings significantly better.
|
Syria's ambassador to Iraq has defected in protest at the military crackdown by Assad's forces against a 16-month uprising.
In exclusive statement to Al Jazeera, Nawaf al-Fares said that his decision came in the wake of what he described as horrible massacre committed against the Syrian people by the regime.
"I announced my resignation as Syrian ambassador to Iraq as I also declare my defection from the Syrian Baath party," said Fares on Wednesday.
"I urge all honest members of this party to follow my path because the regime has turned it [the party] to an instrument to kill people and their aspiration to freedom."
Fares also called upon the military to join the ranks of the Syrian revolution, pointing out that such a move would help defend the homeland against any foreign enemy and "not the killing of the people".
He also urged all Syrians to come together and be patient in front of what he called attempts by the regime to divide them.
A veteran of Assad's rule who held senior positions under the late president Hafez al-Assad, Fares is from Deir al-Zor, the eastern city on the road to Iraq, which has been the scene of a ferocious military onslaught by Assad forces.
Source
|
|
|
|