Russia says ISIS defeated in Syria.....Really?

Look at the timing and circumstances.. and the betrayal of Reagan by Ariel Sharon.

 

LOL, astan had its chance to become a "Soviet" state, nice spin, and BS. Astan never aspired to be a Soviet state, the Soviets just moved in back in 79 and tried to annex it, and basically got their butts kicked, and which subsequently destroyed their empire. That's why astan is called the graveyard of empires)).

 

от русского медведя: ot russkogo medvedya

 

And so, this gives support to the idea that most of these people trying to take assad down, are from the outside, not the inside of syria. And so we have been lied to, in coloring this as the syrian people waging a civil war against a brutal dictator, when in fact, this is not the truth. Which also means, this so called civil war was manufactured, by outsiders, SA, Qatar, Turkey, and the good old american CIA. And this would be typical tactics coming from the CIA. They are experts in such things, and have a history of it, and are very good at it. And of course there is no doubt at all that our foreign policy since 911 has been the policy laid out by PNAC, which many here will ignore or dismiss. Now how they can rationally dismiss it, ignore it, is the question. But when these people also deny living in a cause effect universe, I guess the dismissal comes with that?

 

Москва Moskva ночью noch'yu

 

In the wake of protests after the torture and incarceration of Syrian schoolboys 10,000 Sunni conscripts defected from the Syrian army.. Despots ALWAYS claim that its "outsiders".. Gadaffi did, Mubarak did..

However, Syria went into a downward spiral in 2005... Assad promised reforms.. In 2011 he announced a crackdown instead.. and the Syrians remember his father's brutality.

 

So, you choose to ignore the linked story?

That you have sunnis who supported assad, is damaging to your own opinon, and yet that is what the reporting said. It even gave the names of some of those sunnis.

But allow me to give you a teaspoon of reality and the way the world works. Any nation in the middle east which has both sunnis and shia, is ripe for ginning up what you saw in syria. Add some economic problems, as we also saw in syria, and other nations over there who want to get rid of assad, as well as the US, and you can generate what we have seen in syria. Especially when you can get outsiders, the radicals to join in, in their own self interests. If you do not think our own CIA was not working to bring this about, you are just too naive to be giving an opinion of much of anything, IMO. I would direct you to some books which would reveal the truths about our CIA as well as some of the missions they have run to take down the rulers of other nations, but since it would inform you, of things you do not want to believe, why waste my time? Being naive seems to serve your agenda, as it does with many people. I have read many things that you have written that demands being naive, and it serves your beliefs very well. I just cannot indulge in such things though.

What we have seen in Iraq, libya and syria, was guaranteed to happen, in some form or another. And all that is needed to see this and understand it, is knowledge of the neocon PNAC. For when this scheme was created by a neocon think tank, financed by our war industries. within that paper was also mentioned that in order to kick it off, put it into action, would require some huge event, which would justify getting it moving. That event happened on 911. It provided the reason to go into afghanistan, but not the other nations on the PNAC list. So, what happened, in order to justify taking down those other nations, on the list? Well, we now in hindsight can see that ruses were needed for some of them, and those ruses were provided, and consent was manufactured with the help of MSM. And the rest is just history.

And yet, you must totally ignore, and disregard all of this, especially PNAC. And then you can act like it is completely assad's fault in regards to syria, when it was a guarantee that the PNAC scheme was in force, ever since Bush Jr. and his neocon cabinet and that by hook or crook we would try, even if we had to use proxies, to take assad down. But by ignoring reality, you can believe something else. And do. But it turns you into a very willing naive person in the process. And disconnect you from the very reality in which you live. I think that is a very bad thing. Being disconnected and ignoring what is so obvious. You are not alone though, for many americans will not admit to our PNAC driven foreign policy, which allows those who do recognize reality, to make predictions, and to see them come true, or least an attempt to make them come true. And anyone like russia who might throw a rock in the gears of progress for PNAC become the great and evil enemy as portrayed by our gov't and MSM. But knowing the truth of this, allows one to understand why the collusion allegations were created, and why trump was castrated when it comes to working with russia in regards to radical islam. When the pieces fall into place, from being able to see reality, then also the lies and ruses make sense.

 

Some Sunnis supported Assad. .. most did not.. They are an oppressed majority in Syria.. Assad's father killed them by the tens of thousands.

Not beliefs.. FACTS.

Last census was 1960.. so these are the last official statistics available: 92.1% Muslims (4,053,349) including 75% Sunnis, 11% Alawis, 3% Druzes; 7.8% Christians (344,621) and 0.1% Jews (4,860). In the next census of 1970, the religion statistics were no longer mentioned.

The largest religious group in Syria is the Sunni Muslims which make up around 74% of the population, of whom about 80% are native Syrian Arabs, with the remainder being Kurds, Turkomans, Circassians, and Palestinians. ... In Al Hasakah, Sunnis form a majority, but most of them are Kurds rather than Arabs.
Religion in Syria - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Syria

 

I have been to Syria many times.. How about you?

 

This has nothing to do with anything, and once again fails. For when a biased and very agenda driven, being naive as to what reality is, goes anywhere, it does not leave this stuff at home. No one has to go anywhere, to get the facts and the truth, one just needs a press with journalistic standards. Which is why we invented the news to begin with.

So, for us to depend upon your brain, and ignore everything else, is not intelligence at all. And one must then question the brain which would use the tactic you always use. Given what I have read, coming from you, to date, red flags in great numbers have been raised. Especially when your beliefs in no way match what reality is, many times. And appear to be so naive, as to the world that we actually all live in. For no matter how many times you have been in the middle east, none of those visits contradict the fact that PNAC finally got the reason to be instituted, as well as nothing but observation telling us it was instituted, when it comes to iraq, syria, afghanistan and libya. Coincidences do not show up in such numbers and any astute, objective intellect recognizes this. And iran is on that list, as well as some other north african nations. So, watch what happens in the future with those nations, especially iran. Or rather you might be best to ignore them, in order that your own false beliefs remain intact.

 

Margot thinks her anecdotes about travel make her an authority on Middle Eastern affairs. She does not seem to understand how an anonymous internet forum works.

 

And I never mentioned any number, but just that the facts reveal some sunnis supported him, as well as most christians. And why should christians not support him? They were served well, or at least were in little danger from assad, which would not be the case when it comes to the radicals who went into syria to help take out assad, in their own self interests.

Taking down assad and his gov't was never a good idea, especially since we have seen what happened in libya and iraq. That we continue on with the PNAC scheme speaks for itself, and idiocy. We get it, you are pro SA and obviously pro sunni, even the poisonous Wahabism, and syria and assad were not friends of the saudis. Or qatar. So of course you for some reason want him removed and syria to join libya. I think this is insanity, as any reasonable person would think. If personal beliefs promote and support insanity...

 

The US had no control over what happened in Libya, Egypt or Syria. "Taking them down" suggests we did.

Qatar wanted a gas pipeline from South Pars across Syria to Turkey.. The Saudis never needed one. They have East -West to Yanbu for two decades.

 

Well granted, she would know some things which only living there might reveal. I even gave her a link a couple times to a muslim who grew up in SA, and who would disagree with many things she has said and promoted on this forum. That his own life experience, growing up there and living there until as adult, at which time he and his family moved to canada, with him being on the "inside" and telling us how that culture really is, when these people talk to one another, out of distance of western ears, she would never accept, due to it not being her own personal experience. She seems to reject any ideas which would be voiced in private among muslims, when they negate her own beliefs. So, given this, it has colored my opinion of anything which she tells us. For to me it is analogous to a manufactured consent and belief, which one might get from our propaganda outlets, MSM, which is used to misinform americans for various reasons whether partisan or in support of what the CIA wants us to believe, especially the disinfo and lies which they indulge in, more than telling us the truth.

And that she somehow thinks that living there would trump real deal journalism, and that we should believe her over genuine journalism is just asking too much of any mind, except a mind which wants to be told what to think. If we can find a genuine journalist, who practices standards, they are much more credible than Margot. Given the tendency of what many muslims will do in the presence of westerners. As was revealed by that muslim who knows muslims and the real SA. And how that world operates. I learned more from this muslim than I ever learned from Margot, and much of what she has said has been contradicted by this muslim. Yes, insiders are very valuable when it comes to the middle east and Islam. And it is even more credible when such a muslim left islam, and became an atheist, for he will no longer protect islam, and will be honest. BTW, if he were ever to return to SA, his life would not be worth 2 cents. For spilling the beans on SA and their form of Islam makes him an enemy, and plus apostasy is not something such Islam will ever tolerate.

 

LOL. Believe what you must, but the astute people who are connected with reality think your belief is absurd, and requires a willing ignorance of the world, and the US, in order for you to keep your current state of mind.

I never mentioned egypt. I mentioned those nations on PNAC's list of nations to be dealt with. If you want to ignore that list and what happened in those nations, which you do, then go ahead. And believe in a host of coincidences, as mere coincidence. And ignore what we had to do in order to pull this neocon scheme off. A Sherlock Holmes you are not. If such a character was ever needed to see what is obvious and overt. On that list was also russia, which of course we could not invade, due to MAD. And yet what have we seen in regards to US and Russian relations? Well, right out of the pages of PNAC is all. Another coincidence of course. Which would explain much in regards to what happened to trump when he wanted to work with russia on fighting radical islam. PNAC forbids what trump wanted to do, for we do not want to normalize relations with russia, given our foreign policy is now controlled by PNAC. If and when you ever see a move away from PNAC, only then will we know that it is no longer driving our foreign policy. But so far, there has been no move away, except if you consider the nuke agreement with iran, which we will find a way out of that, sooner or later. By another ruse of course. By more lies.

What is so absurd, is we can read those PNAC paper, and then we can look at what we have done since 911, and that lays it out, what is going on. And yet to just ignore that is what is astounding. We are told what we are gonna do, and then when we do it, time after time, you are sitting there, and will not believe it. Well, that is perhaps because much of what you have said, would be shown to be naive, and wrong, and that is a problem for you. Human nature. But also it allows for you to remain in your delusion. Which is not so good.

 

Afghanistan is a poor land with poor people. They could never afford a state and an army. But they are a crossroads of the world and every great power wants to control this spot. There are few of such places all over the world and everyone of them can be called 'graveyard of empires' for every empire sooner or later collapses and leaves the next empire to control the Afghanistan.

USSR never tried to annex the teriitory. Annexation and henocide would be an easy task, but USSR didn't have such an aim expecially having so many southern muslim republics. USSR invested into the economy of Afghanistan and almost succeeded to make it self-sufficient. However this project failed and chance was not used. Now the 'astans' are being killed at weddings and can only dream of getting a job at drugs plantation... In times of soviet 'occupation' Afghanistan was secular, had some industries and modern life. After 'occupation' it has nothing. So I, being anti-communist, still think that this was an unused chance for Afghanistan rather than heroic battle for freedom. The combatants there were terrorists... They used American weapons to perform hidden assaults provoking soviet military and terrorizing the population who worked with soviet military. Their success led to poverty of Afghanistan... and the presence of the US at the 'graveyard of empires'.

 

So the Soviets assisted their economy by invading with about 200k plus troops" and bust the pace up? LOL, you're delusional, and your statement suggests that, any other fairy tales you wish to add feel free...I enjoy the odd fiction story

 

There is no secret in motivation of USSR. It was not economical. In was purely political.
We need to start with the era when GB was really Great. Once it started to roll down from the top they left a lot of conflicts behind them in the former colonies. Classics included making a conflict between muslim and non-muslim groups of people in formerly the same country. It was not American invention. In was british. USSR had to face a kind of ISIS right after revolution. The civil war ended only after the southern republics were taken from the power of semi-nomadic bands. BTW they were not destroyed completely and some of them were even used by Hitler against the USSR. ISIS started much before the 21st century.
Afghanistan on the way of establishing the state had two political groups (major ones). leftists and muslims. After the revolution they started to have their kind of civil war and the USA started to back the 'peaceful rebels' who of course were not the leftists. If the USSR didn't step in it would have to face Al Qayeda infiltrating its southern republics. It would be much worse than it is happening now in EU or the US. Besides, other allies of the USSR would think twice on relying for this alliance.
The reasons were not economical. The reasons were purely political. If Afghanistan was left by the world as it was they would probably have a chance for development. If the world helped them, they could grow quite rapidly with their favourable location. But the world (including both the USA and the USSR) turned it into battlefield and that is why it is now what it is.
The USSR had only losses because of this intervention. It was used to reason different sanctions of the westerners and it was also seen as an aggression from all the muslim states of Middle East region.

This is a well-known and quite obvious fact. If this is a fairy tale then maybe you could tell me what were the spoils of war for the USSR to grab Afghanistan and incorporate it as a soviet republic? I wonder if you have ever given a single thought about obviously propagandist idea that USSR wanted to earn on Afghanistan. Guess you just took this idea, because you liked it and liked it because of anti-communist propaganda in the US.

 

I agree with so much of this but fundamentally disagree that Afghanistan can become an economically successful country.

I don't think the level of trade that it's natural resources can provide can create enough surplus to sustain a road or rail system in difficult terrain.
I don't think it's developable.
I think it is what it is and is as developed as it ever will be.

Like how Greece will never be as well developed as Germany. Like how Libya will never be as well developed as California.

 

Syria, Egypt and Libya were extremely fragile and they responded to the events in Tunisia that set off the Arab Spring. Very different from Afghanistan .. and circumstances in Afghanistan are quite different from Iran.

For whatever reason you seem to think that the CIA is behind it all. However, the US would have been happy if there had been no Arab Spring and the status quo had been maintained.

Meanwhile, the UN has evidence of Iranian weapons being used in Yemen and that will be produced in the coming week.

There are some spokesmen that you should listen to... among them Abdel Jubeir...

So you are a history teacher.. Is your area of expertise the Middle East?

The PNAC turned out to be the most stupid bunch of neocons.. People who actually no nothing at all about the Middle East or the oil business.

Remember how those fools said that the US could pay for the war in Iraq with Iraqi oil? You should have howled with laughter. The oil business HATES a war zone.

 

Mmmm... OK. The US starts the project with the oil and gas cracking, builds infrastructure for Chinese market, invests into PR and buys some eastern European politicians to promote this expensive and devastating for ecology method of extraction. Then the main oil (and gas) producers drop the price to make this expensive method not profitable, then the main exporters starts to have dying leaders and sort of revolutions, sanctions, at least major terrorist attacks and finally to crown it all the middle point for all the possible projects of exporting mid eastern oil and gas has a democratic revolution, which is used by ISIS and revealed in western media only once they started to eat the bodies, ruin the world wonders etc. Correct me if the facts or timeline is somewhat wrong. Please. If not I can easily trace how all these wars help the USA oil companies to gain positions in Chinese and European markets. Besides, war is a perfect time for business. No government control (how could possibly Assad control the oil extractors which operated under ISIS?), extremely cheap labor and the direct costs (don't you think that ISIS never organized any labor Unions and invested into medicine and safety?). I can hardly imagine any ultra-democratic, non-corrupt and advanced political regime which is any better than operating in a country under the war, civil war or terrorist war.

 

I have no idea what you are talking about. Syrian oil production peaked 25 years ago.. Their infrastructure is crap.. as is the quality of their oil.. Its heavy and so sour that its only fit for asphalt.

 

I was talking about 'chances'. Libya used to be quite a developed state. It had medical care, water supplies, projects to inhabit the desert etc. Democracy could have come there the regular way as any other country. Historically civilization can appear in Italian stony soils or in sands of Baghdad, in the estuary of a small river on an island away from the European mainland, in cold Baltic waters next to the river which floods away everything every 10-20 years. There need to be the will, talent and labour of the people who need only a chance for that. Afghanistan didn't have any for centuries. So i don't know if it was, is or will be possible.

 

My comment covered the period of a last decade and the space around the globe. Your argument is about the quality of Syrian oil... But as long as the question was about the logics and possibility to see someone's profit in a chain of events - I take it as answer. Thank you.