Who should rule Syria? Nobody.

[Mindful]

Who should rule Syria? Nobody

Or at least not all of it. Grasp that and you can see a clear strategy for the West.

 

[Mindful]

Who should rule Syria? Nobody
Or at least not all of it. Grasp that and you can see a clear strategy for the West

The long civil war in Syria is still far from conclusion. Any real possibility of rebel victory ended with the entry of Russian forces last autumn — but while the initiative is now with the Assad regime, the government’s forces are also far from a decisive breakthrough. So who, if anyone, should the UK be backing in the Syrian slaughterhouse, and what might constitute progress in this broken and burning land?

It ought to be fairly obvious why a victory for the Assad regime would be a disaster for the West. Assad, an enthusiastic user of chemical weapons against his own people, is aligned with the most powerful anti–western coalition in the Middle East. This is the alliance dominated by the Islamic Republic of Iran. It includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shia militias of Iraq, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. If Assad won, the Iranian alliance would consolidate its domination of the entire land area between the Iraq-Iran border and the Mediterranean Sea — a major step towards regional hegemony for Iran. So an Assad victory would be good for Islamism — at least of the Shia variety — and bad for world peace. It should be prevented.

The controversy begins when one starts to look at the alternative to an Assad victory.

In November last year, David Cameron claimed to have identified 70,000 ‘moderate’ rebels ready to challenge Islamic State in the east of Syria. That figure was a myth. Yours truly was among the very first western journalists to spend time in Syria with the rebels. I recently returned from a trip to southern Turkey, where I interviewed fighters and commanders of the main rebel coalitions. With no particular joy but a good deal of confidence, I can report that the Syrian rebellion today is dominated in its entirety by Sunni Islamist forces. And the most powerful of these are the most radical.

The most potent rebel coalition in Syria today is called Jaish al-Fatah (Army of Conquest). It has three main component parts: Ahrar al-Sham (Free Men of the Levant), a Salafist jihadi group; Jabhat al-Nusra, until recently the official franchise of al–Qaeda in Syria, now renamed Jabhat Fatah al-Sham; and Faylaq al-Sham (Legion of the Levant), whose ideology derives from the Muslim Brotherhood branch of Sunni political Islam.

 

[dpr112yme]

Maybe, we should just take over.... but how would we get there? who's going to buy the plane tickets and pay for room and board and foods? And after we get there, hey!!! There would be plenty of opportunities for work!!! Limited work but still work... Mostly landscaping and debris dumping. U.S. brought Construction companies would be the hottest sellers there. Syria could become the next 'great frontier.' A second chance.. Only in a different location... Oh, yeah,, wait. We would be surrounded by other non-English speaking nations.. hmmm.. good thought. It needs a little work. Wait.. so we get there, start making camp. Companies start getting formed. Cheap goods in the beginnings. Living arrangements are provided for. Kind of like a Socialist Party but only Democratic Republic. After the place is regrounded , replanted, reirrigated, etc....the land starts looking like it can be lived in. Then the basics begin... okay.. sounds good so far. As far as the surrounding nations.. Well they get interested in what is going on in Syria all of a sudden. They hear of hard workers, of Americans, of new businesses and they start inquiring. Some come over, starting the tourism industry and the Americans in Syria start travelling around the Middle East. People get to know who their neighbors are and people start bringing home baked pies whenever a new neighbor moves in the neighborhood. Brilliant!!!

Syria can hold more than 270 Million persons. America's population is about 324 million or so. It could work.


Watch as the U.S. and the world get populated right before your very eyes... click link..

Population Clock

Every change in the World Population ticker are new born infants.. entering into Generation Alpha.

So you see, WE are not the 1 and ONLY best out there.

All this, 'he said she said, you're wrong, you're politically incorrect, you're too rascist, you're too 'holier than thou', you're too insensitive, you're too judgmental, you're too bossy, you're too pesky, you're too high minded, you're too oppressive, etc.... stuff' hopefully won't be as strong when the new babes have grown to our age today. But wait! Sex Ed. What about the sex-ed with anal, oral, vaginal, multiple, gendered identitied, solo, protected, toys, learning teachings that is being taught in schools, not only here, but all around.


Over 100 new borns has come into the world since this post came up. We are definitely going to need more space.


World Death Clock World Death Clock

On average, there are 1.8 deaths per second in the world. On average, there is 1 birth every 7 seconds.

 

[Mindful]

Maybe, we should just take over....

Who's we ?

 

[The Great Goose]

divide it up, based on ethnicity. In some parts annex it into neighbouring countries, where ethnically appropriate.

 

[Penelope]

Who should rule Syria? Nobody
Or at least not all of it. Grasp that and you can see a clear strategy for the West

The long civil war in Syria is still far from conclusion. Any real possibility of rebel victory ended with the entry of Russian forces last autumn — but while the initiative is now with the Assad regime, the government’s forces are also far from a decisive breakthrough. So who, if anyone, should the UK be backing in the Syrian slaughterhouse, and what might constitute progress in this broken and burning land?

It ought to be fairly obvious why a victory for the Assad regime would be a disaster for the West. Assad, an enthusiastic user of chemical weapons, against his own people, is aligned with the most powerful anti–western coalition in the Middle East. This is the alliance dominated by the Islamic Republic of Iran. It includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shia militias of Iraq, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. If Assad won, the Iranian alliance would consolidate its domination of the entire land area between the Iraq-Iran border and the Mediterranean Sea — a major step towards regional hegemony for Iran. So an Assad victory would be good for Islamism — at least of the Shia variety — and bad for world peace. It should be prevented.

The controversy begins when one starts to look at the alternative to an Assad victory.

In November last year, David Cameron claimed to have identified 70,000 ‘moderate’ rebels ready to challenge Islamic State in the east of Syria. That figure was a myth. Yours truly was among the very first western journalists to spend time in Syria with the rebels. I recently returned from a trip to southern Turkey, where I interviewed fighters and commanders of the main rebel coalitions. With no particular joy but a good deal of confidence, I can report that the Syrian rebellion today is dominated in its entirety by Sunni Islamist forces. And the most powerful of these are the most radical.

The most potent rebel coalition in Syria today is called Jaish al-Fatah (Army of Conquest). It has three main component parts: Ahrar al-Sham (Free Men of the Levant), a Salafist jihadi group; Jabhat al-Nusra, until recently the official franchise of al–Qaeda in Syria, now renamed Jabhat Fatah al-Sham; and Faylaq al-Sham (Legion of the Levant), whose ideology derives from the Muslim Brotherhood branch of Sunni political Islam.

First Assad, user of chemical weapons against its own people= is probably just an excuse to tear his government down. The real reason is Iran, Lebanon and Syria, the terrible 3's for Israel, has to be broken up. Make no mistake that is what this is about. Saudi Arabia is so jealous of Iran as well.

Lets see Shia or radical Sunni's. Or the Kurds. Whatever happens it will be better for Israel to take part of a war torn country.

The author is the director of the : ( so its probably a little bias )
The Rubin Center for Research in International Affairs (formerly the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center), founded by the late Professor Barry Rubin, is a research center located at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, Israel’s first private institution of higher learning.

 

[Mindful]

Who should rule Syria? Nobody
Or at least not all of it. Grasp that and you can see a clear strategy for the West

The long civil war in Syria is still far from conclusion. Any real possibility of rebel victory ended with the entry of Russian forces last autumn — but while the initiative is now with the Assad regime, the government’s forces are also far from a decisive breakthrough. So who, if anyone, should the UK be backing in the Syrian slaughterhouse, and what might constitute progress in this broken and burning land?

It ought to be fairly obvious why a victory for the Assad regime would be a disaster for the West. Assad, an enthusiastic user of chemical weapons, against his own people, is aligned with the most powerful anti–western coalition in the Middle East. This is the alliance dominated by the Islamic Republic of Iran. It includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shia militias of Iraq, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. If Assad won, the Iranian alliance would consolidate its domination of the entire land area between the Iraq-Iran border and the Mediterranean Sea — a major step towards regional hegemony for Iran. So an Assad victory would be good for Islamism — at least of the Shia variety — and bad for world peace. It should be prevented.

The controversy begins when one starts to look at the alternative to an Assad victory.

In November last year, David Cameron claimed to have identified 70,000 ‘moderate’ rebels ready to challenge Islamic State in the east of Syria. That figure was a myth. Yours truly was among the very first western journalists to spend time in Syria with the rebels. I recently returned from a trip to southern Turkey, where I interviewed fighters and commanders of the main rebel coalitions. With no particular joy but a good deal of confidence, I can report that the Syrian rebellion today is dominated in its entirety by Sunni Islamist forces. And the most powerful of these are the most radical.

The most potent rebel coalition in Syria today is called Jaish al-Fatah (Army of Conquest). It has three main component parts: Ahrar al-Sham (Free Men of the Levant), a Salafist jihadi group; Jabhat al-Nusra, until recently the official franchise of al–Qaeda in Syria, now renamed Jabhat Fatah al-Sham; and Faylaq al-Sham (Legion of the Levant), whose ideology derives from the Muslim Brotherhood branch of Sunni political Islam.

First Assad, user of chemical weapons against its own people= is probably just an excuse to tear his government down. The real reason is Iran, Lebanon and Syria, the terrible 3's for Israel, has to be broken up. Make no mistake that is what this is about. Saudi Arabia is so jealous of Iran as well.

Lets see Shia or radical Sunni's. Or the Kurds. Whatever happens it will be better for Israel to take part of a war torn country.

The author is the director of the : ( so its probably a little bias )
The Rubin Center for Research in International Affairs (formerly the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center), founded by the late Professor Barry Rubin, is a research center located at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, Israel’s first private institution of higher learning.

Is there a reason you cannot leave Israel out of every list you put up here?

 

[Penelope]

Who should rule Syria? Nobody
Or at least not all of it. Grasp that and you can see a clear strategy for the West

The long civil war in Syria is still far from conclusion. Any real possibility of rebel victory ended with the entry of Russian forces last autumn — but while the initiative is now with the Assad regime, the government’s forces are also far from a decisive breakthrough. So who, if anyone, should the UK be backing in the Syrian slaughterhouse, and what might constitute progress in this broken and burning land?

It ought to be fairly obvious why a victory for the Assad regime would be a disaster for the West. Assad, an enthusiastic user of chemical weapons, against his own people, is aligned with the most powerful anti–western coalition in the Middle East. This is the alliance dominated by the Islamic Republic of Iran. It includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shia militias of Iraq, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. If Assad won, the Iranian alliance would consolidate its domination of the entire land area between the Iraq-Iran border and the Mediterranean Sea — a major step towards regional hegemony for Iran. So an Assad victory would be good for Islamism — at least of the Shia variety — and bad for world peace. It should be prevented.

The controversy begins when one starts to look at the alternative to an Assad victory.

In November last year, David Cameron claimed to have identified 70,000 ‘moderate’ rebels ready to challenge Islamic State in the east of Syria. That figure was a myth. Yours truly was among the very first western journalists to spend time in Syria with the rebels. I recently returned from a trip to southern Turkey, where I interviewed fighters and commanders of the main rebel coalitions. With no particular joy but a good deal of confidence, I can report that the Syrian rebellion today is dominated in its entirety by Sunni Islamist forces. And the most powerful of these are the most radical.

The most potent rebel coalition in Syria today is called Jaish al-Fatah (Army of Conquest). It has three main component parts: Ahrar al-Sham (Free Men of the Levant), a Salafist jihadi group; Jabhat al-Nusra, until recently the official franchise of al–Qaeda in Syria, now renamed Jabhat Fatah al-Sham; and Faylaq al-Sham (Legion of the Levant), whose ideology derives from the Muslim Brotherhood branch of Sunni political Islam.

First Assad, user of chemical weapons against its own people= is probably just an excuse to tear his government down. The real reason is Iran, Lebanon and Syria, the terrible 3's for Israel, has to be broken up. Make no mistake that is what this is about. Saudi Arabia is so jealous of Iran as well.

Lets see Shia or radical Sunni's. Or the Kurds. Whatever happens it will be better for Israel to take part of a war torn country.

The author is the director of the : ( so its probably a little bias )
The Rubin Center for Research in International Affairs (formerly the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center), founded by the late Professor Barry Rubin, is a research center located at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, Israel’s first private institution of higher learning.

Is there a reason you cannot leave Israel out of every list you put up here?

Well when you post an article from an Israeli and about the area surrounding Israel, no I can't. Its relevant. Israel plays a huge role in that area, and we know they have a huge farm on the illegally occupied Golan Heights.

 

[Mindful]

Who should rule Syria? Nobody
Or at least not all of it. Grasp that and you can see a clear strategy for the West

The long civil war in Syria is still far from conclusion. Any real possibility of rebel victory ended with the entry of Russian forces last autumn — but while the initiative is now with the Assad regime, the government’s forces are also far from a decisive breakthrough. So who, if anyone, should the UK be backing in the Syrian slaughterhouse, and what might constitute progress in this broken and burning land?

It ought to be fairly obvious why a victory for the Assad regime would be a disaster for the West. Assad, an enthusiastic user of chemical weapons, against his own people, is aligned with the most powerful anti–western coalition in the Middle East. This is the alliance dominated by the Islamic Republic of Iran. It includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shia militias of Iraq, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. If Assad won, the Iranian alliance would consolidate its domination of the entire land area between the Iraq-Iran border and the Mediterranean Sea — a major step towards regional hegemony for Iran. So an Assad victory would be good for Islamism — at least of the Shia variety — and bad for world peace. It should be prevented.

The controversy begins when one starts to look at the alternative to an Assad victory.

In November last year, David Cameron claimed to have identified 70,000 ‘moderate’ rebels ready to challenge Islamic State in the east of Syria. That figure was a myth. Yours truly was among the very first western journalists to spend time in Syria with the rebels. I recently returned from a trip to southern Turkey, where I interviewed fighters and commanders of the main rebel coalitions. With no particular joy but a good deal of confidence, I can report that the Syrian rebellion today is dominated in its entirety by Sunni Islamist forces. And the most powerful of these are the most radical.

The most potent rebel coalition in Syria today is called Jaish al-Fatah (Army of Conquest). It has three main component parts: Ahrar al-Sham (Free Men of the Levant), a Salafist jihadi group; Jabhat al-Nusra, until recently the official franchise of al–Qaeda in Syria, now renamed Jabhat Fatah al-Sham; and Faylaq al-Sham (Legion of the Levant), whose ideology derives from the Muslim Brotherhood branch of Sunni political Islam.

First Assad, user of chemical weapons against its own people= is probably just an excuse to tear his government down. The real reason is Iran, Lebanon and Syria, the terrible 3's for Israel, has to be broken up. Make no mistake that is what this is about. Saudi Arabia is so jealous of Iran as well.

Lets see Shia or radical Sunni's. Or the Kurds. Whatever happens it will be better for Israel to take part of a war torn country.

The author is the director of the : ( so its probably a little bias )
The Rubin Center for Research in International Affairs (formerly the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center), founded by the late Professor Barry Rubin, is a research center located at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, Israel’s first private institution of higher learning.

Is there a reason you cannot leave Israel out of every list you put up here?

Well when you post an article from an Israeli and about the area surrounding Israel, no I can't. Its relevant. Israel plays a huge role in that area, and we know they have a huge farm on the illegally occupied Golan Heights.

You're blaming me for your behaviour?

Have you no free will?

 

[Bleipriester]

Bashar will smash all enemies of Syria.

 

[Penelope]

Who should rule Syria? Nobody
Or at least not all of it. Grasp that and you can see a clear strategy for the West

The long civil war in Syria is still far from conclusion. Any real possibility of rebel victory ended with the entry of Russian forces last autumn — but while the initiative is now with the Assad regime, the government’s forces are also far from a decisive breakthrough. So who, if anyone, should the UK be backing in the Syrian slaughterhouse, and what might constitute progress in this broken and burning land?

It ought to be fairly obvious why a victory for the Assad regime would be a disaster for the West. Assad, an enthusiastic user of chemical weapons, against his own people, is aligned with the most powerful anti–western coalition in the Middle East. This is the alliance dominated by the Islamic Republic of Iran. It includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shia militias of Iraq, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. If Assad won, the Iranian alliance would consolidate its domination of the entire land area between the Iraq-Iran border and the Mediterranean Sea — a major step towards regional hegemony for Iran. So an Assad victory would be good for Islamism — at least of the Shia variety — and bad for world peace. It should be prevented.

The controversy begins when one starts to look at the alternative to an Assad victory.

In November last year, David Cameron claimed to have identified 70,000 ‘moderate’ rebels ready to challenge Islamic State in the east of Syria. That figure was a myth. Yours truly was among the very first western journalists to spend time in Syria with the rebels. I recently returned from a trip to southern Turkey, where I interviewed fighters and commanders of the main rebel coalitions. With no particular joy but a good deal of confidence, I can report that the Syrian rebellion today is dominated in its entirety by Sunni Islamist forces. And the most powerful of these are the most radical.

The most potent rebel coalition in Syria today is called Jaish al-Fatah (Army of Conquest). It has three main component parts: Ahrar al-Sham (Free Men of the Levant), a Salafist jihadi group; Jabhat al-Nusra, until recently the official franchise of al–Qaeda in Syria, now renamed Jabhat Fatah al-Sham; and Faylaq al-Sham (Legion of the Levant), whose ideology derives from the Muslim Brotherhood branch of Sunni political Islam.

First Assad, user of chemical weapons against its own people= is probably just an excuse to tear his government down. The real reason is Iran, Lebanon and Syria, the terrible 3's for Israel, has to be broken up. Make no mistake that is what this is about. Saudi Arabia is so jealous of Iran as well.

Lets see Shia or radical Sunni's. Or the Kurds. Whatever happens it will be better for Israel to take part of a war torn country.

The author is the director of the : ( so its probably a little bias )
The Rubin Center for Research in International Affairs (formerly the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center), founded by the late Professor Barry Rubin, is a research center located at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, Israel’s first private institution of higher learning.

Is there a reason you cannot leave Israel out of every list you put up here?

Well when you post an article from an Israeli and about the area surrounding Israel, no I can't. Its relevant. Israel plays a huge role in that area, and we know they have a huge farm on the illegally occupied Golan Heights.

You're blaming me for your behaviour?

Have you no free will?

You posted it, and well if you post a jewish wrote article, we have to assume its bias.

 

[Mindful]

Who should rule Syria? Nobody
Or at least not all of it. Grasp that and you can see a clear strategy for the West

The long civil war in Syria is still far from conclusion. Any real possibility of rebel victory ended with the entry of Russian forces last autumn — but while the initiative is now with the Assad regime, the government’s forces are also far from a decisive breakthrough. So who, if anyone, should the UK be backing in the Syrian slaughterhouse, and what might constitute progress in this broken and burning land?

It ought to be fairly obvious why a victory for the Assad regime would be a disaster for the West. Assad, an enthusiastic user of chemical weapons, against his own people, is aligned with the most powerful anti–western coalition in the Middle East. This is the alliance dominated by the Islamic Republic of Iran. It includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shia militias of Iraq, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. If Assad won, the Iranian alliance would consolidate its domination of the entire land area between the Iraq-Iran border and the Mediterranean Sea — a major step towards regional hegemony for Iran. So an Assad victory would be good for Islamism — at least of the Shia variety — and bad for world peace. It should be prevented.

The controversy begins when one starts to look at the alternative to an Assad victory.

In November last year, David Cameron claimed to have identified 70,000 ‘moderate’ rebels ready to challenge Islamic State in the east of Syria. That figure was a myth. Yours truly was among the very first western journalists to spend time in Syria with the rebels. I recently returned from a trip to southern Turkey, where I interviewed fighters and commanders of the main rebel coalitions. With no particular joy but a good deal of confidence, I can report that the Syrian rebellion today is dominated in its entirety by Sunni Islamist forces. And the most powerful of these are the most radical.

The most potent rebel coalition in Syria today is called Jaish al-Fatah (Army of Conquest). It has three main component parts: Ahrar al-Sham (Free Men of the Levant), a Salafist jihadi group; Jabhat al-Nusra, until recently the official franchise of al–Qaeda in Syria, now renamed Jabhat Fatah al-Sham; and Faylaq al-Sham (Legion of the Levant), whose ideology derives from the Muslim Brotherhood branch of Sunni political Islam.

First Assad, user of chemical weapons against its own people= is probably just an excuse to tear his government down. The real reason is Iran, Lebanon and Syria, the terrible 3's for Israel, has to be broken up. Make no mistake that is what this is about. Saudi Arabia is so jealous of Iran as well.

Lets see Shia or radical Sunni's. Or the Kurds. Whatever happens it will be better for Israel to take part of a war torn country.

The author is the director of the : ( so its probably a little bias )
The Rubin Center for Research in International Affairs (formerly the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center), founded by the late Professor Barry Rubin, is a research center located at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, Israel’s first private institution of higher learning.

Is there a reason you cannot leave Israel out of every list you put up here?

Well when you post an article from an Israeli and about the area surrounding Israel, no I can't. Its relevant. Israel plays a huge role in that area, and we know they have a huge farm on the illegally occupied Golan Heights.

You're blaming me for your behaviour?

Have you no free will?

You posted it, and well if you post a jewish wrote article, we have to assume its bias.

No you (plural?) won't.

 

[Phoenall]

Who should rule Syria? Nobody
Or at least not all of it. Grasp that and you can see a clear strategy for the West

The long civil war in Syria is still far from conclusion. Any real possibility of rebel victory ended with the entry of Russian forces last autumn — but while the initiative is now with the Assad regime, the government’s forces are also far from a decisive breakthrough. So who, if anyone, should the UK be backing in the Syrian slaughterhouse, and what might constitute progress in this broken and burning land?

It ought to be fairly obvious why a victory for the Assad regime would be a disaster for the West. Assad, an enthusiastic user of chemical weapons, against his own people, is aligned with the most powerful anti–western coalition in the Middle East. This is the alliance dominated by the Islamic Republic of Iran. It includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shia militias of Iraq, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. If Assad won, the Iranian alliance would consolidate its domination of the entire land area between the Iraq-Iran border and the Mediterranean Sea — a major step towards regional hegemony for Iran. So an Assad victory would be good for Islamism — at least of the Shia variety — and bad for world peace. It should be prevented.

The controversy begins when one starts to look at the alternative to an Assad victory.

In November last year, David Cameron claimed to have identified 70,000 ‘moderate’ rebels ready to challenge Islamic State in the east of Syria. That figure was a myth. Yours truly was among the very first western journalists to spend time in Syria with the rebels. I recently returned from a trip to southern Turkey, where I interviewed fighters and commanders of the main rebel coalitions. With no particular joy but a good deal of confidence, I can report that the Syrian rebellion today is dominated in its entirety by Sunni Islamist forces. And the most powerful of these are the most radical.

The most potent rebel coalition in Syria today is called Jaish al-Fatah (Army of Conquest). It has three main component parts: Ahrar al-Sham (Free Men of the Levant), a Salafist jihadi group; Jabhat al-Nusra, until recently the official franchise of al–Qaeda in Syria, now renamed Jabhat Fatah al-Sham; and Faylaq al-Sham (Legion of the Levant), whose ideology derives from the Muslim Brotherhood branch of Sunni political Islam.

First Assad, user of chemical weapons against its own people= is probably just an excuse to tear his government down. The real reason is Iran, Lebanon and Syria, the terrible 3's for Israel, has to be broken up. Make no mistake that is what this is about. Saudi Arabia is so jealous of Iran as well.

Lets see Shia or radical Sunni's. Or the Kurds. Whatever happens it will be better for Israel to take part of a war torn country.

The author is the director of the : ( so its probably a little bias )
The Rubin Center for Research in International Affairs (formerly the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center), founded by the late Professor Barry Rubin, is a research center located at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, Israel’s first private institution of higher learning.

Is there a reason you cannot leave Israel out of every list you put up here?

Well when you post an article from an Israeli and about the area surrounding Israel, no I can't. Its relevant. Israel plays a huge role in that area, and we know they have a huge farm on the illegally occupied Golan Heights.

Are you now saying that every Jew is an Israeli, it that like saying every Catholic is an Italian or every terrorist is a muslim ? What would you say and do if Israel turned round and said they wanted no part in it unless the new rulers decided to attack Israel. Yiu saw what they have done to gaza and Lebanon when they attacked.

 

[Phoenall]

Who should rule Syria? Nobody
Or at least not all of it. Grasp that and you can see a clear strategy for the West

The long civil war in Syria is still far from conclusion. Any real possibility of rebel victory ended with the entry of Russian forces last autumn — but while the initiative is now with the Assad regime, the government’s forces are also far from a decisive breakthrough. So who, if anyone, should the UK be backing in the Syrian slaughterhouse, and what might constitute progress in this broken and burning land?

It ought to be fairly obvious why a victory for the Assad regime would be a disaster for the West. Assad, an enthusiastic user of chemical weapons, against his own people, is aligned with the most powerful anti–western coalition in the Middle East. This is the alliance dominated by the Islamic Republic of Iran. It includes Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shia militias of Iraq, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. If Assad won, the Iranian alliance would consolidate its domination of the entire land area between the Iraq-Iran border and the Mediterranean Sea — a major step towards regional hegemony for Iran. So an Assad victory would be good for Islamism — at least of the Shia variety — and bad for world peace. It should be prevented.

The controversy begins when one starts to look at the alternative to an Assad victory.

In November last year, David Cameron claimed to have identified 70,000 ‘moderate’ rebels ready to challenge Islamic State in the east of Syria. That figure was a myth. Yours truly was among the very first western journalists to spend time in Syria with the rebels. I recently returned from a trip to southern Turkey, where I interviewed fighters and commanders of the main rebel coalitions. With no particular joy but a good deal of confidence, I can report that the Syrian rebellion today is dominated in its entirety by Sunni Islamist forces. And the most powerful of these are the most radical.

The most potent rebel coalition in Syria today is called Jaish al-Fatah (Army of Conquest). It has three main component parts: Ahrar al-Sham (Free Men of the Levant), a Salafist jihadi group; Jabhat al-Nusra, until recently the official franchise of al–Qaeda in Syria, now renamed Jabhat Fatah al-Sham; and Faylaq al-Sham (Legion of the Levant), whose ideology derives from the Muslim Brotherhood branch of Sunni political Islam.

First Assad, user of chemical weapons against its own people= is probably just an excuse to tear his government down. The real reason is Iran, Lebanon and Syria, the terrible 3's for Israel, has to be broken up. Make no mistake that is what this is about. Saudi Arabia is so jealous of Iran as well.

Lets see Shia or radical Sunni's. Or the Kurds. Whatever happens it will be better for Israel to take part of a war torn country.

The author is the director of the : ( so its probably a little bias )
The Rubin Center for Research in International Affairs (formerly the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center), founded by the late Professor Barry Rubin, is a research center located at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, Israel’s first private institution of higher learning.

Is there a reason you cannot leave Israel out of every list you put up here?

Well when you post an article from an Israeli and about the area surrounding Israel, no I can't. Its relevant. Israel plays a huge role in that area, and we know they have a huge farm on the illegally occupied Golan Heights.

You're blaming me for your behaviour?

Have you no free will?

You posted it, and well if you post a jewish wrote article, we have to assume its bias.

So when you post an islamonazi terrorist based article do we have to assume that you are a follower of islamonazi terrorism ?

 

[Phoenall]

Bashar will smash all enemies of Syria.

Only as long as he has Russia to help him, once they see the writting on the wall and leave Syria he will be treated just like Saddam by his own people

 

[Penelope]

First Assad, user of chemical weapons against its own people= is probably just an excuse to tear his government down. The real reason is Iran, Lebanon and Syria, the terrible 3's for Israel, has to be broken up. Make no mistake that is what this is about. Saudi Arabia is so jealous of Iran as well.

Lets see Shia or radical Sunni's. Or the Kurds. Whatever happens it will be better for Israel to take part of a war torn country.

The author is the director of the : ( so its probably a little bias )
The Rubin Center for Research in International Affairs (formerly the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center), founded by the late Professor Barry Rubin, is a research center located at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, Israel’s first private institution of higher learning.

Is there a reason you cannot leave Israel out of every list you put up here?

Well when you post an article from an Israeli and about the area surrounding Israel, no I can't. Its relevant. Israel plays a huge role in that area, and we know they have a huge farm on the illegally occupied Golan Heights.

You're blaming me for your behaviour?

Have you no free will?

You posted it, and well if you post a jewish wrote article, we have to assume its bias.

No you (plural?) won't.

Well I do, anything most Zionist write is bias, and puts a favorable light on Israel and a bad light on everyone else.

 

[Mindful]

First Assad, user of chemical weapons against its own people= is probably just an excuse to tear his government down. The real reason is Iran, Lebanon and Syria, the terrible 3's for Israel, has to be broken up. Make no mistake that is what this is about. Saudi Arabia is so jealous of Iran as well.

Lets see Shia or radical Sunni's. Or the Kurds. Whatever happens it will be better for Israel to take part of a war torn country.

The author is the director of the : ( so its probably a little bias )
The Rubin Center for Research in International Affairs (formerly the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center), founded by the late Professor Barry Rubin, is a research center located at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya, Israel’s first private institution of higher learning.

Is there a reason you cannot leave Israel out of every list you put up here?

Well when you post an article from an Israeli and about the area surrounding Israel, no I can't. Its relevant. Israel plays a huge role in that area, and we know they have a huge farm on the illegally occupied Golan Heights.

You're blaming me for your behaviour?

Have you no free will?

You posted it, and well if you post a jewish wrote article, we have to assume its bias.

So when you post an islamonazi terrorist based article do we have to assume that you are a follower of islamonazi terrorism ?

Logic is an alien concept to Penelope.

 

[Mindful]

Is there a reason you cannot leave Israel out of every list you put up here?

Well when you post an article from an Israeli and about the area surrounding Israel, no I can't. Its relevant. Israel plays a huge role in that area, and we know they have a huge farm on the illegally occupied Golan Heights.

You're blaming me for your behaviour?

Have you no free will?

You posted it, and well if you post a jewish wrote article, we have to assume its bias.

No you (plural?) won't.

Well I do, anything most Zionist write is bias, and puts a favorable light on Israel and a bad light on everyone else.

By Zionist, you mean Jew?

 

[dani67]

iran

 

[Penelope]

Well when you post an article from an Israeli and about the area surrounding Israel, no I can't. Its relevant. Israel plays a huge role in that area, and we know they have a huge farm on the illegally occupied Golan Heights.

You're blaming me for your behaviour?

Have you no free will?

You posted it, and well if you post a jewish wrote article, we have to assume its bias.

No you (plural?) won't.

Well I do, anything most Zionist write is bias, and puts a favorable light on Israel and a bad light on everyone else.

By Zionist, you mean Jew?

Not all jews are pro Israel, but the writer of the article is an Israeli and a Zionist(pro state of Israel) and he is the director of the Israel site and write articles for the jewish newspapers. He is Isralie and a Zionist. Likewise not all Zionist are jews.