US jets bomb 'pro-regime' forces in Syria

[HenryWallace]

Hezzbola and the Elite Iranian forces are trying to get a strong foothold in Syria..... to be able to get closer to ISRAEL! They want to take out Israel, and Russia is glad to provide arms, etc. No secret that Russia would never DEFEND Israel in a major conflict.

Except for the fact that Israel is in Syria selling off the gas and oil under the Golan Heights and has been for years!
"Israel unilaterally annexed the Golan Heights in 1981. The move was not recognised internationally."
Golan Heights profile - BBC News
"The area was part of extreme southwestern Syria until 1967, when it came under Israeli military occupation, and in December 1981 Israel unilaterally annexed the part of the Golan it held."
https://www.britannica.com/place/Golan-Heights

Lest we forget, Israel has been holding our leash for quite sometime!

 

[Spear Dane]

Better that Israel gets that money than Syria.

 

[HenryWallace]

Better that Israel gets that money than Syria.

Curious. Why?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZNKK_91RVU
The money made from Syrian ground, why is it better to go to another country?

 

[Spear Dane]

Curious. Why?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZNKK_91RVU
The money made from Syrian ground, why is it better to go to another country?

What does that video have to do with Israel selling Golan petro?

 

[HenryWallace]

What does that video have to do with Israel selling Golan petro?

Just more proof of the lies we're told in order for us to make a rash judgment about a people we don't know, and Tulsi Gabbard has had first hand experience with.
Answer? Or more questions?

 

[BugI02]

Except for the fact that Israel is in Syria selling off the gas and oil under the Golan Heights and has been for years!
"Israel unilaterally annexed the Golan Heights in 1981. The move was not recognised internationally."
Golan Heights profile - BBC News
"The area was part of extreme southwestern Syria until 1967, when it came under Israeli military occupation, and in December 1981 Israel unilaterally annexed the part of the Golan it held."
https://www.britannica.com/place/Golan-Heights

Lest we forget, Israel has been holding our leash for quite sometime!

Annexing The Golan ranks right up there with the US annexing Alta California and Santa Fe de Nuevo México in 1848, and for much the same reasons. Wars have consequences (esp. if you lose)

 

[T.Lex]

"The area came under Israeli control in 1967."

Well. Yes. That is true.

And about 10% of the actual context.

 

[BugI02]

Just more proof of the lies we're told in order for us to make a rash judgment about a people we don't know, and Tulsi Gabbard has had first hand experience with.
Answer? Or more questions?

Here ya' go. Given some of your statements disdain for US or Israeli actions, I thought you might approve of the UN as a source

Syria chemical attack: Key UN findings - BBC News
Syria chemical attack: Key UN findings

 

[HenryWallace]

Here ya' go. Given some of your statements disdain for US or Israeli actions, I thought you might approve of the UN as a source

Syria chemical attack: Key UN findings - BBC News
Syria chemical attack: Key UN findings

Yep, exactly... "Note that the UN inspectors do not anywhere in the report explicitly lay the blame for carrying out the attack at the door of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad."
More of the same.

I reiterate my original post in this thread, to keep in CONTEXT.

Are we going after Assad? Fighting isis? Or are we funding Kurds against Turkey and Syria? It's quite confusing.

 

[Dead Duck]

Just because David's stones have gotten bigger, doesn't make Goliath any less of a giant.

 

[BugI02]

Yep, exactly... "Note that the UN inspectors do not anywhere in the report explicitly lay the blame for carrying out the attack at the door of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad."
More of the same.

I reiterate my original post in this thread, to keep in CONTEXT.

Are we going after Assad? Fighting isis? Or are we funding Kurds against Turkey and Syria? It's quite confusing.

But more importantly the two types of rocket used - a Russian-supplied 140mm system and especially the larger 330mm weapon of unknown origin - are significant since according to both Human Rights Watch and a number of independent arms experts - these are weapons that have only been observed in use by Syrian government forces during this conflict.
There is significantly more detail on these weapons in the Human Rights Watch report Attacks on Ghouta (caution: disturbing images) published last September.

However, in some cases the inspectors were able to make an assessment of the likely trajectory of the rockets and this again seems to corroborate US claims that they came from areas controlled by government forces.
Of the five impact sites investigated by the Mission, three do not present physical characteristics allowing a successful study of the trajectories followed by the rockets involved, due to the configuration of the impact places. However, Impact site number 1 (Moadamiyah) and Impact site number 4 (Ein Tarma) PROVIDED SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO DETERMINE, WITH A SUFFICIENT DEGREE OF ACCURACY, THE LIKELY TRAJECTORY OF THE PROJECTILES.Image copyrightUNITED NATIONS

Selective quotation probably isn't the best "hearts and minds" strategy

 

[Kutnupe14]

Yep, exactly... "Note that the UN inspectors do not anywhere in the report explicitly lay the blame for carrying out the attack at the door of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad."
More of the same.

I reiterate my original post in this thread, to keep in CONTEXT.

Are we going after Assad? Fighting isis? Or are we funding Kurds against Turkey and Syria? It's quite confusing.

I think we're just doing what Americans seem to like to selectively do.... meddle. National Sovereignty... what's that? We gotta tell other countries how they have to treat their people, and if they don't listen.... and we're more powerful, and we're helping "right" people or see some sort of benefit, then it's time to mount up.

 

[Dead Duck]

I think we're just doing what Americans seem to like to selectively do.... meddle. National Sovereignty... what's that? We gotta tell other countries how they have to treat their people, and if they don't listen.... and we're more powerful, and we're helping "right" people or see some sort of benefit, then it's time to mount up.

You're right!
The U.S. should just mind their own business and considerate on themselves. Let those bodies lie where they fall.
Let's go ahead and make a new HashTag Motto.

#****TheWorld

 

[indiucky]

I think we're just doing what Americans seem to like to selectively do.... meddle..

One of my favorite scenes in Casablanca is when the German Officer is questioning Renault about Rick, I.E. Where he stands on the War???

"What about Rick? Where does he stand?"

"Oh Rick tends bar and gambles...He tries to not to meddle in such affairs.."

"Yes I know, but you know how those Americans are such bunglers..."

"Quite...I was with them when they bungled their way in to Berlin in 1918.."

 

[HenryWallace]

Selective quotation probably isn't the best "hearts and minds" strategy

Neither is bombing a country with no definitive proof.

 

[T.Lex]

Neither is bombing a country with no definitive proof.

Even with "definitive proof" (whatever that is), bombing isn't really a hearts and minds strategy.

 

[Libertarian01]

My biggest problem with all of this over the last 70+ years is that we are inconsistent and entirely whimsical on what we do and whom we do it to.

IF we had a policy that said "Any country that does X will get Y response from us" THEN executed it without preference or prejudice, I wouldn't have a problem with that. However, if one despot slaughters his own people we ignore it due to a myriad of excuses but when his despot neighbor does the same thing then we go in, also due to a myriad of excuses.

The military overthrows a leader and that is normally called a coup. However, when it happened in Egypt against democratically elected President Mohamad Morsi then it isn't a coup because we don't like him. Inconsistent...

From the outside we must look like one of the most inconsistent world powers on earth.

Regards,

Doug

 

[GREEN607]

Kutnupe14-

Where have you been for the last 50-60 years?

We (the USA) have always defended Israel. It is "the Holy Land"; our Holy Land too. In case you forgot, we are a Judaeo-Christian nation and if you are a Muslim or Bhuddist or whatever religion.... you still have the freedom of speech to disagree with the nations policy. But we will ALWAYS defend Israel.....

 

[GIJEW]

Ok, so who is the legitimate government of Syria? Is'nt it Assad? Whatever you think he may be, democratically elected he has been.
Don't forget, every time the US tried to say "He's gassing his own people" it ended up being our trained Syrian Rebels that were the ones caught holding the canisters.
UN's Del Ponte says evidence Syria rebels 'used sarin' - BBC News

Are you trying to change the subject or just dodge my point--or both? As for Assad being "democratically elected", you've got to be kidding or using the phrase loosely! He inherited his dictatorship from his father who staged a coup. Whether he's used gas (and he has), artillery, air strikes, or just small arms, he and his father have been using slaughter--or the threat of it--for as long as that regime has existed in order to keep down the sunni majority because he's in the alawite minority and in his corner of the world you're either "king of the hill" or 6' under it.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

"The area came under Israeli control in 1967."

Well. Yes. That is true.

And about 10% of the actual context.

Right ! People forget the how and why of it .