rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 23,407
- 4,953
- 290
You ignore that Israeli attacks would not benefit the Syrian offensive.I mean the denial of the fact that there are no Iranian or Iranian-backed forces partaking. The Russians just confirmed it:You won´t have peace ever with that attitude.I like it when You try to sooth me with fairytales, about what happens in an hour drive from my home.
You're trying to deny the most evident
My attitude is that for the sake of having an independent country,
all foreseeable scenarios must be analyzed.
One doesn't get peace by neglecting the art of war, it also doesn't mean that alternativas to worst scenarios are not considered, or that they will occur in the first place.
MOSCOW, July 19./TASS/. There are no pro-Iranian armed units in the south of Syria, Russian Ambassador in Damascus Alexander Kinshchak told reporters on Thursday.
No pro-Iranian units in southern Syria — Russian ambassador
I'm sure even Kinshchak doesn't believe the words he utters.
The concerns were laid on the table, possible outcomes are being discussed.
Trying to convince me not to use common sense is not a sign of a constructive exchange, definitely not a way to reach an understanding, it only raises more concern and distrust between the sides.
I'm directly discussing the issue, putting the most evident concerns on the table.
The conditions for these attacks were laid clearly, explained to all sides in a straightforward manner. Every Iranian dog from the Iraqi border to the west should know that his nose is hooked to a satellite tracker.
All I'm saying is there're thousands of Syrians gathering at the Israeli border, and there's a high probability that a 3rd party would use them as a cover for a serious provocation.
Such a decision is neither in Israel's, nor Assad's hands.
If there's no basic communication about this scenario, there's a high chance of direct confrontation forced upon the 2 sides.