Russians & Assad Regime deliberately bombed schools and hospitals in Syria

Germany and the Soviet Union invaded Poland. Funny how you left that part out.

Yet Britain and France only declared war on Germany.

 

The good is Assad who is protecting the minorities from the terrorists. There is a genocide of Christians going on. Three hundred are being killed every day, and most in Syria. This doesn't mean that Assad's soldiers who have seen their families and friends killed by the terrorists will not retaliate on them. Of course they will - and harshly. This is why the Russian army went into Douma instead of the Syrians.

Are you saying that if foreign terrorists were sent into our country to impose their own laws and institutions on the American people, that it's a civil war? I beg to differ:

Civil War - A war between the citizens of the same country.

 

Irrelevant. I don't think Britain and France had the ability to wage war on the Soviets as well.

In life you've got to pick your battles.

 

Why is it irrelevant?

They didn't have the ability to wage war on the Germans either.

So how did they decide which battle to fight? By flipping a coin?

 

various factors

 

A weak answer, even for you.

 

Fine. In short it is wise to choose battles small enough to win but big enough to matter.

Satisfied?

 

Not a rebellion against Assad, it started as protests during the Arab Spring. There was shooting by snipers, but they were probably bought in from another country to demonize Assad, the way they were brought into Ukraine to demonize Yanukovich. They came from Georgia.

Hey Mandalus, how about some reality:

Kerry said he wouldn't accept the election in Syria as long as Assad is running because he knew the Syrians would vote for him. Later on when the election was held, Kerry said he wouldn't accept it because there was a war going on.

But guess what Mandalus, there was also a war going on in Ukraine and Kerry accepted that election even though anyone representing the East and South of Ukraine were thrown in trash cans and under threat not to run. If you google, you can find the photos.

If you get on to 4:00 on the following video, you can listen to what the American observers have to say about the election in Syria. They were there Mandelus:



Here are the celebrations in Syria when Assad won. You can see some Sunni women in head dressings, proving that it wasn't only the Christians, Alawites, Shias and other minorities that want Assad's secular society. Once the Sunnis realized that the foreign jihadists/terrorists in Syria wanted to impose sharia law on them, they all rejoined Assad's army. The majority of Assad's soldiers are Sunnis.

The reason the Syrian people were having these massive celebrations, was to let the world know, not to believe anything coming out of our propaganda networks.

Oh, then the Syria people should support the leaders that are chopping their heads off? Interesting!

This is about the only intelligent thing you wrote.
​

​

 

Have to admit the first thing that came to my mind were those Gas attacks.

 

Putin believes in working with all sides to maintain the peace regardless of the ideology. So there is no good or bad - unless of course Russia is threatened.

 

Germany and Poland both invaded Czechoslovakia exactly a year before Germany marched into Poland. Three weeks later, the Soviet Union marched into former Poland since Germany had already conquered them. They wanted a buffer from their historical border. Funny how you left that part out.

 

What Russia gained in 'international opprobrium" (meaning here the disapproval of the dominant forces in world affairs) from its intervention in Syria, in the long run, would have paled in comparison to what Russia could have gained by earning the trust of the people in the region -- and marking itself as a genuinely principled power. Running around trying to win favor from those who preside over the existing international system is not going to carve out for Russia any place but as a glorified sidekick. And one that those same forces will one day come to focus on with even greater attention and vigor.

I will be blunt: the problem with Russia is that, despite having pretty much everything to be great, it lacks the most important ingredient of all: a sense of genuine self-confidence and belief in what it needs to be doing in this world. The Russians have a history of feeling slighted by the West, treated as something less, making the Russians ultimately yearn for an acceptance from the West that is in fact not all that valuable as it seems. This has bred in Russia an insecurity that is doubly dangerous because the Russians in reality have little to be insecure about. It also makes Russia ultimately unable to serve as a leader on any global scale. The best they can manage with this mindset is what they had when oil prices where high and they were cashing in on it.

But if the Russians, instead, could come up with a rather clear-cut, but universally appealing, ideology which took the best from the West and left out the worst (instead of sometimes seeming to pick up the worst and adding some spices along the way), they would be the one who could rightly chart the course of history in the coming decades. Russia, compared to any other country on earth, lacks nothing except a sense of what it needs to be doing. Being the protector of the larger Eastern orthodox church, while trying to make deals and a buck here or there, or whatever else it is that passes as ideology in Russia these days, isn't going to cut it.

 

I'll be blunt, at least they don't have leaders who chant 'death to america' and spend all their income supporting terrorism. Iranians don't have the moral high ground to be speaking about Russian's ideologies.

 

Sure. everyone believes that I'm sure....

 

And it’s funny how you left out a part about Ribbentrop-Molotov pact.

 

Seems you took your opinion of Russia out of a Western playbook. It's totally off.

Europeans have always equated Russia's respect and friendliness towards them as being a desire to gain their acceptance. How insulting! But then again, hubris has always been alive and well in Western Europe - even when they were bashing people's heads in. What Putin wants is an equal respect between nations - with no impositions of anyone's standards as being superior to another's. This though goes against the liberal and globalist one world order that's being imposed on the world by certain elites.
​

In an interview that aired on Sunday, Putin told the Rossiya-1 channel that Russia was “more than merely a country, but truly a distinct civilization.” Being “a multi-ethnic country with many traditions, cultures and faiths,” the nation has to maintain its status and power by nurturing modern tech, he said.
​

 

Same time as Americans responsible for bombing
Doctors Without Borders, well marked on American maps.

 

Ahem.

 

So? Poland taking a tiny, tiny province of Czechoslovakia in no way mitigates the main responsibility belonging to Germany.

 

How is your project to tie Russia to the neocon crusade against "Islam", and the attempt to feed into "Islamophobia" among the modern day Nazis in America and Israel, coming along? My guess is that it won't prove any more lasting, even if you could ink such a deal, than the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact proved to be.

Sure, in the short-run, you will get some spoils, not in Poland as was the case then, but certainly in Syria. But before you know it, you will see that those who tear up deals like the JCPOA signed by every major power in the world and backed by a UN resolution to boot , will have no trouble trashing any deals they ink with Russia when its time comes. And I am not sure the Russian winter will save Russia this time.

If Iran was going to be deterred by labels and accusations by the world's greatest sponsors of terrorism and lawlessness in international affairs, maybe we too would be asking these questions another Russian emigre suggested were being asked among Russians a few years back:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/12/opinion/maxim-trudolyubov-is-russia-the-new-iran.html?_r=0
Is Russia the New Iran?
.

I guess those "many Russians" decided to work with the devil, no doubt spurred in that enterprise by their own fifth column more devoted to Israel than 'mother Russia'! And, besides, it wasn't Iran that vacated its position but those who needed Iran to play that part. The same ones which will need Russia to play its part even more.

 

Hey Jeannette ... some News for you:

this election was, is and will always being nonsense and a propaganda issue of Assad regime. This was everything, but no election worth t becalled democratic election.
All what you show is only propaganda BS and nothing else. What dp these celebrating people show and proof? Nothing and this reality ...

The problem you have is that you miss trust the USA totally ... but believe every crap of the other side.

Please use logical thinking and tell me, how any election can be done serious in a country which is in civil war AND where over 1/3 of its territory was conquered by the IS at this time. Or to put in one simple qustion to disproof your clam about fair and correct elections: Could somene elect the IS / could someone living in IS territoty in Syria take part in election?
And I could ask countless more such questions which show clearly that the complete fairy tale of fair election is bullcrap!

And about Ukraine ... we both have here totally different positions ... even I agree that Crimea is Russian territory and that it is for me OK. You came and come here again with other nonsense of Nazis in Ukraine. Yes, there are Nazis ... but so what? On Russian side fight also Nazis and this is the same sort of fact.

 

Bullshit and again the same fairy tale about the good Assad protecting his minorities and blah blah blah. All nonsense!
Assad did a **** about protecting minorities because he took advantage of them.
If that is true, then you must also insult the mullahs in Iran as bad people, because the US claim the same BS on the Shah of Persia. Do you do that too?

Nice ... then I hope that you also condemn the use of Hezbollah on the part of the Assad regime ... because they are also considered to be terrorists and they are not Syrians, but Lebanese!

And what about Erdogan and Turkey? I always find it amazing how quickly you change the key compared to this bastard. When the Turks illegally shot down the Russian jet, you scolded him. But as soon as Erdogan began to cuddle with Putin, your criticism of Erdogan was silenced. and that is always the case with the Turks and Erdogan with you ... and Erdogan is demonstrably the main supporter of Al nusra (or as they are called again recently) and also of the insurgents against Assad ... far more and far more extensive than USA or anyone else!

 

OK ...
Certainly difficult to distinguish Al Qaeda and the factions ... but you should do it if you want to understand the connections properly. IS was also an ally of Al Qaeda in Iraq, and the United States has officially failed here. If another bomb exploded, etc., and it was not proven to be Shiites, it was always Al Qaeda in the US news and official statements by the military and politics under Bush and Obama. But the fact is that it was mostly IS back then and not Al Qaeda itself! Not making that difference was a huge mistake the US had made!

This alliance of al Qaeda and IS has not only ended for a very long time ... no ... both have been deadly enemies for many years. If ISIS captures any Al Qaeda fighters, it will be beheaded or snored in some bestial way like everyone else ... and vice versa, if Al Qaeda (or its offshoots like Al Nusra) captures any IS fighters, it happens the same.

 

On the Syrian presidential election, and more generally, on attitudes among the majority in Syria regarding Assad, you are wrong.

Of course, holding an election in the middle of a civil war is a challenge, especially when the folks you are fighting are threatening to shoot people who participate in the election. The fact that many of them still participated, even in rebel held areas, and many among Syria's large refugee population outside of Syria, along with those Syrians living in the parts of Syria that were controlled by Assad's forces, show that (at least at that point in time) the people of Syria (as shown even by Western polls taken at around the same time) preferred Assad to his enemies. That is an uncomfortable truth for those who plunged Syria in civil war and mayhem, but the fact remains that even with ALL the obstacles, more than 10.3 MILLION Syrian voted for Assad. A huge number for a country whose entire population even before the civil war was merely 23 million people, many too young to vote. In fact, counting those who voted for other candidates, 73% of Syria's age-eligible voters participated in those elections, sending a clear message to the deaf ears who pretended to speak for them without any mandate to back up their claims.

The Syrian elections were overseen by monitors from 30 countries, including the largest (at the time still) non-aligned democratic country in the world, namely India. Those monitors declared the election to have been free and fair. I take their word for it over those who have nothing to back up their claims.

You can find confirmation of all the facts and figures, and the information I gave about the election, below. Or you could simply ask one of the hundreds of thousands of refugees living in places like Lebanon, Malaysia, Armenia, Sweden and many other foreign countries that allowed these refugees to vote. Of course, those who pretend to favor democracy and the ballot box, in many other countries with Syrian refugees, refused to let them vote!! The US, UK, France and Germany in that list.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Syrian_presidential_election

 

No, about 2/3 are now Islamist, rest not.

I don't stick up for the rebels when I say that the rebellion against Assad is well reasoned.

Both are dictorship, isn't it?

And? It proofs nothing, because Assad preselected the candidates and confimred ... and as I wrote to Jeannete still ... over 1/3 of the country was under control of IS ... could people living there take part on election ... or was IS able to elect?

Nonsense ... ost people fled and those who stayed had no other chpoice as to cheer them as liberators otherwise they wpould be killed - fact!

Ehm ... Bulgaria and Romania took not part in Yugislavia civil war, isn't it? And they are unimportant, because they were ony willingful helpers to give their old weapons ... because in same manner were contracts for better, new and western military weapons done.

If you take a closer look at the history of the FSA, you will see that it originated from many groups. Not were or are any Islamists like Al Nusra & Co.