Syrian war thread - Page 204 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the nations of the Middle East.

Moderator: PoFo Middle-East Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum moderated in English, so please post in English only. Thank you.
User avatar
By Oxymoron
#15122541
skinster wrote:No, he's not doing a "better job". American terrorist troops are still on the ground in Syria occupying its land and stealing its oil and Trump's sanctions on the country continue to kill Syrians. You think a destabilized state of Syria is not in the interest of Israel or the U.S.? Then explain why they're carrying on its destruction and making it difficult for the country to rebuild from the war that was made on it.
:D


This is better for the US getting Oil which we need is never a bad thing, I rather have that then what Obama was doing: letting ISIS grow.
The US and Israel did not cause the civil war; Assad bad decisions led to the civil war. Now that it is on, the US must balance its interest with stabilizing Syria.
For example if ISIS took over, it would be more stable but not good for Israel or the US... the fact is Assad is not in our interests, we want the opposition to take over, at least a divided government. I was just saying I am surprised something was not worked out already between the conflicting powers.
By skinster
#15123057
^ You sound as though you think that oil will go to you. Obama did let ISIS and co grow but Trump hasn't stopped it, that work has been done by Syria and its allies defending themselves from groups like that, which were armed/funded/trained by your government, amongst others. But that's nothing you.

For example if ISIS took over, it would be more stable but not good for Israel or the US...


Israel has been aligned with ISIS type groups in Syria, not to mention it's an ally of an ISIS-type leaders (in the form of the Saudi monarchy). Nethanyahu has been seen on film at Israeli medical tents that were treating some of these Islamist fighters in the Golan before sending them back to Syria to fight the SAA.

And Syria wouldn't be more stable with an ISIS takeover, I have no idea what you're basing that off.

Some updates:




By skinster
#15123333
^ everyone is ignoring that article with leaked reports on just how much the British government and its contractors were involved in making war on Syria.

Anyway,
By skinster
#15129276
In an important new interview with The Grayzone‘s Aaron Maté, the first Director-General of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has revealed new insights into the way the US exerted control over the Organisation in the lead-up to the Iraq invasion and the suspicious way pro-US narratives appear to be dominating controversies in the supposedly impartial OPCW to this day.

The most significant piece of new information revealed in this interview with the acclaimed former OPCW chief José Bustani is his assertion that while the US was orchestrating his 2002 ouster due to the risk he posed of derailing the Iraq war agenda with successful negotiations, his office was packed with hidden surveillance equipment and that his American head of security vanished immediately after this was discovered.
https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2020/10/19 ... -iraq-war/


Ex-OPCW chief defends Syria whistleblowers and reveals he was spied on before Iraq war
By skinster
#15135512
Media silence marks ongoing OPCW cover-up of Syria chemical weapons scandal
This should be a global scandal,” said journalist Aaron Maté on the suppression of evidence from experts from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in order to push for war in Syria. “This is the U.S. government bombing Syria based on allegations that were later found by the investigating team to be false. But then once that team came back to write their report they were pressured by the U.S. government and had their evidence censored.”

Unfortunately, it has not become a global scandal. With very few exceptions, media across the spectrum have refused to report on the fact that the respected Nobel Peace Prize-winning body appears to be suppressing its own experts’ findings on Syria to suit Washington’s agenda. There has been no mention of the continuing scandal in The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, CNBC, or MSNBC. Even alternative media like Democracy Now! Have made only fleeting reference to it. “Since that censorship there has been a complete media censorship by everybody…all the major networks. Even adversarial progressive networks,” Maté added.

Perhaps the most notable case of omission, however, was Newsweek. Journalist Tared Haddad attempted to cover the story but was continually rebuffed by higher-ups who squashed his reporting. Haddad ended up very publicly quitting, rather than allow the scandal to be brushed under the carpet.

“It is certainly not a lack of facts or evidence that is stopping mainstream media from reporting the issue,” Piers Robinson, co-director of the Organization for Propaganda Studies told MintPress, but “covering it would force mainstream media outlets to ask challenging questions of the U.S., UK, and French governments as well as the OPCW itself.” Thus, readers would be forgiven for not knowing the details of what happened.

The birth of a cover-up
In April 2018, dozens of people were found dead in a suspected chemical weapons attack in the Damascus suburb of Douma. The United States government and its allies immediately blamed Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and responded with rounds of airstrikes, bombing targets around the country. Support for the action was bi-partisan and enjoyed widespread media approval. In fact, a survey by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting found that not one of the top 100 U.S. newspapers by circulation opposed the Trump administration’s response.

A team from the OPCW was sent to Douma to investigate the incident. Its report gave some credence to Washington’s accusations. While far from conclusive, it did suggest that it was “likely” that there was indeed some form of chemical weapons used, possibly an air attack that involved dropping chlorine canisters on the city. Although the OPCW refused to speculate on who was responsible, the suggestion of an aerial strike indicated Syrian government forces, the most equipped for such an attack, were to blame.

The report was seized upon by the Trump administration and the media (often the last time the organization has been mentioned in their pages) as justification for U.S. actions. However, its credibility was quickly undermined by the leaking of internal memos from experts on the ground who claimed that their opinions had been censored and that in their estimation, the canisters were likely placed at the site of the incident, suggesting an inside job from American-allied forces.

Senior OPCW officials reportedly ordered the removal of “all traces” of dissenting opinion from the published document, however. The organization’s first president, Brazilian diplomat Jose Bustani, expressed his grave concerns over the news, fearing the OPCW, which was founded in 1997 to represent all 193 of its member states, had become a tool of the U.S. government.

The scandal continued to grow throughout 2020 as OPCW experts came forward to give testimony as to how their findings had been completely manipulated or ignored in order to present a one-sided, incorrect view of events in order to further an agenda.

Things reached a fever pitch last month, however, when Bustani was invited to speak at the United Nations Security Council about his concerns but was blocked by the United States and its allies on the basis that he was not in a position to provide expert details about chemical weapons or the attack. “What has happened now is yet more sad proof that Western delegations fear the uncomfortable truth,” said Russia’s ambassador to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia. The Russian delegation subsequently read out Bustani’s testimony. In doing so, it was accused of undermining the legitimacy of the tribunal.

An impenetrable wall of silence
Bustani claimed the truth was being deliberately “hidden behind an impenetrable wall of silence and opacity, making any meaningful dialogue impossible.”

Regardless of whether or not there is substance to the concerns raised about the OPCW’s behaviour in the Douma investigation, hearing what your own inspectors have to say would be an important first step in mending the Organisation’s damaged reputation. The dissenting inspectors are not claiming to be right, but they do want to be given a fair hearing. As one Director General to another, I respectfully request that you grant them this opportunity,” he concluded.

“The censoring of a respected former head of the OPCW is the latest in a sad string of attempts to keep the public wildly misinformed about what really took place in Douma in 2018,” Haddad told MintPress,

Although much of what took place has now been established beyond all doubt, the OPCW’s frankly childish approach to addressing this incident shows how politicized this body has become, severely undermining its impartiality and credibility going forward. These are developments that should be deeply concerning to everyone, especially given that the real perpetrators of chemical weapons attacks are now that much more likely to go unpunished.”

This is not the first time that Bustani has run afoul of the U.S. government. In 2002, he was unlawfully removed from his position as director-general of the OPCW after contradicting U.S. claims over weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Bush administration under Secretary of State John Bolton threatened to kill his family if he did not resign; “You have 24 hours to leave the organization, and if you don’t comply with this decision by Washington, we have ways to retaliate against you. We know where your kids live,” Bolton told him.

The U.S. has used the Douma attack as justification for increasing sanctions on Syria, a country where at least 83% of people live below the poverty line, according to the UN. Over 13 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance. This summer, the World Food Program also warned of a potential widespread famine inside the country. Sanctions have made the importation of foods and medicine profoundly difficult, further immiserating a society already devastated from nine years of brutal civil war, in which virtually every world and regional power has fueled the fighting. Ultimately, it is the Syrian people who are caught in the crossfire.

“The bottom line” from this story, Robinson stated, is that, “clearly the U.S. and its allies do not want transparency and open debate about the OPCW Douma investigation, and one can only conclude that this is the case because they know full well that their claims cannot be substantiated. Smears and censorship are the only tactics they have left.”
https://mronline.org/2020/11/07/media-s ... s-scandal/
By skinster
#15287919
An update: EU report calls out the OPCW cover-up in Syria.


Another update: Chinese led peace agreement between Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria is going to get the Yankees and their jihadi frands out of Syria soon enough.. 8)
By skinster
#15288576
Files Expose Syrian ‘Revolution’ as Western Regime Change Operation
Throughout August and September, anti-government protests have rocked Syrian cities. While the crowds are typically small, numbering only a few hundred, they show little sign of abating. Demonstrators are motivated by increasingly unlivable economic conditions spurred by crippling U.S.-led international sanctions against Damascus. These have produced hyperinflation, mass food insecurity, and many daily hardships for the population. They also prevent vital humanitarian aid from entering the country.

The media has given the unrest blanket coverage. No reference to Washington’s central role in imposing the misery under which average Syrians suffer today, let alone that several key figures in the protests are former opposition fighters who laid down their arms under a government-approved reconciliation deal in 2018, can be found in the reporting.

By contrast, mainstream news outlets appear positively exuberant at the prospect of a new Syrian ‘revolution’ erupting, and many comparisons have been drawn to the protests in March 2011 that turned into an all-out war by the year’s end. In the process, the long-standing, indomitably established narrative that those demonstrations were initially peaceful and only turned violent after many months in response to brutal repression by authorities has been endlessly reiterated.

This is despite the reality of what happened during that fateful time being spelled out in the Syrian government’s own internal documents. Namely, records of the Central Crisis Management Cell, created in March 2011 by Damascus to manage responses to the rioting that began a few weeks earlier.

While mainstream outlets have previously reported on this trove, dubbing them “The Assad Files,” they have universally misrepresented, distorted or simply falsified the contents to wrongfully convict Syrian officials of horrific crimes. In some instances, quite literally. The documents show that Assad and his ministers struggled valiantly to prevent the upheaval from escalating into violence on either side, protect demonstrators, and keep the situation under control.

Meanwhile, sinister, unseen forces systematically murdered security service officials, pro-government figures, and protesters to foment catastrophe in a manner similar to many CIA regime change operations old and new. This shocking story has never before been told. Now, with dark insurrectionary clouds again pullulating over Damascus, it must be.

‘This opposition is armed’
Over the first months of 2011, the Arab Spring spread revolutionary fervor rapidly throughout North Africa and West Asia. Mass protests dislodged long-reigning dictators Ben Ali in Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. Libya was plunged into civil war, and even the hyper-repressive Gulf monarchies appeared threatened. There was one exception, however.

For the most part, the streets of Syria remained stubbornly calm.

This was despite relentless calls for upheaval by local opposition elements. Repeated demands for a “day of rage” against the government of Bashar al-Assad were widely publicized in the Western media but locally unheeded. As “Al Jazeera” explained in February of that year, Syrians had no appetite for regime change. For one, the country’s ethnically and religiously diverse population cherished their state’s secularism and feared unrest would create potentially violent tensions between them all.

Inconveniently, too, Assad was extremely popular, particularly with younger Syrians. He was widely perceived as a reformer who encouraged and protected diversity and inclusion and oversaw a system that, while far from perfect, delivered extremely high standards of education, healthcare, and much else. Unlike many other leaders in the region, his refusal to accommodate Israel was also greatly respected.

Peace in Damascus finally shattered in mid-March when massive demonstrations broke out in several major cities following weeks of sporadic, small-scale bursts of public disobedience across the country. Reports of thousands arrested and an uncertain number of protesters killed spread widely. This was the spark that ignited the West’s proxy war in Syria. Ominously, mere days earlier, a truck carrying vast quantities of grenades and guns was intercepted at Syria’s border with Iraq.

Pater Frans was a Jesuit priest from the Netherlands who, in 1980, established a community center and farm near Homs where he preached harmony between faiths and cared for people with disabilities. When the crisis erupted, he began publishing regular observations of events that were deeply critical of both the government and the opposition.

Along the way, Frans repeatedly noted that “from the start,” he witnessed armed demonstrators fire on police. “Very often,” he once recorded, “the violence of the security forces has been a reaction to the brutal violence of the armed rebels.” In September 2011, he wrote:

From the start there has been the problem of the armed groups, which are also part of the opposition…The opposition of the street is much stronger than any other opposition. And this opposition is armed and frequently employs brutality and violence, only in order then to blame the government.”

It is unknown whether such problematic insights motivated Frans’ murder by armed militants in April 2014, not long after he refused an offer of UN evacuation.

‘No drop of blood’
If peaceful protesters were killed in the initial stages of the failed “revolution,” the question of who was responsible remains unanswered. The Central Crisis Management Cell records indicate that in the days leading up to the mid-March protests, government officials issued explicit instructions to security forces that citizens “should not be provoked”:

In order to avoid the consequences of continued incitement…and foil the attempts of inciters to exploit any pretext, civil police and security agents are requested not to provoke citizens.”

Similarly, on April 18, the Cell ordered the military to only “counter with weapons those who carry weapons against the state, while ensuring that civilians are not harmed.” Four days later, though, “at least” 72 protesters were allegedly shot dead by authorities in Daraa and Douma, the highest reported daily death toll since the demonstrations began. Condemnation from rights groups and Western leaders was fiery.

Three months later, a number of Syrian Arab Army officers defected and formed the Free Syrian Army. Claiming to have become disaffected, they threw their weight behind the opposition due to the April 18 slaughter and alleged the shooting was expressly ordered by their superiors, which they refused to fulfill. However, if orders to execute protesters were given, they evidently weren’t approved by Assad or his ministers.

Contemporary Cell records show that the highest echelons of the Syrian government were extremely unhappy about the killings in Daraa and Douma, with one official cautioning this “difficult day” had “created a new situation…pushing us into circumstances we are better off without.” They went on to lament, “If the directives previously issued had been adhered to, we would have prevented bloodshed, and matters would not have come to this culmination.”

An obvious suspicion is that the use of lethal force was directed by Army commanders planning to defect who wanted to concoct a valiant pretext while creating significant problems for the government. This interpretation is amply reinforced by the defectors who claimed that soldiers who refused the order to kill civilians were themselves executed.

That narrative was eagerly seized upon by Western media, rights groups, and the Syrian opposition as proof of Assad’s maniacal bloodlust. Yet, even the pro-opposition Syrian Observatory of Human Rights has dismissed it as entirely false “propaganda” intended to create divisions within government forces and encourage further defections. More sinisterly, it also provided a convenient explanation for why Syrian security operatives were dying in large numbers after the “peaceful” protests began.

From late March onwards, targeted killings of security operatives and soldiers by unknown assailants became routine before the military was formally deployed in Syria. By early May, the Cell requested daily updates on casualties among “our own forces.” Publicly, though, the government initially remained silent on the slaughter. The Cell records suggest officials were afraid of showing weakness, inflaming tensions, and encouraging further violence.

It was not until June, with the slaughter of at least 120 security forces by armed militants who’d taken over the town of Jisr al-Shughour, that Damascus – and the Western media – acknowledged the killing spree. Cell records show that by this time, government supporters were being abducted, tortured, and murdered by opposition actors. This led to the formal deployment of the military to handle the crisis, which subsequently became even more deadly. Despite the carnage, the Cell’s instructions remained unambiguous.

“Ensure that no drop of blood is shed when confronting and dispersing peaceful demonstrations,” an August memo states. The following month, an order to “prohibit harming any detainee” was issued. “If there is evidence” that any security official “fell short in carrying out any mission,” the Cell dictated, “any officer, head of branch or field commander” implicated would have to explain themselves to the government “to hold them accountable.”

‘Toppling down the regime’
Some of the most compelling passages in the Cell documents refer to unidentified snipers lurking on rooftops and buildings adjacent to protests from the upheaval’s beginning, firing on crowds below. One memo records that in late April 2011, a sniper near an Aleppo mosque “shot demonstrators, killing one and injuring 43,” and “the situation of some injured is still delicate.”

As such, “focusing on arresting inciters, especially those shooting at demonstrators,” was considered a core priority for the Assad government for much of that year. Around this time, the Cell also hit upon the idea of capturing “a sniper, inciter or infiltrator” and presenting them publicly in a “convincing” manner. One official suggested that “surrounding and catching a sniper alive or injured and exposing him in the media is not impossible” and would “restore public trust in security agencies and the police.”

But this never came to pass. Damascus also neglected to publicly present a bombshell document circulated among “the so-called Syrian opposition in Lebanon” that its intelligence services intercepted in May 2011. The remarkable file, reproduced in full in the Cell records, lays bare the opposition’s insurrectionary plans, providing a clear blueprint for precisely what had happened since March, and what was to come.

The opposition proposed convening mass demonstrations so that security forces “will lose control of all regions,” be “taken unaware,” and become “exhausted and distracted.” This, along with “honest officers and soldiers” joining “the ranks of the revolution,” would make “toppling down the regime” all the more straightforward, particularly as any crackdown on these protests would encourage a Western “military strike,” ala Libya. They foresaw mainstream news outlets playing a significant role in making this happen:

Everyone should be confident that with the continuation of demonstrations today, media channels will have no choice but to cover the events…Al Jazeera will be late due to considerations of mutual interests. But we have Al Arabiya and Western media channels who will come forward, and we will all see the change of tone in covering the events and demonstrations will be aired on all channels and they will have wide coverage.”

The document is the most palpable evidence to date that the entire Syrian “revolution” unfolded according to a pre-prepared, well-honed script. Whether this was drawn up in direct collusion with Western powers remains to be proven. Still, the presence of snipers picking off protesters is a strong indication among many that this was the case.

Unidentified snipers are a frequent fixture of U.S.-orchestrated ‘color revolutions’ and CIA coups, such as the attempted overthrow of Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez in 2002 and the 2014 Ukrainian ‘revolution.’ In both cases, the shooting of unarmed protesters by snipers was pivotal in unseating the targeted government. In Kiev, demonstrations that began months earlier started running out of steam when 70 protesters were abruptly slain by sniper fire.

This turned the entire crowd violent while triggering an avalanche of international condemnation, which made President Viktor Yanukovych’s downfall a fait accompli. In the years since, three Georgian mercenaries have claimed they were expressly ordered by nationalist opposition actors and a U.S. military veteran embedded with them to carry out a massacre “to sow some chaos.” Officially, the crime remains unsolved today.

‘Burn enormous sums’
The Central Crisis Management Cell documents would have forever remained a Syrian government secret were it not for the enterprising work of the Commission for International Justice and Accountability (CIJA). This shadowy organization was founded in May 2011 by Western military and intelligence veterans to prosecute Syrian officials for war crimes. Its first act was to train Syrian investigators “in basic international criminal and humanitarian law” in service of a “domestic justice process in a future transitional Syria.”

For years, CIJA enjoyed glowing profiles in major news outlets and connected journalists and rights groups with material that formed the basis of several hard-hitting investigations exposing purported Syrian government atrocities. At no point was any concern raised about the Commission’s collaboration with dangerous armed groups to smuggle sensitive documentation out of abandoned government buildings in opposition-occupied areas of the country.

CIJA chief Bill Wiley claimed in 2014 that his organization worked with every Syrian opposition group “up to but excluding Jabhat al-Nusra and Islamic State.” However, an investigation by “The Grayzone” indicates that the Commission’s staff in Syria were frequently in extremely close quarters with both groups and, in fact, paid them handsomely for their assistance in securing documentation. This included material seized in the city of Raqqa after its January 2014 capture by ISIS, when the terrorist group was massacring Alawites and Christians.

“We burn enormous sums of money moving this stuff,” Wiley told The “New Yorker” in 2016. Accordingly, CIJA received tens of millions of dollars for these efforts from a number of Western governments, including states at the forefront of the Syrian proxy war.

The Commission’s work produced no prosecutions for many years. This changed in late 2019 when Anwar Raslan and Eyad al-Gharib, two former Damacus’ General Intelligence Directorate members, were indicted in Germany for crimes against humanity.

Raslan headed the Directorate’s domestic security unit, while al-Gharib was one of his departmental lackeys. The pair defected in December 2012, with Raslan and his family fleeing to Jordan, where he would play “an active and visible role in the Syrian opposition.” He was part of the opposition delegation to the Geneva II conference on Syria in January 2014. In July of that year, he was granted asylum in Germany.

Following his escape, Raslan told numerous tales of abuse and atrocities perpetrated by his unit and the Syrian government during his 20 years of state service. He claimed his defection was spurred after learning of an apparent opposition attack in Damascus that he was investigating was, in fact, staged by security forces. Significant doubts about his accounts and whether his defection was principled or just cynical opportunism have been raised.

In a bitter irony, Raslan’s loudmouth tendencies were his undoing. His assorted claims provided grounds for his arrest by German authorities and were used against him in his prosecution, which heavily relied on documents seized by CIJA, including the Cell records. An expert statement submitted to the court by Commission operative Ewan Brown, a British Army veteran, falsely frames these as indicative that Assad’s government sanctioned and encouraged brutality and repression against peaceful protesters.

Al-Gharib was found guilty of aiding and abetting crimes against humanity and received four-and-a-half years in prison in February 2021. A year later, Raslan was given life imprisonment for crimes including mass torture, rape, and murder. The pair were convicted not for personally perpetrating these horrors but for serving in the General Intelligence Directorate when they were allegedly committed. Details of these purported crimes were, in some cases, provided to the court by highly unreliable witnesses.

The conclusion that Al-Gharib and Raslan were prosecuted because they were within easy reach, and CIJA and its Western backers needed something to show for all their efforts, is ineluctable. The Commission had good reason to be nervous about failing to fulfill its founding objective. In March 2020, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) formally accused the organization of “submission of false documents, irregular invoicing, and profiteering” in connection with an EU “Rule of Law” project it ran in Syria.

CIJA’s crusade to punish Syrian officials could only succeed in the event of regime change. Its launch in May 2011 shows that foreign actors were laying the foundations for that eventuality from the earliest days of the ‘peaceful revolution.’ The recent protests may indicate that Western powers haven’t given up on the objective yet.
https://www.mintpressnews.com/central-c ... ge/285803/
User avatar
By starman2003
#15288650
skinster wrote:Another update: Chinese led peace agreement between Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria is going to get the Yankees and their jihadi frands out of Syria soon enough.. 8)


But MBS still wants a US commitment to defend KSA and nuclear weapons to counter Iran. N-bombs must be the goal of the nuclear program he wants.
By skinster
#15288660
starman2003 wrote:But MBS still wants a US commitment to defend KSA and nuclear weapons to counter Iran. N-bombs must be the goal of the nuclear program he wants.


Saudi Arabia doesn't need nukes to counter Iran because Iran doesn't have nukes anyway. Besides, they're allies again anyway since the Chinese brokered that deal.
User avatar
By starman2003
#15288751
skinster wrote:Saudi Arabia doesn't need nukes to counter Iran because Iran doesn't have nukes anyway.


Still nuclear capable; they could produce a few nukes if they wanted.

Besides, they're allies again anyway since the Chinese brokered that deal.


Outwardly relations have improved. But MBS's request for a defense pact, obligating the US to defend KSA, mirrors lingering distrust of Iran.
By skinster
#15288755
starman2003 wrote:Still nuclear capable; they could produce a few nukes if they wanted.


As I said, they have no nukes and they seek no nukes. It is against their constitution. They have repeatedly stated they don't want any nukes. Frankly, I think they should get them considering the imperialist attacks against them which have no end in sight, but that is not part of their state policy.

Outwardly relations have improved. But MBS's request for a defense pact, obligating the US to defend KSA, mirrors lingering distrust of Iran.


They've always had a defense pact. That is the basis of their trade relationship and why KSA is propped up by the empire like Israel is.
User avatar
By starman2003
#15288839
skinster wrote:As I said, they have no nukes and they seek no nukes. It is against their constitution. They have repeatedly stated they don't want any nukes.


That's just their public relations position. If they didn't want nukes they wouldn't have invested so much in their nuclear program, the means to enrich to weapons grade. Iran has the ability to produce nuclear bombs and has a right to have them, to deter Israel which has long had an enormous nuclear arsenal. Unfortunately the power of the zionist lobby has forced the US to scatter objectivity and fairness to the four winds. Iran and Iraq have been mercilessly hounded to abandon nuclear programs while Israel gets away with having 100 or more nukes already...


Frankly, I think they should get them considering the imperialist attacks against them which have no end in sight,


Yes and the big n-arsenal their enemy already has.


but that is not part of their state policy.


They're just as aware as we are of the need for nukes hence it is their real, albeit covert, state policy. Denial is essential because of the glaring bias and double standards enforced by the toadies of Israel.

They've always had a defense pact.


They obviously want more.
By skinster
#15288877
Good article in this tweet about the new partnership between Syria and China:


Anti-imperialists meet each other.


starman2003 wrote:That's just their public relations position. If they didn't want nukes they wouldn't have invested so much in their nuclear program, the means to enrich to weapons grade


That's their position based on their religious beliefs and we are talking about a theocratic state here. For PR it would be much better for them to say they want them and actually get them, since it could make the Zionists give up on trying to destroy them.

Iran has the ability to produce nuclear bombs and has a right to have them,


Agreed, but they don't want them.

Denial is essential because of the glaring bias and double standards enforced by the toadies of Israel.


I disagree. I think if they wanted them they wouldn't pretend not to want them, they would just go ahead and do it. It's not like they're under the military boot of the West.

They obviously want more.


You claimed they want more defense pacts than they already have because of their "lingering distrust of Iran" but I don't agree that this is the case, especially considering a) they already had these defense pacts and b) the recent move to end hostile relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
User avatar
By starman2003
#15288917
skinster wrote:Good article in this tweet about the new partnership between Syria and China:


Good news it seems but it's unclear what tangible benefits Syria will get, or how much.


For PR it would be much better for them to say they want them and actually get them, since it could make the Zionists give up on trying to destroy them.


:lol: Unfortunately enriching to weapons grade and then building n-bombs would spark Israeli and possibly US attacks on them. Iran just can't afford to be so gung ho. It's a recipe for disaster, which is why they tread carefully.


I disagree. I think if they wanted them they wouldn't pretend not to want them, they would just go ahead and do it. It's not like they're under the military boot of the West.


Unfortunately Iran is in no shape to fight a fullscale war with the US or Israel. Their airforce is obsolete and in most other areas their enemies have a big technological edge. Iran's present approach mirrors harsh geopolitical realities. They're not stupid or reckless; they know they have to be cautious.


You claimed they want more defense pacts than they already have because of their "lingering distrust of Iran" but I don't agree that this is the case, especially considering a) they already had these defense pacts and b) the recent move to end hostile relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran.


It's obvious MBS isn't satisfied with the present arrangements. As for the Saudi-Iran rapproachment, it had to be engineered by China; it was not something Riyadh and Tehran did on their own initiative. It's a good development of course but I'm afraid it's rather precarious. No doubt, it'll come under serious strain if or when KSA "normalizes" with Israel.
By skinster
#15288941
Syria-China partnership signals defeat for USA’s regional domination war
The middle east has been entirely reshaped – but not in the way the US imperialists planned 12 years ago.

Back in May, in the context of moves to restore Syria to her rightful place in the Arab League, President Bashar al-Assad flew to Riyadh. Now he has flown to Hangzhou to realise even more far-reaching plans for a strategic partnership with China.

For Syria, after so many years of hard struggle to maintain her independence from imperialism, these are very welcome developments indeed.

It will be remembered that, having failed in its attempt to oust the government of President Assad by means of a proxy war fought out by rival jihadi gangs in the pay of the United States, Britain, the Gulf states and Turkey, imperialism has continued the war by other means – namely, by the imposition of a very heavy sanctions regime putting a drag on Syrian reconstruction efforts and greatly increasing the country’s economic problems.

The economic burdens the Syrians have to bear are real and urgent, which is why the economic assistance now being offered by China is so welcome.

But the Chinese promise of assistance in the reconstruction of Syria’s infrastructure is just one part of the very wide-ranging strategic partnership that China and Syria jointly announced on Friday in the Chinese city of Hangzhou.

We reproduce the statement in full below.

Xi, Assad jointly announce China-Syria strategic partnership
Chinese president Xi Jinping and Syrian president Bashar al-Assad on Friday jointly announced the establishment of a China-Syria strategic partnership.

The two presidents met in the eastern Chinese city of Hangzhou, Zhejiang province, ahead of the opening of the 19th Asian Games, scheduled for Saturday.

Syria was one of the first Arab countries that established diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China, and was one of the countries that co-sponsored the resolution to restore the lawful seat of the People’s Republic of China in the United Nations, Xi said.

Over the 67 years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries, the China-Syria relationship has stood the test of changes in the international situation, and their friendship has grown stronger over time, he said.

Xi noted that the establishment of the strategic partnership will be an important milestone in the history of bilateral ties.

China is willing to work with Syria to enrich their relationship and continuously advance the China-Syria strategic partnership, Xi said.

Xi emphasized that China will continue to work with Syria to firmly support each other on issues concerning the two sides’ respective core interests and major concerns, safeguard the common interests of both countries and other developing countries, and uphold international fairness and justice.

China supports Syria in opposing foreign interference, rejecting unilateralism and bullying, and safeguarding national independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, he said.

China supports Syria in conducting reconstruction, enhancing counterterrorism capacity building, and promoting a political settlement of the Syrian issue following the “Syrian-led, Syrian-owned” principle, Xi said.

China also supports Syria in improving its relations with other Arab countries and playing a greater role in international and regional affairs, he added.

China is willing to strengthen Belt and Road cooperation with Syria, increase the import of high-quality agricultural products from Syria, and jointly implement the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative and the Global Civilisation Initiative to make active contributions to regional and global peace and development.

Assad said that in international affairs, China has always aligned itself with international fairness and justice, and upheld international law and humanitarianism, playing an important and constructive role.

Syria highly appreciates and firmly supports the Belt and Road Initiative, the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative and the Global Civilisation Initiative, and will actively participate in them, Assad added.

The Syrian side thanks the Chinese government for its invaluable support to the Syrian people, firmly opposes any act of interference in China’s internal affairs, and is willing to be China’s long-term and staunch friend and partner, he said.

Assad said Syria will take the establishment of the Syria-China strategic partnership as an opportunity to strengthen bilateral friendly cooperation and step up their communication and coordination in international and regional affairs.

After the talks, the two heads of state witnessed the signing of bilateral cooperation documents in areas including Belt and Road cooperation, and economic and technological cooperation.

The two sides issued a joint statement on the establishment of the strategic partnership.

Senior Chinese leaders including Cai Qi, Ding Xuexiang, Wang Yi and Shen Yiqin attended the activities.

US defeated in Syria, retreating across the region
The Syrian people have endured the most brutal onslaught of imperialism for 12 long years – years of war, terrorism, economic destruction and social upheaval, combined with a vicious media onslaught of imperialist propaganda lies. Yet despite all the horrors and the suffering, they refused to bow down to the immense pressure that was brought to bear against them.

Instead, they have consolidated behind their leadership and stood firm in defence of their existence as an independent, secular, multifaith, multiethnic, anti-zionist and anti-imperialist bastion in the middle east. And with the aid of its Russian, Iranian and Lebanese allies, the Syrian Arab Army has routed almost all the jihadi forces that were thrown into the country by the imperialist aggressors.

The last remaining areas of occupation survive only by the protection of the US army, whose power to maintain them in place is steadily dwindling. Instead of strengthening US domination in the region by wiping out an inconvenient hold-out of Arab independence, the USA’s war on Syria has fatally undermined it.

Every western leader who pronounced that “Assad must go” in 2011 is gone. President Assad remains. Syria remains. And its allies Iran, Russia and China have become firmer friends of Syria and stronger regional influences.

Forced to accept this reality and welcome Syria back into the regional community (from which it had been ejected at the USA’s command), now even the formerly loyal feudal flunkies in the House of Saud and the Emirates are reconsidering where their best interests really lie.

Turkey’s fate has graphically underlined this conundrum. The Ottoman wannabes suffered greatly for their reckless alliance with Uncle Sam and their criminal support of the jihadi armies that were mustered against Syria. They have been forced to backtrack and to try to mend their fences.

Now it is President Assad who issues ultimatums and President Erdogan who has to listen: there will be no meeting of the two leaders until every last Turkish soldier has left the country, says Assad. And it is clear that he means it.

As a result of all this, the remaining US occupation forces are looking isolated in the extreme. Attacks on their bases by local resistance forces are becoming more frequent, and it is only a matter of time before the last of them, kept in place as US president Donald Trump so memorably pointed out “for the oil” (and the wheat), is sent packing.

With their exit, the war will finally be ended, and meaningful reconstruction of Syria’s physical and economic infrastructure can begin in earnest.

The middle east, meanwhile, has been entirely reshaped, and not in the way the USA planned.
https://thecommunists.org/2023/09/25/ne ... omination/


starman2003 wrote:Good news it seems but it's unclear what tangible benefits Syria will get, or how much.


It's great news and you can read above about some of those benefits.

:lol: Unfortunately enriching to weapons grade and then building n-bombs would spark Israeli and possibly US attacks on them. Iran just can't afford to be so gung ho. It's a recipe for disaster, which is why they tread carefully.


This is just your opinion, by the look of it. The Iranians don't fear the Yankees or the Zionists. Iran is not Iraq, it has a million+ strong standing army and a lot of weapons and a lot of allies since it provides many of them in the region with weapons and other support. The Iranians have already stated if the Zionists and their masters in Washington attack them, the first place they would send missiles into is Tel Aviv. And they have the capacity for that. And the Zionists know that. They have been arming their allies in Palestine, Lebanon and Syria against Zionist aggression and the Zionists know this. A few months ago when the Zionists did what Zionists have a tendency to do, and got responses in the form of missiles from Palestine, Lebanon and Syria, the Zionists backed off.

It was beautiful to see. :D

It's obvious MBS isn't satisfied with the present arrangements.


Is it obvious or is this your opinion again?

As for the Saudi-Iran rapproachment, it had to be engineered by China; it was not something Riyadh and Tehran did on their own initiative.


The end result is the same.

No doubt, it'll come under serious strain if or when KSA "normalizes" with Israel.


"There will be no peace between any Arab nation and Israel until the Palestinian conflict is ended by Israel agreeing to share sovereignty over the land"
  • 1
  • 201
  • 202
  • 203
  • 204
  • 205

@KurtFF8 Litwin wages a psyops war here but we […]

[usermention=41202] @late[/usermention] Are you[…]

[usermention=41202] @late[/usermention] The[…]

I (still) have a dream

Because the child's cattle-like parents "fol[…]