Why do we (the US) want Assad overthrown again? Are the Russians right on this?

[kaz]

Assad is a Shiite. ISIS and Assad's opposition are Sunni. Which is why the US just gave up on getting Sunnis to fight ISIS, they want to fight Assad.

So why is it in the US interest if Assad is overthrown? That directly appears to benefit ISIS. They are Sunnis and a Sunni government would run Syria, they would not be enemies, which would allow ISIS to devote their anti-Syrian government resources towards Iraq and other fronts.

Whatever the reason, do the Russians have this one right?

 

[kaz]

And Obama therefore has it wrong?

 

[Brain357]

Assad is a Shiite. ISIS and Assad's opposition are Sunni. Which is why the US just gave up on getting Sunnis to fight ISIS, they want to fight Assad.

So why is it in the US interest if Assad is overthrown? That directly appears to benefit ISIS. They are Sunnis and a Sunni government would run Syria, they would not be enemies, which would allow ISIS to devote their anti-Syrian government resources towards Iraq and other fronts.

Whatever the reason, do the Russians have this one right?

Place seemed more stable with Assad fully in charge. This is just like the disaster created by getting rid of saddam.

 

[kaz]

Assad is a Shiite. ISIS and Assad's opposition are Sunni. Which is why the US just gave up on getting Sunnis to fight ISIS, they want to fight Assad.

So why is it in the US interest if Assad is overthrown? That directly appears to benefit ISIS. They are Sunnis and a Sunni government would run Syria, they would not be enemies, which would allow ISIS to devote their anti-Syrian government resources towards Iraq and other fronts.

Whatever the reason, do the Russians have this one right?

Place seemed more stable with Assad fully in charge. This is just like the disaster created by getting rid of saddam.

Agreed. It makes no sense to topple another government over there in a location where there are nothing but bad guys

 

[Tehon]

So why is it in the US interest if Assad is overthrown? That directly appears to benefit ISIS. They are Sunnis and a Sunni government would run Syria, they would not be enemies, which would allow ISIS to devote their anti-Syrian government resources towards Iraq and other fronts.

Because we are allied with the Saudis and Israel. Both saw a strengthening of Iran across the region after the fall of Saddam Hussein and the appointment of Nouri al-Maliki. Throwing the region into chaos and removing Assad, Iran's ally, essentially diminishes Iran's influence.

 

[kaz]

So why is it in the US interest if Assad is overthrown? That directly appears to benefit ISIS. They are Sunnis and a Sunni government would run Syria, they would not be enemies, which would allow ISIS to devote their anti-Syrian government resources towards Iraq and other fronts.

Because we are allied with the Saudis and Israel. Both saw a strengthening of Iran across the region after the fall of Saddam Hussein and the appointment of Nouri al-Maliki. Throwing the region into chaos and removing Assad, Iran's ally, essentially diminishes Iran's influence.

LOL, the liberals are avoiding explaining what Obama even wants after he got bitch slapped by Putin ... again ...

Obama, an idiot in search of a solution

 

[chao$]

So why is it in the US interest if Assad is overthrown? That directly appears to benefit ISIS. They are Sunnis and a Sunni government would run Syria, they would not be enemies, which would allow ISIS to devote their anti-Syrian government resources towards Iraq and other fronts.

Because we are allied with the Saudis and Israel. Both saw a strengthening of Iran across the region after the fall of Saddam Hussein and the appointment of Nouri al-Maliki. Throwing the region into chaos and removing Assad, Iran's ally, essentially diminishes Iran's influence.

Iran has 10% of the world's oil reserves. That gives them a lot of influence on both the petrodollar and BRICS. The U.S. empire thrives on creating as much chaos in the world as possible. That will end once the people get tired of all the blood.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Tehon]

So why is it in the US interest if Assad is overthrown? That directly appears to benefit ISIS. They are Sunnis and a Sunni government would run Syria, they would not be enemies, which would allow ISIS to devote their anti-Syrian government resources towards Iraq and other fronts.

Because we are allied with the Saudis and Israel. Both saw a strengthening of Iran across the region after the fall of Saddam Hussein and the appointment of Nouri al-Maliki. Throwing the region into chaos and removing Assad, Iran's ally, essentially diminishes Iran's influence.

LOL, the liberals are avoiding explaining what Obama even wants after he got bitch slapped by Putin ... again ...

Obama, an idiot in search of a solution

Liberals for the most part are in denial about Obama's policies because we don't have service men and woman coming home in body bags on a daily basis. Apparently human suffering is fine as long as it doesn't encroach on their senses.

 

[Tehon]

So why is it in the US interest if Assad is overthrown? That directly appears to benefit ISIS. They are Sunnis and a Sunni government would run Syria, they would not be enemies, which would allow ISIS to devote their anti-Syrian government resources towards Iraq and other fronts.

Because we are allied with the Saudis and Israel. Both saw a strengthening of Iran across the region after the fall of Saddam Hussein and the appointment of Nouri al-Maliki. Throwing the region into chaos and removing Assad, Iran's ally, essentially diminishes Iran's influence.

Iran has 10% of the world's oil reserves. That gives them a lot of influence on both the petrodollar and BRICS. The U.S. empire thrives on creating as much chaos in the world as possible. That will end once the people get tired of all the blood.

How does that relate to the US policy of supporting the overthrow of Assad?

 

[chao$]

How does that relate to the US policy of supporting the overthrow of Assad?

It creates a struggle for power that is shown in the video posted by P F Tinmore. The idea is to destabilize a sovereign nation so western banks, oil and food companies can take control of the region.

 

[P F Tinmore]

How does that relate to the US policy of supporting the overthrow of Assad?

It creates a struggle for power that is shown in the video posted by P F Tinmore. The idea is to destabilize a sovereign nation so western banks, oil and food companies can take control of the region.

Thank you.
In chaos there is opportunity for theft.

A common scenario. A people can live in a place for thousands of years. Foreigners show up with guns and the next thing you see is food aid.

 

[chao$]

Thank you.
In chaos there is opportunity for theft.

A common scenario. A people can live in a place for thousands of years. Foreigners show up with guns and the next thing you see is food aid.

That's the part Gad Saad conveniently excludes from his evolutionary behavioral theory.

 

[kaz]

Wow, she's a hottie

 

[kaz]

So why is it in the US interest if Assad is overthrown? That directly appears to benefit ISIS. They are Sunnis and a Sunni government would run Syria, they would not be enemies, which would allow ISIS to devote their anti-Syrian government resources towards Iraq and other fronts.

Because we are allied with the Saudis and Israel. Both saw a strengthening of Iran across the region after the fall of Saddam Hussein and the appointment of Nouri al-Maliki. Throwing the region into chaos and removing Assad, Iran's ally, essentially diminishes Iran's influence.

LOL, the liberals are avoiding explaining what Obama even wants after he got bitch slapped by Putin ... again ...

Obama, an idiot in search of a solution

Liberals for the most part are in denial about Obama's policies because we don't have service men and woman coming home in body bags on a daily basis. Apparently human suffering is fine as long as it doesn't encroach on their senses.

You really think it would bother liberals if Obama was sending people home in body bags? No chance. We already know that, there was no reaction once he took over Iraq or expanded Afghanistan

 

[Timmy]

Tough question . Assad is bad news, but to dump him leaves a power vacuum.

Look at Lybia . We have to decide , do we want freedom over there or stability . Can't have both .

 

[Brain357]

Tough question . Assad is bad news, but to dump him leaves a power vacuum.

Look at Lybia . We have to decide , do we want freedom over there or stability . Can't have both .

They can become unstable just fine without our help. We should stay away.

 

[Tehon]

So why is it in the US interest if Assad is overthrown? That directly appears to benefit ISIS. They are Sunnis and a Sunni government would run Syria, they would not be enemies, which would allow ISIS to devote their anti-Syrian government resources towards Iraq and other fronts.

Because we are allied with the Saudis and Israel. Both saw a strengthening of Iran across the region after the fall of Saddam Hussein and the appointment of Nouri al-Maliki. Throwing the region into chaos and removing Assad, Iran's ally, essentially diminishes Iran's influence.

LOL, the liberals are avoiding explaining what Obama even wants after he got bitch slapped by Putin ... again ...

Obama, an idiot in search of a solution

Liberals for the most part are in denial about Obama's policies because we don't have service men and woman coming home in body bags on a daily basis. Apparently human suffering is fine as long as it doesn't encroach on their senses.

You really think it would bother liberals if Obama was sending people home in body bags? No chance. We already know that, there was no reaction once he took over Iraq or expanded Afghanistan

It would cause them to confront the human suffering Obama's policies have been inflicting on innocents. And I'm sure the republicans would force the conversation.

 

[tyroneweaver]

And Obama therefore has it wrong?

that about sums it up