Bashar al-Assad Fanclub!

"

Anonymous1749704 wrote:

Then what's the motive? I don't have a particularly deep understanding of the situation in Syria, but I find it difficult to imagine that a war-torn shithole of a country would be worthy of large-scale lying to the public and risking the truth of it getting out.

Replace "Syria" with "Iraq" and you've got FOX News 2002-2004.

"

Anonymous1749704 wrote:

Then what's the motive? I don't have a particularly deep understanding of the situation in Syria, but I find it difficult to imagine that a war-torn shithole of a country would be worthy of large-scale lying to the public and risking the truth of it getting out. Not to mention going against Russia as well.

Where do the benefits lie?

The benefit for the elites in charge is a never ending war, with the aim of bleeding Iran and Russia. Most of what the West did in the last 7 years, was to prolong the war and suffering.

Saudi Arabia has also a huge interest in seeing the Assad regime fall and replaced with islamists on their payroll. And the Saudi pay very well for US/EU political & military support.

The American public should instead ask themselves what is the benefit of supporting the islamist rebels in Syria? What do the american taxpayers get out of fighting a foreign war on behalf of Saudi Arabia (& Israel), other than more debt?

Why do people want to overthrow this guy? What makes him any different than all the other middle east dictators/kings ect?

Or is it just that people want to overthrow them all? And will take one at a time?

I mean Saddam Hussein was trying to conquer other territories. This guy didn't do anything like that, right?

I literally never heard of this guy, or cared about Syria, before this rebellion started.

"

/hops around

One of the better posts in here

"

Anonymous1749704 wrote:

Where do the benefits lie?

Oil money.

Based on what I've heard, there are 2 competing factions seeking to run oil pipelines through the region.

On one side, you have Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Russia who want to run an oil pipeline through those countries and into Europe.

And then you have the Saudis, Qatar, USA, Britain and France who wants to run a pipeline into Europe. USA, Britain and France were paid off to support it.

In either situation, the pipeline runs through Syria. And Assad is siding with the Russians and Iranians, and refuses to allow the Saudis to run their pipeline through Syria.

This is why the Saudis and Qatar are funding Sunni Salafists (ISIS) in Syria. And this is also why the USA doesn't appear interested in over committing troops to Syria. They're getting paid by the Saudis and Qatar, but that oil money they're going to be getting isn't gonna be worth if it they end up spending trillions on another long, drawn out war. They don't want Syria to be another Iraq, and ultimately if the fight drags on long enough, the USA will pull their assets out of the region.

I think Russia has far more to gain from the pipeline than the USA does. But they're not going to risk starting WW3 over it.

It's really the only narrative that makes any sense, that also ties all the pieces in together. The Iraq war wasn't about oil, but the Syrian conflict most definitely is.

Sure it was. At least partially. Iraq was about Oil, arms, Israel and not being a slave to US interests. Same with all wars in Middle East. Saddam was no longer our boy like when we gave him chemical weapons and arms to attack Iran. He pursued an independent foreign policy instead, no longer priced oil exports in dollars but euro and paid for families of fighters who died attacking Israel.

Today, American companies are there extracting and made military contractors trillion or so dollars and resistance to Israel no longer comes from there. Why do you think guys like John Bolton call Iraq a success to this day?

Basically unless you are a vassal you are in USA crosshairs everywhere. South America africa, and even Asia with all the coups and wars USA has done. But it's especially true in the Middle East because oil is everything. Everything is a derivative of oil. The food you eat to medicines to wall street profits everything..

If you've been following the middle-eastern wars at some point you'll inevitably ask yourself how come that the west only attacks pan-Arabic secularist countries and is always siding with Sunni islamists? Secular Libya was demolished, secular Iraq was invaded, secular Syria destroyed, secular Egypt almost turned islamist, but the army took power back at the last moment (and Obama + EU poodles weren't too happy about it)...

Monetary gains are certainly a factor in all these wars, but there are two other countries that influence american foreign policy more than american people themselves: Saudi Arabia and Israel.

From the Saudi pov, destroying secular regimes and replacing them with wahhabi islamist means spreading their ideology and influence. You could call it Saudi imperialism and they are willing to pay a lot for this. Israel otoh, is more threatened by a coalition of stable pan-Arabic countries and prefers a destabilized mess of al-Qaeda types running around. Arab stability, unity and prosperity is a threat to the Jewish state.

These two is also why US foreign policy is so rabid toward Iran. Iran is a regional competitor to Saudi, both in ideology (Sunni vs Shia) and economically. Iran is also openly hostile to Israel and Israel treats it as the #1 enemy (axis of evil, hurp duurp).

So the next time some neocon/neolib shill will tell you how "we must bomb this or that for American safety", know that is not really for "American" safety ... :)

Here is Russia's response to the events:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wvE1tXxjaE

- The Russians agree that the damage done to the facility that supposedly got hit with 70+ tomahawk missiles isn't consistent with the amount of ordinance that 70+ tomahawks would have delivered. Not too bad of a guess for someone who's not an expert. Now it's been confirmed by actual experts.

- Also, they've had time to gather up more fragments from cruise missiles.