An invasion of Syria, will barbacue the United States!

Billo_Really

Litre of the Band
Aug 14, 2005
41,808
7,366
1,830
Long Beach, Ca
Russia has come out and said any attack on Syria, it will consider a threat to its national security and would respond with nuclear weapons.

Russia has repeatedly stated that it would consider an attack on Syria as an attack on its national security. (And Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said that if the U.S. invades the sovereignty of countries like Syria, it could lead to nuclear war.

Everyone in the world can see we're going from country to country, making up reasons to invade sovereign nations and change the existing regimes to more US friendly rulers. And people who support this aggression, are completely retarded if they think we can just continue to do this with no opposition.

"We're the only super power, no one will fuck with us!"

Well guess again! Russia has drawn a line in the sand. And that line is Syria.

I can't predict the future; what I can predict, is what I'm gonna do if I hear Russia launched its ICBM's. I figure I've got about 20 minutes to go out and find me a neocon and beat the holy shit out of him! That will be my last act on earth. Beating some war-mongering asshole into a coma, is just my way of saying, "Fuck you, very much, for destroying this planet!"
 
Think yer info is a little outdated...

... lately Russia has seen the handwriting on the wall...

... and more or less abandoned Assad...

... and welcome anyone who would take him off their hands...

... since they're not willing to grant him asylum themselves.
:redface:
UN envoy says Syrian collapse threatens region
Dec 29,`12 -- The United Nations envoy for Syria warned on Saturday that the country's civil war could plunge the entire region into chaos by sending hundreds of thousands of refugees into neighboring nations, but his talks in Moscow produced no sign of progress toward settling the crisis.
Lakhdar Brahimi and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov both said after their meeting that the 21-month-old Syrian conflict can only be settled through talks, while admitting that the parties in the conflict have shown no desire for compromise. Neither official hinted at a possible solution that would persuade the Syrian government and the opposition to agree to a ceasefire and sit down for talks about a political transition. Brahimi, who arrived in Moscow on a one-day trip following his talks in Damascus with Syrian President Bashar Assad this week, voiced concern about the escalation of the conflict, which he said is becoming "more and more sectarian."

The envoy warned that "if you have a panic in Damascus and if you have 1 million people leaving Damascus in a panic, they can go to only two places - Lebanon and Jordan," and those countries may not be able to endure half a million refugees each. Brahimi said that "if the only alternative is really hell or a political process, then we have got all of us to work ceaselessly for a political process." Russia has been the main supporter of Assad's regime since the uprising began in March 2011, using its veto at the U.N. Security Council along with China to shield its last Mideast ally from international sanctions.

Lavrov said Russia would continue to oppose any U.N. resolution that would call for international sanctions against Assad and open the way for a foreign intervention in Syria. And while he again emphasized that Russia "isn't holding onto Bashar Assad," he added that Moscow continues to believe the opposition demand for his resignation as a precondition for peace talks is "counterproductive." "The price for that precondition will be the loss of more Syrian lives," Lavrov said. He said Assad is refusing to step down, adding that "there is no possibility to change that stance." Both Brahimi and Lavrov insisted that efforts to end the civil war must be based on a peace plan that was approved at an international conference in Geneva in June.

The Geneva plan calls for an open-ended cease-fire, a transitional government to run the country until elections, and the drafting of a new constitution. But it was a non-starter with the opposition because of Russia's insistence that the plan leave the door open for Assad being part of the transition process and the fact that it didn't mention possible U.N. sanctions. Brahimi said that while some "little adjustments" could be made to the original plan, "it's a valued basis for reasonable political process." With the opposition offensive gaining momentum in Syria, there is little hope that the initiative would have any more chance of success than it had when it was approved.

MORE

See also:

Syria faces 'hell' if no deal to end crisis - UN envoy
29 December 2012 - The opposition says more than 44,000 people have been killed over the past 21 months
Syria faces a stark choice between a political solution to end 21 months of bloodshed or "hell", United Nations peace envoy Lakhdar Brahimi has warned. Mr Brahimi, speaking after talks in Moscow, said the conflict had become more militarised and sectarian. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov agreed talks were the only solution. But he said Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's removal could not be a condition for talks, as demanded by the Syrian opposition. Mr Brahimi, who arrived in the Russian capital after talks in Damascus with President Assad, expressed concern at the escalation of the war. It risked becoming "a mainly sectarian conflict, with dire consequences for the Syrian people," he said.

It also risked bringing chaos to the region with neighbouring Lebanon and Jordan overrun by refugees, he said. "The only alternative is really hell, or a political process, then we have got all of us to work ceaselessly for the political process," Mr Brahimi said. "The magnitude of the problem that exists now and the magnitude of the problem that exists tomorrow cannot be ignored." Mr Brahimi is trying to seek a way out of the crisis on the basis of a peace plan approved at an international conference in June, but which left President Assad's role unclear. Both he and Mr Lavrov agreed that a negotiated end to the conflict was still possible but neither man gave indication of ways out of the impasse.

Mr Lavrov said the opposition's demand for Mr Assad's removal was "wrong" and their refusal to talk to the Assad government a "dead end". On Friday, Mr Lavrov announced that Russia had agreed to hold talks with the Syrian opposition. But the opposition rejected the offer and said Russia should apologise for backing Mr Assad. Russia, as Mr Assad's main and most powerful international supporter, is a key player in finding a diplomatic solution. Rebels have been fighting the Syrian government for 21 months. Opposition groups say more than 44,000 people have been killed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20866868
 
Last edited:
Am i reading this right? Russia will go to full blown nuclear war with the US in order to protect Syria? Help me understand this. They are going to kill themselves for Syria?

What the fuck have you been smoking?
 
Hundreds Executed In Syria...
:eusa_eh:
Deadly day in Syria as diplomats talk
Sat December 29, 2012 - Opposition reports 399 dead, including 201 a Syrian solder says were executed; State TV reports Syrian forces seize weapons in tunnel used by "terrorists"; Russian foreign minister joins a U.N. envoy in trying to forge a political solution to Syria's war; He says he's surprised the Syrian opposition put conditions on talks
Russia's top diplomat and an international envoy to Syria warned Saturday that the Middle East nation's conflict is becoming more militarized and sectarian, further endangering the region. The statements came on what may be the bloodiest day since the unrest's start 21 months ago: At least 399 people were killed Saturday, the opposition Local Coordination Committees said, the highest daily death toll the group has ever reported. The figure includes 201 people who a captured Syrian soldier said had been executed in Deir Balbah, outside of Homs, after Syrian forces won a battle there, an LCC spokesman said.

The Syrian government has not commented on the alleged mass execution in Deir Balbah. But Syrian state TV did show images of dead bodies and seized weapons in tunnels in that city it claims were being used by "terrorists," the term it routinely uses to describe opposition fighters. A corresponding report on state TV's website, citing a source, said "explosive devices weighing between 15 (and) 50 kilograms" were seized, and Syrian troops "killed and injured several terrorists in the area, while the rest fled." CNN cannot independently confirm casualty and other reports as Syria's government has severely restricted access to the country.

Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Lakhdar Brahimi, the joint U.N.-Arab League envoy, held a meeting aimed at halting any such violence by bringing both sides to the negotiating table. Brahimi warned the civil war was devolving into fighting between factions jostling for power, rather than an effort centered on bettering the lives of all Syrians. "I think Sergey Lavrov is absolutely right that the conflict is not only more and more militarized, it is more and more sectarian," Brahimi told reporters after the talks in Moscow.

Their meeting appeared to signal a shift by Russia, which has staunchly opposed efforts by the U.N. Security Council to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a longtime ally. Moscow remains opposed to any foreign intervention. But as the conflict rages and the casualty count climbs to an estimated 40,000, Russia appears willing to look at options for a political transition in Syria. "Russia is in contact with all sides in Syria. Our priority is to stop violence," Lavrov said, adding only Syrians ultimately should decide their fate. "A lot of things now depend on external players. It's very important to stop actions that lead to militarization."

More Deadly day in Syria as diplomats talk - CNN.com

See also:

International Syria envoy warns of surge in deaths
Dec 30,`12 -- The international envoy to Syria warned Sunday that as many as 100,000 could die in the next year if a way cannot be found quickly to end the country's civil war.
Lakhdar Brahimi, the U.N.-Arab League envoy for the Syrian crisis, told reporters in Cairo that if the crisis continues Syria will not be divided into states "like what happened in Yugoslavia" but will face "Somalization, which means warlords, and the Syrian people will be persecuted by those who control their fate." Syrian rebels are fighting a 21-month-old revolt against President Bashar Assad's regime. Activists say more than 40,000 people have been killed in the crisis, which began with pro-democracy protests but has morphed into a civil war. Since starting his job in September, Brahimi has sought to advance an international plan, reached in Geneva six months ago, that calls for an open-ended cease-fire between rebels and government troops and the formation of a transitional government to run the country until elections can be held.

Over the past week Brahimi went to Damascus where he met Assad then flew to Moscow, one of Syria's closest international allies, where he discussed ways of ending the country's crisis. "The situation in Syria is bad. Very, very bad," Brahimi said after meeting Arab League chief Nabil Elaraby. "It is getting worse and therefore if nearly 50,000 were killed in nearly two years if, God forbids, this crisis continues for another year, it will not only kill 25,000. It will kill 100,000. The situation is deteriorating." The monthly death toll in Syria rose over the past months, as both sides have used heavier weapons and as the Syrian army started using its warplanes to attack rebel-held areas around the country.

Brahimi said that peace and security in the world will be threatened directly from Syria if there is no solution within the next few months. "I warn of what will come. The choice is between a political solution or of full collapse of the Syrian state." Asked if there is any willingness by Assad and the opposition to go into a political process, Brahimi said, "No, there isn't. This is the problem." He added that the two sides don't talk to each other and there is need for help from outside. Brahimi hinted that that the Geneva plan might be adopted by the U.N. Security Council, saying, "We have a suggestion and I think that this suggestion will be adopted by the international community."

The Geneva plan was reached in international conferences this summer and has the backing of Russia and China, which have shielded Damascus, as well as the West. But neither side within Syria appears interested. The rebels reject any efforts that do not call for the ouster of Assad, and Assad's government is unlikely to give up power voluntarily. It is unclear if Security Council backing would significantly up the pressure on either side to support it. In Syria, activists reported violence from area ranging from the northern provinces of Idlib, Aleppo and Raqqa to the capital Damascus and its suburbs, to the central regions of Hama and Homs, to Daraa in the south.

MORE
 
Last edited:
Russia may be in agreement that Assad is on the outs. But they ain't going to put up with a Middle East locked up by the US.

Neither will China.

And that's the bottom line.
 
Maybe it's not the choice of any of those three nations to make?

Not that I disagree with you about how Russia or China sees the situation!
 
Last edited:
MHunterB, et al,

It really doesn't matter what Russia, China or anyone else thinks. The US should not base its action on what other externals think.

By the same token, US action should be well thought out, and do no harm in the end. The Foreign Policy should be based on the concept that - whatever action we take - the outcome must either:
  • Benefit Regional Peace.
OR​
  • Be benign, not effecting the outcome.
Maybe it's not the choice of any of those three nations to make?

Not that I disagree with you about how Russia or China sees the situation!
(COMMENT)

When we strip away the superfluous politics out of the equation, I think most agree that Russia has (quite effectively) worked to maintain an imbalance in the Middle East, and contributed to the chaos in regional security (very effectively!). China, as been the silent player, for the most part, and not initiated policies that have contributed to the destabilization. The US, whatever its intention, has not been successful in stabilizing the region, rebuilding the peace, and contributing to the economic prosperity for any of the countries involved. The US Middle East Foreign Policy has been an unqualified failure. And the US needs to take that into account when considering getting involved in the events that describe Syria today.

The US should back away from Syria, whatever the outcome might be. Not because we are threatened by other world powers, but because, every single time the US intervenes in that region of the world, the outcomes becomes extremely complicated, unpredictable and (ultimately) less than successful. Iraq, no matter how well intentioned our motives, is damn near a total failure, and was a complete disaster. This region of the world has repeatedly demonstrated that it will bit the hand that helps it.

The Real Outcome of the Iraq War: US and Iranian Strategic Competition in Iraq said:
Iraq remains a violent and unstable place, with Iranian influence on the rise. The political, economic, and security situation in Iraq, as well as the US and Iranian competition in the country, are all examined in depth in a new report from the Burke Chair entitled “The Real Outcome of the Iraq War: US and Iranian Strategic Competition in Iraq” which is available on the CSIS web site at: http://csis.org/files/publication/120308_Combined_Iraq_Chapter.pdf
SOURCE: The Real Outcome of the Iraq War: US and Iranian Strategic Competition in Iraq | Center for Strategic and International Studies

Just because the US wants to appear to be a contributing factor in the development of Syria, does not mean that we have the knowledge, skills and diplomatic abilities to make a positive contribution. If the track record holds, Syria will, if the government is brought down, become just another regime under the influence of another terrorist organization. One needs only look at the outcomes of the US involvement in Gaza (HAMAS), Egypt and Lebanon (Muslim Brotherhood), and Afghanistan (Corrupt Regime). Iraq, well, it is what it is, an Iranian Puppet, that arrange to install al-Maliki as PM.

If Syria follows this same path, the US should just back away, and not get entangled. We don't want to be (again) responsible for a failed endeavor that will further degrade the reputation of the US, create more enemies, cost more money, and send us to the hospital for even more stitches.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
Russia has come out and said any attack on Syria, it will consider a threat to its national security and would respond with nuclear weapons.

Russia has repeatedly stated that it would consider an attack on Syria as an attack on its national security. (And Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said that if the U.S. invades the sovereignty of countries like Syria, it could lead to nuclear war.

Everyone in the world can see we're going from country to country, making up reasons to invade sovereign nations and change the existing regimes to more US friendly rulers. And people who support this aggression, are completely retarded if they think we can just continue to do this with no opposition.

"We're the only super power, no one will fuck with us!"

Well guess again! Russia has drawn a line in the sand. And that line is Syria.

I can't predict the future; what I can predict, is what I'm gonna do if I hear Russia launched its ICBM's. I figure I've got about 20 minutes to go out and find me a neocon and beat the holy shit out of him! That will be my last act on earth. Beating some war-mongering asshole into a coma, is just my way of saying, "Fuck you, very much, for destroying this planet!"

With all due respect, I could NOT find words about "respond with nuclear weapons" coming from anyone within Russian official quarters...
 
When we strip away the superfluous politics out of the equation, I think most agree that Russia has (quite effectively) worked to maintain an imbalance in the Middle East, and contributed to the chaos in regional security (very effectively!).

Really?!

So, its not US, UK, SA and Qatar who finance, arm, hire "freedom fighters" and stage "popular revolutions" throughout ME and N. Africa? Its Russia and China?

Are you sure of that?
 
If obama sends troops into syria without congressional approval, he will have committed treason, and that is a impeachable offense.
 
Russia has come out and said any attack on Syria, it will consider a threat to its national security and would respond with nuclear weapons.

Russia has repeatedly stated that it would consider an attack on Syria as an attack on its national security. (And Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said that if the U.S. invades the sovereignty of countries like Syria, it could lead to nuclear war.

Everyone in the world can see we're going from country to country, making up reasons to invade sovereign nations and change the existing regimes to more US friendly rulers. And people who support this aggression, are completely retarded if they think we can just continue to do this with no opposition.

"We're the only super power, no one will fuck with us!"

Well guess again! Russia has drawn a line in the sand. And that line is Syria.

I can't predict the future; what I can predict, is what I'm gonna do if I hear Russia launched its ICBM's. I figure I've got about 20 minutes to go out and find me a neocon and beat the holy shit out of him! That will be my last act on earth. Beating some war-mongering asshole into a coma, is just my way of saying, "Fuck you, very much, for destroying this planet!"

Dumb fuck, if we go to war in Syria it will be because Obama and the Democrats decided to do it. But you live that ignorant fantasy.
 
If obama sends troops into syria without congressional approval, he will have committed treason, and that is a impeachable offense.

He has 90 days to do as he pleases. And then it would not be treason it would simply be a disagreement between him and Congress. If Congress wanted to they could shut the operation down.
 
Russia may be in agreement that Assad is on the outs. But they ain't going to put up with a Middle East locked up by the US.

Neither will China.

And that's the bottom line.

Neither will Obama

That's why he's helping the Muslim Brotherhood
 
obama will do nothing about Syria. He will flap his lips about red lines and everyone will laugh in his face. Everyone but obama worshippers. They will still grovel at his cheesy toes.

Syria is a foreign policy disaster. It is evidence of the utter failure of the asinine reset he fumbled with Russia. If obama took his head out of his ass for a moment he would have realized that Russia wasn't going to give Assad up. obama farts must have hallucinagenic properties. It's the only explanation.
 
When we strip away the superfluous politics out of the equation, I think most agree that Russia has (quite effectively) worked to maintain an imbalance in the Middle East, and contributed to the chaos in regional security (very effectively!). China, as been the silent player, for the most part, and not initiated policies that have contributed to the destabilization. The US, whatever its intention, has not been successful in stabilizing the region, rebuilding the peace, and contributing to the economic prosperity for any of the countries involved. The US Middle East Foreign Policy has been an unqualified failure. And the US needs to take that into account when considering getting involved in the events that describe Syria today.

As usual, you really boil it down to the basic facts.

Russia (and before it the Soviet Union) has tried to keep the region unstable, because that benefited them. After all, look at the amount of weapons and "advisors" they have been supplying the region with for decades.

For years, they were selling or giving some of their weapons to groups so that they could be tested. Generations of tanks, rockets and aircraft have been sold just so one ME nation could use against the other, or against Israel. And the turmoil benefitted them for a long time.

Now, the US has largely stepped in. And for the most part, things have gotten remarkably calm. Almost no nations are threatening Israel. They are no longer constantly threatening to invade each other like they did 30 years ago. And a lot of the borders that were almost armed no-man-land are now quite often open borders (I remember standing at the Qatar-Saudi border, an abandoned military observation post looking across a ripped up barbed wire fence and miles of open desert).

We are now a long ways away from the era of Middle Eastern nations constantly fighting amonst each other. Iran-Iraq, Iraq-Kuwait, and all the other conflicts in the region are largely a thing of the past. Now most of the conflicts are internal, in the most repressive countries.
 
Russia (and before it the Soviet Union) has tried to keep the region unstable,

People, you really are out of your mind!

What country stands behind all these "coloured revolutions" and "arab springs" -- Russia or USA?!
It was US invention -- "coloured revolutions" -- read your Gene Sharp for goodness sake!
Read your Paul Craig Roberts: "Washington is all for invading against Libya and is putting more and more pressure to intervene in Syria because we want to ... clear China and Russia out of the Mediterranean,..
...the CIA is involved in the protests...
...the CIA is the originator of this so-called revolt and protest and is fomenting it and controlling it...
It’s a CIA operation, not a legitimate protest of the Libyan people.
...Once a political decision has been reached to proceed with internal disturbances in Syria, CIA is prepared, and SIS (MI6) will attempt to mount minor sabotage and coup de main (sic) incidents within Syria, working through contacts with individuals. …Incidents should not be concentrated in Damascus..."

US create instability as an excuse to stomp into a country and remain there -- its called "manageable chaos", and it is also US invention!

You are one fucked up nation from the very top to the last member of your sick society!
 
The muslim brotherhood sees stability by restoring the caliphate, and creating a global caliphate. obama is helping them.
 
Russia (and before it the Soviet Union) has tried to keep the region unstable,

People, you really are out of your mind!

What country stands behind all these "coloured revolutions" and "arab springs" -- Russia or USA?!

Uhhh, in case you got lost there, we had been talking about the past several decades for one thing, not the last few months.

And the CIA may have helped fund some of these movements, they certainly did not create them. Or are you going to try to tell us the CIA created the Muslim Brotherhood?
 

Forum List

Back
Top