• You may find search is unavailable for a little while. Trying to fix a problem.

CIA/Mossad Death Squads in Syria

HoverBoarder

Graduate Poster
HoverBoarder
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
1,667
So the story goes from many on the pro-Assad side in the Syrian conflict, that just about everything you see concerning Syria in the media is a lie. It is all a giant CT to destabilize Syria to promote Western goals.


According to the conspiracy theory on the issue, the whole conflict is due to CIA/Mossad death squads. Death squads that include CIA/Mossad agents, as well as CIA contracted Al-Qaeda groups sometimes referred to "Ciaqaeda."


This is by no means a minor conspiracy theory, as you can see from the following videos with tens of thousands of views, and the many articles that subsribe to the idea.

Syria - The REAL Story -- MUST SEE -- CIA & MOSSAD Death Squads Exposed


One of the most major purveyors of this theory has been the conspiracy theorist, and Russian Times correspondent, Webster Tarpley. RT in particular has spent a lot of news coverage time covering this issue, and even famously included a video of a western looking man being beaten on the ground who was claimed to have been part of one of these CIA/Mossad death squads (the last video linked to here).


Since Webster Tarpley is one of the biggest solicitors of this CT, it is probably best to have him describe it in his own words from his video interview with RT:


Clip from RT: Mossad vs Assad? 'CIA death squads behind Syria bloodbath'

1:42-2:50
Webster Tarpley said:
There are terrorist snipers who are shooting at civilians, men, women, and children. Blind terrorism, random killing. Simply for the purpose of destabilizing the Country. I would not call this a Civil war by any stretch of the imagination. That’s a very, very misleading term. In the following sense.

What you are dealing with here are death squads. You’re dealing here with terror commandoes. The kind of thing everyone remembers from Argentina and Central America. This is a typical CIA method. In this case it is a joint production of CIA, MI6, Mossad, DGSE from France. It’s got money coming from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar. And it has a couple of interesting managers, the manager I think you should point to most is a guy named Khadam. Khaddam was the foreign minister for this Country for quite a couple of decades, he is almost 80 years old who operates from Paris, and I think he is being groomed by NATO as the new dictator.
Click to expand...

7:05 - 8:00
Webster Tarpley said:
Foreign fighters have been brought in here by the CIA and the other Western services, and that is what is going on. And that is a very, very large part of it. In the city of Homs for example, they were telling us it was five dead, and seven wounded in one day, and what was it? It’s all snipers. It’s all these terrorists shooting the civilian population. Of course when Al-Jazeera arrives, they so those deaths are the responsibility of the Syrian army. That is absolute baloney, this is a Goebbels big lie campaign, there is no civil war here, there is no insurrection, there is no mass political movement against Assad.


These are very, very limited, minor, and strictly localized phenomenon. This looks nothing like Libya. I know what civil war in a modern Arab Country looks like. I was in Libya during the summer. There is no civil war here, this is a front.
Click to expand...


Clip from RT: CIA Mossad Snipers arrested in Syria


Because of this CT, none of the mass killings, artillery bombings, aerial bombings, Shabiha killings, or other War Crimes attributed to Assad's forces are seen as legitimate by many pro-Assad supporters. Those that due admit the legitimacy of some of the attacks from Assad's regime are ignored or justified because of the CIA/Mossad role in starting and perpetuating this conflict.

I would argue, as I did here, that as for Israel, if they were following their own best interests, they would do all that they could to keep the Assad regime in power. This is because despite his rhetoric, he is unlikely to directly attack Israel ever, and that threat would be much more dire if Syria destabilizes to the point that extremists could get their hands on Syria's biological and chemical weapons.

The US role in this CT is also unlikely because their foreign policy interests in the region would be severely hampered with an uncontrolled destabilized Syria, and the affect that would have on the surrounding countries. The US has been fairly vocal about opposing the mass killings and war crimes in Syria, and they have given verbal encouragement to the FSA, but little actual physical support. Especially not the personal support as described in this CT.

There has been evidence of Iranian and Hezbollah involvement. With the captured Iranians in this video (around 10:20-11:29) with corresponding Iranian military IDs and passports being described as "sharpshooters" who were caught "about to be posted on top of a high rise" in Homs. As well as a string of Hezbollah fighters who have been recently listed in Lebanese obituaries and a killed Hezbollah commander who died "performing his jihadist duties."

Still, even on the flip side, this points towards Syrian regime ally involvement in what has been a violent and bloody civil war to put down a major uprising against Assad. There has been no real data on either side that points towards CIA/Mossad involvement as described in the general CIA/Mossad death squad CT.

The main instigators of this conflict included the many documented regime attacks on protesters (like this one) and the torture, sexual mutilation, and killing of 13 year old Hamza Ali Al-Khateeb in Darraa by the Syrian Mukhabarat secrect police that caused many of the protests to spread, and created the beginning of what is now the FSA. This also casts doubt onto the validity of the CIA/Mossad death squad CT, and is one many things pro-Assad groups ignore in order to push their main CTs on the issue.


So is Webster Tarpley, the famous conspiracy theorist right on this? Is Khaddam, the CIA, Mossad, and other Western intelligence agencies sending death squads to Syria? Why or why not?
 
HoverBoarder said:
So the story goes from many on the pro-Assad side in the Syrian conflict, that just about everything you see concerning Syria in the media is a lie. It is all a giant CT to destabilize Syria to promote Western goals.


According to the conspiracy theory on the issue, the whole conflict is due to CIA/Mossad death squads. Death squads that include CIA/Mossad agents, as well as CIA contracted Al-Qaeda groups sometimes referred to "Ciaqaeda."


This is by no means a minor conspiracy theory, as you can see from the following videos with tens of thousands of views, and the many articles that subsribe to the idea.

Syria - The REAL Story -- MUST SEE -- CIA & MOSSAD Death Squads Exposed


One of the most major purveyors of this theory has been the conspiracy theorist, and Russian Times correspondent, Webster Tarpley. RT in particular has spent a lot of news coverage time covering this issue, and even famously included a video of a western looking man being beaten on the ground who was claimed to have been part of one of these CIA/Mossad death squads (the last video linked to here).


Since Webster Tarpley is one of the biggest solicitors of this CT, it is probably best to have him describe it in his own words from his video interview with RT:


Clip from RT: Mossad vs Assad? 'CIA death squads behind Syria bloodbath'

1:42-2:50


7:05 - 8:00



Clip from RT: CIA Mossad Snipers arrested in Syria


Because of this CT, none of the mass killings, artillery bombings, aerial bombings, Shabiha killings, or other War Crimes attributed to Assad's forces are seen as legitimate by many pro-Assad supporters. Those that due admit the legitimacy of some of the attacks from Assad's regime are ignored or justified because of the CIA/Mossad role in starting and perpetuating this conflict.

I would argue, as I did here, that as for Israel, if they were following their own best interests, they would do all that they could to keep the Assad regime in power. This is because despite his rhetoric, he is unlikely to directly attack Israel ever, and that threat would be much more dire if Syria destabilizes to the point that extremists could get their hands on Syria's biological and chemical weapons.

The US role in this CT is also unlikely because their foreign policy interests in the region would be severely hampered with an uncontrolled destabilized Syria, and the affect that would have on the surrounding countries. The US has been fairly vocal about opposing the mass killings and war crimes in Syria, and they have given verbal encouragement to the FSA, but little actual physical support. Especially not the personal support as described in this CT.

There has been evidence of Iranian and Hezbollah involvement. With the captured Iranians in this video (around 10:20-11:29) with corresponding Iranian military IDs and passports being described as "sharpshooters" who were caught "about to be posted on top of a high rise" in Homs. As well as a string of Hezbollah fighters who have been recently listed in Lebanese obituaries and a killed Hezbollah commander who died "performing his jihadist duties."

Still, even on the flip side, this points towards Syrian regime ally involvement in what has been a violent and bloody civil war to put down a major uprising against Assad. There has been no real data on either side that points towards CIA/Mossad involvement as described in the general CIA/Mossad death squad CT.

The main instigators of this conflict included the many documented regime attacks on protesters (like this one) and the torture, sexual mutilation, and killing of 13 year old Hamza Ali Al-Khateeb in Darraa by the Syrian Mukhabarat secrect police that caused many of the protests to spread, and created the beginning of what is now the FSA. This also casts doubt onto the validity of the CIA/Mossad death squad CT, and is one many things pro-Assad groups ignore in order to push their main CTs on the issue.


So is Webster Tarpley, the famous conspiracy theorist right on this? Is Khaddam, the CIA, Mossad, and other Western intelligence agencies sending death squads to Syria? Why or why not?
Click to expand...

Sure does. Do you think Turkey or some other ME country is footing the tab for staging areas for insurgents to queue up and train?
 
HoverBoarder said:
The US role in this CT is also unlikely because their foreign policy interests in the region would be severely hampered with an uncontrolled destabilized Syria, and the affect that would have on the surrounding countries. The US has been fairly vocal about opposing the mass killings and war crimes in Syria, and they have given verbal encouragement to the FSA, but little actual physical support.
Click to expand...
Please provide some concrete, supporting evidence for this blanket assertion.

Reuters:

'Exclusive: Obama authorizes secret U.S. support for Syrian rebels'

President Barack Obama has signed a secret order authorizing U.S. support for rebels seeking to depose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his government, U.S. sources familiar with the matter said.

...

Separately from the president's secret order, the Obama administration has stated publicly that it is providing some backing for Assad's opponents.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
President Barack Obama has signed a secret order authorizing U.S. support for rebels seeking to depose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his government, U.S. sources familiar with the matter said.
Click to expand...

Many rational people would need a bit more than this to come to a conclusion, but I would imagine that if we aren't "secretely" authorizing support to depose al-Assad we'd be idiots, since of course if Iran isn't "secretely" authorizing support FOR al-Assad they'd be stupid.

It's politics. It was happening for 100,000 years before your reviled Evil Red, White, and Blue Empire was ever even thought of.
 
Last edited:
twinstead said:
Many rational people would need a bit more than this to come to a conclusion, but I would imagine that if we aren't "secretely" authorizing support to depose al-Assad we'd be idiots, since of course if Iran isn't "secretely" authorizing support FOR al-Assad they'd be stupid.

It's politics. It's been happening for 100,000 years before your reviled Evil Red, White, and Blue Empire was ever even thought of.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your irrelevant, strawman, stereotype insertion.
 
JihadJane said:
Please provide some concrete, supporting evidence for this blanket assertion.

Reuters:

'Exclusive: Obama authorizes secret U.S. support for Syrian rebels'
Click to expand...


Frowm the article you have cited it would appear that "support" is limited to being at the same base in Turkey where the Turks are carrying out some training, and some fine words with minimal cash. The weapons seem to be coming from the Saudis, and the training from the Turks.

All Reuters has is some unconfirmed allegation from "unnamed officials" that there is a "secret finding" signed by the POTUS "at some point this year" to provide "support". Hardly evidence that the US is doing more than what it admits to publically (monitoring, expressing support for the rebels, and allowing them to draw on Syrian monies in the US).
 
Border Reiver said:
Frowm the article you have cited it would appear that "support" is limited to being at the same base in Turkey where the Turks are carrying out some training, and some fine words with minimal cash. The weapons seem to be coming from the Saudis, and the training from the Turks.

All Reuters has is some unconfirmed allegation from "unnamed officials" that there is a "secret finding" signed by the POTUS "at some point this year" to provide "support". Hardly evidence that the US is doing more than what it admits to publically (monitoring, expressing support for the rebels, and allowing them to draw on Syrian monies in the US).
Click to expand...

April 18, 2011:

"Newly released WikiLeaks cables reveal that the US State Department has been secretly financing Syrian opposition groups and other opposition projects for at least five years, The Washington Post reports."
 
Big Les said:
The 'Western sniper' looks rather Slavic to me.
Click to expand...

To me as well. If I had to guess, I would say Serbian possibly.

Some of the comments on the same video here claim that this was in Tunisia, and that the accents are Tunisian, but you find the video on most of the 'truth about CIA/Mossad in Syria' CT videos.
 
Donal said:
why don't you link to the WaPo report?
Click to expand...

Found it.

U.S. secretly backed Syrian opposition groups, cables released by WikiLeaks show


The article focuses primarily on support for the London-based satellite channel, Barada TV, as well as the support for the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI).

The Barada TV aspect is not so interesting, but the funding for MEPI definitely is. It is still a far cry from supplying "death squads," or giving direct military support to the FSA, but it could be evidence of helping opposition groups to from political opposition to Assad. Even though there is the aspect of the 2006 US embassy cable that noted that no opposition group in Syria was willing to accept the money, Syria was a much different place in 2006 compared to today in the middle of the Syrian civil war.

2006 was around the time when George Bush labeled Syria part of the "axis of evil." Most Syrians if not happy with the oppressive police State, intensive secret police control, and dictator rule, were not inclined enough in large numbers to stand up to Assad. Accepting money at that point would have meant putting their families in serious risk from the Syrian Mukhabarat secret police who were well known for their willingness to employ torture and extrajudicial killings to obtain their goals. It would also have meant accepting money from the US when Bush was not exactly popular in Syria or anywhere else in the ME.

Today however, that willingness to accept Assad dictator rule is all gone. If there were any illusions that Assad would not be like his mass murdering father, those illusions are far gone. Daily death tolls of 100 plus killed, constant bombings of the main cities, and abuductions of over 28,000 Syrians, have caused many Syrian to shed their complacency to brutal dictator rule.

It is ironically at this very time that Syrians are crying out the most for international support, that the US is most cautious in providing it. The US purposefully and very intentionally released the report on how Rebel Arms Flow Is Said to Benefit Jihadists in Syria. The US learned a hard lesson in Libya, and are not about to nonchalantly allow weapons from them to flow to opposition groups. Which is exactly the reason why Obama has declared that FSA support be restricted to non-lethal assistance.


Which is also another reason why it would be so against US interests to send in "death squads" to Syria.

The funding from MEPI for politial opposition groups is definitely interesting, and is worthy of more review, but it is still not evidence of providing "death squads" or providing military assistance to the rebels.

April 17, 2011

The State Department has secretly financed Syrian political opposition groups and related projects, including a satellite TV channel that beams anti-government programming into the country, according to previously undisclosed diplomatic cables.

The London-based satellite channel, Barada TV, began broadcasting in April 2009 but has ramped up operations to cover the mass protests in Syria as part of a long-standing campaign to overthrow the country’s autocratic leader, Bashar al-Assad. Human rights groups say scores of people have been killed by Assad’s security forces since the demonstrations began March 18; Syria has blamed the violence on “armed gangs.”

...

Barada TV is closely affiliated with the Movement for Justice and Development, a London-based network of Syrian exiles. Classified U.S. diplomatic cables show that the State Department has funneled as much as $6 million to the group since 2006 to operate the satellite channel and finance other activities inside Syria. The channel is named after the Barada River, which courses through the heart of Damascus, the Syrian capital.

The U.S. money for Syrian opposition figures began flowing under President George W. Bush after he effectively froze political ties with Damascus in 2005. The financial backing has continued under President Obama, even as his administration sought to rebuild relations with Assad. In January, the White House posted an ambassador to Damascus for the first time in six years.

It is unclear whether the State Department is still funding Syrian opposition groups, but the cables indicate money was set aside at least through September 2010. While some of that money has also supported programs and dissidents inside Syria,

...

In February 2006, when relations with Damascus were at a nadir, the Bush administration announced that it would award $5 million in grants to “accelerate the work of reformers in Syria.”

But no dissidents inside Syria were willing to take the money, for fear it would lead to their arrest or execution for treason, according to a 2006 cable from the U.S. Embassy, which reported that “no bona fide opposition member will be courageous enough to accept funding.”

...

People involved with the group and with Barada TV, however, would not acknowledge taking money from the U.S. government.

“I’m not aware of anything like that,” Malik al-Abdeh, Barada TV’s news director, said in a brief telephone interview from London.

...

Several U.S. diplomatic cables from the embassy in Damascus reveal that the Syrian exiles received money from a State Department program called the Middle East Partnership Initiative. According to the cables, the State Department funneled money to the exile group via the Democracy Council, a Los Angeles-based nonprofit. According to its Web site, the council sponsors projects in the Middle East, Asia and Latin America to promote the “fundamental elements of stable societies.”

...

Edgar Vasquez, a State Department spokesman, said the Middle East Partnership Initiative has allocated $7.5 million for Syrian programs since 2005. A cable from the embassy in Damascus, however, pegged a much higher total — about $12 million — between 2005 and 2010.

The cables report persistent fears among U.S. diplomats that Syrian state security agents had uncovered the money trail from Washington.

A September 2009 cable reported that Syrian agents had interrogated a number of people about “MEPI operations in particular,” a reference to the Middle East Partnership Initiative.
Click to expand...
 
HoverBoarder said:
Including the 'death squads?'
Click to expand...

Yeah, no, probably not the death squads. I should say that if there were an actual anti-Assad movement in Syria, and they were actually destabilizing the country, and CIA/Mossad operatives were assisting them "to promote Western goals", I would support that.

Death squads and Ciaqaeda, not so much.




For sufficiently large values of "Western goals". Mainly because I'm enough of an idealist to believe that whatever goals "the West" has for Syria, they're better than the goals Assad, Russia or China have for Syria.
 
Last edited:
JihadJane said:
'Syria and Iran: Exposing the Lies and Disinformation '

Published on Oct 21, 2012 by Joe Friendly:



Activists and independent analysts on the Middle East disentangle the lies of the U.S. government and corporate media to destabilize and colonize Syria and Iran.SPEAKERS:
Ramsey Clark, Former Attorney General, Dr. Mazen Adi and Mr. Asaad Ibrahim, Permanent Mission of the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nations, Lizzy Phelan, Independent Journalist and broadcaster who has reported from both Libya and Syria during the wars there, Ardeshir Ommani, American Iranian Friendship Committee (AIFC), Larry Hales, International Action Center, Steve Becker, ANSWER Coalition, Larry Hales, International Action Center,
mediated by Eleanor Ommani, cofounder of the AIFC

Sponsoring Organizations: American Iranian Friendship Committee (AIFC), ANSWER COALITION, International Action Center and New York Peace Council
Endorsed by CPRmetro.org Radio, Solidarity with Iran-SI, Veterans for Peace, Chpt. 21
Click to expand...

I have included another great addition to the CT thread from JJ, just in case people doubt that there are people who seriously believe this CT stuff.

Oh, they do exist.

They may not be rational, they may not rely on facts, they may live in their own crazed fantasy land, but they do exist.
 
theprestige said:
Yeah, no, probably not the death squads. I should say that if there were an actual anti-Assad movement in Syria, and they were actually destabilizing the country, and CIA/Mossad operatives were assisting them "to promote Western goals", I would support that.

Death squads and Ciaqaeda, not so much.




For sufficiently large values of "Western goals". Mainly because I'm enough of an idealist to believe that whatever goals "the West" has for Syria, they're better than the goals Assad, Russia or China have for Syria.
Click to expand...

The thing is that no country in the world benefits from a destabilized Syria.

Some Countries allow it to happen, either because like Iran, they are betting everything on a doomed bloody dictatorship to boost their own foreign policy interests without a care for how many innocent Syrians die from it, or like the US because they cannot afford to get involved except for speaking out against the abuses of the regime, or like Russia because they have financial and military interests in the country that they know will inevitably change from and Assad rule but are making arms sales in the meantime to at least hedge their bets and get something out of it, but destabilization does not benefit any country.

The only group that a destabilized Syria helps is Al-Qaeda.


Beyond the ridiculousness of the whole death squad stuff, the US would never go against their own interests, and the interests of their allies in the region including Israel to destabilyze Syria for the heck of it. Or for any other reason.



Now. Speaking out against the war crimes and human rights abuses of the Syrian regime is one thing, and giving vocal support for groups that fight against the regime is one thing, but that is nowhere near the same as destabilizing Syria for the heck of it.
 
HoverBoarder said:
Now. Speaking out against the war crimes and human rights abuses of the Syrian regime is one thing, and giving vocal support for groups that fight against the regime is one thing, but that is nowhere near the same as destabilizing Syria for the heck of it.
Click to expand...
Giving vocal support is fine too.

What about giving material support? Or giving operational support? Or giving direct military support in the form of allied troops in combat alongside groups that fight against the regime?

Anyway, to restate my previous clarification: I'm not in favor of destabilizing Syria for the heck of it. But if Syria were to be destabilized, I am in favor of influencing the course of events such that when Syria restabilizes, it does so in a state that is more aligned with "Western goals".

I guess what I'm saying is, I reject the conspiracy theory, but if US forces were operating covertly to support the rebels and establish a lasting friendship with a new Syrian government that more closely aligned with Western values, I'd be okay with that.
 
theprestige said:
Giving vocal support is fine too.

What about giving material support? Or giving operational support? Or giving direct military support in the form of allied troops in combat alongside groups that fight against the regime?

Anyway, to restate my previous clarification: I'm not in favor of destabilizing Syria for the heck of it. But if Syria were to be destabilized, I am in favor of influencing the course of events such that when Syria restabilizes, it does so in a state that is more aligned with "Western goals".

I guess what I'm saying is, I reject the conspiracy theory, but if US forces were operating covertly to support the rebels and establish a lasting friendship with a new Syrian government that more closely aligned with Western values, I'd be okay with that.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I would probably agree with that as well, but only because that type of action would be beneficial to the Syrian people.

But this situation is a lot more than just foreign interests.

My main point in focusing on Syria, and highlighting the CTs is to show the reasons why the conflict started, and how to prevent the next one from occurring. All of which largely comes down to accountability.


A lot of the reason why the death squads and other CTs on Syria are so popular is because people would rather use the situation to support their own largely antiwestern bias and propaganda views instead of working to seriously see what is going on.

That kind of behavior contributes to the continuation of the conflict by providing support to groups like Iran and Russia who are perpetuating the Syrian crisis to achieve their own foreign policy goals. Allowing them to not have to hold the Syrian regime accountable for their actions. Many people have built their identities on that type of baseless anti-western CT supported mindset, but they are buying their bubble world fantasy lands with the lives of innocent Syrians.

A selfish act to say the least.

I am interested in looking into why the conflict happened in the first place, and how to prevent a similar occurance from happening in the future.
 
theprestige said:
Anyway, to restate my previous clarification: I'm not in favor of destabilizing Syria for the heck of it. But if Syria were to be destabilized, I am in favor of influencing the course of events such that when Syria restabilizes, it does so in a state that is more aligned with "Western goals".
Click to expand...

I don't think its practical to arrange a kurdish takeover.

I guess what I'm saying is, I reject the conspiracy theory, but if US forces were operating covertly to support the rebels and establish a lasting friendship with a new Syrian government that more closely aligned with Western values, I'd be okay with that.
Click to expand...

Then you don't know much about the rebels.
 
HoverBoarder said:
The only group that a destabilized Syria helps is Al-Qaeda.
Click to expand...

Al Qaeda is only one of the Islamic fundamentalist groups ("rebels") invading Syria and terrorizing Syrians.

They all have substantial foreign support.


Beyond the ridiculousness of the whole death squad stuff,
Click to expand...


Argument from incredulity

Death squads have long been used as a US counter-insurgency tool. Crying "CT" doesn't alter this fact nor does it obscure (wilful?) ignorance about unsavory US foreign policy actions around the globe.


the US would never go against their own interests, and the interests of their allies in the region including Israel to destabilyze Syria for the heck of it. Or for any other reason.
Click to expand...

How did destroying Iraq and turning it over to Iranian influence serve US interests?

The US has long sought to neutralize Syria. Destabilization is the usual way of destroying regimes that no longer serve its "interests".

'Apologies Of An Economic Hitman':




HoverBoarder said:
Fair enough, I would probably agree with that as well, but only because that type of action would be beneficial to the Syrian people.

But this situation is a lot more than just foreign interests.

My main point in focusing on Syria, and highlighting the CTs is to show the reasons why the conflict started, and how to prevent the next one from occurring. All of which largely comes down to accountability.


A lot of the reason why the death squads and other CTs on Syria are so popular is because people would rather use the situation to support their own largely antiwestern bias and propaganda views instead of working to seriously see what is going on.

That kind of behavior contributes to the continuation of the conflict by providing support to groups like Iran and Russia who are perpetuating the Syrian crisis to achieve their own foreign policy goals. Allowing them to not have to hold the Syrian regime accountable for their actions. Many people have built their identities on that type of baseless anti-western CT supported mindset, but they are buying their bubble world fantasy lands with the lives of innocent Syrians.
Click to expand...

In what way would this alleged mindset be "baseless"? Are you claiming that Western foreign policy actions are never destructive to it recipients?

A selfish act to say the least.

I am interested in looking into why the conflict happened in the first place, and how to prevent a similar occurance from happening in the future.
Click to expand...

To summarize, ...CT... blah blah... CT ...blah blah...CT ...blah blah...

What about the West's foreign policy goals, or doesn't it have any besides bringing peace, love and democracy to the barbarians?
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Anyway, to restate my previous clarification: I'm not in favor of destabilizing Syria for the heck of it. But if Syria were to be destabilized, I am in favor of influencing the course of events such that when Syria restabilizes, it does so in a state that is more aligned with "Western goals".
Click to expand...
geni said:
I don't think its practical to arrange a kurdish takeover.
Click to expand...

Syrian Kurds would not be pro-western.


theprestige said:
I guess what I'm saying is, I reject the conspiracy theory, but if US forces were operating covertly to support the rebels and establish a lasting friendship with a new Syrian government that more closely aligned with Western values, I'd be okay with that.
Click to expand...
geni said:
Then you don't know much about the rebels.
Click to expand...
That is not true of all rebels. However it is doubtful that they would be very pro-western whether we helped them or not.


At this point though, we are where we are. The US couldn't just give unconditional support to the Assad regime after he so blatantly killed tens of thousands of his own people in order to retain his bloody grip on power.

We just have to work with whatever government is in power now, and in the future in Syria to make sure they respect basic human rights, and work with the countries that support them (Russia and Iran) to hold the Syrian government accountable for their actions.
 
JihadJane said:
Have you ever researched this topic yourself?
Click to expand...

I've read all about the topic. Indeed, an unnamed source handed me a secret document that explains how full of it Seymour Hersh actually is.

Trust me, these sources are reliable.

wink
 
JihadJane said:
Have you ever researched this topic yourself?
Click to expand...
Nice, try to turn the tables on me first. How about just answering the question?

By the way, this second article ties nothing to the U.S., I'm looking for hard facts, not random dot connecting:
JihadJane said:
Then this:

'Iraqis Exact Revenge on Baathists
Police Shrug Off Killings of 50 Hussein Loyalists by Unknown Gunmen'
Click to expand...

Your New Yorker article by itself would have been the better response to my question:
JihadJane said:
Read this:

'MOVING TARGETS. Will the counter-insurgency plan in Iraq repeat the mistakes of Vietnam?'
Click to expand...

I like the New Yorker, ever since it did the Bromance cover cartoon of Ryan and Romney.

Let's dig into that one, however. The tactics word-of-mouthedly attributed to Rumsfeld and coterie do appear to fit the Wikipedia evolved definition of death squads, which I guess will do. Now, as to the claim whether these are, as you say:
standard US "counter-insurgency" tools"
Click to expand...

Please re-read the article. In the article it states that Rumsfeld had to push his concepts through a reluctant Pentagon staff. For some background, if you recall, Rumsfeld thought that victory in Iraq could be done on the cheap. It was not until the Surge was pushed through by McCain that the tide was turned for the U.S. in Iraq, and Rumsfeld ended up resigning, because his strategy was failing. Some insight for you: one of the case studies that military strategists learn as part of the Joint Professional Military Education that most go through now is Panama. Most notably, a lesson learned after the U.S. invasion of Panama is that it takes a lot of conventional boots on the ground to stabilize a country. Rumsfeld did not take this lesson or learn it: he had his own ideas, which proved to be ineffective.

So what does this show? "Death Squads" are NOT standard U.S. counter-insurgency tools. Now, as to whether or how extensive they are being used in Syria, in concert with Mossad, please supply the proof. Last I checked, Rumsfeld was no longer Secretary of Defense.
 
Last edited:
Clayton Moore said:
Connect the dots



Israel Zionists

neoconservatives Zionists

neoconservatives dictate US Foreign Policy

US Military instigates and enforces US Foreign Policy

Israel's super duper death squad =
Click to expand...

OK, I get it. That was most definitely a joke. Because there are a whole lot more people in the US than the neoconservatives, and it would be extremely illogical to make such a claim.

Seemed pretty obvious, but I was just making sure.


The super, duper, snooper, swooper, death squads out to steal our Lucky Charms.
 
I usually tune out everything that follows "connect the dots" when an ideologue says something
 
HoverBoarder said:
OK, I get it. That was most definitely a joke. Because there are a whole lot more people in the US than the neoconservatives, and it would be extremely illogical to make such a claim.

Seemed pretty obvious, but I was just making sure.


The super, duper, snooper, swooper, death squads out to steal our Lucky Charms.
Click to expand...

Tell MSNBC that.
Chris mentions, almost daily, that the neocons control US Foreign Policy.

220px-Chris_Matthews_2011_Shankbone.JPG
 
Clayton Moore said:
Tell MSNBC that.
Chris mentions, almost daily, that the neocons control US Foreign Policy.

[qimg]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/Chris_Matthews_2011_Shankbone.JPG/220px-Chris_Matthews_2011_Shankbone.JPG[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Clayton, name one neo-con who Controls U.S. Foreign Policy.

ETA: wait, isn't Chris Matthews a member of the Main Stream Media? And you still trust him?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom