Syria shows the way to run security.

boyntonstu

Banned
B
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
908
Syrian deaths rise to 350. Thousands arrested in Damascus
DEBKAfile Special Report April 24, 2011, 8:29 AM (GMT+02:00)
Tags: Syria Syrian uprising Bashar Assad

Syria plunged in bloodbath


Saturday, April 23 saw the mounting uprising against the Assad regime finally reaching the Syrian capital Damascus where debkafile reports 300,000 – 15 percent of the city's dwellers – took the streets shouting: "Bashar Assad you are a traitor!" That day too the Syrian ruler unleashed his security forces for the harshest crackdown yet .The result: 350 dead, tripling the number of Friday's bloodbath and thousands of injured.

http://debka.com

I guess this is par for the neighborhood.

Will the U.S. send in forces to protect the protesters?

Don't hold your breath for the UN to say anything.
 
boyntonstu said:
Syrian deaths rise to 350. Thousands arrested in Damascus
Click to expand...
BFD.
Will the U.S. send in forces to protect the protesters?
Click to expand...
No.

Will anyone from Arab League complain to the UN about this, now that the UN response to Arab League complaints in re Libya have taken shape?

Not likely.

Don't hold your breath for the UN to say anything.
Click to expand...
Given that the UN usually issues inane noise, who cares what they say about Syria? :confused:
 
boyntonstu said:
I guess this is par for the neighborhood.
Click to expand...

Indeed. There must be some causal factor unique to the region that explains their particularly appalling behaviour. I wish we could quantify it somehow and bring some science to it.

Perhaps there's a phrenological root of the issue.... hmmmm
 
Praktik said:
Indeed. There must be some causal factor unique to the region that explains their particularly appalling behaviour. I wish we could quantify it somehow and bring some science to it.

Perhaps there's a phrenological root of the issue.... hmmmm
Click to expand...

Like Joan of Arc, you've picked the least likely explanation. No, they did not awaken from a slumber to find that God had misshaped their skulls while they slept.
 
The Fool said:
possibly you are confused about the UN. It is not a news service and doesn't run a regular commentary like the Israeli Debka site.
Click to expand...

They don't run a news service, but they do occasionally hold meetings to condemn some actions by nations. Or nation, I should say. I think boyntonstu's point is that Syria is not on the very short list of nations that would evoke a response from the UN.
 
Mycroft said:
They don't run a news service, but they do occasionally hold meetings to condemn some actions by nations. Or nation, I should say. I think boyntonstu's point is that Syria is not on the very short list of nations that would evoke a response from the UN.
Click to expand...
Thats correct. And the member nations in the meeting decide what resolutions they make.....so Why hasn't there been a resolution from the UN against the Syrian Governments action...? I would like to know too, possibly you could ask your Government why they havn't proposed a resolution? I could ask mine but they are not at the security council meetings.
 
The Fool said:
Thats correct. And the member nations in the meeting decide what resolutions they make.....so Why hasn't there been a resolution from the UN against the Syrian Governments action...? I would like to know too, possibly you could ask your Government why they havn't proposed a resolution? I could ask mine but they are not at the security council meetings.
Click to expand...

Because when the United States pushes the UNSC to condemn something, we're expected to follow through with action and at the moment we're tied up in Libya, having condemned their actions. That's on top of Iraq and Afghanistan.

However the United Nations General Assembly has certainly acted to condemn various actions from at least one nation in that region without US leadership, why do you suppose they fail to do so in this case?
 
Mycroft said:
Because when the United States pushes the UNSC to condemn something, we're expected to follow through with action and at the moment we're tied up in Libya, having condemned their actions. That's on top of Iraq and Afghanistan.

However the United Nations General Assembly has certainly acted to condemn various actions from at least one nation in that region without US leadership, why do you suppose they fail to do so in this case?
Click to expand...
maybe they have a laughable excuse too...like the excuse you postulate for the US. Maybe they are not saying anything because they believe the same strange thing that you do...That if you condemn something you are expected to "follow through" with military action or something...

,
 
The Fool said:
maybe they have a laughable excuse too...like the excuse you postulate for the US. Maybe they are not saying anything because they believe the same strange thing that you do...That if you condemn something you are expected to "follow through" with military action or something...

,
Click to expand...

No, I said the United States. Not just anyone.

Why do you do that? What do you get out of it?
 
Mycroft said:
No, I said the United States. Not just anyone.
Click to expand...
Sorry...I agree and was only meaning to talk about America I said "That if you condemn something " meaning You as an American but I understand how that could be read other ways....my apologies.
Why do you do that? What do you get out of it?
Click to expand...
I agree, lets just attach that to the UN as well and discontinue discussing another appalling event used as a cheap UN bash in the OP.
 
http://debka.com/

Syrian deaths soar as tanks, snipers, commandos mow down civilians.

Bashar Assad has launched all-out war on his people. Tanks firing artillery, infantry units, commandoes and snipers were deployed for the first time in Syrian cities at daybreak Monday, April 25 for the most brutal assault on any anti-government protesters in the four-month Arab uprising. Hundreds are estimated to have been massacred and thousands injured and left to die in the streets. Syria hopes to conceal the scale of the carnage in Daraa by shutting its borders with Jordan.

Way to go!

Soon, no more opposition and Butcher Assad can rule himself.

Obama! OBAMA! Where for art though?
 
It is China who shows the way to run security. Pre-emptively. The Syrian security situation is a miserable failure already.
 
The Fool said:
Sorry...I agree and was only meaning to talk about America I said "That if you condemn something " meaning You as an American but I understand how that could be read other ways....my apologies.
Click to expand...

Of course. So when you said "maybe they have a laughable excuse too...like the excuse you postulate for the US." I should have read "they" to mean the United States. So the correct parsing of that sentence is "maybe they have the United States has a laughable excuse too...like the excuse you postulate for the US."

:oldroll:


The Fool said:
I agree, lets just attach that to the UN as well and discontinue discussing another appalling event used as a cheap UN bash in the OP.
Click to expand...

Or...it's wrong to discuss the shortcomings of the United Nations?

Why? Wouldn't it make more sense to both condemn the actions of Syria and condemn the apparent double standards of the UN?
 
Mycroft said:
Of course. So when you said "maybe they have a laughable excuse too...like the excuse you postulate for the US." I should have read "they" to mean the United States. So the correct parsing of that sentence is "maybe they have the United States has a laughable excuse too...like the excuse you postulate for the US."

:oldroll:
Click to expand...
no...why would you do that? If I talk about clarifying one word from a post why would you apply that to another word??

I was talking about "you" in ""That if you condemn something " so why are you talking about another sentence? when I said "maybe they have a laughable excuse too" I was obviously talking about the UN....Honestly Mycroft...how could you possibly get that all mixed up?




Or...it's wrong to discuss the shortcomings of the United Nations?

Why? Wouldn't it make more sense to both condemn the actions of Syria and condemn the apparent double standards of the UN?
Click to expand...
I said I thought it is an appalling event used as a cheap UN bash in the OP. My opinion hasn't changed.
 
boyntonstu said:
http://debka.com/

Syrian deaths soar as tanks, snipers, commandos mow down civilians.

Bashar Assad has launched all-out war on his people. Tanks firing artillery, infantry units, commandoes and snipers were deployed for the first time in Syrian cities at daybreak Monday, April 25 for the most brutal assault on any anti-government protesters in the four-month Arab uprising. Hundreds are estimated to have been massacred and thousands injured and left to die in the streets. Syria hopes to conceal the scale of the carnage in Daraa by shutting its borders with Jordan.

Way to go!

Soon, no more opposition and Butcher Assad can rule himself.

Obama! OBAMA! Where for art though?
Click to expand...

Well, since you are asking about Obama and Syria, then I guess you are too smart to have noticed this statement that President Obama issued on 22 APR 2011. After all, if you did notice such obvious things that occurred a few days ago then it would be a bit more difficult for you to pretend to be outraged at what is going on in Syria right now.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/22/statement-president-obama-syria

The United States condemns in the strongest possible terms the use of force by the Syrian government against demonstrators. This outrageous use of violence to quell protests must come to an end now. We regret the loss of life and our thoughts are with the families and loved ones of the victims, and with the Syrian people in this challenging time.
…

We strongly oppose the Syrian government’s treatment of its citizens and we continue to oppose its continued destabilizing behavior more generally, including support for terrorism and terrorist groups. The United States will continue to stand up for democracy and the universal rights that all human beings deserve, in Syria and around the world.
Click to expand...
 
The Fool said:
no...why would you do that? If I talk about clarifying one word from a post why would you apply that to another word??

I was talking about "you" in ""That if you condemn something " so why are you talking about another sentence? when I said "maybe they have a laughable excuse too" I was obviously talking about the UN....Honestly Mycroft...how could you possibly get that all mixed up?
Click to expand...

Okay, I misread that. My apologies.

But the UN produces many condemnation that do not result in any military action, so why would that prevent the UN from condemning this action?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom