Putin and Russia in Syria

[JustAFan]

I'm not sure why we're still arguing about this but moving 40-43k troops anywhere on short notice - bearing in mind these are combat units with vehicles and equipment - in two months is a HELL of a lot of troops. It was a big deal when Op Atlantic Resolve organized the movement of 500 troops (Op Dragoon Ride) just a few months ago.

More than the numbers I just don't know where you're going with this. Are you seriously arguing that the word "rushed" does not reasonably apply to the American withdrawal from Iraq in response to American public opinion turning anti-war? Without said public opinion I doubt Obama would be in office right now!

Yes I am it was not as you put it a rushed decision unless you completely ignore the withdrawal of well over 100k troops that took place before your false date of when the withdrawal started. Your wrong that is all there is to it. The public opinion turning against the war was what led to the 2008 agreement which led to the draw down of combat troops it did not suddenly just start in Oct 2011 no matter how much you want to pretend it did. Obviously you just want to ignore the facts so feel free to continue in your ignorance.

Yes moving 40k troops is a big operation, never said it was not, the decision had been in place for some time and all that was done was to attempt to move the final deadline for the final withdrawal not to change the entire plan which was already 75% complete.

You want to pretend the last stages of the withdrawal were the entire with drawl when in reality it represents just the last 25%. So yeah we are done no point in discussing facts with someone who wants to pretend anything prior to Oct 2011 does not exist.

 

[Raoul]

As expected, Putin has used Assad as a pawn to get back into the good graces of the west, and will shortly get on board with a peace plan to get rid of him.

http://news.yahoo.com/russia-open-assads-ouster-syria-transition-diplomats-224133009.html

 

[naturalized]

You're making an unbelievably pedantic point in an unbelievably pedantic way, and you're crying like a child now. This is your original post, which, incidentally, had almost nothing to do with mine.

FYI the withdrawal from Iraq was done in compliance with an agreement set in place by President Bush. The agreement with the then Iraqi govt was made in 2008 with Dec 31, 2011 as the deadline.

As has been demonstrated to you, this statement is about as meaningful as "Lewandowski left Dortmund in compliance with his contract, which had expired." Yes that's literally true, but if an agreement is made with the implicit understanding by all involved that it will, in the normal course of events, be extended, then obviously the issue is what caused the departure from the normal course of events. The point is that Bayern tapped him up, and the point is that Obama did not extend the SOFA - as everyone and their dog expected him to do - because American public opinion had turned so strongly against the war that he considered it politically expedient to do so, regardless of the downstream negative consequences like ISIS. (Which, again and again, I note that I am not criticizing him for.)

But carry on with your complaints about ignorance.

 

[Raoul]

You're making an unbelievably pedantic point in an unbelievably pedantic way, and you're crying like a child now. This is your original post, which, incidentally, had almost nothing to do with mine.



As has been demonstrated to you, this statement is about as meaningful as "Lewandowski left Dortmund in compliance with his contract, which had expired." Yes that's literally true, but if an agreement is made with the implicit understanding by all involved that it will, in the normal course of events, be extended, then obviously the issue is what caused the departure from the normal course of events. The point is that Bayern tapped him up, and the point is that Obama did not extend the SOFA - as everyone and their dog expected him to do - because American public opinion had turned so strongly against the war that he considered it politically expedient to do so, regardless of the downstream negative consequences like ISIS. (Which, again and again, I note that I am not criticizing him for.)

But carry on with your complaints about ignorance.

There was no option to extend "the SOFA" as the Iraqis didn't want to because Maliki made a deal with the Sadrists and Iran that they would support him for another term as PM, without which he wouldn't have remained in power. Obama had little choice in the matter, nor was he interested in reneging on his campaign pledge of ending US troops in Iraq, as the US and Iraq merely implemented an agreement made by the Bush administration.

 

[naturalized]

There was no option to extend "the SOFA" as the Iraqis didn't want to because Maliki made a deal with the Sadrists and Iran that they would support him for another term as PM, without which he wouldn't have remained in power. Obama had little choice in the matter, nor was he interested in reneging on his campaign pledge of ending US troops in Iraq, as the US and Iraq merely implemented an agreement made by the Bush administration.

Raoul, respectfully, what you're saying flies in the face of contemporary reporting, and not just contemporary reporting but common sense. President Obama is a very intelligent man. If there was "no option" and "little choice in the matter" then President Obaam, a very intelligent man, would not have 43,000 troops with weapons, vehicles and equipment in-country in October 2011, when he announces that after all the negotiations, after being in office for almost three years, the US will abide after all by teh Dec 2011 withdrawal date as per the original SOFA. In fact, taht announcement will not be made in October 2011 at all, two months before the actual date itself. In fact, there will not be negotiations in the first place, nor an announcement. He will just do it. Because there is no option and little choice in the matter.

I genuinely don't understand why the Americans are getting so defensive about this. Are you guys taking this as some kind of insult to your martial resilience or national character or something? No one's making any point remotely like that.

 

[711]

I suspect that the UN resolution for Syria means the US has belatedly overcome it's hubris and done a deal with Russia an Iran. I'm not bothered who takes the credit though, hopefully it's a first step to relative peace.

 

[Raoul]

Raoul, respectfully, what you're saying flies in the face of contemporary reporting, and not just contemporary reporting but common sense. President Obama is a very intelligent man. If there was "no option" and "little choice in the matter" then President Obaam, a very intelligent man, would not have 43,000 troops with weapons, vehicles and equipment in-country in October 2011, when he announces that after all the negotiations, after being in office for almost three years, the US will abide after all by teh Dec 2011 withdrawal date as per the original SOFA. In fact, taht announcement will not be made in October 2011 at all, two months before the actual date itself. In fact, there will not be negotiations in the first place, nor an announcement. He will just do it. Because there is no option and little choice in the matter.

I genuinely don't understand why the Americans are getting so defensive about this. Are you guys taking this as some kind of insult to your martial resilience or national character or something? No one's making any point remotely like that.

I was in the room during parts of negotiations in Baghdad from 2008 to 2011. The media really know feck all.

 

[Danny1982]

As expected, Putin has used Assad as a pawn to get back into the good graces of the west, and will shortly get on board with a peace plan to get rid of him.

http://news.yahoo.com/russia-open-assads-ouster-syria-transition-diplomats-224133009.html

Did you read the UNSC resolution? It was pretty much exactly what Iran has proposed in 2014. Nobody is fighting for Assad, everybody is fighting for their own interests.

Obviously I'm not ITK *wink wink*, so I don't claim to know what's really happening behind the scenes, but these leaks could also very well be an attempt to calm down some of the people who weren't fond of the agreement, which in essence means the US has agreed that Assad stays for at least 2 more years, while terrorism is combated, which imo isn't a bad idea.

However I do need to remind you of what you posted here on May 29th 2012, more than 3 and a half years ago...

The Russians are beginning to crack in their steadfast support for Assad. Obama and Medvedev apparently had an aside at the G8 about a plan to get Assad to step aside for a peaceful change of power.

 

[Raoul]

Did you read the UNSC resolution? It was pretty much exactly what Iran has proposed in 2014. Nobody is fighting for Assad, everybody is fighting for their own interests.

Obviously I'm not ITK *wink wink*, so I don't claim to know what's really happening behind the scenes, but these leaks could also very well be an attempt to calm down some of the people who weren't fond of the agreement, which in essence means the US has agreed that Assad stays for at least 2 more years, while terrorism is combated, which imo isn't a bad idea.

However I do need to remind you of what you posted here on May 29th 2012, more than 3 and a half years ago...

Assad has no future in Syria and will be sooner or later walked out once Putin realizes its his ticket to getting back into the good graces of the international community. We can't expect Syrians to accept a guy whose family have murdered their own citizens for decades, and who himself has been complicit in those murders, including more recently the dropping of barrel bombs on civilian populations and the use of chemical weapons on women and children. No sane population if they had the ability to choose would make such a choice in a democratic context.

 

[Danny1982]

Assad has no future in Syria and will be sooner or later walked out once Putin realizes its his ticket to getting back into the good graces of the international community. We can't expect Syrians to accept a guy whose family have murdered their own citizens for decades, and who himself has been complicit in those murders, including more recently the dropping of barrel bombs on civilian populations and the use of chemical weapons on women and children. No sane population if they had the ability to choose would make such a choice in a democratic context.

I'm not sure what that has anything to do with my post.

By the way, nobody rules forever, Assad, like everybody else, will eventually go. However, it's not about Assad. Some are just trying to distract from the real problem in Syria with the Assad issue. Terrorism is the biggest problem in Syria, and the cause of terrorism in Syria is Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, not Assad. Assad treated the Kurds even worse than the Arabs, but they also agree now that toppling Assad militarily would be a disaster for Syria. They also realise what the priority right now is in Syria. Why didn't Assad "turn the Kurds to terrorists" too?

The reality is the real moderates inside Syria all agree that the priority should be defeating the terrorists first and then dealing with Assad. All the terrorists and their backers and sympathisers don't though, because in reality they (secretly) want the terrorists to rule Syria, for different reasons.

 

[Raoul]

I'm not sure what that has anything to do with my post.

By the way, nobody rules forever, Assad, like everybody else, will eventually go. However, it's not about Assad. Some are just trying to distract from the real problem in Syria with the Assad issue. Terrorism is the biggest problem in Syria, and the cause of terrorism in Syria is Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, not Assad. Assad treated the Kurds even worse than the Arabs, but they also agree now that toppling Assad militarily would be a disaster for Syria. They also realise what the priority right now is in Syria. Why didn't Assad "turn the Kurds to terrorists" too?

The reality is the real moderates inside Syria all agree that the priority should be defeating the terrorists first and then dealing with Assad. All the terrorists and their backers and sympathisers don't though, because in reality they (secretly) want the terrorists to rule Syria, for different reasons.

Why don't you support a democratic process inside Syria instead of supporting Assad and promoting a false choice between ISIS and Bashar ?

 

[Danny1982]

Why don't you support a democratic process inside Syria instead of supporting Assad and promoting a false choice between ISIS and Bashar ?

I don't support a democratic process?? It's actually the US and it's allies that insisted that Assad must be toppled militarily and refused to negotiate. The fact that this UN resolution actually pretty much represents what Iran was proposing in 2014 shows which side in the conflict is actually pushing for peaceful negotiations and which is pushing for a military victory for the terrorists.

Right now though the reality is, whether you want it or not, it's either Assad winning, or the ISIS-like groups winning, and I'm pretty sure you know that very well. I mean even the Kurds (who were oppressed by Assad) are saying that..

Syria civil war: Kurdish leader says collapse of Assad regime 'would be a disaster' despite its treatment of his people
Saleh Muslim tells Patrick Cockburn he is no supporter of President Bashar al-Assad, but is fearful of the dangers Islamist groups close to Damascus pose

The overthrow of President Bashar al-Assad by Isis and rebel groups that are affiliated to al-Qaeda would be a calamity for the world, says the Syrian Kurdish leader Saleh Muslim.

In an interview with The Independent he warned that “if the regime collapses because of the salafis [fundamentalist Islamic militants] it would be a disaster for everyone.”

Mr Muslim said he was fully in favour of Mr Assad and his government being replaced by a more acceptable alternative. But he is concerned that Isis and other extreme Islamist groups are now close to Damascus on several sides, saying that “this is dangerous”. During a recent Isis offensive in the north eastern city of Hasaka, the Kurdish YPG (People’s Protection Units) militia and the Syrian Army both came under attack from Isis, but Mr Muslim denied that there was any collaboration between the two.

The Syrian Kurds, previously marginalised and discriminated against by the Damascus government, have become crucial players in the country’s civil war over the last year. In January, they defeated Isis at Kobani with the aid of US airstrikes after a four-and-a-half month siege and their forces are still advancing. While Mr Muslim said that he wants an end to rule by Mr Assad, he makes clear that he considers Isis to be the main enemy.

“Our main goal is the defeat of Daesh [Isis],” he said. “We would not feel safe in our home so long as there is one Daesh [Isis] left alive.” The threat did not come from them alone, he said, but also from al-Qaeda clones such as Jabhat al-Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham. “They all have the same mentality.”

...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...would-be-a-disaster-despite-its-10515922.html

... and somehow you think if Assad is toppled now that some alien moderates will take over and rule Syria?

 

[antihenry]

Why don't you support a democratic process inside Syria instead of supporting Assad and promoting a false choice between ISIS and Bashar ?

Because that "democratic process'" exists only in your head. Haven't you done enough "promoting western democracy values" in the Middle East? Iraq, Libya, now Syria. Does anyone in their right mind still believe that those countries are meant to be run as western democracies at this point of their history? How much more blood needs to be spilled for the US and its allies to realize that they're making a bad thing much much worse? You repeat that 'Assad must go' mantra like it's somehow a solution to this mess. It's not. If not Assad, somebody like him or more likely far worse will replace him. You didn't like Saddam and Gaddafi? Look what happened when they were removed. Now it's Syria's turn.

 

[Raoul]

Because that "democratic process'" exists only in your head. Haven't you done enough "promoting western democracy values" in the Middle East? Iraq, Libya, now Syria. Does anyone in their right mind still believe that those countries are meant to be run as western democracies at this point of their history? How much more blood needs to be spilled for the US and its allies to realize that they're making a bad thing much much worse? You repeat that 'Assad must go' mantra like it's somehow a solution to this mess. It's not. If not Assad, somebody like him or more likely far worse will replace him. You didn't like Saddam and Gaddafi? Look what happened when they were removed. Now it's Syria's turn.

Nah....everyone will go democratic eventually. Including Russia. It's inevitable, so might as well get on board.

 

[Raoul]

I don't support a democratic process?? It's actually the US and it's allies that insisted that Assad must be toppled militarily and refused to negotiate. The fact that this UN resolution actually pretty much represents what Iran was proposing in 2014 shows which side in the conflict is actually pushing for peaceful negotiations and which is pushing for a military victory for the terrorists.

Right now though the reality is, whether you want it or not, it's either Assad winning, or the ISIS-like groups winning, and I'm pretty sure you know that very well. I mean even the Kurds (who were oppressed by Assad) are saying that..


... and somehow you think if Assad is toppled now that some alien moderates will take over and rule Syria?

Its a false choice. The correct moral position is to favor a democratic process for Syrians to decide their own future, which can't happen as long as Assad is in power. We all know ISIS are very bad, so we can remove them from the discussion.

 

[Danny1982]

Its a false choice. The correct moral position is to favor a democratic process for Syrians to decide their own future, which can't happen as long as Assad is in power. We all know ISIS are very bad, so we can remove them from the discussion.

Yeah, because if we removed them (and Jabhat Al-Nusra and Ahrar Al-Sham...) from the discussion, they'd stop existing...

Sorry to have derailed this fantasy thread about Syria, with a dose of reality.

 

[Raoul]

Yeah, because if we removed them (and Jabhat Al-Nusra and Ahrar Al-Sham...) from the discussion, they'd stop existing...

Sorry to have derailed this fantasy thread about Syria, with a dose of reality.

That's why Syria needs an international force to keep the peace - eliminate the irreconcilable groups and bring the reconcilables into the political process.

 

[Danny1982]

That's why it needs an international force to keep the peace - eliminate the irreconcilable groups and bring the reconcilables into the political process.

Ah, another invasion. Yeah, it's been a while.

How about we tackle the real cause of terrorism instead for a change?

 

[Raoul]

Ah, another invasion. Yeah, it's been a while.

How about we tackle the real cause of terrorism instead for a change?

How far will you go to keep Assad in power at the expense of Syria's future ?

 

[Danny1982]

How far will you go to keep Assad in power at the expense of Syria's future ?

Until we make sure terrorists don't take over.

 

[Raoul]

Until we make sure terrorists don't take over.

In which case why don't you support an international force to secure the country and start a proper political process. There can't be one as long as any of the problematic political actors ranging from Assad to ISIS still have power to not participate.

 

[711]

I don't think Russia would have supported the UNSC resolution unless they thought their allies would do well out of the process, and they would retain their influence. It looks like Russia, the US, and I expect Assad too, have agreed a way forward that they can all live with. We'll find out what that means for Assad in time, meanwhile shouldn't we all support the resolution?

 

[antihenry]

How far will you go to keep Assad in power at the expense of Syria's future ?

Why don't you start with your Saudi friends that are the biggest sponsors of terrorism in the ME? Or your NATO ally Turkey that sends more and more of these "freedom fighters" across the border?

 

[Danny1982]

In which case why don't you support an international force to secure the country and start a proper political process. There can't be one as long as any of the problematic political actors ranging from Assad to ISIS still have power to not participate.

Because I don't trust the US who is in bed with the Wahhabi terrorists.

 

[Raoul]

Why don't you start with your Saudi friends that are the biggest sponsors of terrorism in the ME? Or your NATO ally Turkey that sends more and more of these "freedom fighters" across the border?

I support this wholeheartedly. Everyone should be doing more but that doesn't absolve us from dealing with Assad.

 

[Danny1982]

I support this wholeheartedly. Everyone should be doing more but that doesn't absolve us from dealing with Assad.

Then you should do it in the right order. It's not Assad who is trying to extend his caliphate to Saudi Arabia, it's the other way around. Neutralise Saudi Arabia as the number 1 source of terrorism in the region and the world and I'm all for toppling dictators wherever you want. Right now though you seem to be doing it in an order that just allows terrorism to spread, which makes the whole thing 10 times worse and makes you lose your credibility in pretending to be after democracy and human rights.

 

[Raoul]

Then you should do it in the right order. It's not Assad who is trying to extend his caliphate to Saudi Arabia, it's the other way around. Neutralise Saudi Arabia as the number 1 source of terrorism in the region and the world and I'm all for toppling dictators wherever you want. Right now though you seem to be doing it in an order that just allows terrorism to spread, which makes the whole thing 10 times worse and makes you lose your credibility in pretending to be after democracy and human rights.

There is no right order, just the political actors in Syria. We've established that ISIS and their ilk are very bad, now it's just a matter of doing the right thing and extending that to Assad, who whether we like it or not, is a murderous dictator who has used chemical weapons on his own subjects and thus his continued presence will only promote continued fighting rather than a viable peace.

 

[antihenry]

There is no right order, just the political actors in Syria. We've established that ISIS and their ilk are very bad, now it's just a matter of doing the right thing and extending that to Assad, who whether we like it or not, is a murderous dictator who has used chemical weapons on his own subjects and thus his continued presence will only promote continued fighting rather than a viable peace.

And his removal will lead to... what? The start of the democratic process? You cannot be serious.

 

[Raoul]

And his removal will lead to... what? The start of the democratic process? You cannot be serious.

It has to be an internationally supported democratic process that gives all reconcilable stakeholders inside Syria a seat at the table. Otherwise the fighting will continue indefinitely. Unless you want that, you should support removing all armed groups and the implementation internationally supported plan for a new democratic process that includes all reconcilable parties.

 

[Danny1982]

There is no right order, just the political actors in Syria. We've established that ISIS and their ilk are very bad, now it's just a matter of doing the right thing and extending that to Assad, who whether we like it or not, is a murderous dictator who has used chemical weapons on his own subjects and thus his continued presence will only promote continued fighting rather than a viable peace.

I have high confidence now in saying that most of the promoting of the continued fighting is actually coming from outside the Syrian borders. Most people in Syria now just wants peace.

Assad is a dictator and is bad but he's necessary now to stop those terrorists from converting more Syrian cities to other Raqqas and Idlibs.

 

[Raoul]

I have high confidence now in saying that most of the promoting of the continued fighting is actually coming from outside the Syrian borders. Most people in Syria now just wants peace.

Assad is a dictator and is bad but he's necessary now to stop those terrorists from converting more Syrian cities to other Raqqas and Idlibs.

Removing Assad would surely neutralize that outside support of armed groups.

 

[Danny1982]

Removing Assad would surely neutralize that outside support of armed groups.

They're not "armed groups". They're terrorists funded by the US and its allies and supplied by weapons to achieve a political goal. Just like I said 3 years ago, another Afghanistan.

Anyway, here is another report shedding some light about the "rebels".

Most Syrian rebels sympathise with Isis, says thinktank
Centre on Religion and Geopolitics says at least 65,000 jihadi fighters could fill vacuum if Islamic State was defeated

More than half of the rebel fighters in Syria who are opposing President Bashar al-Assad are sympathetic to Islamic State views, a leading thinktank has claimed.

The Centre on Religion and Geopolitics said efforts to wipe out Isis in Syria and Iraq would not end the global threat from jihadi groups because extremist views were common among Syrian fighters of all stripes.

At least 15 militias, numbering 65,000 fighters, could fill any vacuum resulting from a defeat of Isis in Syria and Iraq by a coalition led by the US, a report by the thinktank found.

About 60% of fighters in rebel factions in Syria identified with a religious and political ideology similar to that of the terror group, it added.

The thinktank, run by the Tony Blair Faith Foundation, said: “The west risks making a strategic failure by focusing only on IS. Defeating it militarily will not end global jihadism. We cannot bomb an ideology, but our war is ideological.”

The report comes after the United Nations agreed a resolution endorsing the start of “urgent” formal negotiations between Assad’s regime and moderate opposition groups early next month.

But the centre warned the radical groups, including al-Qaida affiliate al-Nusra Front and Ahrar al-Sham, could benefit if they went “unchallenged”.

It added: “If Isis is defeated, there are at least 65,000 fighters belonging to other Salafi-jihadi groups ready to take its place.

“The greatest danger to the international community are the groups that share the ideology of Isis, but are being ignored in the battle to defeat the group.

“While military efforts against Isis are necessary, policy makers must recognise that its defeat will not end the threat of Salafi-jihadism unless it is accompanied by an intellectual and theological defeat of the pernicious ideology that drives it.”

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ympathise-with-isis-says-thinktank?CMP=twt_gu

 

[Sir Matt]

Until we make sure terrorists don't take over.

The man who uses chemical weapons on his civilians isn't a terrorist?

 

[antihenry]

The man who uses chemical weapons on his civilians isn't a terrorist?

How about the man who invaded another country under false pretenses and started a war that led to hundreds of thousands of dead and hundreds of thousands of refugees? What do you call him? Wanna go and arrest him? You don't have to travel far, he's probably at his ranch in Texas or something.

Who made America the judge and jury of what happens in the world? Take care of your own criminals first.

 

[Danny1982]

The man who uses chemical weapons on his civilians isn't a terrorist?

First of all,
Assad did not order Syria chemical weapons attack, says German press

Second, Assad actually gave up his arsenal of chemical weapons.

Third, it's ironic that you talk about chemical weapons considering you're coming from the country that dropped two nuclear bombs killing hundreds of thousands of civilians (the only country to do so), and the country that helped Saddam use chemical weapons for 4 years during the Iraq-Iran war.

Fourth, and most importantly, yes Assad did commit crimes against civilians, like every other regime during a military conflict (e.g. the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia,...) and like every other regime facing a military challenge (like Bahrain, Turkey, Saudi Arabia,...), but that's different from the real danger posed by the real terrorist groups you're growing in the region with the help of your Saudi terrorists (and you know this by the way).

 

[LeChuck]

How about the man who invaded another country under false pretenses and started a war that led to hundreds of thousands of dead and hundreds of thousands of refugees? What do you call him? Wanna go and arrest him? You don't have to travel far, he's probably at his ranch in Texas or something.

Who made America the judge and jury of what happens in the world?

True.

Take care of your own criminals first.

So what of Putin and the illegal invasion of Ukraine? Will you take care of your own?

 

[LeChuck]

First of all,
Assad did not order Syria chemical weapons attack, says German press

Second, Assad actually gave up his arsenal of chemical weapons.

Third, it's ironic that you talk about chemical weapons considering you're coming from the country that dropped two nuclear bombs killing hundreds of thousands of civilians (the only country to do so), and the country that helped Saddam use chemical weapons for 4 years during the Iraq-Iran war.

Fourth, and most importantly, yes Assad did commit crimes against civilians, like every other regime during a military conflict (e.g. the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia,...) and like every other regime facing a military challenge (like Bahrain, Turkey, Saudi Arabia,...), but that's different from the real danger posed by the real terrorist groups you're growing in the region with the help of your Saudi terrorists (and you know this by the way).

Your excuses for Assad are fecking pathetic and its wearing thin.

How can you even begin to defend him when he's committed barbaric acts is beyond me. And it's pure deflection talking about 'every other regime'. The topic of conversation isn't 'every other regime' is it? So stop deflecting and address the issue. Assad's position is untenable, and he has caused absolute carnage to his own people. Your stance is moronic and in the face of irrefutable evidence, absolutely pathetic.

You love posting links and then posting a green smiley, so here's some for you:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/01/w...stigates-syria-torture-bashar-assad.html?_r=0

PARIS — France has opened the world’s first criminal inquiry into torture under President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, officials and rights advocates said Wednesday, an indirect rebuke to Russia and its efforts to rehabilitate Mr. Assad as part of an international anti-Islamist coalition.

Based upon tens of thousands of harrowing photographs of torture victimstaken by a Syrian defector, France’s investigation is in the early stages, a spokeswoman for the Paris prosecutor’s office said. It will require the discovery of a French victim, or the arrest of a Syrian official, to move forward, said the spokeswoman, Agnès Thibault-Lecuivre.

“Faced with these crimes that offend the human conscience, this bureaucracy of horror, faced with this denial of the values of humanity, it is our responsibility to act against the impunity of the killers,” the French foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, said in a statement to Agence France-Presse announcing the investigation.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ng-to-kill-inside-syrias-death-machine-caesar

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2011/05/2011515113431187136.html

Where the torture cells of Tadmor, Syria's desert prison, once extracted confessions from individuals accused of standing against the Assads - Communists like Akram Bunni, left partially paralysed after his spine was stretched in a torture known as the German Chair; Muslim Brotherhood members whipped with cable and stunned with electric shock devices - today's torturers appear to be pursuing a policy of deterrence and collective punishment.

The student was released after only a few days, but the message to the wider community of Banias was clear: A naked body, covered in blood, left to limp along the long road back to his village, clutching his broken hand, for all to see.

Three other young men, beaten, thrown down stairs and forced to drink water from a toilet after being starved, were also dumped naked and bloodied on a road outside Banias.

A YouTube video, claiming to have been shot in Banias but which cannot be independently verified, shows men with signs of severe beating on their backs and faces.

"Syrian security is now releasing detainees with unhealed wounds caused by torture in order to spread panic and fear among people hoping it will reduce the numbers participating in demonstrations," said Wissam Tarif, Director of Insan, a leading Syrian human rights organisation, which has documented cases of torture.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...t-how-I-raped-and-killed-for-300-a-month.html

"We love Assad because the government gave us all the power - if I wanted to take something, kill a person or rape a girl I could," he said, in a calm, quiet voice devoid of remorse.

"The government gave me 30,000 Syrian pounds per month and an extra 10,000 per person that I captured or killed. I raped one girl, and my commander raped many times. It was normal."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35005825

One of the other girls in the same cell as her said she was raped. Farah didn't see this, but was threatened with rape herself.

"Not just rape, but gang rape," she says.

Farah believes that she was spared even worse treatment because she was a dual UK-Syrian national - the guards nicknamed her "British" even when they were insulting her. But they tortured her psychologically as well as physically.

Sometimes they threatened to bring Farah's young son to the detention centre. "I used to go crazy when they used to say that. That was the hardest thing… Inside they know who are your closest people - they know everything."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14726294

Amnesty International has said it believes that at least 88 people have died in detention in Syria during the past five months.

It says those who died, including 10 children, were subjected to beatings, burns, electric shocks and other abuse.

The group says it believes all of those who died were arrested after taking part in anti-government protests

 

[Danny1982]

Defend Assad? When did I do that?

It's a war of two sides, and I'm clear about what I don't want in Syria.

If you want to talk about torture, then how about you talk about Bahrain (the capitol of torture)?

The 84-page report, “The Blood of People Who Don’t Cooperate: Continuing Torture and Mistreatment of Detainees in Bahrain,” concludes that security forces have continued the same abuses the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry (BICI) documented in its November 2011 report. The commission was established after the fierce repression of pro-democracy demonstrators in February and March of that year. Bahraini authorities have failed to implement effectively the commission’s recommendations relating to torture, Human Rights Watch found.

...

All said security officers had physically assaulted them. Several described being subjected to electric shocks; suspension in painful positions, including by their wrists while handcuffed; forced standing; extreme cold; and sexual abuse. Six said that the CID interrogators boasted of their reputation for inflicting pain on detainees.

“I’ll show you why Wifaq [Bahrain’s leading opposition party] calls Bahrain the capital of torture,” a former detainee quoted an interrogator as telling him. Another said a CID officer held something to his nose and told him it was “the blood of people who don’t cooperate.”

...

“Since the peaceful anti-government protests of 2011, which the authorities responded to with brutal and lethal force, the Bahrain government has overseen a campaign of incarceration that has decimated its pro-democracy movement,” Stork said. “Bahrain can’t claim any progress on torture while its anti-torture institutions lack independence and transparency and until it takes some serious steps to address the complete lack of accountability for the abuse of detainees.”

https://www.hrw.org/news/2015/11/22/bahrain-detainees-tortured-abused

Or your Saudi Arabia, or even the US prisons, ...

However, for some odd reason , you only seem to be interested in the dictators who are fighting the Wahhabi terrorists.

 

[LeChuck]

Again, it's petty deflection because the truth is you have no real answer.

 

[JustAFan]

However, for some odd reason , you only seem to be interested in the dictators who are fighting the Wahhabi terrorists.

Says the guy who answers every charge against Assad or Putin with a post about something some other nation has done. Pot please meet this similarly hued kettle.