The Syria Thread 2011 - Present

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby dada » Sat Sep 15, 2018 12:25 pm

I find that the degraded character of Western thought is brought into sharp focus in the case of Syria.

For example, in the West, free speech is an important issue when it comes to commercial spaces on the internet. But when the head of Syrian Air Force Intelligence makes a speech like this, it doesn't mean a thing:

What awaits returnees is indicated by the reported comments of the head of the Syrian Air force Intelligence administration, Jamil al-Hassan. According to the Syria Observer, ‘Hassan’s speech, which began with the trumpeting of victories, moved into a discussion about a future plan to stimulate a new phase of the conflict….

‘The future plan includes a number of sections that have been established according to priorities developed by the regime’s senior leadership. It begins with the removal of everything that could affect them in the future, or undermine their work internally. All those concluded to be a hinderance to the plan and its future will be labeled as “terrorists” by the regime’s senior leadership. Whether their crime was in speech or in action, or even if they remained silent, they will be considered a terrorist and prosecuted publicly or secretly.

‘The Head of the Air Force Intelligence said that more than three million Syrians are wanted and their judicial cases were ready. He added that “the huge number of people wanted will not be a major difficulty in achieving the plan.

“A Syria with 10 million trustworthy people obedient to the leadership is better than a Syria with 30 million vandals,” as he put it.’


The thing about hypocritical thinking is that it's entirely predictable, manageable. Any artifacts it produces are cheap and flimsy like bad merchandise. Any argumentation becomes effectively meaningless because the thinking process itself is bankrupt. It's a lot like commercialism. A maximization of short term profit at the expense of quality.

Another example is the Western-style redevelopment that is planned, the transformation into NuPerfect Syria, yet another commercial mecca. So any argument against Western Imperialism, is just an argument for Western imperialism. It's kind of funny, if you think about it. Not what is happening in Syria, of course. That isn't funny.

Western journalists against Bashar's regime can't build an effective case, either, since they certainly can't argue against commercial redevelopment. And so we see the debate narrowed and reduced to discussions about chlorine, and the veracity of internet propaganda.

The veracity of internet propaganda. Boy, what a meaningful topic of discussion.

Like I was saying; In the West, cognitive dissonance rules the day.
Both his words and manner of speech seemed at first totally unfamiliar to me, and yet somehow they stirred memories - as an actor might be stirred by the forgotten lines of some role he had played far away and long ago.
User avatar
dada
 
Posts: 2600
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 12:08 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby Elvis » Sat Sep 15, 2018 1:21 pm

According to the Syria Observer


Syrian Observer is sort of the MEMRI of the militant opposition in Syria. It's run out of the UK, connected with the White Helmets, and like the White Helmets, claims to be independent.


http://www.medialens.org/index.php/aler ... ffice.html

The Syrian Observatory - Funded By The Foreign Office

Print Email

In Alerts 2018
Post 04 June 2018
Last Updated on 04 June 2018
By Editor

The Syrian Observatory - Funded By The Foreign Office

In Alerts 2018
Post 04 June 2018
Last Updated on 04 June 2018
By Editor

Writing in the Mail on Sunday, journalist Peter Hitchens commented last month on the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR):

'Talking of war, and Syria, many of you may have noticed frequent references in the media to a body called the "Syrian Observatory for Human Rights", often quoted as if it is an impartial source of information about that complicated conflict, in which the British government clearly takes sides. The "Observatory" says on its website that it is "not associated or linked to any political body."

'To which I reply: Is Boris Johnson's Foreign Office not a political body? Because the FO just confirmed to me that "the UK funded a project worth £194,769.60 to provide the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights with communications equipment and cameras." That's quite a lot, isn't it? I love the precision of that 60p. Your taxes, impartially, at work.'

This figure was confirmed in communication with the Foreign Office by independent political journalist Ian Sinclair. (Email to Media Lens, May 17, 2018)

In 2011, Reuters reported that Rami Abdulrahman is 'the fast-talking director of arguably Syria's most high-profile human rights group', SOHR:

'When he isn't fielding calls from international media, Abdulrahman is a few minutes down the road at his clothes shop, which he runs with his wife.'

Given the tinpot nature of the organisation, SOHR's influence is astonishing:

'Cited by virtually every major news outlet since an uprising against the iron rule of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad began in March, the observatory has been a key source of news on the events in Syria.'

Described by Reuters as an 'opposition group', SOHR is openly pro-regime change:

'After three short spells in prison in Syria for pro-democracy activism, Abdulrahman came to Britain in 2000 fearing a longer, fourth jail term.

'"I came to Britain the day Hafez al-Assad died, and I'll return when Bashar al-Assad goes".'

In December 2011, Stratfor, an influential research institute formed of former US security officials, cautioned:

'Most of the [Syrian] opposition's more serious claims have turned out to be grossly exaggerated or simply untrue ... revealing more about the opposition's weaknesses than the level of instability inside the Syrian regime.'

Reports from SOHR and other opposition groups, 'like those from the regime, should be viewed with skepticism', Stratfor argued: 'the opposition understands that it needs external support, specifically financial support, if it is to be a more robust movement than it is now. To that end, it has every reason to present the facts on the ground in a way that makes the case for foreign backing.'

The Los Angeles Times described SOHR as 'a pro-opposition watchdog'. And yet, as Reuters reported, Abdulrahman claims neutrality:

'"I'm between two fires. But it shows I'm being neutral if both sides complain," he said, insisting he accepts no funding and runs the observatory on a voluntary basis.'

Two years later, the New York Times described a modified funding model:

'Money from two dress shops covers his minimal needs for reporting on the conflict, along with small subsidies from the European Union and one European country that he declines to identify.'

Thanks to Hitchens, we now know that the country in question is Britain and the funding in 2012 was £194,769.60.

In 2013, we compared the reflexive respect afforded SOHR with the earlier casual rejection of reports on the death toll in Iraq published in 2004 and 2006 by the Lancet, the world's leading medical journal:

'Figures supplied by SOHR, an organisation openly biased in favour of the Syrian "rebels" and Western intervention is presented as sober fact by... the world's leading news agencies. No concerns here about methodology, sample sizes, "main street bias" and other alleged concerns thrown at the Lancet studies by critics.'

In 2004, one of the Lancet co-authors, Gilbert Burnham of the prestigious Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, told us:

'Our data have been back and forth between many reviewers at the Lancet and here in the school (chair of Biostatistics Dept), so we have the scientific strength to say what we have said with great certainty. I doubt any Lancet paper has gotten as much close inspection in recent years as this one has!' (Dr. Gilbert Burnham, email to Media Lens, October 30, 2004)

Despite this, the Lancet reports were subjected to ceaseless attacks from the US and UK governments, and dismissal by corporate journalists. David Aaronovitch wrote in The Times:

'And Harold Pinter invents a statistic. "At least 100,000 Iraqis were killed by American bombs and missiles before the Iraqi insurgency began." This is probably some mangling of a controversial estimate of Iraqi civilian fatalities published in The Lancet in 2004 and based, it was claimed, on standard epidemiological methods.' (Aaronovitch, 'The great war of words,' The Times, March 18, 2006)

An op-ed in the Washington Times commented in December 2004:

'Or how about the constantly cited figure of 100,000 Iraqis killed by Americans since the war began, a statistic that is thrown about with total and irresponsible abandon by opponents of the war.' (Helle Dale, 'Biased coverage in Iraq,' Washington Times, December 1, 2004)

As we described at the time, the 'mainstream' hosted all manner of confused and baseless criticisms of this kind.

By contrast, a recent BBC article noted of the Syrian war:

'Over seven years of war, more than 400,000 people have been killed or reported missing, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.'

No-one, it seems, would dream of challenging such a high figure supplied by a clothes shop owner supporting regime change in Syria from Coventry. Nobody challenges SOHR's methodology, or complains of statistics being thrown about with irresponsible abandon. Why? Because the 2004 and 2006 Lancet reports seriously undermined the US-UK case for conquering Iraq, whereas a high Syria death toll is used to damn the Assad government and to make the case for Western 'intervention'.

In a 2015 interview with RT, Abdulrahman was asked how he could trust the hundreds of 'activists' supplying information from Syria. Claiming that 'I know all of the activists working for the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights', Abdulrahman said that he had last visited Syria in 2000. He added: 'But I know some of the Observatory activists through common friends.'

Innumerable 'mainstream' reports of atrocities blamed on Syrian government and Russian forces have used SOHR as a key source. One of the highest profile claims concerned an alleged massacre of 108 people, including 49 children, in Houla, Syria on May 27, 2012. The claim dominated the Independent on Sunday's front cover, which read:

'SYRIA: THE WORLD LOOKS THE OTHER WAY. WILL YOU?'

The text beneath read:

'There is, of course, supposed to be a ceasefire, which the brutal Assad regime simply ignores. And the international community? It just averts its gaze. Will you do the same? Or will the sickening fate of these innocent children make you very, very angry?'

As so often, SOHR loomed large in these accusations. The BBC reported:

'The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said more than 90 people had died in the 24 hours since midday on Friday.'

The Guardian described how SOHR was condemning Western 'silence':

'The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights issued an unusually harsh statement in the wake of the deaths, accusing Arab nations and the international community of being "partners" in the killing "because of their silence about the massacres that the Syrian regime has committed".'

But the picture was not quite so clear cut. Two weeks later, the BBC reported the head of the UN Supervision Mission in Syria, Major General Robert Mood, as saying of Houla: 'the circumstances that led to these tragic killings are still unclear'. Mood commented significantly:

'Whatever I learned on the ground in Syria... is that I should not jump to conclusions.'

On June 27, a UN Commission of Inquiry said that in apportioning blame, it 'could not rule out any of these possibilities': local militia possibly operating together with, or with the acquiescence of, government security forces; anti-government forces seeking to escalate the conflict; or foreign groups with unknown affiliation. In August of the same year, UN investigators released a further report which stated that they had 'a reasonable basis to believe that the perpetrators... were aligned to the Government'. (Our emphasis)

SOHR is omnipresent in the great Syrian atrocity claims that have gripped our media for years. On April 14, Donald Trump bombed Syria in response to an alleged Syrian government chemical weapons attack on Douma one week earlier. Reuters reported:

'Heavy air strikes on the Syrian rebel-held town of Douma killed 27 people including five children, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.'

On April 7, 2017, Trump launched a missile assault on Syria just 72 hours after an alleged chemical weapons attack on Khan Sheikhoun. Reuters reported:

'The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the attack killed at least 58 people and was believed to have been carried out by Syrian government jets. It caused many people to choke and some to foam at the mouth.

'Director Rami Abdulrahman told Reuters the assessment that Syrian government warplanes were to blame was based on several factors such as the type of aircraft, including Sukhoi 22 jets, that carried out the raid.'

In August 2013, Barack Obama came close to launching a massive attack on Syria in response to an alleged Syrian government chemical weapons attack on Ghouta. The BBC reported:

'The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), a UK-based group that gets its information from a network of activists across Syria, later said it had confirmed at least 502 deaths.'

The Los Angeles Times reported:

'The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, generally regarded as one of the most reliable sources of information on casualty figures in Syria, says it has confirmed 502 deaths, including 80 children and 137 women.'

Last February, the BBC reported:

'The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a UK-based monitoring group, said at least 250 people had been killed in [Syrian government and Russian] air strikes and artillery fire since then.

'It said it was the highest 48-hour death toll since a 2013 chemical attack on the besieged enclave.'

The power of these claims lies in the fact that Western journalists have been unable to report from 'rebel'-held areas in Syria. Veteran Middle East correspondent Patrick Cockburn made the point:

'All wars always produce phony atrocity stories – along with real atrocities. But in the Syrian case fabricated news and one-sided reporting have taken over the news agenda to a degree probably not seen since the First World War... The real reason that reporting of the Syrian conflict has been so inadequate is that Western news organisations have almost entirely outsourced their coverage to the rebel side.'

'Rebel' claims relayed by SOHR and others have been uncontested because they originated from 'areas controlled by people so dangerous no foreign journalist dare set foot among them'.

Many atrocity claims relayed by SOHR and others have been sourced from the White Helmets group in Syria. Former Guardian journalist Jonathan Cook commented:

'In the western corporate media narrative, the White Helmets are a group of dedicated and selfless rescue workers. They are supposedly the humanitarians on whose behalf a western intervention in Syria would have been justified – before, that is, Syrian leader Bashar Assad queered their pitch by inviting in Russia.

'However, there are problems with the White Helmets. They operate only in rebel – read: mainly al-Qaeda and ISIS-held – areas of Syria, and plenty of evidence shows that they are funded by the UK and US to advance both countries' far-from-humanitarian policy objectives in Syria.'

In 2016, political analyst Max Blumenthal wrote:

'The White Helmets were founded in collaboration with USAID's Office of Transitional Initiatives—the wing that has promoted regime change around the world—and have been provided with $23 million in funding from the department.'

Liberal corporate journalists and politicians have been impressed by the fact that SOHR and White Helmets claims have been supported by ostensibly forensic analysis supplied by the Bellingcat website, which publishes 'citizen journalist' investigations. As we noted in a recent alert, Bellingcat is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which is funded by the US government and is 'a notorious vehicle for US soft power'.

We could link to thousands of corporate media articles citing SOHR as a source. As in the above examples, the vast majority of these claims are directed at the same targets – the Syrian government and its Russian ally. To monitor the BBC website in 2013, for example, was to witness what appeared to be a relentless propaganda campaign promoting yet one more Western 'humanitarian intervention'.

This would seem to be an extraordinary scandal, not just for the BBC, not just for British corporate media and democracy, but for media and democracy globally. And yet, our media database search finds exactly one national UK newspaper article containing the terms 'Peter Hitchens' and 'Syrian Observatory'. That, of course, was the original May 13 piece in the Mail on Sunday in which Hitchens reported the UK government's £194,769.60 funding of SOHR. His report has been ignored.

DE


Media Lens
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7411
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby Elvis » Sat Sep 15, 2018 1:24 pm

“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7411
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby dada » Sat Sep 15, 2018 2:56 pm

So? The head of air force intelligence gives a speech, but because of who reported it, the content of his speech is disregarded. Posting a long article about the reporting outfit doesn't change what was said, and what it implies.

It looks like a response to my post, but it doesn't address what it's responding to, it's just an appearance of a response. But this is what I'm saying, the argumentation from the West when it comes to Syria is lightweight, ineffective.
Both his words and manner of speech seemed at first totally unfamiliar to me, and yet somehow they stirred memories - as an actor might be stirred by the forgotten lines of some role he had played far away and long ago.
User avatar
dada
 
Posts: 2600
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 12:08 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby Sounder » Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:42 am

dada wrote...
But when the head of Syrian Air Force Intelligence makes a speech like this, it doesn't mean a thing:


But why do you think that this fellow said these things at all?

If there is no veracity, don't post it.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby Elvis » Sun Sep 16, 2018 2:25 pm

dada wrote: But when the head of Syrian Air Force Intelligence makes a speech like this


A link to the piece quoting the speech would be helpful. Is there a link somewhere to the actual speech?
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7411
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby dada » Sun Sep 16, 2018 5:33 pm

Sounder wrote:But why do you think that this fellow said these things at all?

If there is no veracity, don't post it.


Why does what I think matter to you?

--

Yes, Elvis, the speech is easily found by googling. But I don't see why I'd post it here, we've already established that the Syrian Observer is fake news.
Both his words and manner of speech seemed at first totally unfamiliar to me, and yet somehow they stirred memories - as an actor might be stirred by the forgotten lines of some role he had played far away and long ago.
User avatar
dada
 
Posts: 2600
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 12:08 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby dada » Sun Sep 16, 2018 7:57 pm

I'll post this, though:

Arrest warrant against Jamil Hassan is a milestone and a good news for all affected by Assad’s torture system

https://scm.bz/en/scm-statements/arrest-warrant-against-jamil-hassan-is-a-milestone-and-a-good-news-for-all-affected-by-assads-torture-system

Although those who choose to defend Bashar's regime may consider scm fake news as well, I don't know. How about Deutsche Welle? Fake news, maybe. Lot of fake news out there nowadays.

"The arrest warrant against Jamil Hassan is good news for all those affected by Assad's system of torture: for the survivors, for the relatives and for those who are still imprisoned by the Assad government in Syria," ECCHR Secretary General Wolfgang Kaleck said.

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-issues-international-arrest-warrant-for-syrian-intelligence-chief-reports/a-44132109

I mean, why would Jamil Hassan commit atrocities. He's only an air force intelligence head. Or the other 26 high-level officials of the Syrian Intelligence Services and the Syrian Military identified in the 'torture as crimes against humanity and war crimes' criminal complaints.

Don't believe the hype. Like, they say Jamil is part of Bashar's inner circle. But who are these "they?" Anyway, if he and the others do commit atrocities, they must be doing it without Bashar's knowledge. Bad apples.
Both his words and manner of speech seemed at first totally unfamiliar to me, and yet somehow they stirred memories - as an actor might be stirred by the forgotten lines of some role he had played far away and long ago.
User avatar
dada
 
Posts: 2600
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 12:08 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby dada » Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:36 pm

But the point I was making upthread was about the poor rationale at the core of the arguments in defense of Bashar's regime, it being some sort of bulwark against the tide of western imperialism. Because it simply isn't. Bashar's plan for Syria is westernization.

So the whole line of thinking is undermined at the base, makes every post in support of the regime look foolish as a result. I mean ask yourself, would you take any argument seriously that began on such a ridiculous premise?
Both his words and manner of speech seemed at first totally unfamiliar to me, and yet somehow they stirred memories - as an actor might be stirred by the forgotten lines of some role he had played far away and long ago.
User avatar
dada
 
Posts: 2600
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 12:08 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby Sounder » Mon Sep 17, 2018 8:39 am

From dada's link...
“This decision in Germany confirms that justice must be respected as a principle and will not be ignored for any political reason”, says Anwar al-Bunni. “It is also a victory for the victims who have been waiting for justice for a long time.”


So, will this principle of universal jurisdiction be used by Germany to bring American torturers to justice?

Some background that may be useful to remember. Back in the day the Muslim Brotherhood had set up their power base in Homs. As any Egyptian can tell you, John McCain was the front man promoter and protector for the Brotherhood. Homs was the early incubator for the caliphate and Assad senior did not react kindly to the threat and killed 10,000 Brotherhood members, with the rest fleeing to SA and Egypt.

The Brotherhood has a powerful media machine given that they are western proxy stooges.


dada wrote....
But the point I was making upthread was about the poor rationale at the core of the arguments in defense of Bashar's regime, it being some sort of bulwark against the tide of western imperialism. Because it simply isn't. Bashar's plan for Syria is westernization.

So the whole line of thinking is undermined at the base, makes every post in support of the regime look foolish as a result. I mean ask yourself, would you take any argument seriously that began on such a ridiculous premise?


Interesting word play. There is no defense of Basher's regime going on. The defense is for the Syrian nation and people to able to chart their own path without the ridiculously hypocritical alleged 'values' of the invading powers being used as the proper metric for 'justice'.

Westerners would do well to get off their stupid fucking high hobby horses and take a walk for a mile or two in the shoes of folk that are 'beneficiaries' of Western policies.

Which is so simple in it's crassness that it makes any aware person puke. To wit; we must control Eurasia and never, never ever let the people that live there control it.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby dada » Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:02 am

You're making my point for me, sounder. It is easy for you to understand that torture is terrible, clearly: you say American torturers need to be brought to justice. But Syrian torturers get the apologia treatment. The hypocrisy has stunted your thinking process to the point where you aren't even aware of it.

I'm not arguing or debating with you here, because there really isn't anything to argue or debate with, there's no logic or reason behind your post.

I mean, this: "There is no defense of Basher's regime going on. The defense is for the Syrian nation and people to able to chart their own path without the ridiculously hypocritical alleged 'values' of the invading powers being used as the proper metric for 'justice'."

It's just embarrassing to watch you post on this topic, cringe-worthy. I feel sorry for you, not argumentative.
Both his words and manner of speech seemed at first totally unfamiliar to me, and yet somehow they stirred memories - as an actor might be stirred by the forgotten lines of some role he had played far away and long ago.
User avatar
dada
 
Posts: 2600
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 12:08 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby Harvey » Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:54 am

Until someone can provide an accurate translation of an alleged speech, agreed upon by wide spectrum of thought, there's little point in building any strong opinions from it. That may strike some as extreme, but isn't that the whole of the problem when responding to foreign language reports exactly as those reports intend us to respond? Isn't that the real story of the war on Syria?
And while we spoke of many things, fools and kings
This he said to me
"The greatest thing
You'll ever learn
Is just to love
And be loved
In return"


Eden Ahbez
User avatar
Harvey
 
Posts: 4165
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 4:49 am
Blog: View Blog (20)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby dada » Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:43 am

I think the story is one of who controls the narrative. Debate about the accuracy of translation of a speech by the head of Syrian air force intelligence doesn't challenge the narrative. Attention has been corralled down an ineffective avenue.

Arguments for or against western imperialism in Syria are also non-starters, both sides in that discussion are riding on the same western high horse.

The fight against Islamic State is also a lesser narrative. Muslim fighter proxies will be used by Bashar's regime, if it serves to his advantage.

All these arguments are about lesser narratives within the larger narrative, which is not challenged by them, because it contains them.

Looking for the larger narrative as some sort of 'thing to put one's finger on,' even that is a wild goose chase. The larger narrative is narrative control.

edited to add: What I'm trying to get at is this: a narrative is the telling of a story. People telling different stories are fighting for domination, they struggle to prove that their story is the one, true story. Managing these narratives is a simple matter of telling a story which contains them, making them lesser narratives in a greater narrative. The one telling a story which contains the others is the one who has control of narrative.

So, whose narrative contains the lesser narratives? That's not for me to tell. It's a mystery, you have to read the story to find that out. I'm not going to spoil the ending for anyone.
Both his words and manner of speech seemed at first totally unfamiliar to me, and yet somehow they stirred memories - as an actor might be stirred by the forgotten lines of some role he had played far away and long ago.
User avatar
dada
 
Posts: 2600
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 12:08 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby chump » Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:21 pm

via Pennyforyourthoughts2:

https://ahvalnews.com/turkey-russia/tur ... -columnist

Turkey and Russia agreed on the fate of Idlib - Turkish pro-government media columnist

Although Tehran summit on the fate of Syria's rebel-held Idlib ends without agreement as Turkish ceasefire push is rejected by Russia and Iran, Turkey and Russia agreed on the "design" of the operation in Idlib, columnist Nedret Ersanel wrote to pro-government Yeni Şafak daily.

"The political pressure of the West couldn't spoil the Astana peace talks," Ersenal noted, "that's why all the discussion are held within the framework of the alliance." 

Russia, Iran and Turkey began holding regular talks on the Syrian conflict in Kazakh capital Astana in early 2017.

According to Ersanal, Russian airstrikes in Idlib do not serve a disagreement between Russia and Turkey; instead, airstrikes represent Russia's support for Turkey and "reminders of the tight schedule" to solve Idlib problem.

Europe showed support for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's ceasefire plans and possible humanitarian catastrophe warnings while Russia and Iran rejected. It doesn't indicate a "beginning of a new love" between Europe and Turkey, Ersanal stated, "however, the European support is a useful leverage for Turkey."

Right after the diplomatic contacts between Germany-France-Turkey-Russia delegation on Friday, the Kremlin announced that there would be an Erdogan-Putin meeting on Sept. 17, only ten days after Tehran Summit!- is an evidence of proceeding to a different phase about Idlib.


"It seems that the 'design' and 'mechanisms' of what will be done in Idlib is arranged," Ersanel added.

On Sept. 7, Iran's President Hassan Rouhani hosted his Russian and Turkish counterparts, Vladimir Putin and Recep Tayyip Erdogan, while international warnings over a looming humanitarian catastrophe in Idlib was growing, a province hosting more than three million people, half of whom are internally displaced.

Iran and Russia are major allies of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, while Turkey backs certain rebel groups, including some in Idlib, who are seeking Assad's removal.

Idlib is part of an arc of territory at the Turkish border representing the last major area held by insurgents who have fought Syrian President Bashar al-Assad through more than seven years of war. Assad has vowed to recover “every inch” of Syria.
User avatar
chump
 
Posts: 2261
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?

Postby Sounder » Mon Sep 17, 2018 1:25 pm

I largely agree with the preceding bit from dada, although...

The one telling a story which contains the others is the one who has control of narrative.


Eventually that story will prevail, but right now that story is a nascent one among others. The current prevailing narrative maintains its control via being the chief programmer of our unconscious aspect of mind. This is illustrated by the reliability of the introduction of notions of; OMG, we have to do something about this great suffering, while not recognizing that those appeals to righteousness are the precise thing driving the suffering in much of the world.

We are programmed to be self-righteous so that we respond well to triggers. That aspect within Americans that seeks to apply the Monroe doctrine to the whole world is born out of a hypocrisy so deep that one can only laugh to keep from crying.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 46 guests