Syria
- Started
- Last post
- 253 Responses
- ukit20
Also right now there is a plan in the works to build a pipeline from South Pars field which are the largest reserves of natural gas in the world, controlled by Iran.
The pipeline would go through Iran, Iraq and then to Syria (Shiite countries) where it would be shipped to world markets through a Russian controlled port. This is in direct competition with the Sunni countries, like Saudi Arabia and Qatar, which owns half of the same natural gas field, and would like to build it's own pipeline through Syria and stop the Iranian pipeline.
I don't think that is what is motivating the people on the ground but it helps explain why Qatar has funneled billions of dollars funding the rebels. And from U.S. point of view if Assad is overthrown it isolates and weakens Iran, laying the ground for a "regime change" in that country.
- ukit20
The prospect of regime change in Damascus has long appealed to the US. For the Americans to be able to assert effective influence over Syria would serve US geopolitical interests in at least three ways. It would push back the last extended limb of Russian hard power and cement US victory in its long-term cold-war project to isolate Russian influence globally. It would strengthen Israel's hand by removing one of Hezbollah's main sources of support in Lebanon. And it would complete the encirclement of Iran, whose Shiite Islamist government US hawks have long been looking to overthrow.
- instrmntl0
For clueless people like myself
9 questions about Syria you were too embarrassed to ask
http://www.washingtonpost.com/bl…- this thing sounds as if it was written by an intern.pr2
- Pretty biased tooinv
- this makes me want to punch the screen
autoflavour - comon... heavy propaganda, and sometime when you read something you should follow up the links and authorsGeorgesIV
- Gardener0
- This is so uninformed its sad.monospaced
- house to house looking for oil ?Dillinger
- monospaced0
Seems like we really should be figuring out a way to guilt trip Russia into keeping the violence to a minimum. With great power comes great responsibility and all that. I know it's wishful thinking but if love to see us working with Russia to prevent world wars instead of fuel them.
- If = I'dmonospaced
- is this a motherfuckn game?GeorgesIV
- sorry to add that cat picture jpg ehheheGeorgesIV
- No, not a game, of course not.monospaced
- Russia is the voice in reason this time. THe US should listen to Putinflashbender
- GeorgesIV0
Prez O dun'goofed with dat read line thingy,
know wut'm sayin, now, brother russkiez D-mandz they sh0w da evidanze da sec coun!from: http://blogs.aljazeera.com/topic…
---Russian President Vladimir Putin says that the United States should present its evidence of chemical weapons use in Syria to the UN Security Council, and has said that it would be "utter nonsense" for the Syrian government to have carried out the alleged chemical weapons attacks, according to the Reuters news agency.
Putin also expressed surprise at the fact that the British parliament had voted against taking part in a military intervention in Syria.
The Russian president said that if the US carried out unilateral military operations against Syria it would be "extremely sad", and that the G20 summit in St Petersburg scheduled for next week could be a platform to discuss the crisis in Syria.
good thread going on right now
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnew…
- utopian0
America, Fuck Yeah! Ultimate Edition
America, Fuck Yeah! Ultimate Edition
America, Fuck Yeah! Ultimate Edition- stop trolling so hardmonospaced
- pleasemonospaced
- This is good but no pretzel triple bacon cheeseburger. alway funnyteh
- autoflavour0
this is just one guys opinion.. i dont agree entirely, but there are a lot of good points.
- colin_s0
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/0… is a good read
i think the biggest problem right now is the complete lack of information coming from the white house / congress.
the idea as cited in that memo of being a "limited" engagement makes sense. nobody wants another afghanistan / iraq.
but the lack of evidence being shown on a government level for chemical weapon usage is a hard pill to swallow - i've seen the various evidence broadcast for such atrocities but the fact the UN hasn't declared anything yet is unnerving.
again, georges i think you brought up the US' role in regime change and what not, i don't believe this should be a war the US needs to involve itself in.
however, based on what we've (or rather, obama) already stated, i think assisting the rebellion without actually arming them isn't out of the interest of humanity. with a small engagement from airstrikes, the US could deal a blow to assad's militarism on innocent civilians without risking much at all in the way of US casualities or costs.
now, if the US decides to go full-on invasion, that's a completely different discussion, and that's why i think there needs to be an open debate on this issue. that would be completely untenable as well as a ridiculous course of action.
- mg330
http://www.examiner.com/article/…
A friend posted this on Facebook. The rebels are claiming they are responsible for last weeks chemical attack because they were handling weapons from Saudi Arabia that they didn't know were chemicals. Apparently the article is lifted from infowars but I'm really curious about this development and when it will show on major news sites if it's true.
- teh0
I can't believe... well I can believe it but with everything happening in the united states that we would spend all the money on occupying the med sea. Well fellow americans we just went to war and I don't remember voting on this. This is a sad day.
- ukit20
"i think assisting the rebellion without actually arming them isn't out of the interest of humanity. with a small engagement from airstrikes, the US could deal a blow to assad's militarism on innocent civilians without risking much at all in the way of US casualities or costs."
What everyone seems to be missing is that we ARE arming and funding the rebels. Obama authorized covert action to overthrow the Assad regime around a year ago.
This is the new paradigm. Instead of a full-on invasion, which Iraq showed is costly and disastrous, we go to war largely using proxy armies. Then when needed, call in the cavalry in the form of U.S. airstrikes in order to finish things ff. The people on the ground think they are fighting for sectarian or religious purposes, but are really serving the interests of powers like the U.S.
There are CIA training camps in Jordan and Turkey where the U.S. has been teaching the rebels to fight, providing them with weapons, and sending them out onto the battlefield. This is not conspiracy theory but well reported in the mainstream press:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013…
And then there is the role of Qatar and Saudi Arabia who are providing billions in funding and weapons for the rebels. Qatar is the location of U.S. Central Command in the Middle East, obviously it's not exactly happening without our knowledge or permission.
So now we're supposed to believe we need to take action to stop the bloodshed...in a war we have helped create and perpetuate. Anyone see the slight contradiction there?
- i thought we ceased arming them?colin_s
- Why would we do that?
http://www.jpost.com…ukit2 - comon colin, do you think they're in for the syrian children? go reread the wiki links and connect the dots to the present warsGeorgesIV
- the present wars and conflicts around the world, have you ever heard the term the "long con"GeorgesIV
- oey0
Some bought the Obama because of the package design.
But after a while they realized it tastes slightly like George.
- oey0
Nobel Peace Prize...
- I laughed sooo hard this dayteh
- Yeah, but don't laugh too hard, it might get you in trouble one of these days. The way things are going.oey
- http://www.youtube.c…ukit2