The Syrian "Revolution": A Farce from Beginning to End

The use of a term "Ruskies" undermines racism towards people of Russia, just pointing out.

Ah yes we can definitely trust a site with ".us" and "islamofascism" brand in its top right corner. DEBKAfile Ltd. is Israeli radical POV propaganda media, they are often the only source of the information.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Meh...but at least the "dust up" kept all the unimportant things like the Economy and NSA spying and Eric Snowden and BerghaziGate and HillaryGate and Fukushima and...etc, out of the Headlines!

To Whom it May Concern...the sentence typed ^^above^^ is chock full of heavy sarcasm.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

For me Ruskies is an endearment. I have had a great deal of respect for the Ruskies in the past, but I am not a fan of their current leader.

Can you offer up what you deem as respectable sites?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

They may be reluctant to defend Syria, but Iran is Russia's Cuba.
It would be a mistake for America to expect them to blink when it comes to Iran.

As regards Putin, he has dragged Russia back from the brink of chaos.
His Mafioso mentality has helped him to do that.

 

We would not be attacking Iran, so I don't see what the deal is.

And that has to do with the price of cheese how? Again: What made striking against Libya so easy and yet makes striking against syria so hard?

 

Why then does it constantly criticize Israeli leaders and push the Palestinian peace process? On the first account government propaganda websites don't usually criticize their own leaders, and on the second account it conflicts with the radical Israeli right-wing viewpoint. It gives enough info and commentary for me to at least take it with a grain of salt, and it discusses details you almost never find elsewhere, whether based on factual info or false intel. Even if half the leaks are coming from the Mossad, I still want to know what they're claiming to see and what they predict for the future.

As to the sites you prefer for your information- when do they ever criticize Syrian, Iranian or Russian policy (as being too crazy rather than not crazy enough)? What significant developments have they ever predicted, how do you verify their claims?

 

This analysis of Islam, Terrorism and the US-Russian Rivalry is well worth the read guys and gals.

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/5060

 

It's related to the fact that Libya has oil and location.

It's related to the fact that the word "farce" connected with Syria suddenly and simultaneously appeared in thousands of venues all through the US media, in the writings of people not formerly known for their fusty lit-crit vocabulary.

It's related to the fact that when a US President of the correct Party (for impunity) took it upon himself to employ the US Air Force in an attempt at in home assassination of a foreign head of state using missiles, and ended up killing instead some family and employees and houseguests including the despot's young niece, that established a precedent for the treatment of Libya and a category (alleged supporter of Islamic terrorism) that if well prepared in advance could deflect even Partisan repercussions. (The years of Foxing necessary for the making of a monstrous Assad have been spent making monsters elsewhere).

It's related to the fact that when David Fucking Brooks takes his regular pundit seat at the mic on the the flagship of allegedly "liberal" media, NPR radio, and declares in his ever-so-reasonable "adult" voice that 1) his favored political power group's latest manifestation of its Partisan agenda and scorched earth crippling of all of the current administration's policy initiatives foreign and otherwise is not a manifestation of a scorched earth Partisan agenda and crippling all of the current administration's policy initiatives foreign and otherwise, and offers as evidence

2) a claimed record of consistent support for military strikes at the President's behest regardless of Partisan affiliation since 1945, only interrupted now because of the new and unusual weakness/incompetence/unpopularity/whatever of the current President,

3) nobody on air laughs in his face, the subjects of Bosnia, Clinton, etc, are not introduced, and

4) DFB is invited back on to take his regular seat in this most "liberal" of venues and paid handsomely for his punditry as long as he deigns to show up.

 

Try looking at an Atlas.

 

Why should we strike Syria and risk killing innocent civilians?

Here's what should happen!

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/09/10/assad-committed-a-war-crime-he-should-stand-trial/

 

He will most likely be ripped apart in the streets like his counterpart in Libya.

 

@wegs
You mean "Here's what should (ideally) happen."
It aint gonna happen.

 

Obama had better not walk the streets of Washington then.
He has a lower approval rating in the United States than Assad in Syria.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jan/17/syrians-support-assad-western-propaganda
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/15491675-obama-approval-rating-slips

 

Yeep, got one here, what am I looking for, eh?

 

You say po-tay-toe, I say po-tah-toe.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Yes...'ideally.'

 

other countries besides states of north america.

 

See it does work.

 

Imagine if we had yelled out "WAR! FIGHT! KILL!"? It would be a different place today.

 

How close the countries are to Russia.

@robbity
It certainly would.

 

I woke up this morning and even on CNN they said the Americans can live with Assad staying in power, now that is the first time I heard that from the US and that was after what I had said on the thread, so I'm not copying.
Yes he doesn't want democracy but there comes a time when rulers have to come to their senses.
I think he realizes now the time is ready for a change, at least he is still in control. So he can have the role as President but the people are ruled by the elected Parliament.
I think this is a fair outcome. If the plan can be made to work 100% of the CW will be destroyed whereas a military strike would have only taken out 15 -30% of them. ( figures from Amanpour this morning)