Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

And next, Syria?

agricola said:
That is more because of the way that their overwhelming military power has been misused by politicians, rather than the nature of that power.
Click to expand...

that sounds nice but it doesn't mean anything. if the united states army / marine corps was able to field troops trained in light infantry small unit tactics then perhaps they would have done better in iraq and aghanistan. but they have the wrong tool for the task. if they didn't have such top firepower then they wouldn't have won a war since 1945: man for man their opponents are frequently better trained than them.
 
Pickman's model said:
that sounds nice but it doesn't mean anything. if the united states army / marine corps was able to field troops trained in light infantry small unit tactics then perhaps they would have done better in iraq and aghanistan. but they have the wrong tool for the task. if they didn't have such top firepower then they wouldn't have won a war since 1945: man for man their opponents are frequently better trained than them.
Click to expand...

Thats the point though, their armed forces are set up to quickly deliver a destructive (to civil and military infrastructure, specific personnel and military units) and sustained amount of firepower over a large area, but they rarely if ever do that and instead do what you have identified, ie: send ground troops in to walk about the place and get shot at.
 
The US war objective is primarily to reduce places to rubble - they do that very successfully - not to occupy. Occupy comes down the line in the shape of big business.
 
Pickman's model said:
that sounds nice but it doesn't mean anything. if the united states army / marine corps was able to field troops trained in light infantry small unit tactics then perhaps they would have done better in iraq and aghanistan. but they have the wrong tool for the task. if they didn't have such top firepower then they wouldn't have won a war since 1945: man for man their opponents are frequently better trained than them.
Click to expand...
You might like this PM

QUOTE>>>>>

....a Facebook posting, purportedly by Bashar al-Assad's 11-year-old son Hafez, named after his grandfather, has provoked much comment and speculation about whether it is indeed real. In the post, subsequently deleted along with the account, "Hafez Assad" dares the US to attack. He writes:

"No one has soldiers like the ones we do in Syria ...America doesn’t have soldiers, what it has is some cowards with new technology who claim themselves liberators, they said they supported the "revolution" but actually the made it, right now we're all Syrian ...

I just want them to attack sooo much, because I want them to make this huge mistake of beginning something they don't know the end of it, just like Hezbollah defeated Israel and Nato and by what? What did Hezbollah have back then? Some street fighters and some small rockets and a pile of guns, but they had belief, in theirselves [sic] and their country and that's exactly what's gonna happen to America if it chooses invasion because they don't know our land like we do, no one does."
 
ska invita said:
You might like this PM

QUOTE>>>>>

....a Facebook posting, purportedly by Bashar al-Assad's 11-year-old son Hafez, named after his grandfather, has provoked much comment and speculation about whether it is indeed real. In the post, subsequently deleted along with the account, "Hafez Assad" dares the US to attack. He writes:

"No one has soldiers like the ones we do in Syria ...America doesn’t have soldiers, what it has is some cowards with new technology who claim themselves liberators, they said they supported the "revolution" but actually the made it, right now we're all Syrian ...

I just want them to attack sooo much, because I want them to make this huge mistake of beginning something they don't know the end of it, just like Hezbollah defeated Israel and Nato and by what? What did Hezbollah have back then? Some street fighters and some small rockets and a pile of guns, but they had belief, in theirselves [sic] and their country and that's exactly what's gonna happen to America if it chooses invasion because they don't know our land like we do, no one does."
Click to expand...

Sadly, as impressive as the idea of war may be to small boys and idiots... the US is not planning an invasion, their scheme is as usual to destroy the society from afar. And then plunder the remains through 'reconstruction' contracts. My guess is this whole chemical weapons retaliation idea (quickly before anything gets investigated) is to make sure water treatment plants, schools and universities, hospitals... y'know, the usual stuff they go for gets hit the fuck up. Plus as much bug-splatt as there is to be had obviously. This will show that America is superior, god speed mouse-jockeys.
 
camouflage said:
Sadly, as impressive as the idea of war may be to small boys and idiots... the US is not planning an invasion, their scheme is as usual to destroy the society from afar. And then plunder the remains through 'reconstruction' contracts. My guess is this whole chemical weapons retaliation idea (quickly before anything gets investigated) is to make sure water treatment plants, schools and universities, hospitals... y'know, the usual stuff they go for gets hit the fuck up. Plus as much bug-splatt as there is to be had obviously. This will show that America is superior, god speed mouse-jockeys.
Click to expand...
history makes it impossible not to think that. Plus I think im right in saying syria is irans biggest ally in the region. The US certainly have plenty motivation and previous
 
I note he used the magic word 'credibility' too, one of the factors that will prevent them backing out of action even if they had doubts about it.

And I think I could hear much crying in London when he spoke of 'our oldest allies France'.
 
camouflage said:
Sadly, as impressive as the idea of war may be to small boys and idiots... the US is not planning an invasion, their scheme is as usual to destroy the society from afar. And then plunder the remains through 'reconstruction' contracts. My guess is this whole chemical weapons retaliation idea (quickly before anything gets investigated) is to make sure water treatment plants, schools and universities, hospitals... y'know, the usual stuff they go for gets hit the fuck up. Plus as much bug-splatt as there is to be had obviously. This will show that America is superior, god speed mouse-jockeys.
Click to expand...

The Russian building contractors have just gone to defcon 2
 
Back in June...

US spooks stockpile arms for Syrian rebels in Jordan for August onslaught – report

The CIA is stockpiling arms in Jordan for US-trained Syrian rebels, which they will use in an offensive against Damascus starting August, according to The Wall Street Journal. Up to hundreds of fighters are to be armed and sent to the battlefield monthly.

The intelligence agency had stored Soviet-made arms at a network of secret warehouses in advance of the Obama administration’s decision to provide military assistance to the militants fighting against the government of Bashar Assad, the newspaper reports. The weapons include anti-tank missiles, which may be handed over to the Syrian rebels.
Click to expand...

http://rt.com/news/rebels-syria-us-cia-327/

Ah, the Britam Attack.
 
Russia blaming Prince Bandar/Saudi Arabia for chemical weapons attack

This should be treated with caution it's 99% propaganda but worth seeing what Russia is saying. elbows have you got a link to the article you put on the other thread concerning Prince Bandar's phone conversation with Vladimir Putin?

http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_...ing-the-weapons-were-provided-by-Saudis-1203/

In an interview with Dale Gavlak, a Middle East correspondent for the Associated Press and Mint Press News, Syrian rebels tacitly implied that they were responsible for last week’s chemical attack. Some information could not immediately be independently verified.
“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,” he writes in the article.
The rebels noted it was a result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them.
“My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry,” said Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of a rebel fighting to unseat Assad, who lives in Ghouta.
As Gavlak reports, Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels died in a weapons storage tunnel. The father stated the weapons were provided to rebel forces by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, describing them as having a “tube-like structure” while others were like a “huge gas bottle.”
“They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them,” complained a female fighter named ‘K’. “We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”
“When Saudi Prince Bandar gives such weapons to people, he must give them to those who know how to handle and use them,” she warned. She, like other Syrians, do not want to use their full names for fear of retribution.
Gavlak also refers to an article in the UK’s Daily Telegraph about secret Russian-Saudi talks stating that Prince Bandar threatened Russian President Vladimir Putin with terror attacks at next year’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if Russia doesn’t agree to change its stance on Syria.
“Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord,” the article stated.
“I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us,” Saudi Prince allegedly told Vladimir Putin.
Mint Press News stated that some of the information couldn’t be independently verified and pledged to continue providing updates on this topic.
Voice of Russia might be more credible than US government – Internet users
Recent publication by the Voice of Russia 'Syrian rebels take responsibility for the chemical attack admitting the weapons were provided by Saudis' received a strong outcry among the Internet users as some of them claiming that the company’s reports are more credible than allegations against Syrian government made by US authorities.
‘It's more credible than the US saying we have real evidence of Assad using them [chemical weapons]. Assad doesn't get weapons from Saudi Arabia. They don't have ties. The US will use any reason it can to go to war. Even if it means creating one’, writesDylanJamesCo on Reddit.
Meanwhile, not everyone shares such this point of view.
KoreyYrvaI writes that ‘The Voice of Russia wants us to believe that the Rebels totally were responsible for the chemical attack, and it was an accident… because Russia has been impartial throughout all of this and I don't think America(or anyone) needs another war, but this is hardly credible’.
But one thing unites the users: they believe the US government wants and needs another war in the Middle East.
‘America is just getting better at proxy wars. They have firm ties with the Saudis, and they would have no problem destabilizing Syria if it meant the US could eventually target Iran and its oil reserve’, writes NineteenEightyTwo.
Voice of Russia, Mint Press News
Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_...ing-the-weapons-were-provided-by-Saudis-1203/
Click to expand...
 
I don't think that was me. Rather I provided a link that gave background info about a conspiracy author whose article suggesting Russia would attack Saudi Arabia had been posted by someone else. At some other point I also pointed out that Syria & friends hate Bandar so much that they started a rumour he had been killed last year (which was touted by the likes of the Fars news agency and Voltaire Network).
 
For example see this story from the end of July 2012 in the Time of Israel, which was written before it was confirmed that the story of Bandars assassination was bullshit.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/pro-as...ntelligence-chief-to-avenge-damascus-bombing/

In a new indication of the escalating hostility between the regime of Syria’s President Bashar Assad and Saudi Arabia, pro-Assad Syrian websites claimed that Syria has assassinated Prince Bandar bin Sultan, Saudi Arabia’s flamboyant former ambassador to the United States, who was appointed to head his country’s intelligence services earlier this month.

The reports, which cited unofficial sources and for which there was no confirmation, claimed that Bandar was killed because it was he, with American support, who organized the July 18 bombing in central Damascus that killed several of Assad’s most senior ministers and aides.
Click to expand...
 
Days after the MB massacred in Egypt and forgotten its all on in Syria. Bandars money dictating more than Assad.
 
Mr.Bishie said:
News reports just coming in stating that the US now has proof from samples gathered by UN inspectors, that it was Sarin used.
Click to expand...

Those samples were taken independently of the UN by the sounds of it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23918889

Mr Kerry implied that the US evidence was supplied by its own sources, rather than via the UN inspectors.

"In the last 24 hours, we have learned through samples that were provided to the United States that have now been tested from first responders in east Damascus and hair samples and blood samples have tested positive for signatures of Sarin," Kerry said on NBC's Meet The Press.
Click to expand...
 
elbows said:
Those samples were taken independently of the UN by the sounds of it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23918889
Click to expand...

so we are to assume from the US that the UN samples cant be trusted , and the UN are useless at testing stuff as they are claiming it takes weeks to do it properly but the yanks can do it in days . Also it can be guaranteed theres no verifiable chain of custody for these tests, just like their last ones .
 
Delroy Booth said:
Russia blaming Prince Bandar/Saudi Arabia for chemical weapons attack

This should be treated with caution it's 99% propaganda but worth seeing what Russia is saying. elbows have you got a link to the article you put on the other thread concerning Prince Bandar's phone conversation with Vladimir Putin?

http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_...ing-the-weapons-were-provided-by-Saudis-1203/
Click to expand...


they may have good grounds for saying it . Theres been persistent rumours he was making thinly veiled threats about what AQ might do if Russia didnt back off in Syria . Something bad might happen in Sochi, chechens and stuff .
 
Mr.Bishie said:
elbows - has anything more come out about this?
Click to expand...

Not that I've heard about, but then I wouldn't expect it to.

One thing that has happened is Mint Press added a caveat to the story:

Clarification: Dale Gavlak assisted in the research and writing process of this article, but was not on the ground in Syria. Reporter Yahya Ababneh, with whom the report was written in collaboration, was the correspondent on the ground in Ghouta who spoke directly with the rebels, their family members, victims of the chemical weapons attacks and local residents.

Gavlak is a MintPress News Middle East correspondent who has been freelancing for the AP as a Amman, Jordan correspondent for nearly a decade. This report is not an Associated Press article; rather it is exclusive to MintPress News.
Click to expand...
 
Very interesting piece here: [extract]

"In May 2007, a presidential finding revealed that Bush had authorised CIA operations against Iran. Anti-Syria operations were also in full swing around this time as part of this covert programme, according to Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker. A range of US government and intelligence sources told him that the Bush administration had "cooperated with Saudi Arabia's government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations" intended to weaken the Shi'ite Hezbollah in Lebanon.

"The US has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria," wrote Hersh, "a byproduct" of which is "the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups" hostile to the United States and "sympathetic to al-Qaeda." He noted that "the Saudi government, with Washington's approval, would provide funds and logistical aid to weaken the government of President Bashir Assad, of Syria," with a view to pressure him to be "more conciliatory and open to negotiations" with Israel. One faction receiving covert US "political and financial support" through the Saudis was the exiled Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.

According to former French foreign minister Roland Dumas, Britain had planned covert action in Syria as early as 2009: "I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business", he told French television:

"I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria. This was in Britain not in America. Britain was preparing gunmen to invade Syria."

The 2011 uprisings, it would seem - triggered by a confluence of domestic energy shortages and climate-induced droughts which led to massive food price hikes - came at an opportune moment that was quickly exploited. Leaked emails from the private intelligence firm Stratfor including notes from a meeting with Pentagon officials confirmed US-UK training of Syrian opposition forces since 2011 aimed at eliciting "collapse" of Assad's regime "from within."

[...]

ITS STILL ABOUT OIL

Much of the strategy currently at play was candidly described in a 2008 US Army-funded RAND report, Unfolding the Future of the Long War (pdf). The report noted that "the economies of the industrialized states will continue to rely heavily on oil, thus making it a strategically important resource." As most oil will be produced in the Middle East, the US has "motive for maintaining stability in and good relations with Middle Eastern states":

"The geographic area of proven oil reserves coincides with the power base of much of the Salafi-jihadist network. This creates a linkage between oil supplies and the long war that is not easily broken or simply characterized... For the foreseeable future, world oil production growth and total output will be dominated by Persian Gulf resources... The region will therefore remain a strategic priority, and this priority will interact strongly with that of prosecuting the long war."

more: http://www.theguardian.com/environm...ack-war-intervention-oil-gas-energy-pipelines
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

teqniq
Huge earthquake in Turkey and Northern Syria 05-06/02/23
2 3
Replies
83
Views
3K
JimW
JimW
P
The next American Civil War
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
321
Views
15K
pbsmooth
P
MrCurry
After Ukraine, what’s next?
2 3
Replies
76
Views
5K
Dogsauce
Dogsauce
T
Hong Kong: what next?
65 66 67 68 69
Replies
2K
Views
83K
Yossarian
Yossarian
H
Syria, attack on Conoco gas plant in Feburary 2018
Replies
1
Views
349
yield
Y
Back
Top Bottom