Syrian rebels confront defeat in Aleppo, could Saudi Arabia and Turkey be drawn in?

[anatta]

With rebel forces facing the prospect of a crushing defeat by Syria’s Russian-backed regime, their allies Saudi Arabia and Turkey may send in limited numbers of ground troops, analysts say.

Riyadh on Thursday left open the possibility of deploying soldiers, saying it would “contribute positively” if the US-led coalition against Islamic State (IS) in Syria decides on ground action.

The fate of Saudi-backed Syrian armed opposition groups fighting to topple President Bashar al-Assad is also a major concern for the kingdom.

“I think Saudi Arabia is desperate to do something in Syria,” said Andreas Krieg, of the Department of Defence Studies at King’s College London.

Krieg said the “moderate” opposition is in danger of being routed if Aleppo falls to the regime, whose forces have closed in on Syria’s second city, backed by intense Russian air strikes.

I think Saudi Arabia is desperate to do something in Syria

“This is a problem for Saudi and Qatar as they have massively invested into Syria via the moderate opposition as their surrogate on the ground,” said Krieg, who also serves as a consultant to the Qatari armed forces.

Russia, which along with Saudi Arabia’s regional rival Iran is a major ally of Assad, meanwhile has accused Turkey of “preparations for an armed invasion” of Syria.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called the claims “laughable”. But Krieg said Erdogan’s policy in Syria has achieved nothing so far.

“Turkey and Saudi need to turn this war around. So any Saudi engagement would be in cooperation with Doha and Ankara,” he added.

Aleppo province is among the main strongholds of Syria’s armed opposition, which is facing possibly its worst moment since the beginning of the nearly five-year war, at a time when peace efforts have stalled.

The Saudi-backed opposition umbrella group, the High Negotiations Committee, says it will not return to peace talks which recently collapsed in Geneva unless its humanitarian demands are met.

“The Saudis believe that the chance of a peaceful solution for the Syrian crisis is very limited,” said Mustafa Alani, of the independent Gulf Research Centre.

“They don’t see that there is a real pressure on the regime to give major concessions... They think eventually it will have to end in the battlefield,” Alani said.

“Turkey is enthusiastic about this option [of sending ground troops] since the Russians started their air operation and tried to push Turkey outside the equation.”

Alani said the Saudis are serious about committing troops “as part of a coalition, especially if the Turkish forces are going to be involved”.

The Saudis believe that the chance of a peaceful solution for the Syrian crisis is very limited

But he and other analysts said Saudi involvement would be limited, given its leadership of a separate Arab coalition fighting in Yemen for almost a year and guarding the kingdom’s southern border from attacks by Iran-backed Yemeni rebels.

“They are overstretched. But in principle I think they will not hesitate to send a certain number of their fighters to fight in Syria,” Alani said, adding that this would probably include Saudi special forces.

Turkey and Saudi already belong to a US-led coalition which officially has 65 members. It has been bombing IS targets in Syria and Iraq, as well
as training local forces to fight the extremists.

On Friday, US Central Command spokesman Pat Ryder welcomed Saudi Arabia’s willingness to send soldiers against IS. The United States has been calling on coalition members to do more.

In November, the United Arab Emirates said it was also ready to commit ground troops against jihadists in Syria.

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem warned on Saturday that foreign ground troops entering Syria would “return home in wooden coffins”.

I assure you any aggressor will return to their country in a wooden coffin, whether they be Saudis or Turks

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem

Al-Muallem said conventional wisdom and logic would suggest the idea of Saudi troops in Syria is far-fetched, but that “with the crazy Saudi leadership nothing is far-fetched”.

“Any ground intervention in Syria, without the consent of the Syrian government, will be considered an aggression that should be resisted by every Syrian citizen,” he told a news conference in Damascus. “Let no one think they can attack Syria or violate its sovereignty because I assure you any aggressor will return to their country in a wooden coffin, whether they be Saudis or Turks.”

Jane Kinninmont, senior research fellow at London’s Chatham House, said Saudi Arabia is more interested in the war in Yemen than the struggle against IS.

“But what you might see is small numbers of ground troops and perhaps also special forces which would be there partly to make a symbolic point that Saudi Arabia is supporting the fight against ISIS,” she said, using another acronym for the Sunni extremists.

She declared herself “a bit sceptical” about potential Turkish army involvement in Syria, “but we might see them having some kind of interest in containing Kurdish influence”.

http://www.scmp.com/news/world/arti...crushing-defeat-aleppo-could-saudi-arabia-and

Krieg said that with Saudi and other Gulf kingdoms “bogged down” in Yemen, he could only foresee a possible expansion of “train and equip” missions involving Gulf special forces to help rebels in Syria.

“Saudi and Qatar have already networks on the ground,” he said, viewing Doha as a link between Riyadh and Ankara as relations improve.

 

[moon]

I don't foresee anybody wanting to take on the Russians. The Russians will commit themselves to restoring order to Syria under Assad for the purposes of maintaining their warm water port and, most importantly for us, to prevent any Western/Israeli/Saudi war on Iran. Such a war would be imminent the moment that it was believed that Israel would be safe from retribution via Syria and Lebanon.
You may think that the threat of such a war has been removed by way of Iran's compliance with Obama's diplomacy. The neoZionists and Sauds have other ideas. However, such a globally-important manoeuvre cannot be attempted while Syria remains a threat to Israel. Thanks to the Russians the attempt to destroy the Syrian state appears to have failed- and the Russians will commit 100% to ensuring that remains the case and to the return of the country to its legal government. The later fate of the Assad rule will be decided by the Syrian people- and that's how it should be.
In effect, peace can be facilitated by co-operation with the Russians. Those that do not profit from war- and that's the majority of the world's civilians- will see the wisdom of this and end support for all illegal efforts to overthrow Syria militarily.

In addition, it would be suicidal for the Sauds to attempt any military intervention against Russian intent. The Sauds are good at slaughtering lightly-armed Yemenis from the air with their UK/USA- provided hardware and intelligence but they don't have any soldiers worth spit. Sauds don't even work. They get paid by their corrupt government for doing squat on a daily basis. The work in Saudi-Arabia is done by foreigners- and frankly, them that don't work can't fight. Sauds would make the worst soldiers imaginable and their foreign workers wouldn't fill any uniforms either.

As for the Turks they are now under NATO supervision after their incredibly stupid downing of an unsuspecting Russian bomber. Should they attempt any further overt action against the Russians they will be pressuring the NATO pact in an area wherein NATO doesn't want to become involved. They may well find that NATO's ' one for all and all for one ' schoolyard policy does not apply to NATO states which indulge in aggression.

 

[evince]

shit cork out of the bottle

 

[transwarpdrive]

With rebel forces facing the prospect of a crushing defeat by Syria’s Russian-backed regime, their allies Saudi Arabia and Turkey may send in limited numbers of ground troops, analysts say.

Riyadh on Thursday left open the possibility of deploying soldiers, saying it would “contribute positively” if the US-led coalition against Islamic State (IS) in Syria decides on ground action.

The fate of Saudi-backed Syrian armed opposition groups fighting to topple President Bashar al-Assad is also a major concern for the kingdom.

“I think Saudi Arabia is desperate to do something in Syria,” said Andreas Krieg, of the Department of Defence Studies at King’s College London.

Krieg said the “moderate” opposition is in danger of being routed if Aleppo falls to the regime, whose forces have closed in on Syria’s second city, backed by intense Russian air strikes.

I think Saudi Arabia is desperate to do something in Syria

“This is a problem for Saudi and Qatar as they have massively invested into Syria via the moderate opposition as their surrogate on the ground,” said Krieg, who also serves as a consultant to the Qatari armed forces.

Russia, which along with Saudi Arabia’s regional rival Iran is a major ally of Assad, meanwhile has accused Turkey of “preparations for an armed invasion” of Syria.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called the claims “laughable”. But Krieg said Erdogan’s policy in Syria has achieved nothing so far.

“Turkey and Saudi need to turn this war around. So any Saudi engagement would be in cooperation with Doha and Ankara,” he added.

Aleppo province is among the main strongholds of Syria’s armed opposition, which is facing possibly its worst moment since the beginning of the nearly five-year war, at a time when peace efforts have stalled.

The Saudi-backed opposition umbrella group, the High Negotiations Committee, says it will not return to peace talks which recently collapsed in Geneva unless its humanitarian demands are met.

“The Saudis believe that the chance of a peaceful solution for the Syrian crisis is very limited,” said Mustafa Alani, of the independent Gulf Research Centre.

“They don’t see that there is a real pressure on the regime to give major concessions... They think eventually it will have to end in the battlefield,” Alani said.

“Turkey is enthusiastic about this option [of sending ground troops] since the Russians started their air operation and tried to push Turkey outside the equation.”

Alani said the Saudis are serious about committing troops “as part of a coalition, especially if the Turkish forces are going to be involved”.

The Saudis believe that the chance of a peaceful solution for the Syrian crisis is very limited

But he and other analysts said Saudi involvement would be limited, given its leadership of a separate Arab coalition fighting in Yemen for almost a year and guarding the kingdom’s southern border from attacks by Iran-backed Yemeni rebels.

“They are overstretched. But in principle I think they will not hesitate to send a certain number of their fighters to fight in Syria,” Alani said, adding that this would probably include Saudi special forces.

Turkey and Saudi already belong to a US-led coalition which officially has 65 members. It has been bombing IS targets in Syria and Iraq, as well
as training local forces to fight the extremists.

On Friday, US Central Command spokesman Pat Ryder welcomed Saudi Arabia’s willingness to send soldiers against IS. The United States has been calling on coalition members to do more.

In November, the United Arab Emirates said it was also ready to commit ground troops against jihadists in Syria.

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem warned on Saturday that foreign ground troops entering Syria would “return home in wooden coffins”.

I assure you any aggressor will return to their country in a wooden coffin, whether they be Saudis or Turks

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem

Al-Muallem said conventional wisdom and logic would suggest the idea of Saudi troops in Syria is far-fetched, but that “with the crazy Saudi leadership nothing is far-fetched”.

“Any ground intervention in Syria, without the consent of the Syrian government, will be considered an aggression that should be resisted by every Syrian citizen,” he told a news conference in Damascus. “Let no one think they can attack Syria or violate its sovereignty because I assure you any aggressor will return to their country in a wooden coffin, whether they be Saudis or Turks.”

Jane Kinninmont, senior research fellow at London’s Chatham House, said Saudi Arabia is more interested in the war in Yemen than the struggle against IS.

“But what you might see is small numbers of ground troops and perhaps also special forces which would be there partly to make a symbolic point that Saudi Arabia is supporting the fight against ISIS,” she said, using another acronym for the Sunni extremists.

She declared herself “a bit sceptical” about potential Turkish army involvement in Syria, “but we might see them having some kind of interest in containing Kurdish influence”.

http://www.scmp.com/news/world/arti...crushing-defeat-aleppo-could-saudi-arabia-and

Krieg said that with Saudi and other Gulf kingdoms “bogged down” in Yemen, he could only foresee a possible expansion of “train and equip” missions involving Gulf special forces to help rebels in Syria.

“Saudi and Qatar have already networks on the ground,” he said, viewing Doha as a link between Riyadh and Ankara as relations improve.

If the US had a real president instead of the fake, empty suit sitting in the White House, and his idiot poodle Kerry, they would have armed the moderate rebels as they did in Afghanistan with proper anti-aircraft weapons and shot down the russian jets/helicopters. Charlie Wilson, where are you when we need you?

 

[moon]

If the US had a real president instead of the fake, empty suit sitting in the White House, and his idiot poodle Kerry, they would have armed the moderate rebels as they did in Afghanistan with proper anti-aircraft weapons and shot down the russian jets/helicopters. Charlie Wilson, where are you when we need you?

What sort of a fool would want that sort of a war with Russia ? A half-witted armchair warrior might consider it a good idea.
Imagine- if you can- Hisb'allah armed with Russian ground-to-air capabilities. Wakey, wakey.

 

[anatta]

I don't foresee anybody wanting to take on the Russians. The Russians will commit themselves to restoring order to Syria under Assad for the purposes of maintaining their warm water port and, most importantly for us, to prevent any Western/Israeli/Saudi war on Iran. Such a war would be imminent the moment that it was believed that Israel would be safe from retribution via Syria and Lebanon.
You may think that the threat of such a war has been removed by way of Iran's compliance with Obama's diplomacy. The neoZionists and Sauds have other ideas. However, such a globally-important manoeuvre cannot be attempted while Syria remains a threat to Israel. Thanks to the Russians the attempt to destroy the Syrian state appears to have failed- and the Russians will commit 100% to ensuring that remains the case and to the return of the country to its legal government. The later fate of the Assad rule will be decided by the Syrian people- and that's how it should be.
In effect, peace can be facilitated by co-operation with the Russians. Those that do not profit from war- and that's the majority of the world's civilians- will see the wisdom of this and end support for all illegal efforts to overthrow Syria militarily.

In addition, it would be suicidal for the Sauds to attempt any military intervention against Russian intent. The Sauds are good at slaughtering lightly-armed Yemenis from the air with their UK/USA- provided hardware and intelligence but they don't have any soldiers worth spit. Sauds don't even work. They get paid by their corrupt government for doing squat on a daily basis. The work in Saudi-Arabia is done by foreigners- and frankly, them that don't work can't fight. Sauds would make the worst soldiers imaginable and their foreign workers wouldn't fill any uniforms either.

As for the Turks they are now under NATO supervision after their incredibly stupid downing of an unsuspecting Russian bomber. Should they attempt any further overt action against the Russians they will be pressuring the NATO pact in an area wherein NATO doesn't want to become involved. They may well find that NATO's ' one for all and all for one ' schoolyard policy does not apply to NATO states which indulge in aggression.

SA keeps its armed forces home for defense, unlike Iranian expansionism. Persians are a bunch of hegemonists ..

SA army is effective, but not used in Yemen - King Salman has to make a decision to go in and not just use air -agreed.
Iranian proxies ( Huthi's) are allowing AQAP to flourish, but SA has to make a decision..

Going to Syria is a logistical nightmare - how do they string out supply lines? Once in Syria -whom does SA ally with?
Not al-Nusra ( al-Qaeda in Syria),not Hezbollah -Iranian surrogates -the so called "rebels' are being slaughtered by Russian air for.

Why is Russia bombing Aleppo? - there aren't any ISIS in Aleppo!

You may think that the threat of such a war has been removed by way of Iran's compliance with Obama's diplomacy. The neoZionists and Sauds have other ideas.

absurd. Iran Quds forces are already in Syria

 

[transwarpdrive]

SA keeps its armed forces home for defense, unlike Iranian expansionism. Persians are a bunch of hegemonists ..

SA army is effective, but not used in Yemen - King Salman has to make a decision to go in and not just use air -agreed.
Iranian proxies ( Huthi's) are allowing AQAP to flourish, but SA has to make a decision..

Going to Syria is a logistical nightmare - how do they string out supply lines? Once in Syria -whom does SA ally with?
Not al-Nusra ( al-Qaeda in Syria),not Hezbollah -Iranian surrogates -the so called "rebels' are being slaughtered by Russian air for.

Why is Russia bombing Aleppo? - there aren't any ISIS in Aleppo!

absurd. Iran Quds forces are already in Syria

Anatta, you might want to put that asshole trash on ignore, most of the rest of us already have.

 

[anatta]

Anatta, you might want to put that asshole trash on ignore, most of the rest of us already have.

Not yet. we'll see

 

[moon]

SA keeps its armed forces home for defense, unlike Iranian expansionism. Persians are a bunch of hegemonists ..

The Sauds perform their hegemony with money and the influence that it brings. They have only started to use their military to bomb civilians since their oil price crashed. The oil crash was supposed to impoverish Russia, incidentally, but it has backfired.

SA army is effective, but not used in Yemen -

How do you know ? The Saudi military is only good at bombing Yemeni civilians and infrastructure- which it does with weaponry provided by the US and the UK.

King Salman has to make a decision to go in and not just use air -agreed.
Iranian proxies ( Huthi's) are allowing AQAP to flourish, but SA has to make a decision..

Salman is weak, the product of decades of Saudi dynastic rule. He is neither loved nor respected and his power comes from applied tyranny. His regime has beheaded hundreds of political opponents over the past few months alone.

Going to Syria is a logistical nightmare - how do they string out supply lines? Once in Syria -whom does SA ally with?

It would be suicidal. From which strata of Saudi society would these ' soldiers ' be drawn ? It's not even ' their country ' that they be sacrificed for- it belongs to the House of Saud.

Not al-Nusra ( al-Qaeda in Syria),not Hezbollah -Iranian surrogates -the so called "rebels' are being slaughtered by Russian air for.

The current Syrian government is the legal government of Syria and it has requested Russian assistance. Anybody opposing the legal government militarily is seen as the enemy.

Why is Russia bombing Aleppo? - there aren't any ISIS in Aleppo!

All militias are seen as legitimate targets, whether they're armed and funded by the Sauds, the USA, France, Israel, the UK, Scotland , Botswana, Iceland or anybody else wanting Syria to become a failed state in the manner of anti-Zionist Iraq and Libya.

absurd. Iran Quds forces are already in Syria

Iran is Syria's ally. What exactly is your complaint ?

 

[moon]

Anatta, you might want to put that asshole trash on ignore, most of the rest of us already have.

Note the complete absence of any topic-based input from this multi-personality suffering troll.

 

[moon]

Not yet. we'll see

Ignoring the voices of one's fellows results in the solitary confinement of trolldom.

 

[evince]

Anatta, you might want to put that asshole trash on ignore, most of the rest of us already have.

ignoring facts has gotten you what so far you complete incompetent idiot?

 

[evince]

Not yet. we'll see

why is it I dont have to IGNORE anyone and you people do?

 

[anatta]

The Sauds perform their hegemony with money and the influence that it brings. They have only started to use their military to bomb civilians since their oil price crashed. The oil crash was supposed to impoverish Russia, incidentally, but it has backfired.

The "bombing of civilians" happens but they are not targeted per se' - Yemen is their border, and Iran is using the Huthi's as their proxies. World oil prices aren't set by any 1 country. I have no idea why you tie this in. SA is keeping their production up because they need to fund their gov't.
Iranian hegemony is much more expansive to Baghdad, Damascus, Sana'a, Beirut . Hezbollah in Lebanon and Syria, undisciplined Shia militias in Iraq, and the Houthi rebels in Yemen.
The only reason it has no footprint in Libya is because Libya has no natural Shia constituency for Iran to throw its weight and power behind

How do you know ? The Saudi military is only good at bombing Yemeni civilians and infrastructure- which it does with weaponry provided by the US and the UK.

SA doesn't use it's army as an expeditionary force. It's 28th world global firepower. It stands to reason it would perform in the field - you are making the claim it would not.

Salman is weak, the product of decades of Saudi dynastic rule. He is neither loved nor respected and his power comes from applied tyranny. His regime has beheaded hundreds of political opponents over the past few months alone.

have you looked at the execution rate in Iran? It's 4-5x the amount in SA. SA is fighting al-Qaeda internally. A good part of those executions
are for that.
same with that Shi'a cleric who was gunrunning and espousing sedition in the east. Iran heavily executes "drug trafficers"
which country is executing more for it's security?
Salman is new -i'm waiting to judge him.
SA is a KINGDOM. Iran is a THEOCRACY your hyperbole aside - both have their disadvantages, both have their tyrranys of rule

It would be suicidal. From which strata of Saudi society would these ' soldiers ' be drawn ? It's not even ' their country ' that they be sacrificed for- it belongs to the House of Saud.

Ffor Pete's sake. SA has a standing army. are you claiming they would desert?

The current Syrian government is the legal government of Syria and it has requested Russian assistance. Anybody opposing the legal government militarily is seen as the enemy.

Assad has used barrel bombs on civilians, just like Russia is targeting militias/some civilians.
"Legal government" long ago flew out the window - to be clear I don't want the US supporting Sunni rebels either.
They have a tendency to lose their shit when over-run by Islamist (al Nusra more then once has captured weapons depots).

And I'm fine with Russia supporting Assad as a client. What is not fine is telling me bombing civilians Aleppo (etc.) is somehow a "legitimate function"
Or barrel bombing civilians is legitimate. Or Russia bombing Islamist/FSA militias is "fighting terrorism"
You are sounding like Assad who calls everyone not part of the Syrian army "terrorists". That is a legal and morally bankrupt rationale

All militias are seen as legitimate targets, whether they're armed and funded by the Sauds, the USA, France, Israel, the UK, Scotland , Botswana, Iceland or anybody else wanting Syria to become a failed state in the manner of anti-Zionist Iraq and Libya.

It's not that simple. Assad was losing badly, but Qaddafi was on the offensive when Russia and the US/NATO came in respectively in Syria
and Libya .
The US/NATO bullcrap about "humanitarian war" in Libya ( 2011) is the same crap Russia and Assad and peddling in Syria.
Neither is legitimate
Syria is already a failed state. It's a cauldron for ME regional powers proxies, and armed forces to kill each other.

Iran is Syria's ally. What exactly is your complaint ?

it was in response to....

You may think that the threat of such a war has been removed by way of Iran's compliance with Obama's diplomacy. The neoZionists and Sauds have other ideas

....your self serving point of view that only Iran and Assad somehow have the right to determine Syria's future.
Syria is up for grabs. by the way...WTF is a "neozionist?"

 

[anatta]

United Arab Emirates ready to supply ground troops to fight ISIL in Syria]

Saudi Arabia, one of several Sunni Muslim Gulf Arab states, including the UAE, who are opposed to ISIL, said last week it was ready to participate in any ground operations in Syria if the U.S.-led coalition fighting ISIL decided to start such operations.

Gargash said that any potential supply of troops would not be particularly large.

"We are not talking about a thousand troops, but we are talking about troops on the ground that will lead the way, that will train, that will support ... And I think our position remains the same and we will have to see how this progresses."

"Of course an American leadership in this effort is a prerequisite," Gargash said.

He added that the UAE had been frustrated at the slow pace of the international efforts against ISIL "although there has been some progress in Iraq recently, of confronting Daesh."

Gargash said the UAE had always stated there also needed to be a "genuine political process in Baghdad that will encompass the Sunnis" in Iraq, which has a Shia-led government.

Following Saudi Arabia's announcement, Syria's foreign minister said on Saturday Damascus would resist any ground incursion into its territory and send the aggressors home "in coffins".

Sunni heavyweight Saudi Arabia and most other Gulf states are opposed to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Russian and Syrian government forces have intensified an assault on rebel-held areas around the Syrian city of Aleppo, prompting tens of thousands of refugees to flee to the Turkish border.

On Sunday, aid trucks and ambulances entered Syria from Turkey to deliver food and supplies to those fleeing the escalating government assault on Aleppo.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I don't care who wins the Syrian Civil War as long as its not ISIS. All our efforts should concentrate on ISIS and we should remain neutral otherwise.

 

[moon]

I don't care who wins the Syrian Civil War as long as its not ISIS. All our efforts should concentrate on ISIS and we should remain neutral otherwise.

I don't doubt that the Syrian government will prevail with Russian, Iranian and Lebanese suppport- but Turkey presents a problem, being anti-Assad and anti-Kurd at all costs. I don't have any answers- short of NATO threatening Turkey with expulsion if it continues to offer rogue aggression to the wrong quarters.

 

[moon]

SA doesn't use it's army as an expeditionary force. It's 28th world global firepower. It stands to reason it would perform in the field - you are making the claim it would not.

Yes, I am. Firepower means nothing without experience behind it. Just look at the result of the 1948 war !

have you looked at the execution rate in Iran? It's 4-5x the amount in SA.

Yes, it's appalling- but Iranians have a democracy. When they fight they do so for an elected leadership. Saudis have no such choice- they are ordered to fight by a tyrant.

Salman is new -i'm waiting to judge him.

You're a little slow, if you don't mind me saying.

Assad has used barrel bombs on civilians,

What is a barrel bomb ? If it is an effective weapon then why is it that only Syrians are reportedly using them ?

"Legal government" long ago flew out the window -

Syria has its seat at the United Nations.

And I'm fine with Russia supporting Assad as a client. What is not fine is telling me bombing civilians Aleppo (etc.) is somehow a "legitimate function"

No killing of civilians is legitimate- whatever Hillary Clinton or other neoZionist supporters say- but I'm not about to believe Western reports of Russian actions. It would be crazy to so do- right ?

You are sounding like Assad who calls everyone not part of the Syrian army "terrorists". That is a legal and morally bankrupt rationale

Armed militias randomly occupying a country and killing its inhabitants ARE terrorists. These militias are Western funded and serviced, remember. They are a foreign force .

It's not that simple. Assad was losing badly, but Qaddafi was on the offensive when Russia and the US/NATO came in respectively in Syria
and Libya .

Gaddafi was putting down insurrection in his own country. He would have won and Libya would still be a functioning state- not the state that Israel and the West wanted, certainly, but look at it today.

The US/NATO bullcrap about "humanitarian war" in Libya ( 2011) is the same crap Russia and Assad and peddling in Syria.

Neither is legitimate

I can't agree. Russia is supporting a legal government. The West tried and overthrew one in Libya.

Syria is already a failed state.

No, it isn't. Yet here you are demonstrating against its legal government, perhaps in the hope that it will be. I can't subscribe to illegal international actions.

It's a cauldron for ME regional powers proxies, and armed forces to kill each other.

Wasn't that the intent of the West and Israel ?

Syria is up for grabs. by the way..

.

No- only Syrians have the right to determine Syria's future- and they are legally represented by the current Syrian government, whether you like that or not

WTF is a "neozionist?"

NeoZionism- essentially the boil on the ass of the Middle East;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Zionism

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

If we expel Turkey from NATO we may as well shut the program down.

 

[moon]

If we expel Turkey from NATO we may as well shut the program down.

It would be good for Turkey to have to live in harmony with the neighbours in its region- instead of seeing itself as a European-country-in-waiting .

What is NATO's current policy on NATO members which employ unhelpful aggression ?