Many Syrian protestors feel abandoned by Nato

This is one of the first sentences in today's news in a Swiss paper:

Viele Demonstranten fühlen sich von der Nato im Stich gelassen.
http://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/ausland/naher-osten-und-afrika/Ghadhafi-ist-tot-Assad-/story/29895004

Translation: Many demonstrators are feeling ignored/betrayed/deserted by Nato

I figured that such is likely a rather touchy topic worthy of a discussion. Should Nato become involved in Syria to help many demonstrators feel better? Is there another military power which could do the task? Iran? Saudi Arabia? Turkey? China? Would Nato benefit if it became involved?

The article writes: Doch auch militante Islamisten nutzen die Gunst der Stunde.

Translation: "Yet also islamic militants are taking advantage of the present situation"

Where is Nato? The signs say.

 

Syria is needed as a Buffer & Fulcrum against the Zionist Occupiers ?

 

How about the Chinese move in on the Zionists in order to protect the Palestinians . Nothing heavy, just a no-fly zone over Israel in order to protect civilians.

 

China will not get stuck in that flypaper.



http://www.politicalforum.com/current-events/213326-sinai-gold-could-bring-egypt-billions.html

 

Pakistan then. Why should NATO be the world's crooked policeman ?

 

Hey, I'd love to have China "take care" of Pakistan.

 

Pakistasn?

Are you kidding me? They are hardly a bastion of democracy and stability themselves.

Pakistan still has NO public education and they are a hot bed for every crackpot radical group in the whole of the ME, Asia and Africa.

Why do you want someone else to get involved in this tarbaby?

 

Apparently no one cares.

Nato couldn't get Russia and China (amongst others) to agree a condemnation of the actions of Assad, so Nato will not act.

And why should it? Look at the flack the West is getting on the Libyian threads here on the board.

Nato is to be blamed for the way Ghadaffi died and Ghadaffi is elevated to a hero.

 

Other than Tibet, who are they taking care of anymore?

 

Well, The US of AIPAC has certainly been eliminated as a broker. Give someone else a go.

 

True. Maybe they're out of practice.

 

This broker business is silly.. Every US president since Eisenhower has tried to negotiate a peace in Palestine.

Until the Israelis are willing nothing will happen.


http://www.politicalforum.com/current-events/213326-sinai-gold-could-bring-egypt-billions.html

 

No, they've simply gone through the motions. Now they're unable to continue the charade any longer.

 

Moon, Israel doesn't want to return the Golan, Shaaba Farms and West Bank.. and short of killing them no amount of honest brokering will make the difference.

But, the Arab Spring might..

 

Israel's desires are becoming less relevant over time. The shape of tomorrow's world would be better without it.

 

This is interesting considering Darfur:

"The United States also supported efforts to negotiations under the chairmanship of the Arab League."
Google translated link

They should feel more betrayed by the UN, which was prevented from acting in Darfur by the Arab League's Chinese veto, not NATO.

China? {do you ever pay attention to the news?}

"Russia and China blocked a statement proposed by Britain, France, Germany and Portugal that would have condemned the violence, which has led to hundreds of dead, and backed calls for an independent investigation." http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...h-party-crumbles/story-e6frg6so-1226045986729

"Syria Buying $1 billion in Russian Weapons"
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/syria-buying-mig31s-mig35s-for-1-billion-03391/

"Syrian president, Chinese military official hold talks on ties" http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90776/90883/7192499.html

They should feel betrayed by the Russians and the Chinese.

I was on the USS Coral Sea when I walked into the compartment and some guys were saying we were going to the Med for war under Jimmy Cotter Pin against Libya; some crap going on with regard to territorial waters... Like, (*)(*)(*)(*), that was a long time ago... I remember this one guy with a big smile saying we would get more pay, and one old Vietnam patrol boat veteran with two stripes chiming in about how bad war is and giving us a reality check before I had a chance to go all hawkish. I find it hard to imagine living under Jimmy Carter's regime for as many years as these Arab peoples have lived under their tyrants.

Those protesters "feeling ignored/betrayed/deserted by Nato" seem to me to be saying Bush was right to take down Saddam, and the Democrats who run NATO like Obama are weak in their loose associations, whether they mean it or not.

Pan Am Flight 103 is the biggest link to an attack on a NATO member; there simply is not much else to link Libya to NATO.

Unless some link to an attack on a NATO member can be found to link Syria's regime to NATO, considering the US role in NATO, the Syrian Arab Spring's id must in a twisted way make Bush the Father of the Arab Spring.

They should be saying:

"Where is the UN, where are those that oppose tyrant lovers like moon?"

 

The Arab League has been very busy digging water wells in Darfur and building clinics, because everywhere except in the West , this is perceived as a water war.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/weekinreview/22polgreen.html

Yeah, they are in the East. (*)(*)(*)(*) Yankees too.

Got anything else to say?

 

The Arabs are digging water wells NOT discussing it.. Desertification can be turned around... with care.

http://www.politicalforum.com/envir...rsing-desertification-livestock-zimbabwe.html

Reversing desertification with livestock in Zimbabwe

 

I do not see how overgrazing in Zimbabwe is related to drought in Darfur. Or how a topic asking if there another military power which could do the task in Syria, such as asking if China wants to oust their friend, is related to water.

I do not think Darfur's water problem is the primary result of overgrazing, but that belongs in your other topic.

Without a UN bailiff, that China already blocked, an ICC warrant to arrest Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir is a joke:
http://www.icc-cpi.int/Menus/ICC/Situations+and+Cases/Situations/Situation+ICC+0205/

China and the Arab League's consistent support for keeping dictators and war criminals in power is on topic because of the first post's "China?" and the Arab League's "Saudi Arabia?"

Arabs digging wells and building clinics is not on topic. Until the majority of the Arab League is free of their kings and other tyrants...it is ridiculous for US to think "negotiations under the chairmanship of the Arab League" would do squat with regard to the Arab Spring.

If an ICC arrest warrant for Bashar al-Assad was somehow issued, for crimes against his own people, it is clear without the UN nothing that makes sense under international law could be done about it.

Tell me something. Why do you feel the need to pop up at my turning of the Arab League Jack in the Box crank, and attacking the West with your Arabs walking the walk and talking the talk in digging wells? Boston discovered the lake...wow, wonder why they were there?

 

Zimbabwe has suffered drought and increasing desertification since 1982.......

In Darfur.. subsistence farmers compete with herders for water ..

 

Still NASA like brain children Arabs at Boston University mapping lakes in the Sudan is off topic:

http://www.gsafweb.org/TrusteeBios/faroukel-baz.html

And Rummy with Saddam like pictures of al...Arabs sitting with people indited for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and three counts of genocide has nothing to do with science.

http://www.gsafweb.org/CurrentEvents/1000wellsfordarf.html

Like I pointed out previously my Father Algebra book has an Arab riding a camel on the cover, so there is no reason to think that if I say, "Arab" I am against Arab Scientists at NASA or Boston.

The decade old Atlanta 96 Rock joke about asking who is the president of Zimbabwe because it rhymes is also off topic. So is the water projects of the Atlanta Coke company in Africa. The African American population of Atlanta is off topic too; it has nothing to do with New Coke reality of the Cuban president wanting to end the Cuba Sugar Cane contract. Even White People drink Coke and support African water projects.

Please, let's deal with the fact that your Arab League is made up of pukes, and no amount of wells they dig can make up for their crimes.

Let's deal with the irrefutable fact that Syrians blaming NATO and not the real responsible ones such as the Arab League, and China, and Russia for not taking down just one of many of their butt buddy war criminals is on topic.

 

I think that it is interesting that of all people, they want Nato to help them. They don't want Israeli aid, Turkish aid, Russian aid, Chinese aid, Iranian aid, even Saudi aid, or even US, but rather Nato aid. Nato thus seems to be the entity which people trust the most in such instances. People seem to call Nato for help because it seems to be the only entity which will listen to and act on such requests.

 

That is an interesting thing, but explainable because the UN is mostly dysfunctional in carrying out its purposes and principles, like with the area of Yugoslavia; the endless Palestinian-Israeli issue is one of those areas, and probably why Syria is off the NATO radar.

I think that the treaty is worth reading:

"The Parties to this Treaty reaffirm their faith in the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all governments.

They are determined to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilisation of their peoples, founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law.

They seek to promote stability and well-being in the North Atlantic area.

They are resolved to unite their efforts for collective defence and for the preservation of peace and security." http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/nato.asp

Article 5 mentions the Mediterranean Sea and Article 6 Turkey, and the treaty says up front "They seek to promote stability and well-being in the North Atlantic area." That does seem to put Libya in the sphere, any Mediterranean Sea country and maybe even any country bordering Turkey, where conflict might threaten their well being...

I at first did not understand Yugoslavia, because I felt it was a UN matter, but later came to feel Clinton was right, although the 213 to 213 vote in our Congress did seem to me to not be endorsing the war. I did not see how Libya fit, for the same reasons of the War Powers Act, and because most of NATO refused the use of their airspace when Reagan hit Libya for the Pan Am Flight 103 thing, but things change:

"On 22 February 2011 during the Libyan protests, the ex Minister of Justice Mustafa Mohamed Abud Al Jeleil stated in an interview with the Swedish newspaper Expressen that Muammar al-Gaddafi had personally ordered the bombing." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103#Claims_of_responsibility

It would seem really hypocritical to go after Syria without forcing the issue in Palestine though. The Israeli and Palestinian State issue probably has been the biggest issue effecting the "stability and well-being in the North Atlantic area," decades of terrorist attacks against many members of NATO, especially considering that our biggest complaint against Libya was directly related to that issue.

I hate for every (*)(*)(*)(*) topic to be about Israel, but when I strip away any bias which I have to admit I have in favor of Israel, in all honesty I think this issue is related to Libya and why Syrians might seem confused or just being cheeky.

If we were to use NATO in Syria, it would look really weird not to use NATO to force stability in Palestine. Getting democracy in the Arab countries, which the lack of has had the biggest impact on the issue of Palestine, would force NATO's hand there; Israel is always saying they are "like, gag with a spoon" the only democracy in the region, make it untrue and they lose a major talking point. In a way, even knowing that a large contingent of Arabs just want Israel destroyed, probably even yourself, it might be in all of NATO's best interests to seriously think about, "why not Syria?"

It is a rather touchy topic, because of Palestine, but certainly worthy of a discussion. We should not go to Syria to help the demonstrators feel better, it would have to be a well thought out mission. The ultimate goal of which would have to include a Palestinian State and an end to decades of conflict in the Mediterranean Sea.

One more thing, and not that I believe in such stuff, except that man makes prophecy and knowing it there could be a subliminal and direct desire to bring it about, but I will mention it; although I once got moderator action for it at DP in a topic on the Great Seal of Obamaland started by Tashah. If the NORTH Atlantic Treaty Organization did go to Syria, under the Obamanation, be warned that if Israel becomes an issue and any threat to them emerges, as in Gog and Magog, he more easily becomes the Obamanation of Desolation which some would believe is foretold. Turkey being a part of NATO, and in some respects fitting the map on page 144 of Hal Lindsey's "The Late Great Planet Earth," (1970 by Zondervan Publishing House Grand Rapids, Michigan) and considering it says on page 48, "Shortly after the restoration of the Jews in the land of Israel, and incredible enemy will arise to its 'uttermost north.' This enemy will be composed of one great nation which will gather around it a number of allies. It is this 'Northern Confederacy' that is destined to plunge the world into its final great war which Christ will return to end." One cannot ignore the fact that the Bible and Koran are intimately linked in some of these ideas or prophecy things, just listen to Iran, and there is no need to quote the verse from the Hamas Charter. {hopefully people's eyes, or religious nuts eyes will glass over and they will miss this post}

I really would not want this topic to turn into a rehashing of all of the Israel stuff, or get into religion, the rights of Israel to exist crap, Koran and MoHamMad a false prophet, it would ruin it. Still, that conflict is related to Syria and should not be ignored.

 

Why would Israel be the least bit concerned about Israel or vice versa?

BTW.. Hal Lindsey is a charlatan and a scofield heretic..