Sirija

[Lord Protector]

pozajmljeni komentar

Kad se dim bude razišao na bojištima islamskih zemalja ostaće duboko podeljena društva i osakaćene zemlje koje neće moći da vode nezavisnu spoljnu politiku i koje će biti podložne svakoj vrsti protiska ako pokušaju da naprave otklon od lokalnih i globalnih gospodara rata (Irak, Libija, Egipat, Sirija, Iran..). Klasična politika zavadi pa vladaj. Meni se čini da zbog toga izmiče zdravoj logici smisao događanja na Bliskom istoku. Demokratija, islamizam, diktatori, monarhije, republike, saveznici, protivnici, sve je vezano u neraskidivo klupko koje nema ni početka ni kraja. A to znači samo jedno:stvoren je kontrolisan haos. islamske zemlje će biti nasilno pacifikovane u željenom smeru i neće predstavljati pretnju interesima gospodara rata u sledećim decenijama. To je izgleda osnovni cilj kome je podređeno sve ostalo. Edited August 29, 2013 by slow

[Muwan]

U Ujedinjenom Kraljevstvu su laburisti su tražili uverljive dokaze kako bi podržali vojnu akciju, i evo šta su dobili od vlade odnosno obaveštajnog komiteta:1. Procenili smo i dali svoj sud na osnovu 1 izuzetne procene u kojoj je učestvovao 1 širok spektar procenjivača:

We have assessed previously that the Syrian regime used lethal CW on 14 occasions from 2012. This judgement was made with the highest possible level of certainty following an exhaustive review by the Joint Intelligence Organisation of intelligence reports plus diplomatic and open sources. We think that there have been other attacks although we do not have the same degree of confidence in the evidence. A clear pattern of regime use has therefore been established.Unlike previous attacks, the degree of open source reporting of CW use on 21 August has been considerable. As a result, there is little serious dispute that chemical attacks causing mass casualties on a larger scale than hitherto (including, we judge, at least 350 fatalities) took place. It is being claimed, including by the regime, that the attacks were either faked or undertaken by the Syrian Armed Opposition. We have tested this assertion using a wide range of intelligence and open sources, and invited HMG and outside experts to help us establish whether such a thing is possible. There is no credible intelligence or other evidence to substantiate the claims or the possession of CW by the opposition. The JIC has therefore concluded that there are no plausible alternative scenarios to regime responsibility.

2. Nije moguće da su pobunjenici izveli napad jer mi kažemo da nije moguće. Uz to nam neke informacije sa terena sugerišu umešanost režima. Jedno plus drugo znači da je veoma verovatno da je režim izveo napad.

A chemical attack occurred in Damascus on the morning of 21 August, resulting in at least 350 fatalities. It is not possible for the opposition to have carried out a CW attack on this scale. The regime has used CW on a smaller scale on at least 14 occasions in the past. There is some intelligence to suggest regime culpability in this attack. These factors make it highly likely that the Syrian regime was responsible.Extensive video footage attributed to the attack in eastern Damascus (which we assess would be very difficult to falsify) is consistent with the use of a nerve agent, such as sarin, and is not consistent with the use of blister or riot control agents. There is no obvious political or military trigger for regime use of CW on an apparently larger scale now, particularly given the current presence in Syria of the UN investigation team. Permission to authorise CW has probably been delegated by President Asad to senior regime commanders, such as [*], but any deliberate change in the scale and nature of use would require his authorisation.There is no credible evidence that any opposition group has used CW. A number continue to seek a CW capability, but none currently has the capability to conduct a CW attack on this scale.

Summa sumarum, nula imena, nula prezimena, nula materijalnih dokaza, nulta faktografija, sve počiva na: "Verujte nam na reč da smo sproveli 1 široku analizu i zaključili da je režim odgovoran".I kao bonus evo vladinog dopisa koji objašnjava pravnu utemeljenost vojne akcije:

If action in the Security Council is blocked, the UK would still be permitted under international law to take exceptional measures in order to alleviate the scale of the overwhelming humanitarian catastrophe in Syria by deterring and disrupting the further use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime. Such a legal basis is available, under the doctrine of humanitarian intervention, provided three conditions are met:(i) there is convincing evidence, generally accepted by the international community as a whole, of extreme humanitarian distress on a large scale, requiring immediate and urgent relief;(ii) it must be objectively clear that there is no practicable alternative to the use of force if lives are to be saved; and(iii) the proposed use of force must be necessary and proportionate to the aim of relief of humanitarian need and must be strictly limited in time and scope to this aim (i.e. the minimum necessary to achieve that end and for no other purpose).All three conditions would clearly be met in this case: (i) The Syrian regime has been killing its people for two years, with reported deaths now over 100,000 and refugees at nearly 2 million. The large-scale use of chemical weapons by the regime in a heavily populated area on 21 August 2013 is a war crime and perhaps the most egregious single incident of the conflict. Given the Syrian regime’s pattern of use of chemical weapons over several months, it is likely that the regime will seek to use such weapons again. It is also likely to continue frustrating the efforts of the United Nations to establish exactly what has happened. Renewed attacks using chemical weapons by the Syrianregime would cause further suffering and loss of civilian lives, and would lead to displacement of the civilian population on a large scale and in hostile conditions.(ii) Previous attempts by the UK and its international partners to secure a resolution of this conflict, end its associated humanitarian suffering and prevent the use of chemical weapons through meaningful action by the Security Council have been blocked over the last two years. If action in the Security Council is blocked again, no practicable alternative would remain to the use of force to deter and degrade the capacity for the further use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime.(iii) In these circumstances, and as an exceptional measure on grounds ofoverwhelming humanitarian necessity, military intervention to strike specific targets with the aim of deterring and disrupting further such attacks would be necessary and proportionate and therefore legally justifiable. Such an intervention would be directed exclusively to averting a humanitarian catastrophe, and the minimum judged necessary for that purpose.

Edit: za utehu je jedino to što unutar samih konzervativaca postoji solidan otpor ovome. Navodno čak 70 njih nije baš uvereno u vladinu argumentaciju. Edited August 29, 2013 by beowl

[Gandalf]

ocekivano.

[Caligula]

Kad se dim bude razišao ...

Upravo. Zapad sebi (misli da) pravi jos jedan dugi safe period koristeci sistemske slabosti ovih zemalja i produzavajuci do u nedogled nestabilnost. Ne vidim bilo kakav drugaciji motiv za ovo a da je koliko-toliko logican.

[Gandalf]

http://www.theonion....ng-to-be,33662/

So, What’s It Going To Be?By Bashar Al-AssadIf you don’t do anything about it, thousands of Syrians are going to die. If you do something about it, thousands of Syrians are going to die. Morally speaking, you’re on the hook for those deaths no matter how you look at it.So, it’s your move, America. What’s it going to be?I’ve looked at your options, and I’m going to be honest here, I feel for you. Not exactly an embarrassment of riches you’ve got to choose from, strategy-wise. I mean, my God, there are just so many variables to consider, so many possible paths to choose, each fraught with incredible peril, and each leading back to the very real, very likely possibility that no matter what you do it’s going to backfire in a big, big way. It’s a good old-fashioned mess, is what this is! And now, you have to make some sort of decision that you can live with.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Gandalf

[dillinger]

A to znači samo jedno:stvoren je kontrolisan haos. islamske zemlje će biti nasilno pacifikovane u željenom smeru i neće predstavljati pretnju interesima gospodara rata u sledećim decenijama. To je izgleda osnovni cilj kome je podređeno sve ostalo.

Pa sad, nije da i sami ne tvore tu realnost. Murdoch daje presek aktivnosti glavnog donatora:http://online.wsj.co...2583045962.html

A Veteran Saudi Power Player Works To Build Support to Topple Assad

The Saudis stepped up rebel support in early 2012, at first by joining forces with Qatar and the United Arab Emirates to fund what was then the main opposition group, the Syrian National Council. Saudi Arabia quickly soured on the effort because the Council wasn't buying arms with the money, diplomats said, and began to push for directly arming the insurgents. It also began to work with Qatar through a command center in Turkey to buy and distribute arms.

But tensions grew over which rebels to supply. Both Saudi and American officials worried Qatar and Turkey were directing weapons to the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood. Qatari and Turkish officials denied they favored certain rebel groups.

The Saudi king also was uncomfortable at sharing control with Qatar, a Persian Gulf rival. At a meeting to coordinate arms shipments last summer, Prince Bandar took a swipe at Qatar, a tiny nation with one of the region's largest broadcasters.

Qatar is "nothing but 300 people…and a TV channel," the Saudi prince yelled into a phone, according to a person familiar with the exchange. "That doesn't make a country." Saudi officials declined to comment on the exchange.

Edited August 29, 2013 by dillinger

[Gandalf]

1) ovo sto se desava u Siriji (Egiptu, Libanu, Tunisu, Libiji...) je pre svega sudar medju samim regionalnim igracima, gde postoje barem tri krupna bloka koji su u medjusobnom sukobu. a saveznistva su takticka i privremena.2) i bez vojne intervencije, desetine hiljada ljudi je vec ubijeno, a mnogo njih ce tek biti ubijeno. ili cemo ponovo, kao u slucaju Libije, da citamo kako je rat poceo vojnom intervencijom?

[Agni]

1) ovo sto se desava u Siriji (Egiptu, Libanu, Tunisu, Libiji...) je pre svega sudar medju samim regionalnim igracima, gde postoje barem tri krupna bloka koji su u medjusobnom sukobu. a saveznistva su takticka i privremena.

1. Iran, Asad, Hezbolah; 2. Turska, MB, FSA; 3 S. Arabija i ostale zalivske zemlje...?

[Gandalf]

1. Iran, Asad, Hezbolah; 2. Turska, Katar, MB, FSA; 3 S. Arabija, Izrael, i ostale zalivske zemlje.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Gandalf

[dillinger]

2) i bez vojne intervencije, desetine hiljada ljudi je vec ubijeno, a mnogo njih ce tek biti ubijeno. ili cemo ponovo, kao u slucaju Libije, da citamo kako je rat poceo vojnom intervencijom?

Death toll je već na šest cifara i niko to ne spori. Samo pojedinci, verovali vi ili ne, na temi izražavaju opravdanu bojazan da u vakuumu nakon toliko zazivanog pada Asada jedna etnička grupa u odmazdi ne doživi pravi pravcati genocid. To ovaj sukob odvaja i od libijskog (gde je sve više bilo u stilu diktator vs. narod, nego ovde) a naročito kosovskog koji je za proponente intervencije na zapadu vodilja: ovde se ne planira nikakav mirovni sporazum sa Asadom, a neće biti ni KFOR-a. Edited August 29, 2013 by dillinger

[Roger Sanchez]

U Iraku je već 2 godine široko otvoren put za genocid, ali za sad ježeve jebu samo krstjani. Ne kažem da bi jednako idilično™ bilo i u Shamu™, ali, just sayin'. Možda je to doduše zbog toga što je njima (Iračanima) ibn Saud komšo..

[Budja]

Guardian je preneo video jednog internet influensera™ koji tvrdi da je u pitanju lansiranje hemijskih punjenja od strane vlasti:http://brown-moses.b...ows-assads.htmlPosetioci su ga u komentarima prilično brutalno dezavuisali i čak izgradili kontraargument da je u pitanju FSA.Edit: evo i YouTube linka

Kameron briljira:

Mr Cameron has said he believes there is "compelling" evidence from the intelligence services and from publicly available material, including YouTube videos of the atrocity, that the regime carried out the attack.

Nego, cenim da LibDems idu ispod 10% na sledecim izborima.Nakon kredibliteta povodom student fees, principijelni stav povodom ratova je jedino sto im je ostalo (Libija je prosla kroz UN).Sada se vade na smehotresne pravne savete:

However, Downing Street has released a statement, based on the formal legal advice by the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, that states limited military strikes to deter future chemical weapons attacks would be in line with international law.

[Bane5]

Rodjo, u Iraki ginu i siiti (koju su vecina), ali i suniti koji su uvek spremni da svoje nezdovoljstvo usmere ka vecini.Eno juce je eksplodiralo vise od 10 auto bombi u sunitskim kvartovima Bagdada.Nekada je samo jedna bila vest, danas ni vise od 10 nije dovoljno da se to ozbiljnije isprati.

[Budja]

1) ovo sto se desava u Siriji (Egiptu, Libanu, Tunisu, Libiji...) je pre svega sudar medju samim regionalnim igracima, gde postoje barem tri krupna bloka koji su u medjusobnom sukobu. a saveznistva su takticka i privremena.2) i bez vojne intervencije, desetine hiljada ljudi je vec ubijeno, a mnogo njih ce tek biti ubijeno. ili cemo ponovo, kao u slucaju Libije, da citamo kako je rat poceo vojnom intervencijom?

Gandalfe, ozbiljan si covek.Cemu ovako tanak arguemt 2)?Mnogo ljudi jeste pobijeno, no kakav je to argument za vonju intervenciju? Apsolutni nikakav, ako se ne gleda kontekst.Ako prizivas moralni argument, i on je tanak, i vrlo cinican.

[April]

A to znači samo jedno:stvoren je kontrolisan haos. islamske zemlje će biti nasilno pacifikovane u željenom smeru i neće predstavljati pretnju interesima gospodara rata u sledećim decenijama.

Iz jednog tako kontrolisanog haosa rođena je Islamska džamahirija.Haos može kontrolisati samo i jedino snažna ideologija.