“Britain wants to arm terrorists in Syria”

Rocky,

If all of us here are lucky enough and have our wishes granted you might join them. Kosovo and Metohija deserves to be free to, from occupation and albanian terrorists.

Assad added that “Britain has played a famously unconstructive role in different issues for decades, some say for centuries”.

B92

That is correct.Britain never gave a toss about world peace.Successive British governments have been acting as the world's mercenaries selling weapons to anybody in pursuit of profit and support of their defence industries.Cameron's last trips to Bahrain,Saudi Arabia(oasis of freedom &democracy)and India were aimed to clinch huge defence contracts.

We should expect the British government and the mainstream media,to continue parroting the narrative which is strikingly similar to what we heard in the build-up to Iraq,Libya implying that the Syrian leader might just be crazy enough to use chemical and/or biological agents – an accusation Assad himself has repeatedly denied.

Russia is arming Shi'ite Islamist Terrorists in Syria. However the UK will be arming the Free Syrian Army not terrorists.
(Ian, UK, 3 March 2013 16:22

The so called FSA are a collection of terorist gangs,they like hacking heads off and throwing postal workers off rooftops they have destroyed the Syrian infrastructure for their masters in Washington and Israel,they are the same types who Bill Clinton sent to Bosnia and they will and are being smashed.

Rocky

Last night I devoted you 1400 characters to restart your washed brains and now I can see it was all in vain. Those mentioned by you were nothing worse than their neighbor heads of states. For instance Tujman and Izetbegovic were much worse than Slobo but they went unpunished. To say nothing of the bloody Snakes and Haradiai people who just kiss the right asses. The Saudis are much worse than the Colonel seized by the French and Hussein killed 'only' 5000 against 100 000 killed by the Bushes. To say nothing of Dr. Assad who is just defending his country from the international bandits. To your disappointment he is doing this job well enough.

Tens of thousands of Al Qaeda and Jabha al Nusra and other scoundrels are eliminated and the west has problems with recruiting. Assad’s army proved to be more disciplined and better trained plus better armed. This is why the Sallafites suffer 3 times higher losses while the western mass media has to admire any small local or temporary success like yesterday brought down helicopter. Only 10-15% of Syrians under no circumstances wouldn’t like to live under the Assads. All the rest one way or another support him. In Roma the west voted to keep the terrorists busy with Assad but the increasing clashes among the gangs leave them no chance. So you are the only optimist to believe the west has a chance in Syria.

Assad, you will meet the same fate as, S.Hussein, S. Milosevich, M. Qaddafi! Nothing less, the Syrian people deserve to be free!

Russia is arming Shi'ite Islamist Terrorists in Syria. However the UK will be arming the Free Syrian Army not terrorists.
(Ian, UK, 3 March 2013 16:22)

The Free Syrian Army are terrorists. I don't even support Assad and I know he is corrupt but the Syrian people will be anything but "free" if the FSA wins the civil war. Assad is extremely corrupt but at the very least Syria is a secular society. This will of course change if the FSA were to win. I know you are a Christo-phobe, but Christians, Jews and non-Sunni Muslims will completely lose all their human rights if Assad falls.

So Russia is supporting Shi'ite terrorists as you say (although even they are fighting on the side of a secular leadership) and the West is openly aiding al-Qaeda affiliated Sunni Islamist terrorists. Both for regional stability and more importantly the people of Syria, Assad's leadership is simply the better choice.

What you can expect from the country which invented slavery, concentration camps, conquered half of the world, stole everything worth from its former colonies? And all that for the sake of "morality"? What our General Draza Mihailovic http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,766569,00.html once said "British would be the worst nation in the world if it was not for Germans".

Where do you think the FSA weapons will go when Assad falls? Libyan weapons have made it to Mali and are spreading throughout North Africa. If you are white and western, the you will be on the recieving end sooner or later. RPG9 rocket launchers have just been recovered in Belfast. There's always a price to be payed.

People are called terrorists, dictators are praised. I guess Hitler was a good man also.

The goal England has in mind is to destabilize the region through deceit in order for its own benefit. The De-javu that we're all experiencing whilst we watch this very sad situation in Syria can be attributed to the cancerous foreign policies of England and the US. Nothing has changed in the past 70 years and nothing will, until new world powers start calling the shots.

Following the venom sprayed out by our little Albanian friends, now to reality. The Assad regime is well armed and well prepared for a very long fight with the so called freedom fighters. It has aircraft, heavy weapons and many other things at its disposal. In addition the Russians are advising Assad to be restrained not give material for western propaganda. So what we have here is disorganised groups hold on to section of desert – wow what a prize that is.

The US has no clues what will happen if Assad goes because it only wants him gone so as to isolate Iran further. Lest look at what’s happened in Egypt – fundamentalists in charge; Libya – fundamentalists in charge who killed the US Ambassador; Tunisia – fundamentalists in charge. The Arab spring was not a western engineered movement because western agencies are no longer capable of doing just that.

All of these statements are nothing but western posturing or as I call it piss and wind. If they could they would have done it a long time ago. I know, since NATO is leaving Afghanistan next year why not attack Syria???? Yeah after two major loses NATO is going to do that. I can imagine the countries contributing to such a venture – ZERO and that includes the Washington windbags.

Russia is arming Shi'ite Islamist Terrorists in Syria. However the UK will be arming the Free Syrian Army not terrorists.

Ian UK

another one who can't see the wood for the trees, Britian "IS" arming Islamic terrorists in Syria, and fighting them in Afghanistan, it seems it's only the dim Brits who can't see this. Your country is being run and ruined by a bunch of prize idiots, wake up man!!

Lenard said, "Afghani forces have nothing but respect and admiration of the vast combat knowledge of Croatian forces they come out totally dominating the battle fields."

You are so full of hot air.

Lenard

You know that Croats are cowards. They always strike from behind using a big power as a support. Croats has never been fighters man to man. The Storm operation has shown it once again. So your euphoria is a direct sequence of your inferiority complex. If I were you I wouldn’t care of the far away countries where they know nothing of the brave cowards. Best if you think of how long 6 million will be able to keep such a beautiful coast. Croatia is just one of the puppet states created to weaken Serbs. Outside Europe nobody knows if Croatia is dish or a new Tampax. So don’t tell us fairy tales but go and find yourself a job. How long are you going to hang on your parents’ neck ? Assad enjoys enough support of his people to destroy the bandit gangs from 11 countries. Unlike you he does not let a gauleiter to be appointed on his land. Unlike historically coward croats he has balls to be called a MAN.

ned taylor

you must be short sighted if you believe the British government is on some noble quest where Syria is concerned. Ask yourself this, why is the British government supporting Islamic Jihadists in Syria and fighting against the very same people in Afghanistan?? do you not think that this is in the very least a bit odd?!

You lot did the same in Libya and today those nutjobs you supported there are now fighting each other, a very strange way of fighting a war, I wonder if your military queastion the sanity of Cameron and the other idiots running your country, oh and yes ruining it while they merrily throw away millions on wars and giving millions away to other countries yet take away from the sick and vunerable in your own?????? by god, open your eyes before you make comments of such nitwittery, no wonder your country is going down the pan if everyone is as blinde as you are.

The Syrian freedom fighters now liberated the entire Northern border. The East is free as well and Aleppo is practically under FSA control. Idlib totally surrounded, Homs and Darayya heroically fighting. This year, Assad and his Russian dogs will fall. The port of Tartus will burn and Putin will see the middle fingers of the free Syrian people.

Asad - you should stay out of the limelight. Better yet just go and quit running your mouth. Your filthy war has been going on for too long.

The danger in so many countries is that you get rid of a dictator before you have an acceptable alternative lined up. Mubarek, Gaddafi, the Taliban in Afghanistan, Saddam Hussein...........Which of those countries is any further forward (other than the removal of the aforementioned dictators)than they were on the day they were 'liberated'? I'm reminded of Hungary in 1956 when the CIA whipped up local anti communists only to run for the hills and leave thousands of young students quite literally in the firing line. Assad needs to go at some point, not because he is likely to use chemical weapons against the West but because he simply isn't interested in the majority of his people and is prepared to wipe out thousands of them to retain his position. As has been said over and over throughout the centuries, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter..........or more relevant to this site...one man's war hero is another man's war criminal.

rote kapelle with Croatians involved the murdering despot of civilians Assad has no chance except in hell. With Croatia supplying 10's of thousands of weapons to Syrian liberation fighters just like it is doing in Afghanistan. Croatians also training http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVJHdapvk2I their forces teaching everything from calling in air ,artillery strikes also in the air gun ships training. Also on the ground clearing out routing enemy held towns together side by side with their forces. Afghani forces have nothing but respect and admiration of the vast combat knowledge of Croatian forces they come out totally dominating the battle fields. If Assad was smart he would leave and let Syrian people decide but tin pot despot dictators fight to the last man as long it's not him. But in the end they get a bullet to the head or hanged not until he has caused horrendous suffering and destruction.

Darko: I am interested to know what benefit you think that 'England' would accrue by destabilising the Middle East. If that is indeed our intention, and I've not seen any evidence to suggest that it is, it sounds like a pretty daft idea to me

It's not me it's them: I don't know which comment you read but I've been back through the only one I posted and nowhere did I mention a 'noble quest'; it certainly isn't that. I asked what reason we would have to 'destabilise' the Middle East. I can think of all sorts of selfish reasons why we might support different sides in various conflicts but my question was about deliberate destabilisation and it hasn't been answered. I am no supporter of this UK government but struggle to see what would be gained by doing what was suggested in the post that I initially answered.

Dear Ned
Surprising that you don't see any evidence of England destabilizing the Middle East..Firstly, I say "England" because we know there are parts of "Great Britain"/"United Kingdom" - call it what you will, that don't want to have much to do with England at all. For example, "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" is the official name of the UK - somewhat of a contradiction. I'm sure Northern Ireland nor Scotland nor Wales would be a driving force behind arming the Syrian Rebels so I have to take a wild guess and assume it's England.
Secondly, the benefit the England/America partnership derives from destabilization (and they have a rich history of doing just that) is different in any given region and era. Right now its economic - the Middle East is still full of natural resources, so England and America are right there on the spot. And boy, do they need the money.
Thirdly, think about how England supported Hussein in the 80's, then went to war over in Iraq on SUSPICION of weapons of MD. Think then about how Gaddafi was paraded around by England like a new girlfriend before England helped to kill him off. Isn't it a huge co-incidence that every leader in the Middle East (who acquires anti-west sentiment) turns out to be a murderous tyrant? Finally, think about the way BBC reports these and other events and it will all become clear.

Darko: You make a number of good points but I do not agree that it amounts to deliberate destabilisation. Yes it is poor and inconsistent foreign policy but has more to do with the different approaches of Tory and Labour governments. The weapons industry as with all others is solely about profit but the UK does not need to whip up a frenzy to sell its arms in the Middle East as there is a steady stream of customers. This can dry up to an extent under Labour but they have been prepared to go to war when they believe it necessary. I agree that too much leeway was given to Gaddafi and that action should have been taken sooner but that's as much poor political judgement as anything else. There is also the matter of coordinating with other governments either within the EU or the UN, although the latter was eventually bypassed with regard to Iraq in 2003.

So, to summarise, it is clear that the policy of various governments towards the Middle East has been inconsistent and lacking in cohesion; no argument from me there. However this does not add up to systematic destabilisation not least as I doubt that our ministers or MI6 are capable of such. Finally, I think you underestimate the war like tendencies of the Scots, Welsh and Irish!!

Assad, you will meet the same fate as, S.Hussein, S. Milosevich, M. Qaddafi! Nothing less, the Syrian people deserve to be free!

Russia is arming Shi'ite Islamist Terrorists in Syria. However the UK will be arming the Free Syrian Army not terrorists.

People are called terrorists, dictators are praised. I guess Hitler was a good man also.

Asad - you should stay out of the limelight. Better yet just go and quit running your mouth. Your filthy war has been going on for too long.

The Syrian freedom fighters now liberated the entire Northern border. The East is free as well and Aleppo is practically under FSA control. Idlib totally surrounded, Homs and Darayya heroically fighting. This year, Assad and his Russian dogs will fall. The port of Tartus will burn and Putin will see the middle fingers of the free Syrian people.

rote kapelle with Croatians involved the murdering despot of civilians Assad has no chance except in hell. With Croatia supplying 10's of thousands of weapons to Syrian liberation fighters just like it is doing in Afghanistan. Croatians also training http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVJHdapvk2I their forces teaching everything from calling in air ,artillery strikes also in the air gun ships training. Also on the ground clearing out routing enemy held towns together side by side with their forces. Afghani forces have nothing but respect and admiration of the vast combat knowledge of Croatian forces they come out totally dominating the battle fields. If Assad was smart he would leave and let Syrian people decide but tin pot despot dictators fight to the last man as long it's not him. But in the end they get a bullet to the head or hanged not until he has caused horrendous suffering and destruction.

Darko: I am interested to know what benefit you think that 'England' would accrue by destabilising the Middle East. If that is indeed our intention, and I've not seen any evidence to suggest that it is, it sounds like a pretty daft idea to me

Rocky,

If all of us here are lucky enough and have our wishes granted you might join them. Kosovo and Metohija deserves to be free to, from occupation and albanian terrorists.

Russia is arming Shi'ite Islamist Terrorists in Syria. However the UK will be arming the Free Syrian Army not terrorists.
(Ian, UK, 3 March 2013 16:22

The so called FSA are a collection of terorist gangs,they like hacking heads off and throwing postal workers off rooftops they have destroyed the Syrian infrastructure for their masters in Washington and Israel,they are the same types who Bill Clinton sent to Bosnia and they will and are being smashed.

The danger in so many countries is that you get rid of a dictator before you have an acceptable alternative lined up. Mubarek, Gaddafi, the Taliban in Afghanistan, Saddam Hussein...........Which of those countries is any further forward (other than the removal of the aforementioned dictators)than they were on the day they were 'liberated'? I'm reminded of Hungary in 1956 when the CIA whipped up local anti communists only to run for the hills and leave thousands of young students quite literally in the firing line. Assad needs to go at some point, not because he is likely to use chemical weapons against the West but because he simply isn't interested in the majority of his people and is prepared to wipe out thousands of them to retain his position. As has been said over and over throughout the centuries, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter..........or more relevant to this site...one man's war hero is another man's war criminal.

Rocky

Last night I devoted you 1400 characters to restart your washed brains and now I can see it was all in vain. Those mentioned by you were nothing worse than their neighbor heads of states. For instance Tujman and Izetbegovic were much worse than Slobo but they went unpunished. To say nothing of the bloody Snakes and Haradiai people who just kiss the right asses. The Saudis are much worse than the Colonel seized by the French and Hussein killed 'only' 5000 against 100 000 killed by the Bushes. To say nothing of Dr. Assad who is just defending his country from the international bandits. To your disappointment he is doing this job well enough.

Tens of thousands of Al Qaeda and Jabha al Nusra and other scoundrels are eliminated and the west has problems with recruiting. Assad’s army proved to be more disciplined and better trained plus better armed. This is why the Sallafites suffer 3 times higher losses while the western mass media has to admire any small local or temporary success like yesterday brought down helicopter. Only 10-15% of Syrians under no circumstances wouldn’t like to live under the Assads. All the rest one way or another support him. In Roma the west voted to keep the terrorists busy with Assad but the increasing clashes among the gangs leave them no chance. So you are the only optimist to believe the west has a chance in Syria.

Lenard

You know that Croats are cowards. They always strike from behind using a big power as a support. Croats has never been fighters man to man. The Storm operation has shown it once again. So your euphoria is a direct sequence of your inferiority complex. If I were you I wouldn’t care of the far away countries where they know nothing of the brave cowards. Best if you think of how long 6 million will be able to keep such a beautiful coast. Croatia is just one of the puppet states created to weaken Serbs. Outside Europe nobody knows if Croatia is dish or a new Tampax. So don’t tell us fairy tales but go and find yourself a job. How long are you going to hang on your parents’ neck ? Assad enjoys enough support of his people to destroy the bandit gangs from 11 countries. Unlike you he does not let a gauleiter to be appointed on his land. Unlike historically coward croats he has balls to be called a MAN.

Russia is arming Shi'ite Islamist Terrorists in Syria. However the UK will be arming the Free Syrian Army not terrorists.
(Ian, UK, 3 March 2013 16:22)

The Free Syrian Army are terrorists. I don't even support Assad and I know he is corrupt but the Syrian people will be anything but "free" if the FSA wins the civil war. Assad is extremely corrupt but at the very least Syria is a secular society. This will of course change if the FSA were to win. I know you are a Christo-phobe, but Christians, Jews and non-Sunni Muslims will completely lose all their human rights if Assad falls.

So Russia is supporting Shi'ite terrorists as you say (although even they are fighting on the side of a secular leadership) and the West is openly aiding al-Qaeda affiliated Sunni Islamist terrorists. Both for regional stability and more importantly the people of Syria, Assad's leadership is simply the better choice.

Following the venom sprayed out by our little Albanian friends, now to reality. The Assad regime is well armed and well prepared for a very long fight with the so called freedom fighters. It has aircraft, heavy weapons and many other things at its disposal. In addition the Russians are advising Assad to be restrained not give material for western propaganda. So what we have here is disorganised groups hold on to section of desert – wow what a prize that is.

The US has no clues what will happen if Assad goes because it only wants him gone so as to isolate Iran further. Lest look at what’s happened in Egypt – fundamentalists in charge; Libya – fundamentalists in charge who killed the US Ambassador; Tunisia – fundamentalists in charge. The Arab spring was not a western engineered movement because western agencies are no longer capable of doing just that.

All of these statements are nothing but western posturing or as I call it piss and wind. If they could they would have done it a long time ago. I know, since NATO is leaving Afghanistan next year why not attack Syria???? Yeah after two major loses NATO is going to do that. I can imagine the countries contributing to such a venture – ZERO and that includes the Washington windbags.

It's not me it's them: I don't know which comment you read but I've been back through the only one I posted and nowhere did I mention a 'noble quest'; it certainly isn't that. I asked what reason we would have to 'destabilise' the Middle East. I can think of all sorts of selfish reasons why we might support different sides in various conflicts but my question was about deliberate destabilisation and it hasn't been answered. I am no supporter of this UK government but struggle to see what would be gained by doing what was suggested in the post that I initially answered.

Assad added that “Britain has played a famously unconstructive role in different issues for decades, some say for centuries”.

B92

That is correct.Britain never gave a toss about world peace.Successive British governments have been acting as the world's mercenaries selling weapons to anybody in pursuit of profit and support of their defence industries.Cameron's last trips to Bahrain,Saudi Arabia(oasis of freedom &democracy)and India were aimed to clinch huge defence contracts.

We should expect the British government and the mainstream media,to continue parroting the narrative which is strikingly similar to what we heard in the build-up to Iraq,Libya implying that the Syrian leader might just be crazy enough to use chemical and/or biological agents – an accusation Assad himself has repeatedly denied.

What you can expect from the country which invented slavery, concentration camps, conquered half of the world, stole everything worth from its former colonies? And all that for the sake of "morality"? What our General Draza Mihailovic http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,766569,00.html once said "British would be the worst nation in the world if it was not for Germans".

Where do you think the FSA weapons will go when Assad falls? Libyan weapons have made it to Mali and are spreading throughout North Africa. If you are white and western, the you will be on the recieving end sooner or later. RPG9 rocket launchers have just been recovered in Belfast. There's always a price to be payed.

The goal England has in mind is to destabilize the region through deceit in order for its own benefit. The De-javu that we're all experiencing whilst we watch this very sad situation in Syria can be attributed to the cancerous foreign policies of England and the US. Nothing has changed in the past 70 years and nothing will, until new world powers start calling the shots.

Ian UK

another one who can't see the wood for the trees, Britian "IS" arming Islamic terrorists in Syria, and fighting them in Afghanistan, it seems it's only the dim Brits who can't see this. Your country is being run and ruined by a bunch of prize idiots, wake up man!!

Lenard said, "Afghani forces have nothing but respect and admiration of the vast combat knowledge of Croatian forces they come out totally dominating the battle fields."

You are so full of hot air.

ned taylor

you must be short sighted if you believe the British government is on some noble quest where Syria is concerned. Ask yourself this, why is the British government supporting Islamic Jihadists in Syria and fighting against the very same people in Afghanistan?? do you not think that this is in the very least a bit odd?!

You lot did the same in Libya and today those nutjobs you supported there are now fighting each other, a very strange way of fighting a war, I wonder if your military queastion the sanity of Cameron and the other idiots running your country, oh and yes ruining it while they merrily throw away millions on wars and giving millions away to other countries yet take away from the sick and vunerable in your own?????? by god, open your eyes before you make comments of such nitwittery, no wonder your country is going down the pan if everyone is as blinde as you are.

Dear Ned
Surprising that you don't see any evidence of England destabilizing the Middle East..Firstly, I say "England" because we know there are parts of "Great Britain"/"United Kingdom" - call it what you will, that don't want to have much to do with England at all. For example, "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" is the official name of the UK - somewhat of a contradiction. I'm sure Northern Ireland nor Scotland nor Wales would be a driving force behind arming the Syrian Rebels so I have to take a wild guess and assume it's England.
Secondly, the benefit the England/America partnership derives from destabilization (and they have a rich history of doing just that) is different in any given region and era. Right now its economic - the Middle East is still full of natural resources, so England and America are right there on the spot. And boy, do they need the money.
Thirdly, think about how England supported Hussein in the 80's, then went to war over in Iraq on SUSPICION of weapons of MD. Think then about how Gaddafi was paraded around by England like a new girlfriend before England helped to kill him off. Isn't it a huge co-incidence that every leader in the Middle East (who acquires anti-west sentiment) turns out to be a murderous tyrant? Finally, think about the way BBC reports these and other events and it will all become clear.

Darko: You make a number of good points but I do not agree that it amounts to deliberate destabilisation. Yes it is poor and inconsistent foreign policy but has more to do with the different approaches of Tory and Labour governments. The weapons industry as with all others is solely about profit but the UK does not need to whip up a frenzy to sell its arms in the Middle East as there is a steady stream of customers. This can dry up to an extent under Labour but they have been prepared to go to war when they believe it necessary. I agree that too much leeway was given to Gaddafi and that action should have been taken sooner but that's as much poor political judgement as anything else. There is also the matter of coordinating with other governments either within the EU or the UN, although the latter was eventually bypassed with regard to Iraq in 2003.

So, to summarise, it is clear that the policy of various governments towards the Middle East has been inconsistent and lacking in cohesion; no argument from me there. However this does not add up to systematic destabilisation not least as I doubt that our ministers or MI6 are capable of such. Finally, I think you underestimate the war like tendencies of the Scots, Welsh and Irish!!