Russia defends UN Syria veto

Permanent members Russia and China blocked a condemnation of the government’s crackdown on protesters.

Both oppose regime change in Syria.

B92

Russia and China have realised by now that the ultimate goal of the US/Israel axis is to remove any regime which is not under their direct control and also to remove any effective resistance against Israels expansionist policies - the Herzbollah.

We have already seen how flying zones to "protect the civilians" media hype led to an estimated 50'000- 80'000 deaths in Lybia. NATO didn't count the civilians who died - so therefore didn't "see" any dead civilians.On the other hand,with respect to Syria,we have up to date accurate figures of civilian deaths -surprise-surprise.

Russia and China also know that, as Libya has shown ,the narrative the West claims(death of civilians) is most likely false but that of what the rebels want people to believe so they can get support from Western powers when in reality they are violent, brutal men hidden behind a facade of 'freedom and democracy protestors'.

"Russia defends UN Syria veto"

Reading in between the lines, methinks the Russians (and Chinese) must have learned from their Libya experience -- not to trust the West, that is.

Russia and China used their veto for obvious reasons, just like the USA so far vetoed all resolutions where Israel should be condemned for the excessive use of violence against Palestinian civilians.

Undemocratic countries supporting other undemocratic countries. This is not the first time Russia and China have done that. They support North Korea, Sudan, Iran, Venezuela also.

I read the proposed resolution.It only requests Assad to disarm. It does not request the armed opposition to also disarm and it does not seek an armistice or truce, just a capitulation. It is hopelessly one-sided and does nothing to discourage continued fighting. Clinton and company are just encouraging the armed opposition to continue fighting with the hope for outside military intervention. That is cruel because it's not going to happen this time. This was made to fail and to embarrass Russia, scare Iran and deflect attention from ongoing human rights violations in American allies like Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Any resolutions in the hopper to condemn ongoing Turkish attacks on the Kurds over the past forty years?

No, Leo, Leonides, and all logical thinking posters here. The US will never behave properly. Take a look at this clip I recently came upon:
Russian policymakers have developed an allergy to Western leaders' moralizing. Just as it was pressing al-Assad to resign, the U.S. State Department quietly lifted a ban on military aid to the Karimov dictatorship in Uzbekistan, which had butchered its own protesters a few years earlier. (Uzbekistan is important for supply lines to NATO troops in Afghanistan.) Neither did Washington press the king of Bahrain -- where the U.S. Navy has a port -- to step down after he crushed popular demonstrations in his capital.
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/02/02/opinion/treisman-russia-syria/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

The problem is not why Russia has vetoed the Resolution but why it had not done it when Libya’s fate was on the stake ? I guess Medvedev has personal responsibility for letting to destroy this country and for murdering thousands of innocent Libyans. Was it not evident that the evil won’t be satisfied with a non fly zone ? It was but with no support inside Russia like Eltsyn and Gorby he seeked for support with our rivals. Both Medveputins keep silent about this crime of theirs. But naturally they are not so stupid to make the same mistake twice. Especially now that the stakes are so high.

If only Russia betrays Asad Putin’s chances at the coming Presidential would fall down. Who else can help Iran or Syria but us ? We supply Syria the Yahont aircraft carrier killer missiles. Within 200-300 km they can destroy the all aircraft carrier war ships to minimize the attack of the 6-th fleet. We supply them with S-300 missiles which had once stopped the war between Turkey and Greece. Any attack at Syria will automatically draw Iran into the war and the opposite. So by supplying Syria with S-300 missiles we de facto supply them to Iran. This innocent and proud country which has never attacked anyone. At least for the last 210 years.

Marg bar Amrika !

Russia's seat at the UN makes them money, a veto probably coasted Bashar a lots of money. Russians veto everything so Serbian government do you still feel special???hmm maybe not!! yeah by the way that veto helps you lie to the Serbian people. Even Russian people are constantly fighting against that regime,no other way to threaten their people harder than saying"see we don't care about people dying" better don't do it here

Undemocratic countries supporting other undemocratic countries. This is not the first time Russia and China have done that. They support North Korea, Sudan, Iran, Venezuela also.
(Avni, 5 February 2012 17:27)

Firstly; Venezuela is a democracy, Chavez has won elections judged internationally free & fair

Secondly, you cant expect any better from the Uk, US & France, They Support Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Bosnia, Kosovo, Georgia, Uzbekistan, Egypyt (Previously) & Even Pol Pots Cambodia

http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/10/10/58473914.html

Seems to me people are getting smarter. That seem to smart others. No Bingo for them......

Fooled us once.....etc

"Dear, if the West wanted to intervene in Syria, it could easily do that. The legal reasons can be easily found or created by those who look for them :) "

Where did I state that the West could not "easily" intervene in Syria? Judging by their public reaction to the vetoes, however, they appeared to be more than just a bit upset.

"But Russia failed to read the main lesson from Lybia - i.e. that they are supporting the side who's going to loose in the short- or long-term."

The losers would be known in due course when the situation in Syria unfolds, with or without the intervention of the West. I wouldn't know in advance as I do not have a fortune teller at my disposal unlike some people apparently.

In Libya's case, methinks Russia and China must have thought that when that resolution did not allow ground forces, they probably expected the West to give air support to the rebels there which did turn the tide in the end. And as I see it, they may have vetoed the Syrian resolution because they don't want to be legally taken for a ride at the UN again.

"In the meantime the US is successfully and very cheaply managing to make Russia the target of the Arab people hatred so that US is not alone because of its support for Israel :). "

You may admire the Yankees if you wish, nobody's stopping you as far as I know.

"Why do you think the US brought the draft resolution to a vote knowing very well that Russia would have vetoed it ? I hope people are not that naive to believe that the US did that because it cares for those being massacred by Assad's regime !
(icj1, 6 February 2012 06:18)"

Actually I agree with you about the Yankee motves. But methinks you will be disappointed in your hope that there won't be any naive people around -- anyway lets see whether any guillible ones emerge on this thread itself in the days ahead!

And not just one veto.

Reading in between the lines, methinks the Russians (and Chinese) must have learned from their Libya experience -- not to trust the West, that is.
(lowe, 5 February 2012 14:03)

Dear, if the West wanted to intervene in Syria, it could easily do that. The legal reasons can be easily found or created by those who look for them :)

But Russia failed to read the main lesson from Lybia - i.e. that they are supporting the side who's going to loose in the short- or long-term.

In the meantime the US is successfully and very cheaply managing to make Russia the target of the Arab people hatred so that US is not alone because of its support for Israel :).

Why do you think the US brought the draft resolution to a vote knowing very well that Russia would have vetoed it ? I hope people are not that naive to believe that the US did that because it cares for those being massacred by Assad's regime !

"In Libya's case, methinks Russia and China must have thought that when that resolution did not allow ground forces, they probably expected the West to give air support to the rebels there which did turn the tide in the end. And as I see it, they may have vetoed the Syrian resolution because they don't want to be legally taken for a ride at the UN again."

Just realized that I left out the word "never" in my earlier post's sentence -- that part should read "they probably never expected the West etc etc......"

"Russia defends UN Syria veto"

Reading in between the lines, methinks the Russians (and Chinese) must have learned from their Libya experience -- not to trust the West, that is.

Permanent members Russia and China blocked a condemnation of the government’s crackdown on protesters.

Both oppose regime change in Syria.

B92

Russia and China have realised by now that the ultimate goal of the US/Israel axis is to remove any regime which is not under their direct control and also to remove any effective resistance against Israels expansionist policies - the Herzbollah.

We have already seen how flying zones to "protect the civilians" media hype led to an estimated 50'000- 80'000 deaths in Lybia. NATO didn't count the civilians who died - so therefore didn't "see" any dead civilians.On the other hand,with respect to Syria,we have up to date accurate figures of civilian deaths -surprise-surprise.

Russia and China also know that, as Libya has shown ,the narrative the West claims(death of civilians) is most likely false but that of what the rebels want people to believe so they can get support from Western powers when in reality they are violent, brutal men hidden behind a facade of 'freedom and democracy protestors'.

Undemocratic countries supporting other undemocratic countries. This is not the first time Russia and China have done that. They support North Korea, Sudan, Iran, Venezuela also.

Undemocratic countries supporting other undemocratic countries. This is not the first time Russia and China have done that. They support North Korea, Sudan, Iran, Venezuela also.
(Avni, 5 February 2012 17:27)

Firstly; Venezuela is a democracy, Chavez has won elections judged internationally free & fair

Secondly, you cant expect any better from the Uk, US & France, They Support Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Bosnia, Kosovo, Georgia, Uzbekistan, Egypyt (Previously) & Even Pol Pots Cambodia

I read the proposed resolution.It only requests Assad to disarm. It does not request the armed opposition to also disarm and it does not seek an armistice or truce, just a capitulation. It is hopelessly one-sided and does nothing to discourage continued fighting. Clinton and company are just encouraging the armed opposition to continue fighting with the hope for outside military intervention. That is cruel because it's not going to happen this time. This was made to fail and to embarrass Russia, scare Iran and deflect attention from ongoing human rights violations in American allies like Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Any resolutions in the hopper to condemn ongoing Turkish attacks on the Kurds over the past forty years?

Russia and China used their veto for obvious reasons, just like the USA so far vetoed all resolutions where Israel should be condemned for the excessive use of violence against Palestinian civilians.

The problem is not why Russia has vetoed the Resolution but why it had not done it when Libya’s fate was on the stake ? I guess Medvedev has personal responsibility for letting to destroy this country and for murdering thousands of innocent Libyans. Was it not evident that the evil won’t be satisfied with a non fly zone ? It was but with no support inside Russia like Eltsyn and Gorby he seeked for support with our rivals. Both Medveputins keep silent about this crime of theirs. But naturally they are not so stupid to make the same mistake twice. Especially now that the stakes are so high.

If only Russia betrays Asad Putin’s chances at the coming Presidential would fall down. Who else can help Iran or Syria but us ? We supply Syria the Yahont aircraft carrier killer missiles. Within 200-300 km they can destroy the all aircraft carrier war ships to minimize the attack of the 6-th fleet. We supply them with S-300 missiles which had once stopped the war between Turkey and Greece. Any attack at Syria will automatically draw Iran into the war and the opposite. So by supplying Syria with S-300 missiles we de facto supply them to Iran. This innocent and proud country which has never attacked anyone. At least for the last 210 years.

Marg bar Amrika !

No, Leo, Leonides, and all logical thinking posters here. The US will never behave properly. Take a look at this clip I recently came upon:
Russian policymakers have developed an allergy to Western leaders' moralizing. Just as it was pressing al-Assad to resign, the U.S. State Department quietly lifted a ban on military aid to the Karimov dictatorship in Uzbekistan, which had butchered its own protesters a few years earlier. (Uzbekistan is important for supply lines to NATO troops in Afghanistan.) Neither did Washington press the king of Bahrain -- where the U.S. Navy has a port -- to step down after he crushed popular demonstrations in his capital.
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/02/02/opinion/treisman-russia-syria/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

Russia's seat at the UN makes them money, a veto probably coasted Bashar a lots of money. Russians veto everything so Serbian government do you still feel special???hmm maybe not!! yeah by the way that veto helps you lie to the Serbian people. Even Russian people are constantly fighting against that regime,no other way to threaten their people harder than saying"see we don't care about people dying" better don't do it here

Reading in between the lines, methinks the Russians (and Chinese) must have learned from their Libya experience -- not to trust the West, that is.
(lowe, 5 February 2012 14:03)

Dear, if the West wanted to intervene in Syria, it could easily do that. The legal reasons can be easily found or created by those who look for them :)

But Russia failed to read the main lesson from Lybia - i.e. that they are supporting the side who's going to loose in the short- or long-term.

In the meantime the US is successfully and very cheaply managing to make Russia the target of the Arab people hatred so that US is not alone because of its support for Israel :).

Why do you think the US brought the draft resolution to a vote knowing very well that Russia would have vetoed it ? I hope people are not that naive to believe that the US did that because it cares for those being massacred by Assad's regime !

"Dear, if the West wanted to intervene in Syria, it could easily do that. The legal reasons can be easily found or created by those who look for them :) "

Where did I state that the West could not "easily" intervene in Syria? Judging by their public reaction to the vetoes, however, they appeared to be more than just a bit upset.

"But Russia failed to read the main lesson from Lybia - i.e. that they are supporting the side who's going to loose in the short- or long-term."

The losers would be known in due course when the situation in Syria unfolds, with or without the intervention of the West. I wouldn't know in advance as I do not have a fortune teller at my disposal unlike some people apparently.

In Libya's case, methinks Russia and China must have thought that when that resolution did not allow ground forces, they probably expected the West to give air support to the rebels there which did turn the tide in the end. And as I see it, they may have vetoed the Syrian resolution because they don't want to be legally taken for a ride at the UN again.

"In the meantime the US is successfully and very cheaply managing to make Russia the target of the Arab people hatred so that US is not alone because of its support for Israel :). "

You may admire the Yankees if you wish, nobody's stopping you as far as I know.

"Why do you think the US brought the draft resolution to a vote knowing very well that Russia would have vetoed it ? I hope people are not that naive to believe that the US did that because it cares for those being massacred by Assad's regime !
(icj1, 6 February 2012 06:18)"

Actually I agree with you about the Yankee motves. But methinks you will be disappointed in your hope that there won't be any naive people around -- anyway lets see whether any guillible ones emerge on this thread itself in the days ahead!

And not just one veto.

"In Libya's case, methinks Russia and China must have thought that when that resolution did not allow ground forces, they probably expected the West to give air support to the rebels there which did turn the tide in the end. And as I see it, they may have vetoed the Syrian resolution because they don't want to be legally taken for a ride at the UN again."

Just realized that I left out the word "never" in my earlier post's sentence -- that part should read "they probably never expected the West etc etc......"

http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/10/10/58473914.html

Seems to me people are getting smarter. That seem to smart others. No Bingo for them......

Fooled us once.....etc