DrRingDing
'anti-human wanker'
Putin has been playing this pro-actively. If Assad falls Putin will lose face. I don't he'll let Syria go without it getting more serious.
And next, Syria?
- Thread starter Idris2002
- Start date
Putin has been playing this pro-actively. If Assad falls Putin will lose face. I don't he'll let Syria go without it getting more serious.
DrRingDing
'anti-human wanker'
'a targetted strike'
just one?
DrRingDing
'anti-human wanker'
Ah, he's bottled it...
DrRingDing
'anti-human wanker'
DrRingDing
'anti-human wanker'
Let's bomb the fuck out of them instead.
Shoulda mentioned this yesterday, Human Rights Watch have released a 22-page report about what happened on August 21st in Eastern Damascus. This is worth keeping bookmarked so it can be compared to what the UN reports say. How reliable is Human Rights Watch, especially in terms of being indepedent of American foreign policy? I'll quote the article in full
Here's a copy of the full report (WARNING: VERY GRAPHIC IMAGES) : http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/syria_cw0913_web_1.pdf
It all seems very thorough and consistent with what we already know. The only fault I can see is that they didn't get any inspectors to the area in the immediate aftermath of the attack, therefore relying on images posted online of weapons and eyewitness testimony. The UN didn't manage that either - the inspectors were fired upon trying to enter the area. Interviewing only a small group of people via Skype doesn't strike me as the most exhaustive possible methodology, but their analysis of the secondary sources seems absolutely spot on. The weapons used were the bm-14 and farj-5 rocket artillery it seems.
There's also this Noam Chomsky video where he's interviewed on Democracy Now about Syria, I put it up here because of the comments made by Gen. Wesley Clark in 2007, very interesting in retrospect.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/09/10/syria-government-likely-culprit-chemical-attack
(New York) – Available evidence strongly suggests that Syrian government forces were responsible for chemical weapons attacks on two Damascus suburbs on August 21, 2013. These attacks, which killed hundreds of civilians including many children, appeared to use a weapons-grade nerve agent, most likely Sarin.
The 22-page report, “Attacks on Ghouta: Analysis of Alleged Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria,” documents two alleged chemical weapons attacks on the opposition-controlled suburbs of Eastern and Western Ghouta, located 16 kilometers apart, in the early hours of August 21. Human Rights Watch analyzed witness accounts of the rocket attacks, information on the likely source of the attacks, the physical remnants of the weapon systems used, and the medical symptoms exhibited by the victims as documented by medical staff.
“Rocket debris and symptoms of the victims from the August 21 attacks on Ghouta provide telltale evidence about the weapon systems used,” said Peter Bouckaert, emergencies director at Human Rights Watch and author of the report. “This evidence strongly suggests that Syrian government troops launched rockets carrying chemical warheads into the Damascus suburbs that terrible morning.”
The evidence concerning the type of rockets and launchers used in these attacks strongly suggests that these are weapon systems known and documented to be only in the possession of, and used by, Syrian government armed forces, Human Rights Watch said.
Click to enlarge map
Special Feature: Map of Impact Zones, Photo Essay, Diagram of Chemical Rocket >>
Human Rights Watch analyzed publicly posted YouTube videos from the attacked areas as well as higher-resolution images of weapon remnants provided by a local activist in Eastern Ghouta. Two separate surface-to-surface rocket systems believed to be associated with the delivery of chemical agents were identified. The first type of rocket, found at the site of the Eastern Ghouta attacks, is a 330mm rocket that appears to have a warhead designed to be loaded with and deliver a large payload of liquid chemical agent. The second type, found in the Western Ghouta attack, is a Soviet-produced 140mm rocket that, according to reference guides, has the ability to be armed with one of three possible warheads, including one specifically designed to carry and deliver 2.2 kilograms of Sarin.
The Syrian government has denied responsibility for the attacks and has blamed opposition groups, but has presented no credible evidence to back up its claims. Human Rights Watch and arms experts monitoring the use of weapons in Syria have not documented Syrian opposition forces to be in the possession of the 140mm and 330mm rockets used in the attack or their associated launchers.
While Human Rights Watch was unable to go to Ghouta to collect weapon remnants, environmental samples, and physiological samples to test for the chemical agent, it has sought technical advice from an expert on the detection and effects of chemical warfare agents. The expert reviewed accounts from local residents, the clinical signs and symptoms described by doctors, and many of the videos that were taken of the victims of the August 21 attacks.
Click to enlarge diagram
Three doctors in Ghouta who treated the victims told Human Rights Watch that victims of the attacks consistently showed symptoms including suffocation; constricted, irregular, and infrequent breathing; involuntary muscle spasms; nausea; frothing at the mouth; fluid coming out of noses and eyes; convulsing; dizziness; blurred vision; red and irritated eyes and pin-point pupils (myosis). Some young victims exhibited cyaonis, a bluish coloring on the face consistent with suffocation or asphyxiation. None of the victims showed traumatic injuries normally associated with attacks using explosive or incendiary weapons.
Such symptoms, and the lack of traumatic injuries, are consistent with exposure to nerve agents such as Sarin, Human Rights Watch said. There is laboratory evidence that Sarin gas has been used in a previous attack in April on Jobar, near Damascus, when a photographer for Le Monde newspaper who was present at the time later tested for exposure to Sarin.
The use of chemical weapons is a serious violation of international humanitarian law. Although Syria is not among the 189 countries that are party to the 1993 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling, and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction, it is a party to the 1925 Geneva Gas Protocol. Customary international law bans the use of chemical weapons in all armed conflicts.
The August 21 attacks on Ghouta are the first major use of chemical weapons since the Iraqi government used chemical weapons on Iraqi Kurdish civilians in Halabja 25 years ago, Human Rights Watch said.
“The increasingly evident use of chemical weapons in Syria’s terrible conflict should refocus the international debate on deterring the use of such weapons and more broadly protecting Syria’s civilian population,” Bouckaert said.
Here's a copy of the full report (WARNING: VERY GRAPHIC IMAGES) : http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/syria_cw0913_web_1.pdf
It all seems very thorough and consistent with what we already know. The only fault I can see is that they didn't get any inspectors to the area in the immediate aftermath of the attack, therefore relying on images posted online of weapons and eyewitness testimony. The UN didn't manage that either - the inspectors were fired upon trying to enter the area. Interviewing only a small group of people via Skype doesn't strike me as the most exhaustive possible methodology, but their analysis of the secondary sources seems absolutely spot on. The weapons used were the bm-14 and farj-5 rocket artillery it seems.
There's also this Noam Chomsky video where he's interviewed on Democracy Now about Syria, I put it up here because of the comments made by Gen. Wesley Clark in 2007, very interesting in retrospect.
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
Hes currently going on a public relations offensive in the US, and on the face of it seems to be making a much more compelling case than Obama to the American public . Todays New York Times have given him a very prominent op ed where he highlights AQs prominence among the rebels, places the blame for the chemical attacks squarely on them and makes the argument the USA is therefore on the wrong side ...essentially on AQs side.
On the anniversary of 9 11 thats bound to have some resonance...at least with New Yorkers.. and can only undermine Obama even further. .
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
Yeah I missed Obamas address. Did he say anything interesting?
Loved Putins nyt thing. Vlad the Talk-Nutters-Downer.
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
Not just that but he emphasizes the importance of international law, a very important point to make considering the Rule of Brute Force the US stands for.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Putin loves the law. He is the law in Russia. Ask any of the opposition party members or protestors he's locked up for speaking against him.
gsgs
Member
http://www.npr.org/2013/09/10/221186456/transcript-president-obamas-address-to-the-nation-on-syria
transcript of Obama speech
--------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-russia-on-syria.html
A Plea for Caution From Russia
What Putin Has to Say to Americans About Syria
------------------------------
hopefully Obama will reply, address the points, and there will be a public
discussion, including the "scholars"
one country debates another one
the power of internet and communication and argument ....
==============================================================
my summary of Obama's speech
it has 6 passages.
------------------------
the first is a short introduction to the reason of the speech, while
already using adjectives like repressive regime,brutal war,moderate opposition
to make opinion for one side.
------------------------
Then he describes the chemical attack trying to point out why this is so bad
and the horrifying pictures and videos of people's pain and death, especially children.
Also showing why he thinks Assad is responsible.
----------------------
then he explains why in general the use of chemical weapons is a threat to US security
in the long run and why he thinks an US-military strike would reduce that risk.
-----------------------
then he addresses concerns about retaliation and escalation and comparison
with Iraq,Afghanistan - no ground troops in Syria, no "pinpricks"
----------------------------
then he mentions the recent diplomatic initiative to destroy Assad's chemical weapons.
Pointing out the agreement with Russia here
---------------------------
then he speaks about the historical US role in conflicts of the last 7 decades
which he sees positive and as an anchor of global security
And how he thinks USA is exceptional here, however doesn't want to be
viewed as the world's policeman.
-------------------------------------------------------------
he is not being explicite about the magnitude of the planned strikes
and what kind of targets they would hit
he doesn't mention the opposition and concern of Russia,China,UNO
and the possible negative consequences of US-relationship to these
======================================================
Putin's response in the NY-times is shorter, only 53% the length of Obama's "Address".
I would spot these 8 passages, key themes :
----------------------------------------------
role of UNO and USA's historical involvement in it
--------------------------------------------
dangers and possible (negative) consequences of US military actions to the region
and the international system
----------------------------------------------
his view of the actual situation in Syria
------------------------------------------
UNO=law
---------------------------------------------
poison gas not used by the Syrian army but by opposition forces
----------------------------------------------
use of force as political method
------------------------------------------------
hope and support on the new plan to destruct the chemical weapons
---------------------------------------------
critics of Obama's claimed exceptional role of USA
-------------------------------------------------
what I found remarcable for a Russian:
sees insufficient communication between US and Russian societies
(censorship in Russia)
he tries to address US-sentiments in small sidenotes,
"defeated the Nazis together","including the pope","democracy",
"Qaeda","terrorists","weapons of mass destruction"
"Lord's blessings","God created us equal"
(things that I wouldn't expect him to say in Russian media)
he fails to elaborate on his attitude that not Assad used the chemicals,
one of the key points in the controversy.
(Has he info from Syria that USA doesn't have ? Will he be able to
prove it, to provide evidence, details ?)
that "exceptional role" and the use of force that he denies for USA wrt. the world
had long been the key-part Russian politics to keep their big empire
together, the USSR, Eastern Europe in cold war.
Invasion and forceful intervention in Hungary,Czechoslawakia,Afghanistan,
Tschetschenia,Georgia and military pressure and threats as a legitimate method
of Russian politics.
Is Putin now stepping back from that, a change in Russian political methods ?
it will be interesting to see whether they will be trying to clarify
and examine and resolve those points where they disagree.
Those presidents are not yet using links or charts to support their views,
a technic that has proved useful in internet discussion
and scientific presentations.
They are not directly quoting and replying to each other -
another such technic.
======================================================
transcript of Obama speech
--------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-russia-on-syria.html
A Plea for Caution From Russia
What Putin Has to Say to Americans About Syria
------------------------------
hopefully Obama will reply, address the points, and there will be a public
discussion, including the "scholars"
one country debates another one
the power of internet and communication and argument ....
==============================================================
my summary of Obama's speech
it has 6 passages.
------------------------
the first is a short introduction to the reason of the speech, while
already using adjectives like repressive regime,brutal war,moderate opposition
to make opinion for one side.
------------------------
Then he describes the chemical attack trying to point out why this is so bad
and the horrifying pictures and videos of people's pain and death, especially children.
Also showing why he thinks Assad is responsible.
----------------------
then he explains why in general the use of chemical weapons is a threat to US security
in the long run and why he thinks an US-military strike would reduce that risk.
-----------------------
then he addresses concerns about retaliation and escalation and comparison
with Iraq,Afghanistan - no ground troops in Syria, no "pinpricks"
----------------------------
then he mentions the recent diplomatic initiative to destroy Assad's chemical weapons.
Pointing out the agreement with Russia here
---------------------------
then he speaks about the historical US role in conflicts of the last 7 decades
which he sees positive and as an anchor of global security
And how he thinks USA is exceptional here, however doesn't want to be
viewed as the world's policeman.
-------------------------------------------------------------
he is not being explicite about the magnitude of the planned strikes
and what kind of targets they would hit
he doesn't mention the opposition and concern of Russia,China,UNO
and the possible negative consequences of US-relationship to these
======================================================
Putin's response in the NY-times is shorter, only 53% the length of Obama's "Address".
I would spot these 8 passages, key themes :
----------------------------------------------
role of UNO and USA's historical involvement in it
--------------------------------------------
dangers and possible (negative) consequences of US military actions to the region
and the international system
----------------------------------------------
his view of the actual situation in Syria
------------------------------------------
UNO=law
---------------------------------------------
poison gas not used by the Syrian army but by opposition forces
----------------------------------------------
use of force as political method
------------------------------------------------
hope and support on the new plan to destruct the chemical weapons
---------------------------------------------
critics of Obama's claimed exceptional role of USA
-------------------------------------------------
what I found remarcable for a Russian:
sees insufficient communication between US and Russian societies
(censorship in Russia)
he tries to address US-sentiments in small sidenotes,
"defeated the Nazis together","including the pope","democracy",
"Qaeda","terrorists","weapons of mass destruction"
"Lord's blessings","God created us equal"
(things that I wouldn't expect him to say in Russian media)
he fails to elaborate on his attitude that not Assad used the chemicals,
one of the key points in the controversy.
(Has he info from Syria that USA doesn't have ? Will he be able to
prove it, to provide evidence, details ?)
that "exceptional role" and the use of force that he denies for USA wrt. the world
had long been the key-part Russian politics to keep their big empire
together, the USSR, Eastern Europe in cold war.
Invasion and forceful intervention in Hungary,Czechoslawakia,Afghanistan,
Tschetschenia,Georgia and military pressure and threats as a legitimate method
of Russian politics.
Is Putin now stepping back from that, a change in Russian political methods ?
it will be interesting to see whether they will be trying to clarify
and examine and resolve those points where they disagree.
Those presidents are not yet using links or charts to support their views,
a technic that has proved useful in internet discussion
and scientific presentations.
They are not directly quoting and replying to each other -
another such technic.
======================================================
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
I'm far more concerned about international law than Russian or American law. Don't get me wrong, those things are important too, but international absence of law can hurt far more people than the wanton disregard for law exhibited by the NSA, CIA, FBI or DHS inside the US or some political protesters or feminists with a shockingly interesting name inside Russia. Always remember, thousands of nuclear weapons are ready to en the world, nations need to be polite to one another and keep things legal and not get carried away with their own delusions of grandeur.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Timothy Garton Ash in the Gruniad.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/11/crisis-resolves-little-syria-says-much-about-us
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/11/crisis-resolves-little-syria-says-much-about-us
Fuchs66
Ring a ding
Very interesting and informed piece regarding chemical weapons:
http://www.the-trench.org/internationalisation-of-syrias-chemical-weapon-stockpile/
http://www.the-trench.org/internationalisation-of-syrias-chemical-weapon-stockpile/
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
Tankus
Amused OAP
Russia's got a vested interest in the he destruction of the sarin , anyway ....As there are plenty of Chechen's fighting against Assad in Syria . if they get their hands on the stuff in volume ?? , it was just 4 litres that was used in the 90's Japanese underground railway attack which killed 13 , crippled another 50 and injured 6252 others . . Moscow , New York , Paris metro and London underground is such a fat target!
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
For once the BBC analysis of the Putin Obama thing was spot on . Obama the anti war president having to be constrained by world pleas for peace, Obama the former law professor being given a public lecture on the necessity of legality, Obama whod publicly opposed the very notion of American exceptionalism being chided over his public embracing of American exceptionalism, and Obama the civil rights campaigner having to be given a lecture on how God created us all equal, rich and poor, strong and weak .Then reminding him on the anniversary of 9 11 hes on the same side as AQ
Just one massive public dig after another . And all true .
By the man whos thrown him a much needed diplomatic lifeline to get Obama off his own stupid hook .
Just one massive public dig after another . And all true .
By the man whos thrown him a much needed diplomatic lifeline to get Obama off his own stupid hook .
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
What Putin didn't mention.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/12/vladimir-putin-new-york-times-oped-syria
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/12/vladimir-putin-new-york-times-oped-syria
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
er....Yes, what Putin isn't telling us is his vested interest in preventing chemical weapons wielding terrorists, hardened from Syrias civil war travelling to Russia and elsewhere to commit terrorist attacks, that devious cynical bastard. Why not tell us the truth Putin!
J Ed
Follow Back Pro Expropriation
Why is it that all these neocons, even when accusing someone of being one sided, cannot bring themselves to actually talk about what atrocities the 'rebels' are committing? We are talking about massacres on the basis of religion, ethnic cleansing against Kurds, attacks on Kurdish fighters for refusing to wear hijab, rape, chemical weapons attacks, forced conversions to Islam, cannibalism, suicide bombings, torture...
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
She works for Human Rights Watch.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
J Ed
Follow Back Pro Expropriation
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Why does pointing out Assad's war crimes make her a neocon?
I don't know that much about Human Rights Watch, I linked something of theirs earlier on and asked if anyone had any reason to distrust Human Rights Watch because I couldn't think of much off the top of my head, no-one said anything then. Are Human Rights Watch independent of the US govt financially? Coz if they are then they should be taken seriously when they make criticisms like this. I'll have a look through the Human Rights Watch website tonight and see where they stand on Syria in general, see what else they've said about the rebels.
It's an reply to Putin's op-ed piece, thus primarily concerned with exposing Putin's hypocrisy rather than anything else. And it's right too - we've got the butcher of grozny writing articles about international law and people are just lapping it up rather than laughing at it for it's desperation. Although credit where it's due, it's got some results and might've helped head off the conflict which I'm pleased about, but don't think for one minute Putin would be reduced to pleading about international law in the guardian (last refuge of the scoundrel) if the US weren't so much stronger than Russia. Putin's shown no inclination towards observing international law when it's Russia bullying smaller countries in it's sphere of influence.
It's this hypocrisy that staggers me. Russia is providing arms to Syria, knowing full well how those arms are going to be usd. We've seen Syrian jets dropping cluster bombs on civilian areas, all Russian manufactured, and the indiscriminate use of violence against civilians on an unbelievable scale, a war crime by any definition, and will Putin's Russia be demanding anything be done about that? Will it stop them providing their ally weapons? The ICC? Don't bet on it.
That kind of hypocrisy is more than worth pointing out. The cynical way in which Human Rights and International Law is used as a figleaf to pursue the national interests of the great imperial powers should be pointed out vehemently, whether it's Russia, the US or Britain who does so. I've got no problem with making a big deal of rebel atrocities and I've never said a word in favour of Western intervention in Syria, but I think Putin's got a problem with ackowledging how his ally (with his support) is guilty of some of the most serious war crimes carried out by a govt anywhere in the world for decades.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Maybe it's difficult sorting out the real atrocities from the ficticious accounts of girls having their arms sawn off. Assad's atrocities are better documented.
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
I hear ya bruthr, I'd rather refuse to believe the world can contain such things too.
Similar threads
