17th division was surrounded for over 16 months by ISIS in an isolated Raqqah desert. No not in the desert. At the airport. Can you prove that the Kurds rescued the 17th Division? No that's not how warfare works. They pushed out the remnants of the Syrian army from Raqqa which has meant that that territory has been lost. The rebels now have additional options for resupply. Because it's on the border in the Syria. If you can't control your borders then it's a lot easier to get recruits and supplies to bolster the ranks especially as the Turkish border is actually quite porous and even those going through proper crossings aren't subject to thorough searches. I mean you are aware of the international contingent within Syria's rebels as well as ISIS? And what makes you think that the Kruds are your allies? Considering how badly they've been treated by Damascus. Then it's clear that there is a supply issue within the Syrian army. I do but it's a bad strategy. Do you understand the nature of guerilla warfare? I'd love to know how Syria gets it's money despite having considerably reduced tax income courtesy of the war. The images aren't showing. Really? Can I ask whether you think that rebuilding whilst the war is still going on is a good idea? And especially considering how a militia like ISIS now has access to IFV's, SPG's (mobile artillery) and MBT's In my view either somebody somewhere in the Syrian administration has seriously miscalculated the situation or it's a propaganda move.
Excuse me. I am behaving like an adult. Unlike you, I am a former journalist and I know how the mainstream media works. Facts aren't ridiculous just because propaganda sponges like you say they are. Now, read this and learn something: http://www.medialens.org/index.php/...rsh-revelations-of-obama-s-syrian-deceit.html Now are you going to deal with the substantive issues of inherent Western mainstream media bias of the kind raised by Herman and Chomsky in addition to the more obvious forms of BBC propaganda in relation to Syria that I highlighted or not? If you continue to avoid them, then we are done.
A former journalist? What for? The sun. And no you haven't behaved like an adult as you repeatedly ignored my queries and had the hypocrisy to deny the validity of my sources which also included articles from papers which you yourself have cited. The article which you cited used another article from the Guardian and somebody else's comment. And I'm not going to talk about the so called media bias by Herman and Chomsky because it doesn't relate to this topic at all. If Herman and Chomsky had pursued the idea of media bias through the courts and done so successfully then I might consider it valid. If you really think the BBC or the Guardian or even Al Jazzera has fraudulently reported the events in Syria then I suggest you prove it. But quite frankly I don't care. I only responded to make sure that you are aware as to why I believe conversing with you is like going around in circles. Even your posts are actually beginning to mirror my own. And if you are a journalist in my country then why have you used American English? That's a rhetorical question by the way.
Of course you don't care. Ignorant people, rarely care about anything. Herman and Chomsky's ground breaking analysis on media bias is absolutely relevant to the topic relating to mainstream media bias on Syria but you won't deal with it because you can't. You want proof of media bias, and in some cases blatant and crude forms of BBC propaganda, then my posts 128 and 130 provided it. But of course, you side-stepped them and/or are incapable of comprehending information.The evidence is overwhelming that propaganda is the dominant grand narrative of our time: http://www.medialens.org/index.php/...the-dominant-grand-narrative-of-our-time.html Where have you been living for the last decade since Iraq in a cave or something? So you won't accept the proof of the more crude forms of propaganda in relation to Syria as highlighted by the Panorama documentary I cited. Here's more proof of the media propaganda system as the dominant grand narrative of our times as it relates to Syria, at work: http://www.medialens.org/index.php/...-the-comic-book-simplicity-of-propaganda.html http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2014/776-the-purpose-and.html http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2014/773-damascene-conversions.html http://www.medialens.org/index.php/...lity-filtering-sources-on-the-syrian-war.html http://www.medialens.org/index.php/...rsh-revelations-of-obama-s-syrian-deceit.html http://www.medialens.org/index.php/...chemical-weapons-attacks-in-ghouta-syria.html http://www.medialens.org/index.php/...ts-2013/740-massacres-that-matter-part-2.html http://www.medialens.org/index.php/...-protect-in-egypt-libya-and-syria-part-1.html http://www.medialens.org/index.php/...-editors-swallow-us-claims-on-syrian-wmd.html http://www.medialens.org/index.php/...rsuasive-evidence-syria-sarin-libya-lies.html http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/alerts-2013/730-this-madman.html http://www.medialens.org/index.php/...et-fooled-again-hyping-syrias-wmd-threat.html http://www.medialens.org/index.php/...the-houla-massacre-part-2-shades-of-grey.html http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2012/682-the-houla-massacre.html That's you done.
I didn't actually say that. For a self-claimed former journalist you seem to have trouble reading. It's not relevant because my view which seems to have triggered these bizarre responses was that I sided solely with the Syrian civilians because I believe that the armed groups both state and non-state elements are destructive and oppressive. No. You've nearly exhausted my patience hence I cannot be asked to have to go through your posts unless they're addressed to me. No not a cave but then again even caves can have satellite communication. I lived in New Zealand for a year but I've travelled around, particularly in the middle east and I'm actually studying Arabic. Really? And yet you offer medialens.org which in itself pretty crude journalism. I'm not going to bother with the rest of the links because quite frankly; who has the time. But I will go through this one with which is at the top of the long the list that you gave me and I will show you why I discount it which will be on the following post. No I'm not done and that statement tells me that you think that this is some sort game that you have to win.
That's an opinion not fact. Which isn't the best opening and also it hyper links to one of it's own articles. This part links to video which features Noam Chomsky whose training is in linguistics. And I'm assuming that this is from the video This passage references it's own separate article again although the difference is that this is actually an order page for a book that you can buy. This doesn't substantiate the statement in this paragraph. And curiously enough the co author of that book who also helps run the site has had no training in journalism but was actually a geophysicist. Which was an accurate announcement from the news reader. So if anybody mentions the words "steps" or "next" then it must mean war. That is illogical It's funny that they didn't show a clip of that. And it wasn't the BBC that said it. Again this is an opinion. Which funnily enough was recently found to be correct as Saddam Hussein did possess chemical weaponry which was destroyed during the occupation by the coalition in secret. There's no reason to remind people as to what Rasmussen said. That's called military tradition. Being a serving soldier myself albeit in the reserves I can tell you that being dressed up on parade is actually a privilege because it's a reminder of the work that you've invested and a show of the dedication and skill both for yourself, family and the nation. I can also tell you that getting those shoes to shine on passing out takes a lot longer than you think and you can actually see yourself in them. Also the article references once again to Chomsky.
A perfectly reasonable and logical analysis coupled with my own experience. If there's any one else who wishes to challenge post #156 then please feel free. One of the first things they teach you in college and university is how to distinguish fact from opinion otherwise you'll get little more than simply a pass at best. But if you want to call me a "propaganda sponge" then I think that's it's only fair for me to say that you're a person that has traded a free service whose mission is to 'inform' as it's written on their charter to another which is trying to sell you books as well as offering even less content and even less information. Well done.
Yes, I do want to call you a propaganda sponge because that's precisely what you are. You soak it up like the compliant poodle that you are. You were a serving soldier and that says it all. I can't imagine what I did wrong when I passed my degree with first class honours and then went on to successfully complete my masters. I must of been dealing with opinion all along....LOL. Now, you asked for proof of my claim that supports Chomsky and Herman's seminal analysis that that the mainstream media is structurally biased and I provided it in relation to the numerous medialens critiques of mainstream media coverage of Syria by recourse to links only for you to side-step them. You've also sidestepped the brilliant dissection of the BBCs propaganda blitz on Syria in the form of the Panorama documentary that I posted. To remind other posters, this latter propaganda blitz happened at the time when the security establishment were trying to propel us into war against Assad, before they decided it was just as profitable to have a war against Assads enemies. For the security establishment and arms industry, any dream will do. Anyway, here is the brilliant dissection once more: http://bbcpanoramasavingsyriaschildren.wordpress.com/ Now please argue with a straight face that the BBC Panorama documentary in question is not blatant propaganda and the entire forum will laugh you out of town.
And that's what we call a personal attack. Current. And no it doesn't. If that's the case then why didn't you pick on the fact that medialens keeps using opinions rather than information. It's pretty biased as well. Also why do you keep using American English and why can't you read? No. I didn't As I said before you had and still behaved poorly towards me. You mean the one which you now just posted? That belongs here: http://www.politicalforum.com/conspiracy-theories/ You do realise that this is the internet and not a town? Did you write this?
Yet more misrepresentations, distortions, lies and deflections from you. I'm tired of your crap and so you are now on ignore,. Bye.
When ISIS took the 17th division base, 30-40 Syrian soldiers died. 600+ escaped to brigade 93 base north of Raqqah. From there they regrouped and fought an ISIS attack again. 550+ of them made it out alive by heading over to Kurdish controlled area in the area of Kobane. Once terrorists are pushed out from major urban areas, they NEVER return. We are coming for them , one by one,until we eliminate them. Soon there will be no more terrorists in Damascus province, Homs and Latakia. Once they are kicked out, and killed, the civilians will return there. Where does Syria get money for rebuilding? We have plenty of labor here available, people want to rebuild their homes. All we need is supplies, the labor is practically free. Russia, Iran are helping us with aid.
Because of the rebels who implemented the violence, and the type of government they wanted to impose on the Syrian people. As an example, the first city they entered was Homs, and the first thing they did was to tell the sixty thousand Christians to leave or be killed. Look Margo Assad might not have had the best government in the world, but he did have the most tolerant one in the Middle East and no one should have interfered, especially not foreign powers like Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, I mean look at them? Great governments there! And then again Washington wanted Assad to go because he refused to screw Russia, so to those countries it was the opportune time to grab a chunk of Syria...or at least that's how I see it.
If that's the case then what happened to the rest of the division? Because the numbers you've used describe a battalion. My point is that Raqqa clearly showed that the Syrian army has serious difficulties in reinforcing and supplying it's units. And you'd think that if the Syrian army was in a good position then they would be able to send a relief column or a QRF. This is why I asked you whether you understood the ideas behind guerrillas warfare because they don't need cities in order to continue. I don't doubt that people are eager to rebuild but as you said they supplies like bricks mortar e.t.c. but whose is going to pay for that and where is that money going to come from? From what I can see Iran has helped by sending members of the Quds to Syria but that's military aid. Also the Russians haven't delivered Syrian purchases of Russian equipment. It seems clear to me that the Syrian air force also lacks ordnance hence the IED's known as barrel bombs being used by them.
17th Division wasn't a division in manpower by the time it was taken. There were not 10,000 soldiers inside the 17th. Some were redeployed to Aleppo and Hassakah much earlier. That is what I am saying, it is not like ISIS took out a whole division. No they could not send any relief column. Raqqah is a long way from the next major Syrian Army stronghold in Aleppo. If you send 5000 soldiers in a convoy on a 500 mile march through a desert, what do you think would happen? I bet ISiS would love to see a nice convoy in a single line. That would be a bloodbath. We don't have to rebuild everything at once. Slowly one house, one living quarter at a time. WIll take decades
Well how strong was the division then? Even if they didn't wipe out an entire division they still gained a place from which they can better resupply themselves. And it did mean a loss of control for the north of Syria. This also means they have territory and one of the reasons for Kobane is for an easier influx of fighters and arms. You don't need to send so many nor do you need to send them all at once as they could be stacked up over a few days. Providing that they were aware of it and I don't think that they would have struck Raqqa if the Syrian army was flexible enough to reinforce Raqqa. Decades; therein lies the problem because during that time the economy will be even harder on the average Syrian particularly if the some 9 million refugees return home. And you'll still have to deal with the resentment of those families who have been killed by the state either lawfully or unlawfully, there will be a sense of revanchism.
Your analysis is spot on. As you inferred, agent provocateurs initiated the conflict. The aim from the outset was regime change in Syria. This is what the attacks on ISIS, under the guise of mission creep, are ostensibly about.
Life in Western part of Aleppo, which is controlled by Syrian Government and Army. To all of you terrorist and opposition supporters, have a look at this video. [video=youtube;HXVc60723e8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXVc60723e8[/video] Modern women wearing western clothing. Men and women dancing in a disco club. What did we do wrong? Who is the moderate? Those who love music, equal rights, dancing, and personal freedoms, or those who want to impose sharia law on us, turn women into slaves and kill all the minorities? Who should the West support? Any decent person who is not a total moron will clearly understand that the West needs to support Syrian Army and Government. Give me 1000 more years of secular dictatorship rather than "freedom" by Jabhat Al Nusra, Wahhabis, ISIS and the FSA dogs.
The Middle Eastern partners of the Western allies of Britain, France, Canada and Australia include military top brass from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. Yet, all these Middle Eastern "partners" are documented as having deep logistical links with the Islamic State and other related jihadist terror groups marauding in Syria and Iraq. Joe Biden, the US vice president, admitted this terror connection between Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the other Arab oil monarchies in a public debate at Harvard University earlier this month. Although Biden was later forced into making cringing apologies to the said offender countries, his initial blundering confirms the paradox that the US-led anti-terror coalition is comprised of, well, state-sponsoring terrorists. The terror sponsors include the US and Britain, who together spawned the Al Qaeda-linked network in their laboratory of illegal occupation of Iraq from 2003 onwards. Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) later mutated into Islamic State (IS, ISIL or ISIS) during the West’s covert war for regime change in Syria, which has been raging since March 2011, with a death toll of nearly 200,000, more than six million people displaced, and half of Syria’s 23 million total population living in dire humanitarian conditions, according to the United Nations. The open secret of weapons supplies to extremists from the US, coordinated by its Central Intelligence Agency and routed through Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Jordan, is not even a matter of controversy in the Western media. It has already been reported with mundane indifference by mainstream Western media outlets, such as the New York Times and the Daily Telegraph. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article40005.htm
The Saudis are not very good at PR... but they have tried very hard to keep their young hotheads home warning them that to go to fight in Syria would only make matters worse.. They have frozen the assets of financial supporters and put returning "warriors" in jail.
No, according to Joe Biden. I know you have a thing against ICH but for once, try attacking the information presented with sources as opposed to attacking the source itself on the basis that the information contained within the said source rightly attacks the kind of Arab dictatorships you support.
I saw that speech and there was something real stupid and inaccurate in what he said... I just can't recall the specifics now. Saudi Arabia isn't a dictatorship.
