Syria Superthread [merged]

[Inquisitor]

British Parliament Votes Against Military Intervention In Syria

link here http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/29/british-parliament-syria-vote_n_3839067.html?utm_hp_ref=canada&ir=Canada

Comment: Kudos to all for the debate and the call back, The Process seems to work. The against side seemed to focus on no clear perp, as well as crying wolf once to often, eg. Tony Bliar and WMD.

The comment that stands out in my mind is reproduced under the fair dealings provision of the copyright act from Huffington post.

"Defense Secretary Philip Hammond confirmed that British forces would not be involved in any potential strike, something he said would doubtless upset Washington – and please Assad.

"It is certainly going to place some strain on the special relationship," Hammond told BBC radio. "The Americans do understand the parliamentary process that we have to go through.... Common sense must tell us that the Assad regime is going to be a little bit less uncomfortable tonight as a result of this decision in Parliament."

Comment  Not holding my breath, but some in the US Congress might want to use this as a precedent to put the help put executive/legislative branches back into balance.

One can but hope

 

[CougarKing]

From the Washington Times

Syrian rebels used Sarin nerve gas, not Assad’s regime: U.N. official

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/


If true his would shake the entire debate

Wait a minute. Look at the date when you go to the source link. Isn't that article from wayyyyyy back in May????

 

[CougarKing]

This article below seems to "clear things up" a bit...

The UN official did say the above statement back in May, but ITAR-TASS falsely reported that she said it on August 21; the Russian agency also made her statement sound more alarming.

Russia Goes Ballistic Over Inaccurate Syria Report
August 29, 2013
By Alexander Kolyandr

Russian state agency ITAR-TASS published a report from Cairo Wednesday quoting a top United Nations official as saying it was Syrian rebels, not government forces, that used poison gas on Aug. 21. ITAR-TASS attributed quotes from Carla Del Ponte, a member of the UN’s commission looking into alleged gas attacks, to a Syrian news portal, which in turn was citing an interview on Swiss TV.

Russian politicians seized on the quote, which appeared to back up Russian government claims that rebels could have been responsible for the attack. Alexey Pushkov, a senior lawmaker from President Vladimir Putin’s United Russia party, accused Western press of deliberately ignoring Carla Del Ponte’s statement because it destroyed the basis for a military strike.

One problem: There was no such statement.

That story appears to have passed to ITAR-TASS via the BBC, The Washington Times and Assyrian International News Agency’s website, with the timing and wording changed.

Ms. Del Ponte did say something similar—but not quite as stark—back in May: “Investigators have been in neighboring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals and, according to their report of last week which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated,” she told Swiss TV, referring to another alleged attack.

By the end of Wednesday, a UN spokesman had told BBC Russian Service that Ms. Del Ponte didn’t say anything about the Aug. 21 attack, and that the members of the commission haven’t spoken publicly since June 4.

ITAR-TASS and Interfax reported the UN’s denial of the quote, but didn’t publish a correction. ITAR-TASS’s desk editor said the agency “took the reporter’s dispatch at face value” and the editors didn’t check it.

Wall Street Journal

 

[George Wallace]

Wait a minute. Look at the date when you go to the source link. Isn't that article from wayyyyyy back in May????

The date stamp many be dated, but it does show that the rebels did and may still have the capability and intent to use chemical and biological agents.  If they did it less than a year ago, what is to say they did not stage another such event?  As stated in other posts, this Region is know for manipulating the MSM with staged events, often reusing cadavers, etc. to garner support for their side.

 

[GAP]

Assad accused of moving human shields to key military targets as a defence against Western air strikes
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2406351/Assad-accused-moving-human-shields-key-military-targets-defence-Western-air-strikes.html

President Assad has moved thousands of Syrian prisoners to key military targets to use as human shields against air strikes, opposition groups claimed last night.

Sources in the capital Damascus report inmates being led from their cells onto buses and being taken to sites the regime fears will be targeted by western forces.

As the international community continues to debate military intervention in the long-running civil war following the alleged use of chemical weapons, opposition groups opposed have accused the Assad regime of murdering and torturing political prisoners.

In a statement released last night, The Syrian Coalition in Istanbul said:  'Assad's fascist regime is amassing detained activists and civilians in prisons inside military locations that may be potential targets for foreign military forces.

'Using civilians as human shields is a blatant breach of International Humanitarian Law, and those responsible must be held accountable for crimes against humanity.
more on link

 

[The Bread Guy]

Wait a minute. Look at the date when you go to the source link. Isn't that article from wayyyyyy back in May????

1)  Also reported by Turkish media around that time (see second link below)

Point:  "Intercepted Calls Prove Syrian Army Used Nerve Gas, U.S. Spies Say" (Syrians fired the stuff, but was it one unit doing its own thing, or regime ordered?)
(Potential?) counterpoint:  ".... seven suspected individuals from the al-Qaeda-linked Al Nusrah Front were captured in antiterrorist operations in Adana, Turkey, and two kilos (4,5 pounds) of sarin gas were found in their apartments. According to the accompanying reports, they were planning attacks on the Incirlik Base in Adana and in Gaziantep, a city near Turkey’s border with Syria ...." (Were AQ really going to use it on the base, or maybe bringing it into Syria to make it look like Syria was using it, causing the West to jump in on the side of the anti-Syria folks?)

Wilderness of mirrors ....

2)  It was between mid-March and late April that chemical weapon claims initially started flying.

However, all that said, before we jump on the "it had to be the rebels" bandwagon too hard, while I don't agree with this blogger's "let's go with the rebels" view, let's consider this ....

.... the call went out for UN inspectors to investigate the sites, with permission finally granted by the Syrian government on August 25th (Sunday). The Inspectors visited one small site the next day, but only for a few hours before being withdrawn by the Syrian government, and without having had the opportunity to investigate any of the main sites or to remove any of the material believed to be part of the delivery mechanisms (possibly mortar or artillery shells).

This should be kept in mind by anyone questioning why Assad would allow the Inspectors to conduct a survey of the area if it was him (or members of his regime) who ordered the attacks. The Inspectors were held back for several days, they were only allowed to visit one site and only for a short period of time, and they were denied the opportunity to bring back important evidence that could help identify who launched the attack.

When combined with the context of the regimes offensive, as well as reports coming from the US that they have both satellite imagery of activity around a known chemical weapons site in the days preceding the attack, as well as rumours of communications intercepts related to the attacks, the evidence against Assad and his regime is beginning to mount ....

 

[tomahawk6]

Its clear from communications intercepts that it was the Syrian Army that gassed the civilians.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Its clear from communications intercepts that it was the Syrian Army that gassed the civilians.

I've read the same thing, although some "anonymous sources" say it's not clear whether the Bosses gave the order, or whether some unit commanders went outside their arcs.  If it was the latter, though, and if Syria didn't want bang-things flying their way, methinks this dude would have been "dealt with" by now.

More along those lines here.

 

[vonGarvin]

Its clear from communications intercepts that it was the Syrian Army that gassed the civilians.

Reading what was intercepted, it's not that clear.  A higher HQ was calling a lower HQ to demand "WTF is going on?"  In short, the higher HQ knew that chemicals were being used, but of course no authorisation came through that HQ. 

 

[CougarKing]

France says it is still willing to support the US and other allies, and to punish Syria (a former French colony) without British help.

Reuters link

France says ready to punish Syria despite British no vote
Reuters

By Catherine Bremer

PARIS (Reuters) - France said on Friday it still backed action to punish Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's government for an apparent poison gas attack on civilians, despite a British parliamentary vote against it.

An aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin, a close Assad ally, seized on the British no vote as evidence that "people are beginning to understand" the dangers of military action.

U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said his country would keep seeking an international coalition to act together on Syria, where hundreds of people were killed in last week's reported chemical attacks. Syria denies using chemical weapons.

"It is the goal of President (Barack) Obama and our government ... whatever decision is taken, that it be an international collaboration and effort," he said.

French President Francois Hollande told the daily Le Monde that he still supported taking "firm" punitive action over an attack he said had caused "irreparable" harm to the Syrian people, adding that he would work closely with France's allies.

Asked if France could take action without Britain, Hollande replied: "Yes. Each country is sovereign to participate or not in an operation. That is valid for Britain as it is for France."

The British parliamentary defeat on Thursday of a government motion on Syria has set back U.S.-led efforts to take military action against Damascus.

Russia fiercely opposes any such action, backing the assertions of Damascus that Syrian rebels were behind the chemical attacks. Putin's senior foreign policy adviser Yuri Ushakov said the British vote reflected majority opinion in Europe. "People are beginning to understand how dangerous such scenarios are," Ushakov told reporters.

Any military strike looks likely to be delayed at least until U.N. investigators report back after leaving Syria on Saturday.

Hollande is not constrained by the need for parliamentary approval of any move to intervene in Syria and could act, if he chose, before lawmakers debate the issue on Wednesday.


(...)

 

[Journeyman]

Its clear from communications intercepts that...

The only thing that's clear to me is that Obama issued an ultimatum, got called on it by someone, and is now trying to get everyone.....anyone.....Bueller? .....to back him up.

No thanks; not my fight.

 

[vonGarvin]

The only thing that's clear to me is that Obama issued an ultimatum, got called on it by someone, and is now trying to get everyone.....anyone.....Bueller? .....to back him up.

No thanks; not my fight.

:nod:

And I think that the Admiral Kuznetzov may cause some concern... once it arrives there in December.

 

[krustyrl]

The only thing that's clear to me is that Obama issued an ultimatum, got called on it by someone, and is now trying to get everyone.....anyone.....Bueller? .....to back him up.

No thanks; not my fight.

Agreed, I'm guessing due to his ultimatum , he's feeling pretty darn lonely on the worlds stage  :crickets: 
Glad Harper has no plans to enter militarily simply because  that would most likely involve a new round of injured Veterans and he has a hard time looking after the current ones.!  Ooops, my inside voice yelling there. 

 

[myself.only]

OK fine, with this august assembly of strategic wisdom on hand, I'll play Devil's Advocate on this... WRT framing a response that deters nations from using WMD, what action, if any, should other nations take against Syria?

 

[Kat Stevens]

OK fine, with this august assembly of strategic wisdom on hand, I'll play Devil's Advocate on this... WRT framing a response that deters nations from using WMD, what action, if any, should other nations take against Syria?

Blockade them and starve them out, worked pretty well on Cuba. Ummm, never mind....

 

[Edward Campbell]

OK fine, with this august assembly of strategic wisdom on hand, I'll play Devil's Advocate on this... WRT framing a response that deters nations from using WMD, what action, if any, should other nations take against Syria?

Why is it necessary to "deter" anyone from using WMD?

 

[Kat Stevens]

Why is it necessary to "deter" anyone from using WMD?

Exactly.  What precisely makes one Weapon of Mass Destruction any less or more horrific than large scale use of Weapons of Individual Destruction or a bunch of Weapons of Small to Medium Group Destruction?

 

[The Bread Guy]

Standby for a few new soundbites (but no new pictures) shortly ....

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Director of Communications, Andrew MacDougall, along with senior government officials, will hold a briefing on Friday, August 30, 2013, on Prime Minister Harper’s upcoming trip to the G-20 Summit in St. Petersburg, Russia.

Event: Briefing (open to media only; no cameras)
Date: Friday, August 30, 2013
Time: 1 p.m. ET
Location: National Press Theatre, 150 Wellington Street, Ottawa, Ontario ....

 

[myself.only]

Well without taking the discussion of options down any particular lane too early & off the top of my head....

I would imagine the deterrence camp would say their policy:
(a) makes it harder to destroy masses of people,
(b) discourages the use of weapons viewed to be more likely to indiscriminately produce collateral civilian casualties, and / or
(c) is part of a general policy against the proliferation of WMD and WMD technology.

Similarly, these would likely be the perceived differences between killing people with WMDs vice conventional arms as described by Kat.

Needless to say, if someone wants to throw out other objectives / outcomes / presumptions of the deterrence camp, pls add to the list, add to the discussion.
Or just side-step the why and throw out some how.  I'm sure that'll fuel discussion too.

 

[The Bread Guy]

For the record, here's a map released by the U.S. at a media briefing this hour ....

.... and attached find the U.S. and Brit int assessment documents shared publicly via media.