So... Al Qaeda are now our friends in Syria? Cool!

[Rampion]

We have been told a fairy tale about a phantomatic organization called Al Qaeda, which leader hid in caves in Afghanistan, which supposedly organized 9/11 training their men with Microsoft Flight Simulator. Most of people in West bought that story, and pretty much everybody in high positions agreed Al Qaeda is evil and must be destroyed.

Making a long story short: the US military attacks Al Qaeda in Yemen and Pakistan, while gives them funds in Syria in the fight against Al Assad. Now it seems the US will strike Syria to help Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic fundamentalists against the Syrian secular regime, where religious freedom is guaranteed and any kind of political form of islamism is forbidden.

Seriously guys, WTF?

Anyhow, my call is the US will not have the balls to do a "real" war, sending occupying forces to the territory. Its pretty obvious to me they will just throw some tomahawks to show off. They know too well Hezbollah is very strong in Syria, they are heavily armed with Russian and Chinese weapons financed by Iran. This could be a new Vietnam (or Iraq), and they know it - they cannot afford that ATM.

[1715605498]

1715605498

[1715605498]

1715605498

[1715605498]

1715605498

[skull88]

That's right, for years they fight all those fundamentalists and than help them to overtake the most moderate Muslim they ever had there. Because we all know, the people there will be much better of with these rebels. Seems a bunch of really rational and loving people ready to build a free democratic country. These womens that enjoy free educations thanks to Assad will be so happy they finally can stay at home now.

I'm sure there is no hidden agenda, it is for the good of the people there.

[Rampion]

That's right, for years they fight all those fundamentalists and than help them to overtake the most moderate Muslim they ever had there. Because we all know, the people there will be much better of with these rebels. Seems a bunch of really rational and loving people ready to build a free democratic country. These womens that enjoy free educations thanks to Assad will be so happy they finally can stay at home now.

I'm sure there is no hidden agenda, it is for the good of the people there.

Yep, just as in Iraq, a country where women went uncovered and in skirts to the university, and that was just bombed back to the stone age.

And what about the destruction of the National Library, one of the most valuable in the world, which was the memory (now lost forever) of a 5,000 years old civilization... Wikipedia says those crazy Saddam nutjobs burnt it to destroy their secret archives which they hided between the clay tables written thousands of years ago in ancient cuneiform... Feels great that now civilization arrived to Iraq, Saddam is no longer a deadly threat to us, the good guys, and good Iraqui will finally be able to illustrate themselves and live in peace... God bless!

[tvbcof]

...
Anyhow, my call is the US will not have the balls to do a "real" war, sending occupying forces to the territory. Its pretty obvious to me they will just throw some tomahawks to show off. They know too well Hezbollah is very strong in Syria, they are heavily armed with Russian and Chinese weapons financed by Iran. This could be a new Vietnam (or Iraq), and they know it - they cannot afford that ATM.

O'bomber vs. al-Assad:

[hlynur]

I wouldn't say that Al-Qaeda in syria is funded by US. (perhaps more by accident because of the intransparency of the whole situation)

the rebellion forces in syria are split into several groups with different backgrounds:

according to an independent documentary i saw lately a lot of jihad fighters (most probably of Al-Qaeda) come to syria via the turkish border and can move freely within that border zone.
Supposedly these forces are financed by Saudi Arabians and turkey seems to be ok and its military takes no action against this.

Then there's the secularistic rebels that are financed by western governments and fight against assad not because of religious background but they just have enough of the dictatorship and nepotism of Assad Family representing a small minority, the alawites.

On top you have sunnites representing 70% of syrian society and a lot of other minorities (kurds, schiites, turkmen, palestenians, christians etc.).
Sunnites and every minority again have their own or allied forces.

now throw the interests of countries (USA, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Iran) and of islamic groups like lebanese hezbollah,palestenian hamas in the pot and you get a really strange brew.


besides that one thing is for sure though:

This is a great opportunity to get US military in action, spread the footage worldwide on the media and let john doe forget what's going on with snowden affair for some time.

[krach]

 hamas isnt in Syria. hezbollah got into it when there border was being used like the Turkish border. The EU and USA sell Quatar and Saudi Arabia weapons, they give them to the mercinaries in Syria. Some of the same weapons and mercinaries that were used in the Lybian "revolution" are in Syria. This is a traveling pack that is used by gulf monarchies to destablize any threat to them, mainly secular non-islamic goverments. The only thing that will stop the war is if pressure is put on Saudia Arabia to stop payrolling the mercinaries. This is not a civil war , this is a proxy war.

[hlynur]

hamas isnt in Syria. hezbollah got into it when there border was being used like the Turkish border. The EU and USA sell Quatar and Saudi Arabia weapons, they give them to the mercinaries in Syria. Some of the same weapons and mercinaries that were used in the Lybian "revolution" are in Syria. This is a traveling pack that is used by gulf monarchies to destablize any threat to them, mainly secular non-islamic goverments. The only thing that will stop the war is if pressure is put on Saudia Arabia to stop payrolling the mercinaries. This is not a civil war , this is a proxy war.

well sure it's a proxy war but imo also a civil war.
if a state lets its military force kill people because of their social affiliation to a certain ethnical group and minorities start taking sides in this conflict I don't know any other name for that.
i didn't mean that hamas forces are directly in syria but from what i know they are involved and support the rebellions and have divergent interests with hezbollah supporting the syrian military.
I don't think there will come a point in the near future where pressure is build on saudi-arabia.
A lot has to happen until western governments decide to put off their velvet gloves regarding gulf monarchies. (until they don't start massacring their own people)

[Rampion]

Didn't understand your last sentence. You mean USA is OK with its allies massacring "other" people, but not "their own people"?

I think I'm getting it wrong because is obvious nonsense. The USA didn't care much about Bahrein slaughtering its own citizens.

This is ONLY about the money. Human lives don't mean shit to those pulling the strings.

[hlynur]

Didn't understand your last sentence. You mean USA is OK with its allies massacring "other" people, but not "their own people"?

I think I'm getting it wrong because is obvious nonsense. The USA didn't care much about Bahrein slaughtering its own citizens.

This is ONLY about the money. Human lives don't mean shit to those pulling the strings.

no, i meant the gulf monarchies. as long as they don't kick over the traces and start seriously massacring their own people on a large scale US and western governments don't care too much about it
as long as they can make their money with supplies of weapons and observation-tech and it only streaks second pages instead of headlines in the massmedia at home (which could badly influence elections and innerpolitical sentiment).
eg gaddafi gambled too much and fought his last stand at some point only backed up by some mercenaries... assad is already turning this way.

[krach]

"well sure it's a proxy war but imo also a civil war.
if a state lets its military force kill people because of their social affiliation to a certain ethnical group and minorities start taking sides in this conflict I don't know any other name for that.
i didn't mean that hamas forces are directly in syria but from what i know they are involved and support the rebellions and have divergent interests with hezbollah supporting the syrian military.
I don't think there will come a point in the near future where pressure is build on saudi-arabia.
A lot has to happen until western governments decide to put off their velvet gloves regarding gulf monarchies. (until they don't start massacring their own people)"

Ok there is 0 proof that the military killed people because of "social affiliation" unless that means being part of a military insurection against the goverment. Surly the Syrian military are no angels, however most of these claims are unfounded at best. Hamas might support Syria by word , but im not really sure. Hamas is just a word that the media likes to add to lists of names that sound negative to people. Hamas has extremly little military power- you have to understand, Syria and Hezbollah are ANTI- Muslum Brotherhood- At least 60% of the "rebels" are foreign fighters, that is clearly a WAR, aka a proxy war. Foreign military invading a country. The "intervention" is over 2 years old. It has failed. The govement finaly went on the offensive and started kicking the mercinaries butt, thats why something "needs" to happen now.  According to NATO info 70% of Syrian´s support Assad.

Other intersting facts:
Syria and Israel have not radified the convention on chemical weapons. So -IF- chemical weapons were used, in anyway by Syria it would NOT be against international law, since they are not part of that convention. (same goes for Iraq and Lybia pre war)

Syria owes the IMF ZERO or VERY Little money (couldnt find out if they really owe them 0). I belive this was true for Lybia and Iraq (pre -war)

This guy thinks about bods, t-bills ect. interesting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVGVwkUL-hw&list=UUAoA66dH7UHEMwTJBTbO3Nw

[hlynur]

it's difficult to find 100% proof news articles on this term. (just read some german articles and watched couple documentaries on tv station Arte, which I consider the most objective in germany)
an improportional division of powers between the different ethnical groups is smoldering in syria since their independancy since WWII.
whole government and security sector went into the hand of the alawites and Assad family over some decade. (sunnites represented less than 10% of important military positions)

You're right, Arab Spring triggered big demonstrations by the opposition that were immediately fought down (more than 70,000 prisoners), but the following rebellion was then started mostly by foreign forces.
I just read a lot about assaults on several minorities over these last years. (it was always rebellion forces of one ethnic minority taking revenge on another one because of their historical conflicts)
On a second thought this could also be counted as the typical chaotic secondary result of a proxy war in a country with a long and tense history between its ethnical groups.
That fact blurred my perspective towards my assumption it's also a civil war and i think i need to reassimilate my point of view.

According to NATO info 70% of Syrian´s support Assad.

ehm, sorry but I wouldn't give two cents about any info from NATO. (to me that's more a relict of the cold-war and still a good tool for US to have more control in europe, but that's another story)
According to what I've seen most of the sunnites and other disadvantaged groups in syria want assad gone forever.
In the past he made some allowances to every group to keep things calm for some decades, but the ongoing historical conflict between sunnites and shiites (to which the alawites belong to) broke out as soon as fighting started.
(same problems in Iraq).

it's really hard with the countries in that region to see through what's actually happening there.
Of course it's also easy for foreign influences under these circumstances to turn some screws here and there and shape the conflict to whatever they need it to be.

This guy thinks about bods, t-bills ect. interesting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVGVwkUL-hw&list=UUAoA66dH7UHEMwTJBTbO3Nw

interesting, thanks for a new perspective

[tvbcof]

...
According to what I've seen most of the sunnites and other disadvantaged groups in syria want assad gone forever.
In the past he made some allowances to every group to keep things calm for some decades, but the ongoing historical conflict between sunnites and shiites (to which the alawites belong to) broke out as soon as fighting started.
(same problems in Iraq).
...

Accd to my analysis, Hafez al-Assad was a specialist in inducing disparate religious groups to go along with his rule and his kid is at least as good at doing so.  Being from a minority group they had to be.  Even if the country was a true mono-culture it would always be possible to find plenty of people at all levels (local, regional, and state wide) who would see a potential win in the down-fall of the autocrat, so it is not surprising to see the conflict include a fair contingent of Syrians on the rebel side, but I'd say that it is certainly more of a proxy war than a civil war given the vast influence of outside funding, manpower, and material.

Much of my impression of Hafez comes from discussions from an Israeli friend of mine.  He seemed to have a fair amount of respect for Hafez specifically in that his word was solid and reliable.  Unlike the Turks and most of the other scum in the area who are largely duplicitous camel sodomizing motherfuckers.  Of course my friend did not like the guy but he did respect him and he respected the Syrian military as tough and mean bastards.

[PrintMule]

Other intersting facts:
Syria and Israel have not radified the convention on chemical weapons. So -IF- chemical weapons were used, in anyway by Syria it would NOT be against international law, since they are not part of that convention. (same goes for Iraq and Lybia pre war)

Syria owes the IMF ZERO or VERY Little money (couldnt find out if they really owe them 0). I belive this was true for Lybia and Iraq (pre -war)

This guy thinks about bods, t-bills ect. interesting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVGVwkUL-hw&list=UUAoA66dH7UHEMwTJBTbO3Nw

About chemical weapons you are absolutely correct there. Only difference is that, when israel used white phosphor no one cared.

And about IMF, if you're ok with putting on your tinfoil hat for a minute - there's a nice looking, full-lipped lady to sum it up in a video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TP3mXVRd89Y&list=TLpj4ei-3Ix9g (although she is wrong on some points).

[mmitech]

Sorry original poster, but you have no Idea of what you are talking about..... after 12 years of the 9/11 most of people agrees that Al Qaeda is made up, but mixing this with what happening in Syria proves that you have no clue about what is happening in middle east.

I lived 20 years in north Africa, I did breath their air and practiced their traditions and I think I have a better understanding of what is happening there, Let me make it short because it is really complicated:

it all started in Tunisia couple of years ago when a man (Bouazizi)who sells groceries outside in the street got shut down because of working without a license till here the story seems normal, but the way he got shut wasn't fear and nonhuman, not mentioning the fact that he was a father and he had to provide for his family somehow but the critical part is that he got slapped from the policewoman and they took all what he had at the time. being desperate and angry he tried to complain, but he got refused...  because he couldn't provide for his family in a legal way and he didn't want to go and steal he went and  set him self on fire.

people got touched, and when they knew the reason after this incident got even angry, they went down to protest for this system victim and they got answered with real live ballet from the police killing hundreds of civilians.... Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was the president of Tunisia since 1987 running the country in a dictatorship, it was just about time that people had enough and went out to break the system and replace it with democracy..... read here for more Info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunisian_revolution.

why did I mention Tunisia ? because it all started from here, then what was called the Jasmine Revolution followed to most Arabic dictatorship countries as Egypt and Libya and Yemen and here we come to Syria.....

Al Assad was never voted to be a president but was brought after the death of his father which was a president and was forced by military, Syrian lived a miserable life where only the people on the top of the government or people close to them had a good life, when it happened in all other countries Syrians realized that they can change their system as well and take down Al Assad, they realized that they can have freedom and they can choose who to guide them, But Al Assad was stronger than they even imagined being supported by Russia and Iran, Al Assad commited one of the worst crimes after the World war, used all kind of weapons to kill civilians, it was never about religion in Syria.

 and when talking about Hezbollah Allah you prove that you have no clue, Hezbollah (pronounced /ˌhɛzbəˈlɑː/;[4][5] Arabic: حزب الله‎ Ḥizbu 'llāh, literally "Party of Allah" or "Party of God")—also transliterated Hizbullah, Hizballah, etc.[6]—is a Shi'a Islamic militant group and political party based in Lebanon, if you want more about it read up here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah


Al Assad is a criminal and people in Syria and any place in the world  have the right to live in freedom peace and dignity, we have a saying that is in this meaning " If people wanted to live they can change their destiny" (bad translation )

things wouldn't look like this If when people started peaceful protest, Al Assad should just know that people doesn't want him and he should just quit, but no he thinks that he owns the country.

[xxjs]

[..]
Other intersting facts:
Syria and Israel have not radified the convention on chemical weapons. So -IF- chemical weapons were used, in anyway by Syria it would NOT be against international law, since they are not part of that convention. (same goes for Iraq and Lybia pre war)
[...]

Correct. It is an interesting development that they are now ready to join this convention. To up the ante now, USA can step into the convention banning cluster bombs. They are currently not in, which makes it not against international law to produce, sell and use such weapons.

[tvbcof]

[..]
Other intersting facts:
Syria and Israel have not radified the convention on chemical weapons. So -IF- chemical weapons were used, in anyway by Syria it would NOT be against international law, since they are not part of that convention. (same goes for Iraq and Lybia pre war)
[...]

Correct. It is an interesting development that they are now ready to join this convention. To up the ante now, USA can step into the convention banning cluster bombs. They are currently not in, which makes it not against international law to produce, sell and use such weapons.

Currently the game board is lined up with Syria having CW's against Israel with CW's and Nukes.  Syria losing their CW's will have two potential effects.  One which may be minor is that Israel's non-member status in the CW convention may be put in the lime-light.  Another more significant one is that Russia will feel more latitude (and genuine need) to arm both Syria and Iran with the most powerful anti-air and anti-ship weapons systems around as well as the tools necessary to thwart proxy insurgencies.  This will possibly allow China to up it's economic cooperation, and may peel off countries such as India who have a fierce need for Iran's wares.

Strategically it looks to me like pushing on the Syria domino might end up being counter-productive.  Frankly I hope so since I feel that our 'new American Century' strategy half way around the world is a grave danger to me and my family over the next few decades, and vastly more threatening to the common people in the areas of conflict of course.

[semaforo]

  Yes, Al Qaeda are now our friends. You know, if you can't beat 'em...

[Rampion]

Sorry original poster, but you have no Idea of what you are talking about..... after 12 years of the 9/11 most of people agrees that Al Qaeda is made up, but mixing this with what happening in Syria proves that you have no clue about what is happening in middle east.

I lived 20 years in north Africa, I did breath their air and practiced their traditions and I think I have a better understanding of what is happening there, Let me make it short because it is really complicated:

it all started in Tunisia couple of years ago when a man (Bouazizi)who sells groceries outside in the street got shut down because of working without a license till here the story seems normal, but the way he got shut wasn't fear and nonhuman, not mentioning the fact that he was a father and he had to provide for his family somehow but the critical part is that he got slapped from the policewoman and they took all what he had at the time. being desperate and angry he tried to complain, but he got refused...  because he couldn't provide for his family in a legal way and he didn't want to go and steal he went and  set him self on fire.

people got touched, and when they knew the reason after this incident got even angry, they went down to protest for this system victim and they got answered with real live ballet from the police killing hundreds of civilians.... Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was the president of Tunisia since 1987 running the country in a dictatorship, it was just about time that people had enough and went out to break the system and replace it with democracy..... read here for more Info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunisian_revolution.

why did I mention Tunisia ? because it all started from here, then what was called the Jasmine Revolution followed to most Arabic dictatorship countries as Egypt and Libya and Yemen and here we come to Syria.....

Al Assad was never voted to be a president but was brought after the death of his father which was a president and was forced by military, Syrian lived a miserable life where only the people on the top of the government or people close to them had a good life, when it happened in all other countries Syrians realized that they can change their system as well and take down Al Assad, they realized that they can have freedom and they can choose who to guide them, But Al Assad was stronger than they even imagined being supported by Russia and Iran, Al Assad commited one of the worst crimes after the World war, used all kind of weapons to kill civilians, it was never about religion in Syria.

 and when talking about Hezbollah Allah you prove that you have no clue, Hezbollah (pronounced /ˌhɛzbəˈlɑː/;[4][5] Arabic: حزب الله‎ Ḥizbu 'llāh, literally "Party of Allah" or "Party of God")—also transliterated Hizbullah, Hizballah, etc.[6]—is a Shi'a Islamic militant group and political party based in Lebanon, if you want more about it read up here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah


Al Assad is a criminal and people in Syria and any place in the world  have the right to live in freedom peace and dignity, we have a saying that is in this meaning " If people wanted to live they can change their destiny" (bad translation )

things wouldn't look like this If when people started peaceful protest, Al Assad should just know that people doesn't want him and he should just quit, but no he thinks that he owns the country.

What are you rambling about? Are you denying Hezbollah is strongly supporting Assad? Are you denying they have Chinese and Russian weapons financed by Iran?

First and foremost, as I posted in the OP it seems that USA won't have the balls to do a full-scale intervention in Syria. They cannot afford another Vietnam, Iraq or Afghanistant (at least for the moment). I stand correct, IMO there won't be US military boots on Syrian soil any time soon, despite of Saudi Arabia pushing for it.

Secondly, independent studies have proved that aprox. 70% of the population supports Assad, which is confirmed by the NATO (http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/05/31/nato-data-assad-winning-the-war-for-syrians-hearts-and-minds/). This is a hard cold fact proven by independent researches. The vast majority of "rebels" are just a bunch of mercenaries (Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, etc. etc.) financed by Saudi Arabia and the West. Christians in Syria support Assad. Non religious people in Syria support Assad. The "Jazmine Revolution" is just a bad joke - or do you think Egypt is now a free and safer country? What about Libya?

[elektibi75]

You Gotta Love Politics...

[virtualmaster]

The keyword is doublethink:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink

[Puppet]

As I posted in a similar thread:

Time to cut through the rhetoric and talk about what this conflict is really about: gas. Natural gas, not chemical weapons. In a nutshell, back in 2009 (IIRC), qatar wanted a pipeline from its rather recently discovered massive (actually, world's largest) North Dome gas fields to the EU. This pipeline would go through SA, Jordan, Syria to the  Mediterranean and/or Turkey. Syria refused, because it would threaten the stranglehold its Russian ally has on the EU gas market though Gazprom. Instead Syria pursued an alternative pipeline from Irans South Pars gasfield (actually the same gas field, but on Irans side of the persian gulf)  through Iraq to lebanon and the Med, with an option to connect to Turkey. A $10B deal that was signed in 2010. Not much later, the "uprising" began. No coincidence.

Qatar and later SA fund the "rebels" (better word is jihadists or mercenaries) for billions of dollars to get rid of Assad and install a more sunni friendly regime. Failing that, plan B is to split the country in 2, allowing the north/eastern "free Syria" to run the qatari's beloved pipeline to the EU, instead of Iranian gas flowing to the EU. Thats whats going on. The vast majority of "rebels" arent even Syrians, they are jihadist mercenaries from all over the world, and most of them religious fanatics generously paid for by the Saudi's and qatari's.  

The US really doesnt really have a horse in this race, except placating to its allies saudi arabia and israel. And weakening Iran by not allowing Iran to sell gas to the EU, although the only real reason the US wants that is because Israel and SA want that. As for Israel, it doesnt want a Saudi controlled extremist sunni regime at its borders, but it doesnt want a strong Assad supporting Hezbollah (and Iran) either. Lacking a better option, Israel wants perpetual war in Syria, weakening all fractions, including Hezbollah.

Thats the short story.

[lucasjkr]

One which may be minor is that Israel's non-member status in the CW convention may be put in the lime-light.

Haha. Very funny.

Israel isn't affected one iota; to countries that are their forever and unwavering allies (which is us. Sometimes the uk or whichever other UN member owes us a favor), they either do no wrong or else they do (wink wink, nudge nudge, keel over in laughter), Israel has an "undeclared" arsenal. To the rest of the world, that expects Israel to be treated just like every other country, that undeclared arsenal is an egregious issue, expanding territory via seizing land during war is illegal, and countless other issues exist.

So, no limelight will be aimed at anyone. The sponsor of said limelight would do better trying to apply sanctions to an actual US state (to which the state dept, If really backed against a wall, might say "ok, yes Mississippi is host to an illegal nuclear arsenal, but that complaint about our ally? We veto it"

Sorry, they're not getting any limelight shined on them until the worlds sole superpower ceases to be their unequivocal backer.

[tvbcof]

One which may be minor is that Israel's non-member status in the CW convention may be put in the lime-light.

...
Sorry, they're not getting any limelight shined on them until the worlds sole superpower ceases to be their unequivocal backer.

Actually, my prediction came to pass.  There was some mention made of the issue, and Israel had to say something absurd in order to justify (in their minds) remaining in the company of the half dozen states who refuse to be convention members.  The other part of my prediction is that it would be minor, and that also seems to have been borne out.  To pretty much all thinking people in the rest of the world, and about half of the thinking people in the US, Israel is one of the few nations who continues to do land grabs and ethnic cleansing.  Being on the wrong side of chemical weapons deployment is a relatively minor infraction and not especially surprising from them.

It is an interesting apparent truth, though, that Israel's national security, or at least their Zionist aspiration for a 'Greater Israel', does indeed rest on a foundation of support from the US.  And thus, in the ability to manipulate the policies of the US.  Some might call it a form of parasitization especially since their lobbying results in multiple billions of my tax dollars being issued to them in support.  I cannot hold it against the Israelis to look out for their national security interests, but I can hold it against those in MY government who walk in the grey area between looking out for our allies and flat out treason.  In my mind, McCain, Graham, Rice, and a lot of others are out on some pretty thin ice at this time.

---

Lastly, and tangentially, the one thing that _has_ genuinely surprised me in the wealth of info that Snowden provided was that we are piping raw intel feeds replete with information about US citizens to Israel.  We don't know the exact nature of the feeds, much less the end uses of them is, but the enumeration in the leaked document suggest a pretty significant and broad data dump.  I also note that Israel (or the AIPAC-like support groups) tries very hard and usually succeeds in having a well aligned individual installed at the highest level of our internal security apparatus (DHS these days.)  They even floated Jane Harmon again thinking, apparently, that enough years had passed since she was caught red-handed in the Franklin affair.  My analysis is that this potential subversion is not (yet) true for our national intel and defense heads.  Thankfully.

Anyway, I do find it a bit disconcerting that Israel is receiving my personal data, and apparently has enough info about me as an individual to (supposedly) throw the data out after a year.  We are pretty sure they will honor this agreements because they recited the oath 'swear to god, hope to die, stick a needle in my eye' I guess because it was not like they have any legal obligation or oversight as best we can tell.

[the joint]

As I posted in a similar thread:

Time to cut through the rhetoric and talk about what this conflict is really about: gas. Natural gas, not chemical weapons. In a nutshell, back in 2009 (IIRC), qatar wanted a pipeline from its rather recently discovered massive (actually, world's largest) North Dome gas fields to the EU. This pipeline would go through SA, Jordan, Syria to the  Mediterranean and/or Turkey. Syria refused, because it would threaten the stranglehold its Russian ally has on the EU gas market though Gazprom. Instead Syria pursued an alternative pipeline from Irans South Pars gasfield (actually the same gas field, but on Irans side of the persian gulf)  through Iraq to lebanon and the Med, with an option to connect to Turkey. A $10B deal that was signed in 2010. Not much later, the "uprising" began. No coincidence.

Qatar and later SA fund the "rebels" (better word is jihadists or mercenaries) for billions of dollars to get rid of Assad and install a more sunni friendly regime. Failing that, plan B is to split the country in 2, allowing the north/eastern "free Syria" to run the qatari's beloved pipeline to the EU, instead of Iranian gas flowing to the EU. Thats whats going on. The vast majority of "rebels" arent even Syrians, they are jihadist mercenaries from all over the world, and most of them religious fanatics generously paid for by the Saudi's and qatari's.  

The US really doesnt really have a horse in this race, except placating to its allies saudi arabia and israel. And weakening Iran by not allowing Iran to sell gas to the EU, although the only real reason the US wants that is because Israel and SA want that. As for Israel, it doesnt want a Saudi controlled extremist sunni regime at its borders, but it doesnt want a strong Assad supporting Hezbollah (and Iran) either. Lacking a better option, Israel wants perpetual war in Syria, weakening all fractions, including Hezbollah.

Thats the short story.

Bingo, but I think this is connected to a larger issue.  The only thing keeping the dollar alive is a mountain of bullshit, and everyone knows it.  On the other hand, the Chinese yuan is the next best bet for a global reserve currency.  Aside from the obvious explosive growth of the Chinese economy, China has also been doing something else in recent years - they've been buying fucktons of gold, even above market price.

Unfortunately, no matter what happens the dollar is going to fail.  But, with enough war, enough chaos, and enough disruption in a region of the world that will draw some of the world's largest superpowers into the scuffle, you might make everyone so sick, tired, and disgusted with the current plan (i.e. building mountains of bullshit) that they'll settle for any solution, such as "plan B."

What's plan B?  Introduce a new global reserve currency.

Edit:  Don't confuse my plan B with your plan B

[Yura]

We have been told a fairy tale about a phantomatic organization called Al Qaeda, which leader hid in caves in Afghanistan, which supposedly organized 9/11 training their men with Microsoft Flight Simulator. Most of people in West bought that story, and pretty much everybody in high positions agreed Al Qaeda is evil and must be destroyed.

Making a long story short: the US military attacks Al Qaeda in Yemen and Pakistan, while gives them funds in Syria in the fight against Al Assad. Now it seems the US will strike Syria to help Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic fundamentalists against the Syrian secular regime, where religious freedom is guaranteed and any kind of political form of islamism is forbidden.

Seriously guys, WTF?

Anyhow, my call is the US will not have the balls to do a "real" war, sending occupying forces to the territory. Its pretty obvious to me they will just throw some tomahawks to show off. They know too well Hezbollah is very strong in Syria, they are heavily armed with Russian and Chinese weapons financed by Iran. This could be a new Vietnam (or Iraq), and they know it - they cannot afford that ATM.

Al Qaeda is nothing more than just a sub division of the cia. If they want them to appear as an evil organization bent on destroying america, they show them to the world in that light. Cia wants them to be rebel freedom fighters.. that's what they become with proper propaganda.

Can't afford it? As long as the government has the tax payers and the printing press they can afford anything for now

[tvbcof]

Al Qaeda is nothing more than just a sub division of the cia. If they want them to appear as an evil organization bent on destroying america, they show them to the world in that light. Cia wants them to be rebel freedom fighters.. that's what they become with proper propaganda.

Can't afford it? As long as the government has the tax payers and the printing press they can afford anything for now

As I understand things, 'al Qaeda' translates to 'the base' where 'base' initially meant 'database'.  It was a catalog of individuals who our intel services knew of and could induce to perform certain functions.  They performed certain tasks against the Soviets in Afghanistan where things started of course, but also were players in our actions in the Balkans (esp, Kosovo) all the way through the current efforts in Syria.

Whether they 'went rouge' for 9/11 is debatable in my mind since the event ended up being the key to a new series of actions which many in our government were anxious to undertake (exactly as predicted when PNAC mused about a 'new Pearl Harbor' when out of power at the end of B. Clinton's last term.)  Some might suspect that al Qaeda was simply the most convenient party to produce a plausible explanation for the attacks which the American chumps would find believable.  I do.  The biggest hang-up I have with this hypothesis is that Ayman al-Zawahiri would have to be on-board and I have trouble figuring out how that could have been accomplished.

[Yura]

Al Qaeda is nothing more than just a sub division of the cia. If they want them to appear as an evil organization bent on destroying america, they show them to the world in that light. Cia wants them to be rebel freedom fighters.. that's what they become with proper propaganda.

Can't afford it? As long as the government has the tax payers and the printing press they can afford anything for now

As I understand things, 'al Qaeda' translates to 'the base' where 'base' initially meant 'database'.  It was a catalog of individuals who our intel services knew of and could induce to perform certain functions.  They performed certain tasks against the Soviets in Afghanistan where things started of course, but also were players in our actions in the Balkans (esp, Kosovo) all the way through the current efforts in Syria.

Whether they 'went rouge' for 9/11 is debatable in my mind since the event ended up being the key to a new series of actions which many in our government were anxious to undertake (exactly as predicted when PNAC mused about a 'new Pearl Harbor' when out of power at the end of B. Clinton's last term.)  Some might suspect that al Qaeda was simply the most convenient party to produce a plausible explanation for the attacks which the American chumps would find believable.  I do.  The biggest hang-up I have with this hypothesis is that Ayman al-Zawahiri would have to be on-board and I have trouble figuring out how that could have been accomplished.

Yes, you're right on point, that Al Qaeda was trained and armed by the US to fight against Soviet Union in Afghanistan and other conflicts.

They didn't go rogue, they were simply doing what they were told by top officials of CIA and Mossad and by other string pullers. They need to create a problem first to offer up a solution. Problem, reaction, solution. Stage a false flag terror attack, everyone is thrown off and begs for the gov to do something, offer to start a huge mess in the middle east!

Good thing you brought up 911 because what happened in syria with the chemical weapon attacks is another false flag staged attack just 9/11 was.

And for people that think the CIA is your friendly spying agency that would never stage a terror attack... look up Operation Northwoods declassified document

[PrintMule]

It is an interesting apparent truth, though, that Israel's national security, or at least their Zionist aspiration for a 'Greater Israel', does indeed rest on a foundation of support from the US.  And thus, in the ability to manipulate the policies of the US.  Some might call it a form of parasitization especially since their lobbying results in multiple billions of my tax dollars being issued to them in support.  I cannot hold it against the Israelis to look out for their national security interests, but I can hold it against those in MY government who walk in the grey area between looking out for our allies and flat out treason.  In my mind, McCain, Graham, Rice, and a lot of others are out on some pretty thin ice at this time.

Imagine if US would suddenly drop ALL support of Israel? Where would Israel seek new allies? Would it cease to exist without said support?