ForumGarden

Obama to Step Up Support of Syrian Rebels - YouTube

Where's the proof? There have been small groups of individuals caught making nerve agents in Iraq, how do we know the rebels are not doing the same? They certainly have more to gain. This is bulls**t, an excuse to help the freaking terrorists who're getting their arses kicked these last few weeks.

June 1 2013 Turkey found Syrian rebels with cylinder sarin gas - End Times News update - YouTube

Don't watch the video, it's garbage. I'll quote the article below it.

WE ARE COMPLETE IDIOTS to give these "rebels" so much as a piece of toilet paper, let alone a bullet.

Published on Apr 26, 2013

June 1 2013 Turkish security forces found a 2kg cylinder with sarin gas for chemical warefare after searching the homes of Syrian militants from the Al-Qaeda linked Al-Nusra Front who were previously detained - Last Days End Times News update 6-1-13

Turkish media reports. The gas was reportedly going to be used in a bomb.

The sarin gas was found in the homes of suspected Syrian Islamists detained in the southern provinces of Adana and Mersia following a search by Turkish police on Wednesday, reports say. The gas was allegedly going to be used to carry out an attack in the southern Turkish city of Adana.

On Monday, Turkish special anti-terror forces arrested 12 suspected members of the Al-Nusra Front, the Al-Qaeda affiliated group which has been dubbed "the most aggressive and successful arm" of the Syrian rebels. The group was designated a terrorist organization by the United States in December.

Police also reportedly found a cache of weapons, documents and digital data which will be reviewed by police.

Following the searches, five of those detained were released following medical examinations at the Forensic Medicine Institution Adana. Seven suspects remain in custody. Turkish authorities are yet to comment on the arrests.

Russia reacted strongly to the incident, calling for a thorough investigation into the detention of Syrian militants

in possession of sarin gas.

"We are extremely concerned with media reports. Russia believes that the use of any chemical weapons is absolutely

inadmissible," Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said on Thursday.

May 2013 Syria Used Chemical Weapons - The U.S. got in line today with its European allies on the question of Syria and chemical weapons: It now says it has evidence that Syria used sarin gas, but that this evidence needs to be confirmed before devising a U.S. response.

Only a day earlier, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel had deflected reports of an Israeli general's blunt assertions that Syria had used chemical weapons. "Suspicions are one thing. Evidence is another," Hagel said. We are skeptical that new evidence suddenly came to light in the past 24 hours, and have our own suspicions -- namely, that President Barack Obama was intent on blurring the one red line that he has said would trigger "consequences" for the regime of Bashar al-Assad.

Even so, we agree with the White House that a higher standard of proof is required to launch a military response. "Given the stakes involved, and what we have learned from our own recent experience," the White House wrote in a letter to senators, "intelligence assessments alone are not sufficient -- only credible and corroborated facts that provide us with some degree of certainty will guide our decision-making."

Yes, we all remember Iraq's missing weapons of mass destruction.

So what will it take to achieve that clear proof? A United Nations investigation has been stalled by Syria's insistence on limiting its scope to a March clash in which government and rebel fighters have accused each other of chemical strikes. The UN wants to explore other reports as well.

The U.S. and its allies should press Russia, which has the same interest as other world powers in containing the chemical threat, to persuade its ally Assad to give the UN team a full mandate.

The U.S. can't afford to take a back seat again.

Here's what we do know: Syria has one of the world's largest stockpiles of chemical weapons, including mustard gas, which is a blistering agent, and sarin and VX, both nerve gases.

If the Syrian regime begins to distribute weapons for use against the opposition, it may also be emboldened to pass some to its Hezbollah allies in Lebanon, presenting a clear threat to Israel. If Assad begins to lose control, chemical weapons may fall into the hands of al-Qaeda-linked fighters, posing a global threat.

The Pentagon estimates that at least 75,000 troops would be needed to secure Syria's chemical weapons if the country came apart. Such daunting numbers must not be allowed to block action if proof of chemical weapons use emerges. Instead, a graduated range of responses to Syria's chemical threat seems both feasible and desirable.

I believe Syrian rebels already have In excess of 3 billion's worth of weapons from Saudi.

The problem Is, If we did arm them, Is they at present have minimal arms. If we do arm them, are we talking more hard core artillery and the problem of UK forces having to train the rebels to use them resulting In a physical ground presence?

I don't think anyone Is actually sure weather these rebels are Jihadists linked to Al Qaida or not.

Then, arming them could have absolutely no effect but then It's too late, we are committed. Then we are talking no fly zones etc etc. Then you have the possibly of Russia arming Assad forces. We may not even get UN backing for a no fly zone.

Worse, the US and the UK seem to have no strategy whatsoever and you'd think given our leaders were against Blair/Bush Intervening In Iraq and Afghan, they'd steer clear.

Here we go. Again.

"The United States and its allies have concluded that the government of Bashar Assad has used chemical weapons in Syria's protracted civil war, leading President Barack Obama to broaden aid — including military support — to opposition groups.

The intelligence community concluded with "high confidence" that the Assad regime had used chemical weapons — including the nerve agent sarin — "on a small scale against the opposition multiple times in the last year." "

US offers Syrian rebels 'military support,' alleges Assad used chemical weapons - NBC Politics

I could have sworn the "intelligence" Community (I've come to hate the word 'community') said the same about WMDs & Saddam Hussein.

Why the Interest In Syria?

Oh yeah, Europe Is Syria's mail oil consumer.

Assad using chemical weapons has been in the news for a very long time, I doubt our inept "intelligence" community had much involvement in this discovery. Bush was very interested in invading Iraq, as far as I know, Obama doesn't have a stake in Syria's "freedom." I don't see what we have to gain from this, Obama might just consider it a humanitarian mission. I'd prefer if we just stay out of other's internal conflicts for a few years and let us recover from the effing disaster our economy is in.

Washington will always find or create an international crisis. If we're not constantly on a war footing, then Washington can't justify circumventing their constitutional boundaries.

Accountable;1429845 wrote: Washington will always find or create an international crisis. If we're not constantly on a war footing, then Washington can't justify circumventing their constitutional boundaries.


Your statement reminds me of Orwell's 1984, perpetual warfare. Btw, this book is now enjoying a great uptake in sales which to me is very good news indeed.

America's foreign policy does not make any sense. They would back one islamic faction in syria against another and against the assad government

In Turkey they are criticising the demonstrators who are protesting about the creeping islamification of their country and the way those in power are abusing it - unlike syria Turkey is one of the oldest democratic secular states in the middle east.

It's almost as if they want to start all out war in the middle east and if I was given to conspiracy theories it looks like the intention is to end up with saudi arabia (home of Wahhabism and the 911 terrorists) as the dominant country in the region.

The initial; reports suggested that the rebels had been the ones to use chemical weapons.

You wouldn't back Catholics against protestants so why back sunni against shia or is it shia against sunni, I get the two mixed up. Just let them sort out theor own problems for a change.

And It's the Saudi's funding the Wahhabism Mosque's In the UK that radicalised the murderers of Lee Rigby.

oscar;1429879 wrote: And It's the Saudi's funding the Wahhabism Mosque's In the UK that radicalised the murderers of Lee Rigby.


"The hijackers in the September 11 attacks were 19 men affiliated with al-Qaeda, and 15 of the 19 were citizens of Saudi Arabia."

wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijackers_in_the_September_11_attacks‎

gmc;1429862 wrote: America's foreign policy does not make any sense. They would back one islamic faction in syria against another and against the assad government

In Turkey they are criticising the demonstrators who are protesting about the creeping islamification of their country and the way those in power are abusing it - unlike syria Turkey is one of the oldest democratic secular states in the middle east.

It's almost as if they want to start all out war in the middle east and if I was given to conspiracy theories it looks like the intention is to end up with saudi arabia (home of Wahhabism and the 911 terrorists) as the dominant country in the region.

The initial; reports suggested that the rebels had been the ones to use chemical weapons.

You wouldn't back Catholics against protestants so why back sunni against shia or is it shia against sunni, I get the two mixed up. Just let them sort out theor own problems for a change.
I don't think anyone in Washington thinks that deeply. It's much more simple. Will one group cooperate with us more than the other (or, is one more easily manipulated)? Then we support that group. If not, then we either support both or neither, whichever way is more to our political advantage.

Well in the last week the SAA has made some additional progress. The rebels threw around 1000 fighters into the Menagh Airport area in an effort to end the siege once and for all by taking out the water supply. The SAA troops held out, at one point being forced into 3 buildings. The SAA to catch them in between 2 forces and it was all but a slaughter. 150 to 200 dead rebels is the unofficial body count.

They also attacked the 17th division in Ar Raqqah from the north and south in force. The garrison there held and while suffering over 50 casualties gave better than what they got. Rebels lost 150 plus and fled up the highway back to Turkey and to the desert. Heavy fighting all around Aleppo, everywhere. The SAA is trying to trap them in the city.

Who was using the chemical weapons? It's a good question. I suspect the SAA may have, I definitely believe the rebels have. They have the most to gain as we have recently seen. Obamas red line. It's known that Turkish border officials have found rebels with it and Iraq arrested several people who were manufacturing it in their home, they were Sunnis. The latter instance is very scary, just think of some terrorist with a small drone (easily obtained today) over a school playground. There's a small bottle of nerve agent built onto that RC drone and it just slowly drips it's payload onto the kids. A few drops will kill an adult in minutes.

I think the SAA may have used them on rebels in retaliation and they apparently used them judiciously as there have not been mass casualties in areas where it supposedly occurred. Nerve agents dropped on a city will not kill 10s or 100s, it will kill 1000s in a very short time.

Syria has had various chemical agents in its military arsenal for decades, it keeps them as a deterrence against Israeli aggression which is prudent.

America's foreign policy does not make any sense.


If you think of it in a corporate monetary view it makes perfect sense. Would it be wise for a to invest in a region that is potentially unstable? Syrias Assad has long had a reputation of being a maverick, remember Qadaffi? What if he were to demand too much $$$ to have the oil companies develop the infrastructure in Syria? Look at Israel too, there have been significant amounts of gas deposits discovered in the eastern med these last few years. America is NOT going to do anything to make them angry are they? Would you be eager to invest your dollars/pounds in a potentially volatile region like this?

It's about the ease of investing, minimizing risk. It's also about obedience.

That's long term, short term the profits are in weapons. Croatia gets to empty all those warehouses full of old Soviet weaponry, same with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, everyone else involved. Certain powerful people in Turkey, Lebanon, all over get a cut of that money. Why do you think a 40 yr old .50 cm Soviet machine gun goes for 40000 dollars? There's a lot of hands in the pie, in all the countries involved. Look at the mercenaries, they get paid too. Most of the rebels in Syria are not from Syria, they're from as far away as Morocco and Chechnya, Indonesia, even some Americans have been spotted there. I suspect that's yet another reason the SAA has done so well. The rebels are fighting for money, the Syrian people are fighting for their way of life. Had the PEOPLE of Syria wanted Assad gone, there is no doubt in my mind he would not be there now.

Your statement reminds me of Orwell's 1984, perpetual warfare. Btw, this book is now enjoying a great uptake in sales which to me is very good news indeed.


Perpetual warfare is what this not only is, it's the intent of the policies enacted. There's no conflict of interest here, only an interest in conflict.

Another interesting angle on this is the question of if the Syrian government wins, where will all these mercenaries go?

What will be the reaction do you think if American troops go in and start getting killed by the Syrian army or the iranian republican h=guard troops who are supposed to be on their way to help assad?

Iran to Send 4,000 Revolutionary Guard Troops to Syria - IBTimes UK

There have IRG personnel in Syria for over a year now or so I have been informed. If you want to toss this link into the bigger picture of things you will begin to see a pattern concerning the ME and Central Asia. Syria is part of The Great Game. I don't know that America is sending troops to Syria, I'm sure they'll get even more weapons though. Do the rebels have enough manpower? They're stooping to using 14 yr old boys.

US Lawmaker Seeks Pentagon Checks on Russia Energy, Military | Defense | RIA Novosti

These last couple of weeks have seen a return to the standoff between SAA and the "rebels". Basically they have been trading blows. In Daraa the "rebels" have taken a key point after taking heavy casualties. The place was a series of buildings on a slight rise that the SAA had fortified with snipers and armored troops. Jamat Al Nusra acquired some 500 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M113_Konkurs ATGMs via Turkey and most likely Croatia. This made the SAA armor go back into hiding and the offensive has essentially slowed. JAN was given about 100 of them and they reportedly promptly used a few on their "allies" to let them know who was boss to boot.

The rebels are in disarray, many different factions all trying to gain access to the most resources and turf. JAN is the biggest, there are mercenaries from all over the Muslim world coming to the country but it is said manpower for the rebels is getting thin while the SAA is able to maintain about 250000 boots on the ground.

There was a report of some "rebels" beheading an Orthodox Christian priest and his assistant somewhere if it happened it's not the first time. Most Christians have fled to the Mediterranean coast or abroad.

Hezbollah has apparently went home after the fall of Qusayr, Iranians are in the fight in small numbers. Russia definitely is supplying the SAA and training the replacements which it seems the SAA has no trouble getting.

Some of the "rebels" new recruits.

Attached files

Ouch.

Violence vs Violence: Bloodshed & chaos as US push to arm Syrian rebels - YouTube