Chemical Weapon used in Syria, Western military response likely

[Itse]

Originally Posted by NBC

Personally I'd love to see the persons responsible tried in the ICC. Use of these weapons is expressly prohibited in the Rome Statute of the ICC:

Wouldn't be too surprising to get some of them, if the FSA wins the war.

[CaptainCrunch]

It will take years for this to happen, and I have doubts that there will ever be full disclosure to the UN or the Western Powers.

I'll believe the destruction of the manufacturing and storage plants and a full accounting of the weapons when I see it.

I have no doubt that the Russians will "handle" the turnover of these weapons.

Meanwhile the questions will continue about when the killing will stop. The Syrians can still kill enmasse with conventional artillary and aircraft dropping anti-personal weapons.

Now the only best situation is that the country completely depopulates except for the rebels on one side and the Asaad government on the other side. The other countries around Syria get resource stretched due to millions of refugees.

[burn_this_city]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/op...f=opinion&_r=1&

Putin wrote a piece for the NY Times.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/op...f=opinion&_r=1&

Putin wrote a piece for the NY Times.

Very well written. A few bits of misinformation, but overall very compelling

[J pold]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/op...f=opinion&_r=1&

Putin wrote a piece for the NY Times.

The link doesn't seem to want to work for me.

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/op...f=opinion&_r=1&

Putin wrote a piece for the NY Times.

That is insane he'd reach out and write a letter like that. Very well written article.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

That is insane he'd reach out and write a letter like that. Very well written article.

Also that piece may be the most hypocritical op-ed piece ever published.

Putin said this when he was PM of Russia and they were invading Georgia and never had any UN vote to OK it.

Moreover, the Russian leader said such action without the U.N. Security Council's approval "would constitute an act of aggression."

"It could throw the entire system of international law and order out of balance," Putin said

"No government can stand idly by when terrorism strikes," he wrote. "It is the solemn duty of all governments to protect their citizens from danger."

And this beauty from his piece in the NY Times...

"It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation,"

"We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord's blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal."

Except for gay men and women in Russia....right Vlad?

What a feakin putz.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/op...f=opinion&_r=1&

Putin wrote a piece for the NY Times.

Interesting, I would how open Putin would be to this type of letter being published in Russian newpapers.

Perhaps The West should send a letter to a Russian paper about the anit-gay laws, or is one had been sent about the Chechnya War(s).

Trust and communication is a 2-way street, but only when Putin wants it that way.

Putin should get his own house in order.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Interesting, I would how open Putin would be to this type of letter being published in Russian newpapers.

Perhaps The West should send a letter to a Russian paper about the anit-gay laws, or is one had been sent about the Chechnya War(s).

Trust and communication is a 2-way street, but only when Putin wants it that way.

Putin should get his own house in order.

His own house IS in order.

Just the way he likes it.

[Bill Bumface]

Yeah, it's a well written article, until you consider the source. They've done a nice job of breeding a bunch of terrorist cells all around their borders from marching in and crushing unrest, including civilians... even elderly and children!!

[Coach]

The letter may be full of hypocrisy given Russia's history, but if the situation was reversed, and if Obama was to write something similar, there would also be an array of hypocrisy. If, as someone suggested, he was to write a letter centered around the LGTB rights issue in Russia, it's not like the US would be coming from a side of complete tolerance. Almost every nation (and person) in the world can be found to be full of hypocrisy. History is full of our mistakes as human beings. Hind sight is 20/20 and yes, even a man like Putin should be given the opportunity to change his tune and rectify his mistakes.

Just because it is hypocritical, doesn't mean it's wrong.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by MattyC

The letter may be full of hypocrisy given Russia's history, but if the situation was reversed, and if Obama was to write something similar, there would also be an array of hypocrisy. As it would for almost every other nation in the world. History is full of our mistakes as human beings. Hind sight is 20/20 and yes, even a man like Putin should be given the opportunity to change his tune and rectify his mistakes.

Just because it is hypocritical, doesn't mean it's wrong.

It goes a step beyond just being hypocrtical in this situation. It's full on deceptive.

Russia is the one supplying Assad with weapons. Russia is putting out this statement not because they want a non-interventionist policy in Syria, but becasue they want to be the only one intervening . They want their side to win.

Putin promotes the ideals of democracy several times. Meanwhile he is funding a dictator and going out of his way to defeat any chance of democracy in Syria.

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by blankall

It goes a step beyond just being hypocrtical in this situation. It's full on deceptive.

Russia is the one supplying Assad with weapons. Russia is putting out this statement not because they want a non-interventionist policy in Syria, but becasue they want to be the only one intervening . They want their side to win.

Putin promotes the ideals of democracy several times. Meanwhile he is funding a dictator and going out of his way to defeat any chance of democracy in Syria.

And so what if they're supporting Syria with weapons? or are Middle Eastern countries not allowed to have weapons? weapons are usually bought just so you know.

It's not like the States doesn't have a long history of arming countries and rebels. Sometimes for free.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

And so what if they're supporting Syria with weapons? or are Middle Eastern countries not allowed to have weapons? weapons are usually bought just so you know.

It's not like the States doesn't have a long history of arming countries and rebels. Sometimes for free.

These weapons are not being used for self-defence or military action against another country. They're being used against a civilian population.

Putin's comments don't just represent a statement about military conflict and pacifism. They are a part of a media war to keep Assad in power.

[Muta]

Russia has too much financial interest in Syria to see Assad's regime topple. This should be a surprise to no one.

The thing I find perplexing is Putin's claim that it was the rebels that fired the missiles with sarin gas attached. Weren't the rocket fragments found identified as the type the Syrian army uses? Furthermore, do the rebels even have the ability to fire missiles?

[NBC]

What irritates me about the Russian position is how they keep banging on about international law. Since when have the Russians (Soviets) ever given a "toss" about international law?

Hollow words.

[Itse]

https://play.google.com/store/apps/d....endgamesyria2

This is a news-game; a simulation that uses interactivity to explore a real world event. Developed by GameTheNews.net in around two weeks, the game allows users to explore the options open to the Syrian rebels as they push the conflict to its endgame. Each choice the user makes has consequences – the types of military units you may deploy, the political paths you choose to tread. Not only does each choice impact the current situation but your choices may also impact the final outcome. Users can play and replay events to see how different choices on the ground might lead to different outcomes. Will you choose to accept peace at any cost? What if the war goes badly and the only options left mean more extreme actions; would you agree to follow this path?

Not the worst 15 minutes I've spent. Free game. I kind of like the idea.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Very well written. A few bits of misinformation, but overall very compelling

More than a few, at least in the underlying argument. Very hypocritical.

Originally Posted by puckluck2

That is insane he'd reach out and write a letter like that. Very well written article.

Reach out? He's basically kicking them when their down. He won the diplomatic wrangling and he knows it. Now he's being a dick about it.

If he stood behind what he said, then yeah, it's a great article. And it's easy to paint the Americans as hypocrites because they often are too.

But he's got no legs to stand on for this article. His past positions and even his current positions undermine him to anyone who can look past his flowery prose.

[jofillips]

I am no fan of Russia or Putin but in my opinion he is diplomatically all over the US and loving it!
He's got the US into a position it cannot back out of unless Assad uses more chemical weapons.

[CaptainYooh]

Not about chemical weapons, but still on the war in Syria topic (didn't think it deserved its own thread).

SEXUAL JIHAD

http://rt.com/news/sexual-jihad-tunisia-syria-133/

Tunisian women have traveled to Syria to wage 'sexual jihad', performing intercourse with dozens of Islamist fighters and returning home pregnant, Tunisia’s Interior Minister Lotfi ben Jeddou told MPs.
The Tunisian girls “are [sexually] swapped between 20, 30, and 100 rebels and they come back bearing the fruit of sexual contacts in the name of sexual jihad and we are silent doing nothing and standing idle,” the minister said during an address to the National Constituent Assembly on Thursday.

"After the sexual liaisons they have there in the name of 'jihad al-nikah' [sexual holy war] they come home pregnant," ben Jeddou continued.

P.S. This is truly unreal. Who do you want to win this war: the bloody dictatorship regime or radical islamists supported by Al-Qaeda? What a great choice of outcomes!