Syria conflict: Thousands hanged at Saydnaya prison, Amnesty says

I support accurate information because the world today is filled with inaccurate and falsified information. If you want to berate Russia then you should mention the domestic law changes they made regarding women which I am against completely, or the doping cases going on with their athletes, or the apparant corruption in the building of the Olympic infrastructure around Sochi. You need to hit whatever you're against with real and accurate information. Perhaps you should talk to some of the Russians on this forum, they certainly appear to disagree with the comments you have made. And no, I am not a very old man.

 

Yes, as Jill Stein correctly pointed out Clinton was "the candidate of Wall Street, War and the Walmart economy".

 

dont you know that Putler´s empire roles on the kiselev´s propaganda? and 90 % of Muscovites live in the virtual TV.ru world ?

its a well expert on this subject Professor Timothy Snyder of Yale University, if you really "support accurate information"
[video=youtube;xpOpnFzTfVQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpOpnFzTfVQ[/video]

 

You linked me this before, that time completely off subject when we were talking about Chechnya. I already gave you an answer before, on different threads and I will give it to you once more seeing as you mentioned Ukraine;

According to the prevailing wisdom in the West, the Ukraine crisis can be blamed almost entirely on Russian aggression. Russian President Vladimir Putin, the argument goes, annexed Crimea out of a long-standing desire to resuscitate the Soviet empire, and he may eventually go after the rest of Ukraine, as well as other countries in eastern Europe. In this view, the ouster of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014 merely provided a pretext for Putin’s decision to order Russian forces to seize part of Ukraine.

But this account is wrong: the United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for the crisis. The taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement, the central element of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and integrate it into the West. At the same time, the EU’s expansion eastward and the West’s backing of the pro-democracy movement in Ukraine -- beginning with the Orange Revolution in 2004 -- were critical elements, too. Since the mid-1990s, Russian leaders have adamantly opposed NATO enlargement, and in recent years, they have made it clear that they would not stand by while their strategically important neighbor turned into a Western bastion. For Putin, the illegal overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected and pro-Russian president -- which he rightly labeled a “coup” -- was the final straw. He responded by taking Crimea, a peninsula he feared would host a NATO naval base, and working to destabilize Ukraine until it abandoned its efforts to join the West.

Putin’s pushback should have come as no surprise. After all, the West had been moving into Russia’s backyard and threatening its core strategic interests, a point Putin made emphatically and repeatedly. Elites in the United States and Europe have been blindsided by events only because they subscribe to a flawed view of international politics. They tend to believe that the logic of realism holds little relevance in the twenty-first century and that Europe can be kept whole and free on the basis of such liberal principles as the rule of law, economic interdependence, and democracy.

But this grand scheme went awry in Ukraine. The crisis there shows that realpolitik remains relevant -- and states that ignore it do so at their own peril. U.S. and European leaders blundered in attempting to turn Ukraine into a Western stronghold on Russia’s border. Now that the consequences have been laid bare, it would be an even greater mistake to continue this misbegotten policy.

 

See last line

Must you be reminded that the word alleges stands for there is still no proof?

 

The best outcome would likely be for Israel to annex Syria

 

Ha! Yeah, riiiiiight!

 

It might be sacred to Obama and his ilk, that it is legal to overthrow Syria's government, but it is not sacred to me.

The rebels may indeed have just cause. But the right system is to get your neighbors to help and vote.

Assad faced guns. He fought back.

Take Crimea, they voted. This to me makes them moving to Russia legal. The constitution of Ukraine was violated by the new junta.

Was the election of Assad done correctly? I honestly do not know nor will i pretend he won. I don't know.

 

Wait for it..... any minute now. Will show up [MENTION=71623]Sandy Shanks[/MENTION] to explain why she should have won to be president.

 

Then we should have a hands-on approach to the reconstruction of the Syrian Government. It'd be a transitional government, and for the time being basically the US and Allies would govern it from the shadows. But the more and more reconstruction takes a positive path, the more we can let go until eventually Syria is back to being a prosperous, civilized country again.

It's what we should have done with Iraq: Give it training wheels instead of letting it fall off completely. Would I give a son for Syria? No, not really but I remember the INTL condemnation for having done nothing in Darfur. I think Syria is way worse than Darfur in that we're seeing blatant violations of the rights of the people there, as well as many military factions. It might be in Syria's best interests for a quick explosion of warfare, followed by a long peace process.

 

Oh gee...I was thinking China would lay claim to much of the far east as I read several times they once owned it.

 

The same map can be drawn about Russia as to what actually belongs to russia and what doesn't...

 

It probably would be in Syria's best interest, friend. But it would cost us billions, if not a trillion. And it would cost us our sons, and probably some daughters. You are talking about a presence there that would last at least a decade, and history has shown us that America will politicize that occupation, Congress and the media will turn against it, and we will leave before the job is done. We did that in Iraq, and we are doing it now in Afghanistan, as the taliban is taking back more and more ground in that country.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archi...ment-has-lost-territory-to-the-insurgency.php

Not a single one of our sons or daughters should suffer or die for a war America is not willing to win, and America is not willing to win if it takes time. You will never get America's politicians, press, and media to stay supportive of a long war. We know this from experience! It's not that we can't win; it's that we don't have the will to win. And it's not the soldiers and Marines who won't win. It's the politicians, media, and public who won't win.

This is the state of affairs, like it or not. So no. I don't want anything to do with Syria's civil war, and I don't want anything to do with peacekeeping in Syria. If anything, we can go in and ruthlessly destroy ISIS, kill as many as possible, scatter the survivors, and get the hell out. We can let the Russians and Assad try and govern that dunghole afterwards, because we know America will not do it. Any president, especially a Republican president, who thinks America will stand behind him for a long, protracted occupation, is crazy.

And finally, as a "war parent" of Iraq and Afghanistan, I have learned to ask the "your son" question. If a war is not worth losing your son over, then it is not worth losing any American son over. This is the test I use to judge whether or not we should go to war. I think it is a fair test.

My two cents ...

 

You're absolutely right. One of the problems I have is that when I read these books and listen to these reports, I start to think like/understand the Establishment. After all, the only way to get anything across is to speak their language. From a humanistic standpoint, does the atrocities tug at my heart? Immensely. But you're right that the worst case is that we get in, we're not committed and we do this dance all over again. And worse yet, should American families break up, should men and women(and people's children), suffer for some geopolitical grand chessboard? Hell no.

The Founders were right that we shouldn't have a "standing army" on call, but miltias. As long as we do have a standing army, it should only be used for self-defense.

 

The Nazis showed their hand. Hard to hide all that evidence.

 

you have point sralin - killed much , much more but you can still find musicians , public figures with nickname sralin . simply ´cos sovok has had time to hide stralin´s crimes

 

"But this account is wrong: the United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for the crisis" MUCH shorter question, what do you think about putler´s personal Dr. Goebbels, mr. Dima Kiselev, and his work? according your post you are a big admirer of his art (art of Goebbels-Sralin´s propaganda) ?

https://newrepublic.com/article/118...ins-favorite-tv-host-russias-top-propogandist

 

do you think its realistic?

 

Of course not

 

ACTUALLY, the hans use such maps in their school books , according hans outer Manchuria (Muscovite for 150 year only ) belongs to china

 

Horrible idea.. Most Syrians are Muslims.. and Israel would no longer be a Jewish democracy.

 

Margot
Sorry if it was not clear that i was being ironic

That said
It seems IRONICALLY true that israel annexing syria would be both abhorrent
While at the same time reduce the killing
Apart from that syria seems destined for one of many possible horrible bloody futures

Several years ago various people complained how bad assad is
And said that he must therefore be.removed

What we now see is that getting rid of a bad situation can ultimately make things even worse
We got the soviets out of afghanistan and made things worse

 

The Syrian revolution began with 14 year old school boys in Feb 2011. I posted a thread.

 

Yes but it was supported and given encouragement elsewhere including here
http://m.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Po...0ODdEOEEwQjIyNjg4RUFGRDBDMkE4NEY4MzYzM0UyQTU=