Al Qaeda leader backs Syrian revolt against Assad

[dipsydoodle]

(Reuters) - Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri, in a video recording posted on the Internet on Sunday, urged Syrians not to rely on the West or Arab governments in their uprising to topple President Bashar al-Assad.

In the eight-minute video, entitled "Onwards, Lions of Syria" and posted on an Islamist website, the Egyptian-born Zawahri also urged Muslims in Turkey, Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan to come to the aid of Syrian rebels confronting Assad's forces.

"Wounded Syria still bleeds day after day, while the butcher, son of the butcher Bashar bin Hafiz (Hafez al-Assad), is not deterred to stop," Zawahri, wearing his white turban and seated against a green curtain, said.

"But the resistance of our people in Syria despite all the pain, sacrifice and bloodshed escalates and grows," he added.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/02/12/uk-syria-zawarhi-idUKTRE81B05720120212

Al-Qaida chief urges outside help for Syria rebels.

BAGHDAD (AP) -- The head of al-Qaida is calling on Muslims across the Arab world and beyond to support rebels in Syria who are seeking to overthrow President Bashar Assad, and says they cannot depend on the West for help.

In a new videotaped statement, Ayman al-Zawahri calls on Muslims in Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey to join the uprising against Assad's "pernicious, cancerous regime."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ML_AL_QAIDA_SYRIA?SITE=NYNYP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[maddezmom]

1. that is an interesting development n/t

[Posteritatis]

12. Hardly a surprise; they've always hated baathists. (nt)

[CAPHAVOC]

2. NATO ...Hope they do not become the Al-Qaeda Air Force.

[harmonicon]

3. Too late. It already happened in Libya. nt.

[CAPHAVOC]

4. We oughta bail out of there not bail out Greece.

[pampango]

5. You either supported Gaddafi or you were with Al Queda, is that right?

Got to support those anti-terrorist dictators as part of the GWOT, don't we?

"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."

In the long run Al Queda will flourish in the face of poverty and repression. They haven't had a coherent response to the Arab Spring to date. Aspirations for democratic forms of government and citizen rights hasn't exactly been their calling card.

In the case of Syria they can support the uprising because it is a majority Sunni population ruled by a minority Shia dictator. That's really all that matters to them, not any desire for freedom or representative government.

[harmonicon]

6. No, I don't think that at all.

Don't think for a second though that NATO gives a rat's ass about freedom or representative government either. NATO was established to further the interests of capitalist regimes against communism. Overthrowing the Libya's socialist government was totally in line with NATO's stated mission.

Just think back to what the result was of us supporting anti-Soviet forces in Afghanistan. We're really at risk of doing the same in Syria. The enemy of our enemy is often not our friend.

[pampango]

7. NATO wouldn't have done a thing in Libya without UN approval. The same applies to Syria.

Russia and China allowed UN/NATO action in Libya and chose to block it in Syria. NATO and Europe/US in general has no appetite for military involvement in Syria, both because it would be much more difficult than in Libya and the consequences would be worse.

The Syrian people are on their own and the sooner they figure this out the better for them.

Libya's government was only socialist in the sense that the government/dictator owned everything. Dictators often love socialism, but not democratic socialism, because they own the government.

Juan Cole: The Dilemma over Syria

http://www.juancole.com/2012/02/the-dilemma-over-syria.html

"The first thing the (European) diplomat underlined is that there is no United Nations Security Council authorization for the use of force, so no European country will use force. It was a refreshing reminder that in Europe the UN Charter and international law is still taken seriously. In the US, mention of international law is usually greeted with gales of derision.

I gradually realized that if any semblance of the international rule of law were to be maintained, the international community could do nothing kinetic as long as Russia and China were running interference for the Baath regime in Syria. The logjam here is the Security Council, and its archaic veto privileges for the 5 permanent members, essentially the victors of WW II who still make policy for the whole world.

If you want practical action or even military intervention in Syria beyond financial and economic sanctions, there are only two ways to get it legitimately. That would be to find a way to pressure Russia and China to stop protecting Bashar al-Assad. The other possibility would be to find a way to abolish the one-country veto on the UNSC.]/i]

I remember my anger and despair, as a teenager, at the crushing of the Prague Spring by Soviet tanks in 1968. I feel the same way about Syria today. But in both cases, great power sphere of influence politics made it impossible to do anything practical about it. The hope lies only in the longer term. ... Syrian dissidents will just have to keep up a non-violent struggle for the truth that might go on for a while. If they can prevail non-violently, their revolution would immediately be more well-grounded and likely to succeed.

[harmonicon]

11. Syrian dissidents went past non-violence a very long time ago.

I'm all for trying to stop the violent oppression of non-violent protests, such as Prague in 1968. I'm not for choosing sides in foreign civil wars apart from in ideology or spirit. I think supporting armed conflict only serves to spread more violence in this world.

[jakeXT]

8. FSA & NTC/LIFG a replay of Mujahideen and KLA ?

Always the same script...

[agentS]

9. When even Al Qaeda doesn't like you,

then you've (Assad) got all kinds of problems.

[sofa king]

10. So I guess they're working for us, now...

... once again.

[bemildred]

13. OMG, we're on the same side as al Qaeda now!

[azurnoir]

14. oh my gosh so now we have to back Assad

cause AQ's against him so that must mean.............oh it's all so confusing who to hate ? we just don't know anymore