RugbyRebels

Turkey has so far killed almost 4000 evil terrorists and zero civilians in northern Syria, and is already planning its next conquests in both northern Syria and Iraq. The opposition leader claims it is serving as a battering ram for its NATO boss. The US is presently camped in oil-rich northern Syria to fight terrorists, even though it has killed more government aligned troops than anybody, and even though the government of Damascus does not want it there, making this yet another violation of international law and all of its military actions war crimes. But let's talk about the Russians . . .

Are Nuclear power stations & gas pipelines in Turkey good for business and is Rojava a thorn in Assad's side or tolerable, therefore ok with Russia ?

On the first count consensus seems to be yes. The 2nd question needs clarifying. I'm not exactly sure what you mean. I'm also about to head out, so will get back to you later on it.

DFNS...West Kurdistan, whatever.
The West will love their multi ethnic/faith gender equality confederate principles, and their oil of course.
Assad I guess won't recognise it as Autonomous.
It is anti-Islamist /IS Caliphate design so helps the West & Russia, but a danger to Turkey in terms of Kurdish nationalist sentiment there (Northern Kurdistan).
Turkey appears to be following a more Nationalist and Islamist agenda, and Russia has already given a pass to fly over Afrin...the question was where does Russia sit with Kurdistan in general & the Syrian bit in particular, especially after the recent summit meeting with Turkey
& Iran.

Trump does seem keen on leaving Syria to triple dictatorship. How much he can bring congress with him isn't clear

Galfon wrote:DFNS...West Kurdistan, whatever.
The West will love their multi ethnic/faith gender equality confederate principles, and their oil of course.
Assad I guess won't recognise it as Autonomous.
It is anti-Islamist /IS Caliphate design so helps the West & Russia, but a danger to Turkey in terms of Kurdish nationalist sentiment there (Northern Kurdistan).
Turkey appears to be following a more Nationalist and Islamist agenda, and Russia has already given a pass to fly over Afrin...the question was where does Russia sit with Kurdistan in general & the Syrian bit in particular, especially after the recent summit meeting with Turkey
& Iran.

The US has given up on regime change but is determined to maintain a presence in oil-rich northern Syria as part of its global empire project, which will serve as some consolation for losing out to the Russians on the big prize. The Kurds will accept anything with amounts to a step toward independence, albeit under American control for the foreseeable future. Not sure if we'll arrive at a similar conclusion as Iraq, where an autonomous Kurdish region comes into existence, ostensibly under Baghdad's control, but really under America's (because the Iraq gov't is now under US control). The big difference is that the US won in Iraq and lost in Syria, so it can't dictate the terms to the same degree. Russia won't like this and will be following developments in northern Syria very closely, but so long as their naval base at Tartus remains unaffected they're unlikely to challenge the might of the world's major super power on the issue. Damascus and Ankara will be outraged, as neither wants another Kurdish entity on its back doorstep. Damascus will only settle for that if it has complete control. Ankara won't tolerate it under any circumstances, but in the final analysis Turkey is nothing without America, whether it knows it or not. 4th biggest army in the world is not going to get you far against nuclear powers.

Red Cross all but confirming further worrying use of chemical weapons

Since 2003 the US-UK alliance has been making the same claim against all of its enemies - chemical weapons.

They were lying about Iraq and killed 2.4 million people.

They have repeatedly stated this about Syria & Russia but later forced to backtrack and concede they had no evidence (while investigative journalists and journalists on the ground pointed to the terrorists themselves and at least one NATO member).

They have claimed this about Russia in Britain without any evidence and made utter buffoons of themselves.

But somehow this slipped under the radar, and rather than being sanctioned or bombed, Israel picked up its annual 30 billion dollars in aid from the US, while the UK continued its lucrative arms trade with the apartheid state

(Jerusalem) - Israel's repeated firing of white phosphorus shells over densely populated areas of Gaza during its recent military campaign was indiscriminate and is evidence of war crimes, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.

The 71-page report, "Rain of Fire: Israel's Unlawful Use of White Phosphorus in Gaza," provides witness accounts of the devastating effects that white phosphorus munitions had on civilians and civilian property in Gaza. Human Rights Watch researchers in Gaza immediately after hostilities ended found spent shells, canister liners, and dozens of burnt felt wedges containing white phosphorus on city streets, apartment roofs, residential courtyards, and at a United Nations school. The report also presents ballistics evidence, photographs, and satellite imagery, as well as documents from the Israeli military and government.

It seems that one of the primary sources for the latest chemical weapons accusations was again the White Helmets, US funded and British trained, and very much in league with the rebels and terrorists:

rowan wrote:It seems that one of the primary sources for the latest chemical weapons accusations was again the White Helmets, US funded and British trained, and very much in league with the rebels and terrorists:

The motorcycle display team? Surely not.

rowan wrote:It seems that one of the primary sources for the latest chemical weapons accusations was again the White Helmets, US funded and British trained, and very much in league with the rebels and terrorists:

I have come to be suspicious of these white helmets. They manufactured that propaganda photo of the boy in the ambulance chair, and as they were founded by a British intelligence officer, I can assume their main function is a front for the dissemination of rebel (incl. Al Qaeda) friendly propaganda.

Again we rush to judgement, with no possibility of an investigation...

If you're rushing to judgement on the White Helmets then maybe stop rushing.

Digby wrote:If you're rushing to judgement on the White Helmets then maybe stop rushing.

Equally so regarding rushing to accept their claims without question.

Zhivago wrote:

rowan wrote:It seems that one of the primary sources for the latest chemical weapons accusations was again the White Helmets, US funded and British trained, and very much in league with the rebels and terrorists:

I have come to be suspicious of these white helmets. They manufactured that propaganda photo of the boy in the ambulance chair, and as they were founded by a British intelligence officer, I can assume their main function is a front for the dissemination of rebel (incl. Al Qaeda) friendly propaganda.

Again we rush to judgement, with no possibility of an investigation...

You can find interviews with the boy's father (son present) stating the whole thing was a set-up, that the White Helmets were with the terrorists and that he himself is an Assad supporter. You can also find photos of the White Helmets posing with the terrorists as they decapitate a boy. You really have to wonder how stupid people are to keep on believing these lies. Just last week scientists revealed they had no idea where the nerve agent used in the Salisbury poisoning had come from. & last time the US accused Syria of using chemical weapons (and bombed them into the bargain) they were eventually forced to backtrack and concede they had no evidence. & as usual, not only was there no motive, the incident occurred at a time when the Syrian government was least likely to have done it for very obvious reasons. Besides which, nobody in the Western media has even challenged America's presence there and their involvement in the conflict, which itself has been in violation of international law from the outset. Neither are we hearing anything from the Western media about what is happening in northern Syria. Do you realise far more people have been killed there in the past few months than anywhere else in Syria - and it's not the Syrian government or Russia who's doing it...

This would be the same Russians who've not only killed far more people in Syria than the USA but who've killed a much higher % of civilians into the bargain

Digby wrote:This would be the same Russians who've not only killed far more people in Syria than the USA but who've killed a much higher % of civilians into the bargain

Depends whose propaganda you are reading. Most Western media claim its Assad, by far. But the Syrian government is fighting a foreign invasion which is mostly being waged by proxy with the use of mercenary and Jihadist terrorists. & it is undoubtedly the terrorists who have been responsible for most of the civilian carnage, as they have repeatedly holed themselves up in residential areas with the civilian population as hostage. Besides, the government not only has the right but the duty to defend its nation, and Russia has been invited to support it in this regard. The US and its allies have not been invited and their involvement has been a direct violation of international law. & right now it is certainly not the government or Russia which is doing most of the killing, as that is occurring in the north - and going largely unreported in the Western media. Neither was it the case when the Independent published this report:

More civilians caught up in the Syrian conflict were killed by US-led coalitions than by Isis or Russian-led forces in the last month, according to figures released by a human rights organisation. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 63881.html

Nothing confirmed yet on what response the USA will take for the further use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime and their Russian backers. Given it seemed only minutes ago Trump wanted to withdraw all US involvement I'm guessing it'll be missile strikes and on a bigger scale than the last such response

A final parting shot that will divert attention from Gaza, Stormy and NATO activities in the north of Syria, perhaps. But they won't go to war over it. Just remember, China is on Syria's side as well.

Who remembers this?

Digby wrote:Nothing confirmed yet on what response the USA will take for the further use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime and their Russian backers. Given it seemed only minutes ago Trump wanted to withdraw all US involvement I'm guessing it'll be missile strikes and on a bigger scale than the last such response

Alleged *

Russian military has found no evidence of a chemical weapons attack in Douma, suggesting Russian military has only sent in people who failed basic science in school and have equipped them with the sort of crap equipment which the Russian military all too often provides to those on the front line

This was also alleged



as was this . . .

Zhivago wrote:

Again we rush to judgement, with no possibility of an investigation...

Well if the Russians would stop using their veto to block any investigation by the UN we might have a better chance of finding out some semblance of truth.

https://tinyurl.com/y9bt8h32

Digby wrote:Russian military has found no evidence of a chemical weapons attack in Douma, suggesting Russian military has only sent in people who failed basic science in school and have equipped them with the sort of crap equipment which the Russian military all too often provides to those on the front line

A video of people being washed with water convinces you?

In fact, Russia has always supported a proper investigation into the use of chemical weapons in Syria. What it has vetoed are biased reports. Indeed, one of those reports blamed Assad outright, yet the Americans themselves were subsequently forced to backtrack on its claims and concede there was no evidence at all. Investigative journalists and independent journalists on the ground in Syria have also disagreed with the reports.

The U.S. has no evidence to confirm reports from aid groups and others that the Syrian government has used the deadly chemical sarin on its citizens, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Friday.

“We have other reports from the battlefield from people who claim it’s been used,” Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon. “We do not have evidence of it.”

https://www.apnews.com/bd533182b7f244a4b771c73a0b601ec5

canta_brian wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Again we rush to judgement, with no possibility of an investigation...

Well if the Russians would stop using their veto to block any investigation by the UN we might have a better chance of finding out some semblance of truth.

https://tinyurl.com/y9bt8h32

Not arguing in favour of the Russians. The area is controlled by Jaish al Islam. If you want to believe unquestionably allegations coming from such sources, then fine. But it's perfectly reasonable to resist a rush to judgement based solely on unverifiable emotional claims.