The Syria Thread 2011 - Present

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:30 pm

American Dream » Wed Sep 19, 2018 3:05 am wrote:I am most concerned about how ordinary people are suffering now and will suffer in the future, including the ongoing trauma for the millions of survivors who have escaped the actual battlefields.

Realpolitik does have a certain kind of logic but it is not a compelling logic to me. I will not be cheering on this war, nor even an uneasy peace imposed by those who embrace ethnic cleansing, torture and worse as the allegedly better alternative to their cruelest strategies of repression.

All the big powers act viciously but that doesn't make a bloodbath worthy of support. Much less, the peace of the graveyard and of eternal exile, the trauma that does not heal over generations.


I don't disagree with a word of that. The likely peace to be negotiated by the involved powers (minus Gulf States and probably minus U.S.-Israel, but probably with a buy-in for Europeans) will be a peace of the grave and the grief and trauma and physical wounds will remain unto the nth generation. I won't be cheering at any point, never have. So? I have no influence over it. What annoys about your stance here is that you seem to think you have to educate people who haven't figured that out, as most of us have, or to convert a few who don't want to and won't be converted. And this is undermined by how you seem incapable of acknowledging who the other side of the actual military conflict currently is, and has been for years: international jihadis whose warlord statelets would have subjected the Syrian majority to even worse conditions than the Damascus regime will offer. At this point, a peace could at least bring a rebuilding program, capitalist and worse of course, but a hell of a lot better than what the heroic Idlib fighters can offer. Do I care about the hundreds of thousands or millions of civilians trapped in the province? I do, and it means absolutely nothing.

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15254
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby American Dream » Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:12 pm

It is sad but in my ordinary life I have no need whatsoever to emphasize that Putin and Assad are far from heroes. Even among the most radical leftists I know, none equate fighting the Power with lining up behind such murderous leaders. In Conspiracyland it is another thing altogether- such ideas are regrettably common. I have zero interest in changing the true believers- not worth my time- but I do feel concerned about the undecided who checked things out because they sincerely want to do something good in the world and are looking for some guidance as to what's really going on.

More than a few have latched on to toxic- or at best, misguided- ideas and that's an incredible shame. I would never help perpetuate such a sad state of affairs- it's a grotesque inversion of everything that brought me into Deep Politics in the first place.

So I will continue doing what I do- those that are ready to engage such perspectives with an open mind will do so. The rest will not- and that's as good as it gets. I've known more than a few potentially good people who will likely never recover. Conspiracy discourse- something that should be a force for liberation- turned into a weapon against us. Now there's a concept that bears some serious consideration. I doubt I'll ever stop feeling like that's important.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:56 pm

American Dream » Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:12 pm wrote:It is sad but in my ordinary life I have no need whatsoever to emphasize that Putin and Assad are far from heroes.


Golly, that's exactly what I said. Thanks for correcting me.

In my ordinary life, I also have little to explain who the jihadi forces on the other side are. Not most of the people under the bombs, tragically, but the armed forces actually in control of the territory. I doubt you need that explained either, seems you'll just continue never to address it.
Last edited by JackRiddler on Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15254
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby American Dream » Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:58 pm

Because I consider it so incredibly obvious. The reactionary Islamic forces are often invoked as a kind of straw man by Assad supporters. ISIS and other such forces do not make Putin, Trump, Netanyahu et al. somehow palatable or benevolent either. The problem I see here is not partisans of ISIS nearly as much as it is partisans of Assad and Putin. They really are bad but they do not provide a free pass to the National Security State.
Last edited by American Dream on Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:07 pm

That was fast. Devil deal with the devil, peace of the grave, if it sticks better than the alternatives.

Putin agrees to demilitarised zone around Syria’s Idlib
Russian president reaches deal with Erdogan to avert bloody assault on rebel bastion

https://www.ft.com/content/82b71568-ba9 ... 176fbf93f5
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15254
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby American Dream » Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:19 pm

Yeah, I found that out today. I can't continue now but, it does not fill me with great hope to know this. The odds still seem high that a massive bloodbath is coming and that the masters of the universe will not care much about the collateral damage.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:25 pm

Turkey supposed to disarm all "extremists" (however they will define it?) in Idlib province by October 15.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15254
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby Elvis » Wed Sep 19, 2018 11:39 pm

American Dream wrote:Because I consider it so incredibly obvious. The reactionary Islamic forces are often invoked as a kind of straw man by Assad supporters.


So it's obvious to you, but when others point out the obvious, they're "Assad supporters." Okay. Whatever.
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 6658
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby American Dream » Sat Sep 22, 2018 7:12 pm

Image

In Syria, Russia is using acts of peace to prepare for war

Sam Hamad

Russia still has its eye firmly fixed on the last remaining 'liberated' province [Anadolu]


Date of publication: 18 September, 2018

Given the extremely precarious situation facing the people of liberated Idlib, the recent Turkish-Russian deal for a 'buffer zone' between pro-regime forces and the rebels might provide some breathing space.

But, as ever in Syria, do not think security for Syrians will be indefinite.

In fact, almost every instance of the conquest of liberated areas of Syria by Assad-Iran-Russia, has involved or been preceded by an alleged act of 'peace'. It was under the guise of a 'de-escalation' zone that Assad-Iran-Russia viciously bombed, cleansed and eventually conquered liberated Daraa.

The same was true in the liberated areas of northern Homs, another area covered by 'de-escalation' zones agreed to by Russia. An identical process unfolds: The savage bombing and/or besiegement of civilian areas, prompting the deliberate but 'informal' cleansing of civilian populations, coupled with a ground offensive by Iranian-led forces to seal the conquest and force more people to flee. Then come the formal 'evacuations', a code word for the formal cleansing of civilian populations in liberated areas.

The world stood by and watched just a few months ago as this brutal process played out in East Ghouta, another area covered by a Russian 'de-escalation' zone. If the pattern of Russia's superficial commitment to 'de-escalation' zones isn't yet apparent, some of the worst violence from Russia and Assad unleashed on the people of East Ghouta - including the use of poison gas in Douma - occurred during a 30 day UN-ceasefire.

It hardly takes a cynic to imagine that Russia's commitment to the 'buffer zone in Idlib has little to do with any genuine will to avoid humanitarian catastrophe. Russia still has its eye firmly fixed on the last remaining liberated province.

Almost every instance of the conquest of liberated areas of Syria by Assad-Iran-Russia, has involved or been preceded by an alleged act of 'peace'


Russia will never agree to a permanent peace agreement with any rebel force for many reasons, one of which is its commitment, shared by Assad, of returning Syria to the ante bellum status quo. This 'buffer zone' in no way resolves Assad, Iran and Russia's previous enthusiasms to annihilate the 'terrorists'.

The other reason is the strategic value of Idlib to Russia.

Everyone, the three million people who have made their homes in the province included, know that there is nowhere left in Syria for them to run if Assad-Iran-Russia move for Idlib. If the Assad axis were to launch a full scale attack on the province, going by the process of its usual genocidal conquests as described above, the humanitarian crisis would be unprecedented.

The quantity of refugees that would flood into Turkey would be larger than any other single cleansing since the war began. For Russia, this is perhaps the most important element regarding how Idlib fits into its grand strategic designs.


Continues: https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/comme ... re-for-war
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby JackRiddler » Sat Sep 22, 2018 10:37 pm

You left out the part wherein Hamad endorses the view of the NATO supreme commander:

Russia has long been observed to weaponise Syrian refugees against Europe.


First, the passive voice creates the authority of established fact. Observed, by whom? Hamad continues with a source:

Over two years ago, General Phil Breedlove, the Supreme Allied Commander for NATO in Europe, made a statement to the US Senate Armed Services Committee regarding Russia and Assad's methodology of warfare in Syria. Breedlove noted that the kind of weapons used, such as barrel bombs, and the targets of such weaponry, served no other purpose than that of terror - to create refugees.

He told the Senate that this was part of a larger strategy to "make [refugees] a problem for someone else". Breedlove continued that, "Russia and the Assad regime are deliberately weaponising migration in an attempt to overwhelm European structures and break European resolve."


The claims by Breedlove, endorsed by Hamad, are identical, identical, to what you can often hear on RT and among many on the European right. Just substitute "Western and Gulf states" (or some variation on "Soros") for "Russia and Assad." They support the international jihadis, whose methodology of head-chopping and harsh, arbitrary sharia law is terror, but not simply against Syrians. It is terror to "weaponize" refugees against "Europe."

Both of these structurally identical stories are dubious, and both require a very Eurocentric view of things. In both versions, the war isn't a war in Syria, the main suffering isn't happening in Syria. The refugees are also not the ones who mainly bear the suffering. The point of the war becomes to upset the precious Europeans.

Never mind that Europe has taken a relatively small fraction of the Syrian refugees, who number 3.5 million in Turkey, according to Hamad's story, with about 1.5 million in Lebanon. The one million who have been received in Europe unsettle the easily unsettled Europeans, and this gets votes for the AfD in Germany and Orban in Hungary.

I say it's bullshit in either version. The war is the war. The sides were fighting to win the war, meaning dominion over the territory of Syria. Now Damascus is fighting to win, and the remnants of the rebels are trying to keep their last stronghold.

The refugees are a logical consequence of the war. Europeans are not the ones suffering. The reaction of the European right and states to the refugees has been heartless. Especially for those states that have involved themselves in prolonging the war, which are the most distant from the entry points and have taken the fewest number.

Neither side in the war has a master plan to undermine Europe by "weaponizing" refugees. The only geographically possible culprit for such a plan would be Turkey, by the way. That applies to both versions of "the plan" and of "Europe," Hamad's and Breedlove's as much as RT's and the European right wing's.

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15254
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby conniption » Sat Sep 22, 2018 10:46 pm

The Nation

Tulsi Gabbard on the Administration’s Push for War in Syria

The congresswoman has accused President Trump and Vice President Pence of protecting “al-Qaeda and other jihadist forces in Syria.”

By James Carden
September 20, 2018


Image
Representative Tulsi Gabbard. (AP Photo / Bill Clark)

On September 13, Hawaii Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard took to the floor of the House to rebuke the administration, accusing President Trump and Vice President Mike Pence of protecting “al-Qaeda and other jihadist forces in Syria,” all the while “threatening Russia, Syria, and Iran, with military force if they dare attack these terrorists.”

“This,” continued Gabbard, “is a betrayal of the American people, especially the victims of Al Qaeda’s attack on 9/11 and their families, first responders, and my brothers and sisters in uniform who have been killed or wounded in action and their families. For the President, who is Commander in Chief, to act as the protective big brother of al-Qaeda and other jihadists must be condemned by every Member of Congress.”

I spoke to Gabbard earlier this week about her opposition to Trump’s Syria policy.

James Carden: In June you and Republican Congressman Walter Jones introduced HR 922, the No More Presidential Wars Resolution, which would both define presidential wars not declared by Congress under Article I, section 8, clause 11 as impeachable “high crimes and misdemeanors” as well as prohibit the president from perpetuating ongoing wars or from supplying, among other things, war materials, military troops, military intelligence, and financial support without first receiving congressional authorization.

While the policy of attacking Syria clearly fails on a moral, legal, and consequentialist grounds, it also will likely backfire on realist grounds. What is your view in terms of who would benefit and who would suffer from a US-led attack on Syria?

Tulsi Gabbard: In the short term, President Trump would benefit the most. The president loves being adored and praised, and despite his rants against them, he especially craves the favor of the media. Trump remembers very well that the only times he has been praised almost universally by the mainstream media, Republicans, and Democrats, was when he has engaged in aggressive military actions. Brian Williams, Fareed Zakaria and others could hardly contain their delight. CNN’s Fareed Zakaria said, “Donald Trump became president of the United States” the moment the bombs started dropping. MSNBC’s Brian Williams praised the launching of US missiles, saying, “I am guided by the beauty of our weapons.” The Washington Post’s David Ignatius said that he thought that by taking this action, Trump “restored the credibility of American power.”

Right now, President Trump’s approval ratings are dropping, and he craves positive reinforcement. He and his team are making a political calculation and looking for any excuse or opportunity to launch another military attack, so that Trump can again be glorified for dropping bombs.

Others who would gain the most are Al Qaeda and all the terrorist organizations who are wanting to keep alive the regime-change war against Assad. Their war to overthrow Assad is about to end. They’re finally facing defeat. A US attack that significantly weakens the Syrian military and would be a gift to these terrorist groups who want to overthrow the government and set up a Sunni Extremist theocracy in Damascus. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar would be the beneficiaries.

The military-industrial complex and others who profit from the continuation of these regime-change wars will benefit.

Who would suffer the most? The Syrian people, who are pleading to be left alone so they can try to rebuild their country. When I visited Syria, people shared their desperation with me, asking me to share their message with the American people: “We’re not begging for your money or your help. We are simply begging you to stop supporting the terrorists who are destroying our country. Please let us live in peace!”

A US attack will increase the likelihood of more US troop casualties, injuries, and suffering, and billions more dollars of taxpayer money wasted, that could instead be used to improve the lives of the American people.

JC: One of the problems with the conflict in Syria is in the language that is used to describe it. The media and many policy-makers tend to use deliberately vague or opaque language when describing what has been going on there for the past six to seven years. So today we hear that Idlib province is “rebel held” that is “holding out” against an imminent attack (possibly with the use of chemical weapons) by Assad. But describing those who control Idlib today merely as “rebels” seems to obscure more than it illuminates: Is it a peaceful, moderate band of rebels who are currently in control of Idlib? What do you suppose would happen to Christians, Druze, Alawites, and the non-practicing if such “rebels” were able, with the help of the US and Turkey (among others) to overthrow Assad and expand their control over Syria?

TG: I believe it would strike most Americans as absolutely insane that the president of the United States, his vice president, UN ambassador, secretary of state, and the mainstream media describe the very terrorist entities that were responsible for the attack on 9/11 as “rebels.”

Since we know that they know Al Qaeda is the primary force in control of Idlib, we can only conclude that they no longer consider Al Qaeda to be a terrorist organization or the enemy.

General Joseph Dunford, as well as the UN, have confirmed that Idlib is controlled by 20,000 to 30,000 Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. Brett McGurk, the administration’s special envoy to counter ISIS, said that, “Idlib is Al Qaeda’s largest safe haven since 9/11.”

So there is no ambiguity about the situation: The United States is acting as the big brother and protector of Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations in Syria.

The real question is why.

We’ve been waging a regime change war in Syria since 2011. Central to that war to overthrow the Syrian government of Assad, along with our allies Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar, has been providing direct and indirect support to terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda who are effectively serving as our ground force in that regime-change war, enabling them to grow in numbers and strength in Syria.

Now, President Trump and his cabinet of warhawks are concerned that if Al Qaeda is defeated in Idlib, then our regime-change war to overthrow the Syrian government will be over.

There is no doubt that if the United States and its allies are successful in their war to topple Assad, the most powerful forces on the ground (Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups) would take over, and religious minorities or anyone who disagreed with Al Qaeda’s theology/ideology would be targeted. When I visited Syria, I met with Christian leaders in Aleppo who took me to a few of their historic churches that had been targeted and bombed to rubble by terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS who adhere to the extreme Wahhabi Salafi ideology, propagated by Saudi Arabia around the world, believing that unless you adhere to their extremist exclusivist ideology, then you must be killed or enslaved.

Just last week, President Trump and Vice President Pence delivered solemn speeches about the attacks on 9/11, honoring the victims of Al Qaeda’s attack on our country. Yet they continue to protect Al Qaeda and other terrorist forces in Syria, and have threatened “dire consequences” and an illegal war against Russia, Syria, and Iran if they dare attack these terrorists—potentially putting our country on a path towards World War III. The Trump administration’s continued protection of Al Qaeda is a betrayal of the American people, especially the victims of 9/11, first-responders, my brothers and sisters in uniform who have been killed or wounded in action, and their families. It’s a betrayal of the American people who have had trillions of dollars taken from their wallets, ostensibly to defeat the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11, only to find Al Qaeda is stronger today than ever before.

This is not a partisan issue. Every American—Democrat, Republican, independent—must condemn this betrayal by our commander in chief. This regime-change war in Syria and US alliance with Al Qaeda and other terrorists must end now.

JC: One will often hear neocons and liberal interventionists (surely by now a distinction without a difference) warn against over-learning the lessons of Iraq. Which is kind of an odd concern. In your years in Congress have you seen any evidence that those lessons have been actually been learned by the political and media establishments in the first place?

TG: No. Based on our country’s continued counterproductive regime-change war policies, it is clear that leaders on both sides of the aisle have not learned the painful lessons of decades of interventionist regime-change wars, most recently in Iraq, Libya, and now Syria. The result has been costly for the American people, in human lives and taxpayer dollars, and devastating for the people of these countries, where countless lives have been lost, humanitarian crises created, with refugees’ being forced from their homes, and the utter destruction of their way of life.

I recently fought to strip a provision from the 2018 defense-authorization bill that essentially authorizes the secretaries of state and defense to go to war with Iran. Only 60 members of Congress supported my amendment.

While many members of Congress and the Trump administration rail against Iran and are calling for US troops to remain in Syria indefinitely to counter Iran’s influence and presence there, they refuse to acknowledge the fact that the United States regime-change war in Syria has greatly strengthened Iran’s presence and influence in that country. In other words, the Syrian government of Assad has become much more dependent upon and beholden to Iran and Russia, due to our efforts to overthrow their government. This obviously does not serve the national interests of the United States or Israel.

Furthermore, Iran’s presence and influence in Iraq was zero before we overthrew Saddam Hussein. Now Iran is the dominant power in Iraq.

The problem is that our leaders are either extremely shortsighted, or they’re consciously working against the interests of the United States and our allies. The undeniable truth is that the direct result of our overthrowing the regimes of Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, and our efforts to overthrow Bashar al-Assad, has greatly increased the presence and influence of Russia and Iran, as well as Al Qaeda and other jihadists, in all three of those countries.

In short, we have spent trillions of taxpayer dollars and thousands of American lives in order to help those we consider to be our enemies or adversaries. Who needs enemies when we have leaders like this?

JC: President Trump has, over the past year with the addition of John Bolton and the elevation of Mike Pompeo to secretary of state, assembled what might fairly be called a “war cabinet.” Yet, with the notable exceptions of yourself, Representative Ro Khanna, Representative Walter Jones, and Senator Rand Paul, some, but not too may, voices have been raised against the specter of yet another disastrous war in the Greater Middle East. What do you think explains the the silence?

TG: I think there are a number of reasons for this. Some people mean well—they see pictures of children suffering and are moved to want to do something to try to alleviate that suffering. But too often they are shortsighted, waging regime-change wars and dropping bombs, without realizing their actions will likely increase the suffering of the very people they say they want to help.

Others simply do not care that they will cause unnecessary suffering.

Others may be concerned about how speaking out against regime-change wars may impact their political “career” or campaign. They don’t want to be slandered as being “pro-dictator” by the media and on social media. If you were against the regime-change war in Iraq, you’re a Saddam lover. If you were against the regime change war in Libya, you’re a Gaddafi lover. If you ask for evidence before launching a US military attack against a sovereign nation without congressional approval, you will have leaders like Howard Dean saying, “This is a disgrace. This person should not be in Congress!” Our politicians see leading Republicans and Democrats joining hands to smear anyone who stands up against regime-change wars.

Some remain silent because they don’t have the strength to stand up against the corporate lobbyists.

Every politician wants to see themselves as great humanitarians. But sadly, and dangerously, many fail to realize that all too often the path to hell is paved with good intentions.

These well-meaning people make decisions based on emotions, without considering the consequences of their actions. If they see children suffering, and are told by the media that Mr. X is responsible for that suffering, they feel a moral responsibility to get rid of Mr. X.

But they do so without thinking through the consequences of their actions and the likelihood that their decisions will end up causing infinitely greater human suffering.

Just look at the situation in Libya. In order to “save” the Libyan people, we completely destroyed their country. It’s a failed state. They are under the domination of terrorists and slave merchants where women and children are publicly sold in marketplaces. It’s hell on earth. Yet we have not heard a single apology to the Libyan people from any American or European leader who was responsible for this regime-change war. These leaders are not interested in the wasteland that they left behind—they’re too busy planning and promoting new regime-change wars.

The proclamations being made by President Trump, Ambassador Nikki Haley, Secretary Mike Pompeo, and John Bolton about trying to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe and civilian casualties in Idlib, Syria, ring especially hollow. They seem to have completely forgotten our attacks on Mosul and Raqqa—which resulted in many thousands of civilian casualties.

The Trump administration’s proclamations of humanitarianism are just a pretext to protect Al Qaeda and other terrorist forces we have allied with in our quest to overthrow the Syrian government. The bottom line is we don’t want them killed because they work for us. Their interests are our interests, and vice versa.

If the Trump administration and leaders in Congress really cared about preventing civilian casualties, they would end all US support for Saudi Arabia and condemn their genocidal war in Yemen that has killed thousands of civilians with bombs, caused millions to suffer due to forced starvation and cholera, creating the worst humanitarian crisis in the world.

If they were truly concerned about human suffering, they would most certainly not take action to increase the likelihood of direct conflict with Iran or Russia—which could lead to World War III and suffering beyond our imagination.

If they were truly concerned about the suffering of the Syrian people, then they would recognize that intervening to protect the terrorists who are trying to overthrow the Syrian government will simply prolong the war and lead to more suffering for the Syrian people.
_______

James W. Carden is a contributing writer at The Nation and the executive editor for the American Committee for East-West Accord.

https://www.thenation.com/article/tulsi ... -in-syria/


~~~

Tulsi Gabbard Calls Out Trump's Syria Warmongering

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XALBP9c-49g
The Jimmy Dore Show
Published on Sep 14, 2018
conniption
 
Posts: 1897
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby Elvis » Sat Sep 22, 2018 11:34 pm

Here is a list of agreements (it says 13 but I count 14) by which the Syrian government negotiated and facilitated the evacuation of many thousands of civilians to safety from besieged areas and of opposition fighters (foreign and Syrian) allowed to retreat unmolested to areas held by ISIS—mostly in buses provided by the Syrian government. These evacuations are separate from a number of amnesty offers from the government.


Timeline: Syria's 13 'people evacuation' deals
A fact sheet about Syria's evacuation deals between the regime and armed opposition groups.
by Mays Al-Shobassi
16 May 2017

Image

The large blast that targeted Syrian evacuation convoys on Saturday and killed at least dozens of residents who were evacuated from the rebel-besieged towns of Foua and Kefraya in Idlib province under a deal reached between the Syrian government and rebels, has brought the focus back to the evacuation deals signed between the Syrian regime and opposition armed groups.

Since 2014, the Syrian government and the armed opposition groups have reached a series of reconciliation agreements in a number of besieged areas, mainly aiming at allowing armed opposition fighters to leave government-besieged cities and town to opposition-held areas in northern Syria , near the borders with Turkey.

These deals also offer civilians the opportunity to flee conflict zones and allow entry of humanitarian aid into war-afflicted areas. International actors involved in the Syrian conflict such as Russia , Iran and Turkey have been acting as mediators.


While the Syrian government positively regards such reconciliation agreements, armed opposition groups and activists, however, view them as "compulsory displacement" aiming at reshaping the demographic population structure of the country.

"The compulsory deportation agreement in Al Waer neighbourhood in Homs came to announce the forceful entrance of the Russians in line with the [regime's] demographic change plans targeting all those who are regarded by the Syrian regime as part of a 'useful Syria', under the patronage of Russia," wrote Syrian activist and writer Omar Kokash in reference to the recent swap deal carried out on April 8 in Al Waer neighbourhood, the last opposition-held district in Homs, with some 2,500 people expected to leave.

Here is a timeline of the main "people evacuation" agreements that have been implemented since 2014 until the present day.


Homs, February 2014

An agreement was reached between the Syrian regime and the United Nations on the evacuation of Syrian civilians from Homs and the entry of humanitarian aid into the city.


Yarmouk, December 2015

The Syrian Human Rights Observatory reported that the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant ( ISIL , also known as ISIS) and the Syrian regime had reached an agreement to facilitate the departure of ISIL fighters and their families from southern Damascus neighbourhoods, including the al-Yarmouk, the Palestinian refugees camp.

The agreement was discreetly reached between the regime and ISIL through local and international mediation. It stated that the evacuees would be transferred to Beer Qassab town in Damascus's southeastern countryside, Homs's eastern countryside or Raqqa city.


Qamishli City, April 2016

An agreement was reached between the Syrian regime and the Kurdish People's Protection Units in Qamishli city. The agreement stated the following:

The Syrian regime reached a prisoners exchange deal with the Kurdish YPG in April 2016 [Reuters]

• Exchange of prisoners between the two parties.

• Upholding a ceasefire in the city.

• Discussing locations of posts where government forces and pro-government militias would be deployed and others where Kurdish forces would be deployed.

• All Kurds held prisoners by the government in Qamishli since before 2011 must be released.

• The regime will not arrest any Kurd for any reason nor will it arrest any Arab or Christian affiliated with the Kurdish People's Protection Units or working with the Kurdish administration.


Daraya, August 2016

An agreement reached between the Syrian regime and opposition allowed civilians and armed opposition fighters to leave Daraya town in Damascus's countryside. The agreement stated the following:

• Civilians leave Daraya and head to regime-controlled areas in Sahnaya town, in Damascus's countryside.

• Armed fighters leave Daraya and head to Idlib, in northern Syria.

• The agreement is implemented under the supervision of the International Committee of the Red Crescent.


Al Waer, September 2016

" Al Waer Agreement " between the Syrian regime and the opposition under the patronage of the United Nations. The agreement stated the following:

• The regime halts the bombing of Al Waer neighbourhood in Homs.

• Opposition fighters are allowed to leave the neighbourhood, in separate groups, and head towards northern Syria, as follows:

1. Three hundred fighters leave with their families from Al Waer to opposition-held areas in Idlib, and in return, the regime opens all roads leading to the neighbourhood and allows entry of food supplies to the area.
2. The regime releases 200 Al Waer residents held in jail, and in return, 500 opposition armed fighters and their families will leave the neighbourhood and head towards Idlib.
3. The regime reveals information about prisoners held in jail, and in return, 300 opposition armed fighters leave with their families.
4. The opposition withdraws from government sites and posts in the neighbourhood as the rest of the armed fighters leave with their families.
5. The Syrian regime is handed over full control over the neighbourhood.


Moadamiyah, October 2016

Hundreds of armed opposition fighters and their families left on October 19, 2016, the Damascus suburb of Moadamiyah heading towards Idlib, in northern Syria.

Up to 3,000 people were set to leave Moadamiyah as part of this deal between the Syrian regime and the opposition, including 620 armed fighters, their families and people from Daraya and Kafr Sousa who had been living in Moadamiyah after fleeing their homes.

In the same month, an agreement between the Syrian regime and opposition was reached on the departure of 600 opposition fighters with their families from Qudssaya and al-Hama towns in Damascus's countryside. The agreement, effective starting from October 11, stated the following:

• Five hundred opposition fighters and their families leave Qudssaya and head towards Idlib.

• One hundred opposition fighters and their families leave Hama and head towards Idlib.

• The fighters must hand in their weapons.

• Opposition fighters who choose to stay in the towns hand in their arms and get their situation settled by the regime.

• The regime lifts the blockade imposed on civilians in the two towns.

• The regime restores water and electricity services in the two towns.
Civilians carry their belongings after reports of an agreement between rebels and Syria's army to evacuate civilians and rebel fighters from Mouadamiyah, in Damascus [Reuters]


Al Tal, November 2016

An agreement reached between the Syrian regime and the opposition in Al Tal town in Damascus's countryside. The agreement stated the following:

• The opposition hands over Al Tal town to the regime.

• The regime allows opposition fighters, armed with light weapons, to leave Al Tal and head towards Idlib.


Khan al-Sheeh, November 2016

An agreement reached between the Syrian regime and the opposition groups to evacuate all the opposition's armed fighters from the Palestinian refugee camp of Khan al-Sheeh in Damascus's countryside to opposition-held areas in Idlib.

The agreement stated that opposition fighters could keep their light arms but must hand in their medium and heavy arms in return for ending the regime's shelling on the refugee camp, lifting the siege, allowing entry of humanitarian aid and restoring all public services in the camp.


East Aleppo, December 2016

An agreement reached between the Syrian regime and the opposition on the evacuation of civilians and opposition armed fighters from east Aleppo , to head towards Aleppo's northern and western countryside.


Aleppo, December 2016

An agreement between the Syrian armed opposition, including Ahrar al-Sham, on one side, and the Syrian regime and Russia, on the other, to allow the evacuation of civilians from Aleppo . The agreement stated the following:

• Full evacuation of Aleppo civilians in return for the evacuation of a set number of "people" from Kefraya and Foua, in Idlib's countryside, two towns besieged by the opposition's "Jaish al-Fatah", and others from Madaya and Zabadani, in Damascus's countryside, that are besieged by the pro-regime Hezbollah forces.


Wadi Barada, January 2017

"Wadi Barada" agreement signed between the Syrian regime and the opposition through the mediation of a German delegation. The agreement stated the following:

• Ceasefire between the two parties in Wadi Barada region.

• Armed opposition to leave Ain al-Fijeh town and head towards Deir Muqaran village.

• Armed opposition fighters and civilians who choose to remain in Wadi Barada must reach reconciliation with the regime and get their situation settled by the regime. Otherwise, they must leave to Idlib.

• The return of families of opposition fighters who had previously fled from Wadi Barada so they can escort the fighters (their relatives) as they head towards Idlib.


Four Towns agreement, April 2017

The "Four Towns" agreement between the Syrian opposition's "Tahrir al-Sham" and "Ahrar al-Sham", on one side, and the Syrian government, the Lebanese Hezbollah and the Iranian side, on the other. The agreement stated the following:

• Up to 3,800 people, including opposition fighters, to leave from Zabadani, in Damascus's countryside, and head towards Idlib.

• Up to 8,000 people, including pro-regime militiamen, to leave from Kefraya and Foua, in Idlib's countryside, and head towards Aleppo.

• Exchange of prisoners and dead bodies.

• Departure of those who want to leave Madaya, Zabadani and Bloudan towards the north.

• Release of 1,500 prisoners held by the Syrian government, mostly women.

• Resolving the case of 50 families, originally from Zabadani and Madaya, stuck in Lebanon in return for the departure of all of Kefraya and Foua's residents in two groups.


Foua and Kefraya, April 15

A large blast in Rashidin, west of Aleppo, targeted residents who were evacuated from the rebel-besieged towns of Foua and Kefraya in Idlib province under a deal reached between the Syrian government and rebels. the attack has killed dozens of people.


Qaboun and Barzeh, May 15

More than 1,500 rebels and their family members left the devastated district of Qaboun on the edge of Damascus on Sunday, as the Syrian army and its allies continue to advance in areas in and around the capital, rebels and state media said.

Hundreds of rebels and their families were also evacuated from the adjacent Barzeh district after rebels there decided to lay down their arms and leave to rebel-held Idlib province.

SOURCE: Al Jazeera
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Mays Al-Shobassi


Image
Syrian Army forces look on as buses leave Al Waer neighbourhood during a truce between the government and rebels in Homs [Reuters]


Image
Aleppo residents gather to get onto buses to take them out of the besieged city [Malek al-Shimale/Al Jazeera]

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/featu ... 13089.html



"Cleansing"? "Annihiliation"? I can't understand why the "bloodthirsty" Assad didn't just slaughter them all. :roll:
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 6658
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby Sounder » Sun Sep 23, 2018 5:57 am

Takfiri headchoppers are the best, those guys are real liberators.

I hear they are not big on minority or women's rights, but there is a larger imperative here and when applied with a higher level of critical analysis it becomes plain to see who it is that right thinking people must support.

And if you do not agree, you are (that most vile of creatures) a Putin lover (yuck).
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby DrEvil » Sun Sep 23, 2018 7:25 am

DrEvil » Tue Sep 18, 2018 2:42 pm wrote:
Sounder » Tue Sep 18, 2018 2:27 am wrote:And yet, here is a 'state' you are happy to support.



What about theft as being a distinction that matters?


Any chance of summing up this video in a few short sentences? What's the gist of it? I'm not wasting an hour on a bunch of UKIPers, and I'm not giving an anti-feminist gamergate fucktard any extra Youtube views. Thanks in advance.


Since you ignored my question I went ahead and suffered my way through most of it. It's just a bunch of UKIP morons reciting Brexit talking points. It's a political attack ad, made for and by UKIP. There's nothing new there for anyone who pays even minimal attention to how the EU works.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 2943
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby JackRiddler » Sun Sep 23, 2018 8:44 am

Video is very low-grade response as a post here, distraction, off-topic.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15254
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 5 guests