Home | Sketchy reports have been filtering in from Sky News, Debka, etc. regarding bombings and fighting in Damascus.
The target appears to be the Iranian embassy or Iranian ambassador's residence.
Of course, as Syria is an Islamo-fascist state we may have to wait a long time to find out what really happened.
From news article: 21:15 Syrian TV reports that Syrian security forces clash with `terrorist band` in capital of Damascus (AP)
Which liar is telling the truth?
It now appears the target was a UN building which the UN says is no longer used...
Since the identity of the attackers, their target, and their motive are unclear, and the Syrian gov't claims to have quickly restored control, I would not be surprised if this event was staged by the Syrians to either make it look like they, too, are fighting terrorists and/or to accuse Israel of being behind terrorist attacks.
Yes, but Syria has a little side deal with the U.S. apparently, which is that the U.S. doesn't flatten Syria for engaging in State-sponsored terrorism and, in exchange, Syria tortures al Qaeda captives and gives some of the information to the U.S.Originally posted by ibrodsky
Of course, as Syria is an Islamo-fascist state we may have to wait a long time to find out what really happened.
No Bill of Rights, no Geneva Convention, no ACLU. Just good old Syrian know-how about extracting "delicate" information from prisoners.
al Qaeda doesn't like this deal...
"All we are saying is give peace a chance." - John Lennon
No Bill of Rights, no Geneva Convention, no ACLU. Just good old Syrian know-how about extracting "delicate" information from prisoners.
Yes, Canada has been participating as of late with a few "Muslim Canadians" who have been "re-routed" to Syria in their travels for a little bit of R n' R in Syria's torture chambers.
have you got more accurate information on Canada doing that?Originally posted by Kev
Yes, Canada has been participating as of late with a few "Muslim Canadians" who have been "re-routed" to Syria in their travels for a little bit of R n' R in Syria's torture chambers.
Let's review the facts:Originally posted by NewsGuy
Yes, but Syria has a little side deal with the U.S. apparently, which is that the U.S. doesn't flatten Syria for engaging in State-sponsored terrorism and, in exchange, Syria tortures al Qaeda captives and gives some of the information to the U.S.
No Bill of Rights, no Geneva Convention, no ACLU. Just good old Syrian know-how about extracting "delicate" information from prisoners.
al Qaeda doesn't like this deal...
The US Congress passed the Syria Accountability Act and President Bush signed it into law.
Several months ago, Israel bombed Syria and President Bush defended the action.
Israel has liquidated Yassin and Rantissi. Hezbollah, which resides in southern Lebanon as Syria's terrorist guests, possesses 10,000 rockets but has been unable to respond to the destruction of Hamas' leadership.
If, according to you, Syria is battling and arresting al Qaeda members, that's a good thing.
As for a Bill of Rights, ACLU, and Geneva Conventions... all of these things are incompatible with contemporary Islam. Demanding a "Bill of Rights" for Syria is like expecting the Iraqi barbarians to create democracy under the auspices of the United Nations. Besides, who cares?... as far as I can tell, the vast majority of Muslims prefer totalitarianism.
Our first priority should be to force Arab/Muslim dictators to abandon terrorism. Bringing democracy to the Arab/Muslim world is a long-term experiment that can't succeed until the religion of jihad is completely overhauled.
Why then is it not being enforced?Originally posted by ibrodsky
Let's review the facts:
The US Congress passed the Syria Accountability Act and President Bush signed it into law.
My guess is that Assad was made to understand that Israel would target him personally if Hizbullah hit Israel, not due to American support for eliminating Hamas leaders. I say this after Israel performed a supersonic flyover Assad's palace when the IDF bombed Syrian positions.Several months ago, Israel bombed Syria and President Bush defended the action.
Israel has liquidated Yassin and Rantissi. Hezbollah, which resides in southern Lebanon as Syria's terrorist guests, possesses 10,000 rockets but has been unable to respond to the destruction of Hamas' leadership.
It would be a good thing, but what I believe to be happenning is not really a strategic decision by Syria to battle terrorists. On the contrary, Syria is a State sponsor of terorrism and also dispatches hundreds of terrorists to murder American troops in Iraq.If, according to you, Syria is battling and arresting al Qaeda members, that's a good thing.
I believe that the unofficial arrangement is that, mysteriously, a handful of al Qaeda prisoners winds up in Syria for the purpose of extracting intelligence from them without the constraints of Human Rights, etc. It is of a very limited scope, but enough to allow Syria to escape American sanctions.
That's all true.As for a Bill of Rights, ACLU, and Geneva Conventions... all of these things are incompatible with contemporary Islam. Demanding a "Bill of Rights" for Syria is like expecting the Iraqi barbarians to create democracy under the auspices of the United Nations. Besides, who cares?... as far as I can tell, the vast majority of Muslims prefer totalitarianism.
Our first priority should be to force Arab/Muslim dictators to abandon terrorism. Bringing democracy to the Arab/Muslim world is a long-term experiment that can't succeed until the religion of jihad is completely overhauled.
"All we are saying is give peace a chance." - John Lennon
I suspect this has more to do with internal divisions and bureaucracy than a "side deal with Syria."Originally posted by NewsGuy
Why then is it not being enforced?
Still, I share your frustration with U.S. strategy. Drawing from history, our government hopes to drive a wedge between terrorists and other Arabs through a carrot-and-stick approach. Just as the Romans were admired by many of the peoples they conquered for imposing good administration, we hope to impress the Arab/Muslim world with our fairness, use of force only as a last resort, and economic aid.
It won't work, because we are up against something new: the marriage of a murderous political ideology with a perfectly receptive religion.
Hopefully, we will learn before long that what's needed in this case is a bludgeon-and-stick approach.
President Bush has supported Israel's right to self-defense. It doesn't matter whether the U.S., Israel or both threaten Assad. Assad knows that if Hezbollah strikes Israel, Israel will strike Damascus and President Bush will reiterate that the problem is Syria's support for terrorism.My guess is that Assad was made to understand that Israel would target him personally if Hizbullah hit Israel, not due to American support for eliminating Hamas leaders. I say this after Israel performed a supersonic flyover Assad's palace when the IDF bombed Syrian positions.
Nobody believes the Syrian dictator has made a strategic decision to battle terrorists. But if he is forced to fight some of them half-heartedly, it's still a good thing.It would be a good thing, but what I believe to be happenning is not really a strategic decision by Syria to battle terrorists. On the contrary, Syria is a State sponsor of terorrism and also dispatches hundreds of terrorists to murder American troops in Iraq.
So you are suggesting this is done at the request of the Bush administration?I believe that the unofficial arrangement is that, mysteriously, a handful of al Qaeda prisoners winds up in Syria for the purpose of extracting intelligence from them without the constraints of Human Rights, etc. It is of a very limited scope, but enough to allow Syria to escape American sanctions.
What evidence do you have of this?
Suckers!
Syria: Damascus Shoot-Out
NewsweekMay 10 issue -
U.S. intelligence analysts aren't sure what to make of an apparent terrorist attack last week in the diplomatic quarter of the Syrian capital, Damascus. Explanations from Syrian authorities about who the perps were and why they attacked a vacant former U.N. building are "vague" at best, says a U.S. official.
Some anti-Syrian hard-liners in Congress suggest that Syrian security forces staged the attack so President Bashar Assad could show the White House he was curbing terrorism. (According to reports, two or three assailants died in the attack.) Under a new law approved by Congress, President George W. Bush is supposed to impose economic sanctions on Syria soon unless he is convinced that Damascus is serious about shutting down Syrian-based terrorist groups.
The Assad government, desperate to avoid U.S. sanctions, has been trying to convince Washington that it is indeed moving against militants. (The prevailing theory in D.C. is that the Syrians may have tried to mount a crackdown against local jihadis and the militants struck back.) U.S. officials say the Syrians made one appeal in a recent phone call to CIA Director George Tenet, whose agency got considerable help from Syria in investigating 9/11 attackers and related Qaeda cells. But sources say Tenet couldn't promise Damascus that sanctions would be forestalled. Syria's commitment against terrorism was seriously called into question by authorities in Jordan, who recently released detailed evidence—including confessions from captured terror suspects—about a major bombing plot against Jordanian and U.S. targets in Amman; the plotters allegedly got critical support from cohorts in Syria.
—Mark Hosenball
neither do you, since you're still hoping to expand the Iraqi experiment to Syria, so you would like to see cooperation between Syria and Al-Quaida, it would be the perfect excuse to invade Syria and get rid of the assad-regime (and get stuck in a bloody and endless war in Syria as well, which will mostly benefit Al-Quaida, but you don't really care since battling the baathist regimes is much higher on your list of priority then battling real terrorism).No Bill of Rights, no Geneva Convention, no ACLU. Just good old Syrian know-how about extracting "delicate" information from prisoners.
al Qaeda doesn't like this deal...
I understand your point of view (as well as the Bush administration): Syria and Iraq are (was) anti-American and anti-Israeli regimes, but not connected to Al-Quaida or religious extremists. those are not really a threat since their extremism isolates them from the entire world, while the regime of Syria is not so isolated and has more realistic goals in their struggle against Israel and the US. Syria has good relations with Europe, Russia and China and is a remain of the cold war, as long as Syria escapes US-controll it remains a real threat for the US grip on the region. (also considering Syrian protection of and influence on Libanon).
Syria repeatedly said they want peace with Israel if it hands over the Golan heights and stop the occupation of the Westbank and the Gaza-strip, this is much more dangerous for the Israeli leaders than Al-Quaida or hamas who want the destruction of Israel, since that's realpolicy that has considerable support in the rest of the world, especially the Arab world, and might also convince sooner or later a part of the Israeli electorate, who don't really consider Syria a threat and would not oppose the withdrawel from the golan-heights on the contrary to Israel's leaders.
To summarise Syria offers a real alternative to American dominance in the region while Al-Quaida and hamas do not. Syria will not destroy Israel but wants to decrease its influence and controll over the region.
The current war in Iraq enhances the position of Syria and further weakens the position of pro-American dictatorships as Egypt, Jordan or Saoudi Arabia, who are nearly collapsing under the threat of terrorism and general unpopularity. In Syria terrorism isn't a serious problem (I indeed think the last events have been staged by the Syrian secret service) and not very popular since the Syrian government already proved to be resciliant to American and Israeli pressure and is secretly supporting the Iraqi opposition.
Assad is in a good position, smashed between two intifadehs, one against the Israeli occupation one against the us-occupation, to become a real Arab hero. And it's very unlikely after their debacle in Iraq and their isolated position in the world and public opinion they'll engage in another invasion.
Read the third post in this thread.Originally posted by Oh Jerusalem
Suckers!
ibrodsky, Prophet
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks