Disaster for US foreign policy and credibility

[al-Hasani]

US and other countries have responsibility if there is UN mandate and total unanimity on the issue. when there are so many dissenting voices against attack on Syria then other options must be explored to restore peace in Syria

How can there be a united UN mandate when certain countries are against that despite knowing that people are getting killed in Syria each day and that nothing will change?

Why are they (Russia) against it? Well because Russia and USA are nearly always against each other by default because they view each other as competitors and both countries have a ambition of being the main super power.

Russia is not on the level of USA and never were and they are losing influence everywhere. They don't want to loss Syria as well and be left with no real allies in the Arab world which we all know is one of the most important geopolitical regions.

Russia was also voting against international intervention when their Serbian friends and allies were murdering Bosnian and Albanian Muslims and committing genocide in the 1990's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre

Ironically the UN soldiers (Dutch) were just looking at that massacre silently since they had no mandate to engage in confrontations other than protecting the civilian population which they failed at miserably.

Are you a Muslim? If so then don't tell me that the situations are nearly not identical or that you opposed the international invention in the Balkans just because Russia voted against that in the UN?

Come on.

 

[Lone]

In the end innocents will keep suffering.

 

[T-123456]

Dont expect anything from the UN,its just a ''tea party''(not Boston)

 

[Serpentine]

What war? You mean a few airstrikes? The Americans will not do more. They just want to show that the line has been crossed. So in a way their involvement is pathetic but us that actually are against the Child-Murderer are open for everything that could topple him and end the conflict because he has been butchering and carpet bombing his own people for 2.5 straight years now and nothing tells me that he will suddenly stop.

He is still clinching to power as any other insane dictator. Do you really think that he has any legitimacy left to rule ALL of Syria? Really?

Nazi Germany's invasion of Poland is a bad example since history has proven that Hitler's ambition of conquest were not only limited to Poland but actually most of Europe and ultimately the world.

Before Poland he had annexed lands in what is now the Czech Republic and the world and European powers knew where all this would led to when he decided to attack Poland in September 1939.

A few airstrikes doesn't even make sense. Declaring war on a country doesn't know any limited or unlimited strikes.
And a 'red line' was crossed by who? U.S couldn't prove anything and it actually embarrassed itself by saying that we know who used chemical weapons but not showing any evidence. It could be another war based on lies and a hoax, they have done it in Iraq.

A year ago, Iran secretly informed U.S that chemical materials and ingredients are being smuggled in to Syria, they didn't respond to it and see what happened now.
Even one single missile strike meant that they have officially declared war on Syria and also meant that Syria has a right to defend itself and target U.S interests in the region.

 

[Hussein]

Dont expect anything from the UN,its just a ''tea party''(not Boston)

what ???

ok ok ok i get it now why UN won't do anything

 

[al-Hasani]

A few airstrikes doesn't even make sense. Declaring war on a country doesn't know any limited or unlimited strikes.
And a 'red line' was crossed by who? U.S couldn't prove anything and it actually embarrassed itself by saying that we know who used chemical weapons but not showing any evidence. It could be another war based on lies and a hoax, they have done it in Iraq.

A year ago, Iran secretly informed U.S that chemical materials and ingredients are being smuggled in to Syria, they didn't respond to it and see what happened now.
Even one single missile strike meant that they have officially declared war on Syria and also meant that Syria has a right to defend itself and target U.S interests in the region.

The Americans have openly said that there would be no land invasion. Only strikes from the air or sea. You can find a lot of sources that confirm this.

The red line was crossed by Al-Assad who is responsible for his country don't you think that? Or do you think that carpet bombing whole villages, cities etc. indiscriminately is just a fight against a few hundred "Al-Qaeda fighters"?

Assad has been using chemical weapons before. The rebels simply do not have the capacity to do that. Also it is no secret that Al-Assad has a big arsenal of chemical weapons. Why do you even think that Russia has proposed this deal? If they had no chemical weapons (stock) this deal would not be relevant.

Why pretend that you Iranians did not agree with the Iraq war? You removed Saddam Hussein that killed 1 million Iranians and gassed you even and destroyed much of Iran. In return you got a new Iraqi government that is largely friendly towards Iran and now Iraq is ruled by mainly Islamists parties with historical ties to Iran after the 1979 revolution. The Dawa Party etc.

Just like your leadership also welcomed the invasion of Afghanistan and removal of Taliban although they still rule most of the Pashtun areas of Afghanistan.

Also do you really think that the international community do not have ENOUGH of "excuses" to topple Al-Assad? 120.000 dead Syrians is not enough?

But when a few chemicals are used and a few hundred persons dies then we have a "reason" to invade?

That is false. Why are you making that up or rather your rulers? Why the hell does Syria need to smuggle chemicals into it lands when they themselves have among the largest stocks of chemical weapons THEMSELVES? Makes no sense.

Oh, so you blindly support Al-Assad no matter what.

Also can you answer this question. Very simple if you can? You did not answer that in my quoted post.

Which American interests can Al-Assad attack? He can't even control his own country and you want him to attack "American interests". What are we talking about? The biggest American embassy in the world in the Green Zone in Baghdad for example? The American bases in Bahrain? Israel?

Lastly Israel already attacked Al-Assad. What was his reply? Yes we both know it. A big NOTHING.

Just like Syrian land (Golan Heights) have been occupied by Israel for 40 years with him not even raising a finger.

Is this what you call the "axis of resistance"? Really?

He is still clinching to power as any other insane dictator. Do you really think that he has any legitimacy left to rule ALL of Syria? Really?

 

[T-123456]

what ???

ok ok ok i get it now why UN won't do anything

I like her,she is the funniest US politician.
Some people might know the Boston Tea Party,thats why i said Not Boston.

 

[al-Hasani]

I like her,she is the funniest US politician.

She is a dangerous illiterate retard. I know that the American president is surrounded by 1000's of advisers and experts on every single field (nearly) but I would still fear a nuclear war if she ever became the president.

A big, no thank you.

 

[Serpentine]

The Americans have openly said that there would be no land invasion. Only strikes from the air or sea. You can find a lot of sources that confirm this.

The red line was crossed by Al-Assad who is responsible for his country don't you think that? Or do you think that carpet whole villages, cities etc. indiscriminately is just a fight against a few hundred "Al-Qaeda fighters"?

Assad has been using chemical weapons before. The rebels simply do not have the capacity to do that. Also it is no secret that Al-Assad has a big arsenal of chemical weapons. Why do you even think that Russia has proposed this deal? If they had no chemical weapons (stock) this deal would not be relevant.

Why pretend that you Iranians did not agree with the Iraq war? You removed Saddam Hussein that killed 1 million Iranians and gassed you even and destroyed much of Iran. In return you got a new Iraqi government that is largely friendly towards Iran and now Iraq is ruled by mainly Islamists parties with historical ties to Iran after the 1979 revolution. The Dawa Party etc.

Just like your leadership also welcomed the invasion of Afghanistan and removal of Taliban although they still rule most of the Pashtun areas of Afghanistan.

Also do you really think that the international community do not have ENOUGH of "excuses" to topple Al-Assad? 120.000 dead Syrians is not enough?

But when a few chemicals are used and a few hundred persons dies then we have a "reason" to invade?

That is false. Why are you making that up or rather your rulers? Why the hell does Syria need to smuggle chemicals into it lands when they themselves have among the largest stocks of chemical weapons THEMSELVES? Makes no sense.

Oh, so you blindly support Al-Assad no matter what.

Also can you answer this question. Very simple if you can? You did not answer that in my quoted post.

From those 100,000 dead people, nearly half belong to Syrian army or supporters of government, don't play with numbers.

Also regarding Iraq, you should study more in this regard. Iraq didn't kill 1 million Iranians, the numbers vary between 350,000 to 500,000 by different sources. The official number declared by Iran includes nearly 300,000 military personnel and 100,000 civilians while casualties of Iraq are between 250,000 to 500,000, most of them military personnel.

No mmatter what you think, we didn't help U.S in Iraq war, but its Arab 'brothers' did help U.S in the war, that's the irony. We opposed the war before it started, our conscience is completely clear. The reason Iraq is friendly toward Iran is that its government represents the majority of its people.

We did help U.S to remove Taliban because those backward scums deserved what was coming to them, we will definitely do it again if they want to take the leadership in Afghanistan. Taliban and Al-Qaeda are our eternal enemies and we'll help to kill them every chance we get.

 

[zzzz]

USA is humilated and isolated. This is what happens when amateur nation goes against 1000 years old Empire. The lesson to all US puppets.

 

[al-Hasani]

From those 100,000 dead people, nearly half belong to Syrian army or supporters of government, don't play with numbers.

Also regarding Iraq, you should study more in this regard. Iraq didn't kill 1 million Iranians, the numbers vary between 350,000 to 500,000 by different sources. The official number declared by Iran includes nearly 300,000 military personnel and 100,000 civilians while casualties of Iraq are between 250,000 to 500,000, most of them military personnel.

No mmatter what you think, we didn't help U.S in Iraq war, but its Arab 'brothers' did help U.S in the war, that's the irony. We opposed the war before it started, our conscience is completely clear. The reason Iraq is friendly toward Iran is that its government represents the majority of its people.

We did help U.S to remove Taliban because those backward scums deserved what was coming to them, we will definitely do it again if they want to take the leadership in Afghanistan. Taliban and Al-Qaeda are our eternal enemies and we'll help to kill them every chance we get.

Let us just assume that this number is correct (different versions) then what about all the THOUSANDS of innocents Syrians who have been killed by the Child-Murderer that you support? How many cities, villages etc. have been destroyed?

We all know how the protests started. First peacefully until the protestors were killed and thus all the decades of frustration and oppression came into surface and they retailed and defended themselves. Only like 1 year after the start of the conflict did it attract foreigners FROM BOTH SIDES. You probably realize that there are a lot of HizbAlShaitan and other Shia extremists fighting in Syria from Iraq, Lebanon, the tiny Houthi controlled parts of Yemen, even KSA and obviously Iran too.

So it all goes back to the lunatic Al-Assad that as the dictator he is has tried to clinch to the power with all means possible and deemed anyone not agreeing with that as a "foreign" terrorists forgetting that over HALF of his army have defected to the Syrian opposition. Pathetic much?

Eh, many sources put it between 500.000-1.000.000. Point is that hundred of thousands died. Many are dying each day due to the after effects of the gas attacks or other health related symptoms.

Eh, I did not say anything about help. But yes, your leadership admitted that they worked together with the USA to remove Saddam Hussein. So did some of the Arab states. And why are you surprised by that? Saddam was a unreliable partner in the middle of the Middle East. Why are you pretending that you care about his plight?

Iraq is totally divided including the politics and 90% of the Iraqi Shia Arabs do not agree with your poisonous "Vali-ye faqih" nonsense.

This clips also says something totally different.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdF5aWC0yNc

No matter how you spin it then you cannot make a single sane argument about the removal of Saddam Hussein NOT being in the interest of your Mullah's.

Eh, Taliban is already ruling most of the Pashtun areas. The Americans did really not achieve anything in removing them. In fact they are now TALKING together and NEGOTIATING.

Besides I do not support the Taliban. In fact they are not my business or the situation there since that is an internal Afghan matter. Besides I would have to read much more about the conflict from both sides and draw my own conclusion. At the end of the day the Afghans themselves will have to deal with their problems and remove Taliban themselves.

 

[Serpentine]

@al-Hasani: Provide one single evidence that a high ranking official in Iran admits we have supported the war in Iraq.
The outcome of Iraq war and removal of Saddam was indeed in our interests, but that doesn't prove we have supported them in the war.

How could we support it while at the same time, we were organizing military groups to fight U.S in Iraq? We thought U.S is going to invade us after Saddam, so we fought them indirectly in Iraq to make them think twice before attacking Iran.

 

[al-Hasani]

@al-Hasani: Provide one single evidence that a high ranking official in Iran admits we have supported the war in Iraq.
The outcome of Iraq war and removal of Saddam was indeed in our interests, but that doesn't prove we have supported them in the war.

How could we support it while at the same time, we were organizing military groups to fight U.S in Iraq? We thought U.S is going to invade us after Saddam, so we fought them indirectly in Iraq to make them think twice before attacking Iraq.

Watch the clip or read reports about it. I see that you are not able or willing to reply to my other points and that you only focus on this small part that has nothing to do with Syria.

But ok, let us take it.

You see, you said that "we Arabs" helped USA invaded Iraq. Who are the Arabs you are referring to? The truth is that only Kuwait voted in favor and the INVASION of Iraq took place from Kuwait. And you know why? Because Saddam Hussein attacked Kuwait and destroyed much of it. They had a reason for this or rather their ruling family.

KSA was against it but when we realized that we could not change anything then we also realized that a removal of Saddam Hussein had its benefits for the reason I already mentioned. Unstable leader, attacked our allies and friends in Kuwait, Khafji etc.

At the same time we already predicted all the problems that Iraq has suffered from since since we Arabs know each other really well and our countries. One can say much about the House of Saud but they are often spot on in their analyses. You are not able to rule for that long without knowing the region that surrounds you.

Well the same time as we KSA who are accused by your likes of supporting AQ could launch attacks against the American forces while being a key USA ally.

The truth is that the Al-Saud were not supporting them but rather individuals. At the same time we suffered from many terrorists attacks by Al-Qaeda until they were defeated.

List of militant incidents in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[T-123456]

She is a dangerous illiterate retard. I know that the American president is surrounded by 1000's of advisers and experts on every single field (nearly) but I would still fear a nuclear war if she ever became the president.

A big, no thank you.

What does funny mean to you in politics?
Because of her dumb comments she is funny!

 

[al-Hasani]

What does funny mean to you in politics?
Because of her dumb comments she is funny!

Depends on the context and whether you are serious. I took it for you supporting her due to her being "funny". In that case I agree. She is indeed funny. But not in the "funny" sense of the word but rather in a tragicomical and dangerous way.