Nato members could act against Syria without UN mandate
Source: Guardian
Barack Obama is unlikely to have much trouble mustering a Nato coalition of the willing if Washington opts for military intervention in Syria in response to the alleged chemical weapons atrocities by the Assad regime.
There is, however, no prospect of a UN mandate for international military action over Syria with the Kremlin, enraged at what it saw as abuse of a UN mandate to topple Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, certain to keep wielding its veto.
Turkey, which accounts for Nato's second largest army after the US, and which is on the frontline with Syria, bearing the brunt of the massive refugee crisis, is already a key conduit for arms supplies to, and a safe haven for, the sundry groups of fighters at war with Damascus.
It has been the loudest critic of the Assad regime, clamouring for the west to do more. In any international coalition Turkey would be likely to play a key role with a potential impact on the country's own ethnic balance, especially the relations between the Sunni Muslim majority and the sizeable Alevi minority concentrated in the south near the Syrian border
Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/25/syria-un-mandate-nato-military-action
Catherina
(35,568 posts)just swoop in there and finish off what we started.
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)which they are talking about recalling to debate the subject now. Hopefully it wouldn't pass. If it did it would at least further ensure that the Conservatives got voted out in our next elections and quite possibly change the political landscape elsewhere as when elections occurred - some should take care of what they wish.
'nuff said.
and goodnight.
Mr_Jefferson_24
(8,559 posts).... to like being hampered by such things as established procedure or the rule of law.
The decision to upend Assad, as with Hussein and Gaddafi, has clearly already been made well in advance of the false flag chemical weapons attack pretext they're going to use as justification.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)I'm sorry, but there is no way WWIII is going to break out over Syria.....unless, perhaps, something akin to stuff you'd hear on the Alex Jones Show, etc. was going on behind the scenes first.....which is kinda doubtful.
Also, you do realize that the person who posted this video on YouTube seems to be a bit of a nutjob, right? Just sayin'.
Mr_Jefferson_24
(8,559 posts)... the future shows you to be right about WWIII being an unlikely consequence of US foreign policy. However, I think historical events would tend to suggest you're quite mistaken.
As to your suggestion that the StormCloudsGathering videos are created by someone who seems like a nutjob, I strongly disagree.
Please pay close attention as you view this video and tell me precisely what leads you to say he "seems to be a bit of a nutjob."
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)However, I think historical events would tend to suggest you're quite mistaken.
Which ones? If you're going to say World War I, forget it. There was no general unawareness that something was coming, outside of maybe the U.S.; tensions had been building up for years and things could very well have gone lopsided as much as a full decade before they did. And if you're going to bring up other Middle East wars, I can tell you that every single one of these wars, with maybe the exception of '48, all had a real chance of turning into WWIII, especially Yom Kippur. But even in this era of constant tension, it never went that far. And now that the Cold War has been over for 20 years now, it's practically next to impossible now, unless a Mussolini or Hitler-like dictator were to take over Russia or something(which isn't likely).
Mr_Jefferson_24
(8,559 posts)... it doesn't sound like you even watched these videos.
Go back to my post #6 and advance to 4:04. An amnesia and/or ignorance of history on the part of the citizenry is in part what makes prosecuting these illegal wars so easy for the PTB.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)Admittedly, there was SOME decent info, but mixed with crap.....not to mention the "ingsoc" reference at around 1:15 gave away the schtick.....
Mr_Jefferson_24
(8,559 posts)... accepting the reality of how truly bad things have become and how monstrous and black-hearted the behind-the-scenes PTB who actually control the West really are. I was in denial for a while myself -- to be sure, these are very unsettling and disturbing truths.
In any case, thanks for the exchange AverageJoe, and take care. I'll let you have the last word here.
Snowfield
(46 posts)November 29, 2012 (LD) - "War on Syria: Gateway to WWIII" (118 pages) attempts to cover the intricacies of the West's methods of unconventional warfare and how they've manifested themselves over the last several years, finally miring Syria in a state of war. The book also looks at how the violence in Syria is just one part of a much larger geopolitical strategy, and where it may lead next.
"War on Syria" is a free e-book for reading, printing, translating, and sharing - your reading and sharing of this book is the greatest payback possible for the time and effort that has been put into it. If Syria cannot be saved, at least let what is happening to this nation serve as a warning and example to others around the world, still pending Western subjugation, regime change, and exploitation at the hands of the largest corporate-financier interests on Earth, and their myriad of institutions, NGOs, media fronts, and contractors.
I want to thank Nile Bowie (NileBowie.blogspot.com), a frequent contributor to the Land Destroyer Report, for his tireless effort and expediency in compiling, adding to, enhancing, and editing this work. I would also like to thank Eric Draitser of StopImperialism.com who also helped edit the work.
Below are several links where you can access the .PDF file. If you have any requests for document hosting sites you would like to see this work appear on, or have problems downloading the book, please contact me at cartalucci@gmail.com.
-Tony Cartalucci
Scribd: (no account necessary to read, but must have Scribd account to download) click here. http://www.scribd.com/doc/114889281/War-on-Syria-Cartalucci-Bowie2
Google Docs: (no account necessary to read, and no account necessary to download) click here. https://docs.google.com/open?id=0Bzf5hXPESLSdbTd0V2dIY3hvVGM
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)It is, sadly, a very flawed work filled with mis/dis-information & half-truths, even with the decent stuff in there(for example, they fail to mention the left/secular opposition to Al-Assad).
They also fail to make a distinction between the various factions of the CIA, nor do they adequately address the *confirmed* war crimes that Syria has committed, and Russia's aid of Syrian gov't war criminals
(Strangely, not much seems to be said about any WWIII scenarios, only that of a wider regional war.....which wouldn't count for anything.
KG
(28,751 posts)another_liberal
(8,821 posts)I'll bet you they will still expect the United States to bring most of the hardware, most of the manpower and, especially, most of the cash.
warrant46
(2,205 posts)When your coalition acts as the worlds policeman most of the time, and the last War is winding down, its time to make more $$$$ for the Industrialists.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)Response to bowens43 (Reply #7)
CJCRANE This message was self-deleted by its author.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Bonus points for having us play the evil empire when NATO members can do it themselves. And remember, we are still the BAD GUYS to most of them now.
We should stand down from this just like we should not got to war with Iran. But we have Neo-cons like McCain visiting a rebel fanction in Syria, already picking allies, saying he still wants to be president. He knows very well that Russia will never go for it.
But he can sing 'Bomb Iran' again. PNAC and its followers need to stop calling for more wars. He, the 'Christians First' guys like Rand and the End Timers with the Gog and Magog roadshow need to shuffle off the world stage now.
The right and left would jump on this conflict to impeach Obama, just like they did with Libya. The right will play 'wag the dog' like they did to Clinton on Kosovo and the left will call him Bush. But if he sees something that is doable, and believes it is the right thing for the long run, he will.
Also, I'm not saying it's not hell over there. But they don't want us there. We can't make them love each other. The poor people will suffer while the Masters of the Universe get fat. And I don't trust MSM, they were so gungho about Iraq.
NONE of the Syrians want us there. No one but Rand, McCain, Romney and the rest of the Neo-cons wants us in there. Paul has been framing this as a war to save Christians. Really?
Hoping these guys don't pull a stunt to get us into another war. I am ready to be educated on why some think this MUST be done by the USA. Just the humanitarian thing may be enough. But no one will satisfied by it, not Syria, the USA, Middle East or Europe. It would take a generation to come to some kind of conclusion, and I'd hate to see PNAC or the End Timers get their wishes.
Bosonic
(3,746 posts)#BREAKING Turkey says will join coalition against Syria even without UN consensus
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/371891501489348608
rolls nearer
Alamuti Lotus
(3,093 posts)none of these rogue states in NATO have any problem with committing acts of aggression in that, or any other, part of the world. There should be consequences for this prevailingly arrogant mindset and behavior, but I know enough about how the world works to not hold my breathe for this.
Snowfield
(46 posts)http://landdestroyer.blogspot.se/2013/08/defeated-nato-dangerously-desperate-in.html
August 25, 2013 - (Tony Cartalucci) As far back as 2007, it was a documented fact that the West, including the United States and its allies Saudi Arabia and Israel, conspired to use terrorists drawn from the ranks of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda in an attempt to overthrow the governments of Iran and Syria.
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his 2007 New Yorker article, "The Redirection," http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh?currentPage=all stated (emphasis added):
"To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabias government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda."
Starting in 2011, this conspiracy was catapulted into all out war - albeit behind the tenuous smokescreen of "pro-democracy activists" and the so-called "Free Syrian Army" fighting for "freedom" within and along Syria's borders.
Not only has this conspiracy been exposed, but it has categorically failed. The Syrian government has routed even the most dug-in terrorist proxies, making irreversible gains against a clearly depleted enemy. While the US continuously threatens to "arm the opposition," it is a fact that any and all weapons, cash, and support the US had, it has already sent over the last 3 years. This includes untold millions in cash, and literally thousands of tons of weaponry airlifted by the US and UK. The US and its regional allies have also scoured the global extremist networks they have built up over decades for every last fighter they could possible find - all to no avail.
There is nothing left except direct military intervention, which cannot be sold as helping an opposition now clearly exposed as being Al Qaeda. That means, the humanitarian intervention, "right to protect" (R2P) must be wiped clean of NATO's lies and crimes in Libya, and prepared for Syria. Only what exactly could the West use to justify an intervention against the Syrian government that is worse than what it and its proxies have already done to tens of thousands of Syrian civilians?
snip
----------------------------
U.S. Preps for Possible Cruise Missile Attack on Syrian Gov't Forces
http://www.activistpost.com/2013/08/us-positions-for-attack-on-syria.html
U.S. Positions For Attack On Syria
While President Barack Obama meets with his national security advisers early on Saturday morning to discuss the, at best, highly questionable nature of the recent Syrian chemical weapons attacks, the US Navy is repositioning itself in the Mediterranean as a preparatory move for future strikes against Syria.
As a result of the ridiculous Red Line talk which began in earnest last year, Obama and his puppet counterparts in Britain and France as well as the ever present Mad Dog of the Middle East, Israel, have repeated the threats of military action against Syrian on numerous occasions, most notably after reports of the Regimes use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people or the death squads also known as the Syrian rebels. Of course, in every single case, the evidence clearly suggests that it was the death squads, not Assad, who used the chemical agents against Syrian soldiers and innocent civilians. Likewise, the latest chemical weapons attack appears to be the handiwork of the death squads, with even mainstream experts questioning the veracity of the claims surrounding the Syrian governments culpability.
Regardless, the plan to attack Syria is moving forward.
On Friday, August 24, 2013, it was reported by a variety of mainstream sources that the US Navy has begun repositioning itself in the Mediterranean for the possibility of a military assault on Syria. An anonymous defense official has stated that the US Navy is expanding its presence in the Mediterranean from three destroyers to four.
Commenting on the move, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel stated ..............
warrant46
(2,205 posts)Old Union Guy
(738 posts)How can we miss you if you never went away?
fujiyama
(15,185 posts)I wonder what ever happened to Mr. "I hate dumb wars".
fujiyama
(15,185 posts)It wants its headlines back.
Deja Vu can give you whiplash.