Monat: August 2013

Syria 2013 = Iraq 2003 reloaded

radioyaran Iraq, Syria , , , , , ,

Syria 2013 is close to becoming „Iraq 2003 reloaded“. Already the Kerrys, McCains, Camerons and Hagues exactly know who used chemical weapons in Syria. So, why then the UN inspections? As with Saddams weapons of mass destructions that later turned out to be non-existent the leaders of the „civilized world“ will over and over repeat their biased and unproven allegations against Syria to manipulate the opinion of a public that is heavily opposed to military intervention.

Now, Mr. Kerry, the same person who declared the military takeover in Egypt and the subsequent killings „restoring democracy“ is saying this:
„Attacking the area, shelling and systematically destroying evidence is not the behaviour of a government that has nothing to hide. The regime’s belated decision to allow access is too late… to be credible,“ Mr Kerry said.

So, unless a sovereign country´s president does not immediately jump at the tune of the US´ whistle this is proof of guilt and reason enough to fire Tomahawks, yes?

The „civilized worlds“ short-breathed diplomacy regarding Syria

radioyaran Syria , , ,

They say about Syria that the time for diplomacy is over, but when did this diplomacy start and when did it finish? All I remember is that the Americans, British, the French and their wahhabi allies from Qatar and Saudi Arabia sabotaged every negotiation and conference by stupidly demanding Assads political departure as a pre-condition.

But is it not „funny“ that the same war mongering Nato countries who expect Palestinians to take part in the farce of decade long end- and fruitless „peace talks“ with Israel now say their patience with Syria is over?

Syrias rebels and the perfect orchestration of the gas attacks

radioyaran Syria , , , , , , , , , , ,

It cannot be denied that some sort of poisonous gas was used near Damascus with devastating effect. This is a fact. What is no fact is that it is clear who perpetrated the attack. The permanent statements of western politicians pointing at the syrian government are not evidence based and impartial but an intentional method to manipulate public opinion. There seems to be another fact to arrive at: That the rebels/“activists“ lied:

The sophisticated level of post-attack orchestrations by the opposition:
– immediate social media uploads reporting chemical attacks on 4 different suburbs/outskirts of Damascus
– spreading the apparently exaggerated claim of 1300 dead
– the lining up of heart breaking children corpses in almost total absence of rebel dead

and by contrast the relatively late first reaction of an obviously surprised government side suggest that one party in this conflict had a plan and a detailed chain of events to follow, while the other was caught in „shock an awe“ failing to publicize their version of the story through high ranking officials and at the right time (earlier than the rebels). The syrian government had no real story to tell.
By now, it seems that there were at most 350 dead, which is still a lot, especially given the high number of children deaths, but almost a 1000 casualties less than the very first horror reports. Then it seems, that only one place was really subject to a gas attack. These corrected versions that are either untold or played down by mainstream media in the days following the attack are no minor details: The claim of a four-fold almost simultaneous chemical attack and the high casualty figures were meant to assume that such a well-coordinated attack can only be carried out by an army with regular command and communication structure.

If the article below regarding the „Doctors without borders“ (Medicins sans frontieres) is true, then the statements by this organization cannot be considered 100% reliable and have to be taken with a grain of salt:
landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/doctors-behind-syrian-chemical-weapons.html

 

 

Syria – Western democracies ignore their people´s will

radioyaran Syria , , , , , ,

Polls taken in France, UK and US show that the broad majority of these Nato countries populations are vehemently opposed to military intervening in Syria. A similarly high level of opposition is also expressed towards the idea of further arming the increasingly radicalized and sectarian syrian rebels.

The sight of often non-syrian Salafi jihadists beheading christian Pastors as well as syrian Alawites but also the video clip showing a leader of an allegedly moderate syrian rebel faction cannibalizing the body of a dead syrian soldier will hardly have changed public opinion in favor of the rebels.

So, why are the Camerons, Hagues, Hollandes,…and probably also Obamas so keen on attacking Syria?
Why don´t they care for their people´s will? Is not a democracy about representing and fulfilling the people´s will?

Syria – The bombings of „civilian areas“

radioyaran Syria , , , , , ,

Bombed houses, badly damaged buildings, destroyed cars in the middle of towns and cities. Western media and politicians are quick to be „shocked“ and condemn barbarian acts against „civilian areas“.

The truth is that with rebels firing from roofs and through windows of houses and apartments the formerly civilian nature of such places is not given anymore.

This video clip is a good example of rebels using heavy machine guns from the middle of a „civilian area“ and using peoples houses to find shelter and hide their armed vehicles:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f97_1377384728

The syrian airforce hit them precisely which indicates that contrary to generalizing accusation the army is not deliberately shelling and bombing civilian areas with the sick intention to massacre the own people as rebel propaganda claims.

Following article supports the assertion about the relative accuracy of the syrian armys firing:
„But as constant, punishingly accurate, mortar, tank and sniper fire attested, President Bashar al-Assad’s soldiers on the other side, often just a room or a grenade toss away, are also well drilled, courageous — and much better armed.“
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2013/02/one-month-in-damascus.html

 

(Too) many open questions regarding the alleged chemical attack near Damascus

radioyaran Syria , , , , , , , , ,

To start, here is a brief summary of arguments that highlight the unlikeliness of the syrian army being behind the chemical attacks around Damascus:

1. The syrian army has been making a number of military gains, especially in the Homs governorate but also in and around Damascus. The current military situation was not threatening at all. Resorting to chemical attacks in the midst of „normal“ military clashes does not make sense.
2. The syrian government for month has been threatened with military intervention by Nato countries in case the „red line“ of using chemical weapons would be crossed.
3. It has been the syrian government itself that invited a UN inspector team which arrived only 2 days before the alleged attacks.
4. Contrary to repeated accusations by western media and politicians from the US, UK and France (among others) the syrian government is not „insane“. Even after being subject to multiple attacks by the israeli airforce and artillery and in one case by the turkish army – acts that resulted in destruction and many casualties for the syrian army – the regime did not hit back, knowing well that any violent reaction would trigger a massive military attack that would be suicidal.

But there are more questions:
a) If it was the syrian army why did they not use „regular“ and much more deadly chemical weapons that they posses?
b) Why did they chose areas around Damascus for such an attack?
c) Why did the army not carry out a more massive chemical attack followed up by a major troop incursion, both to finish off the (remaining) rebel fighters and  – more important – remove the traces of the attack?
d) If it was the army, it must have been crystal clear to them that such a gas attack cannot be concealed. They would know that the victims would be brought to hospitals and clinics. It should not be difficult for the army to take control of those facilities in advance to avoid that medical reports „leak“ out and doctors give interviews that could implicate the army. Besides, the regime could break down the internet connection and block access to Youtube and co., while being prepared to spread their own (fabricated) story to the media before the „activists“ shape public opinion
e) It would be obvious to the army that the military value of apparently blind attacks on civilian areas supportive of rebels would be limited while the resulting outrage and revenge feelings would be huge

In addition there are a number of valid reasons why it is not just a conspiracy theory to suspect the rebels:
https://radioyaran.wordpress.com/2013/08/22/why-it-is-not-unlikely-that-the-rebels-could-have-used-chemical-weapons/

A good scientific analysis:http://strongpointsecurity.co.uk/site/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Revised-Thoughts-on-Damascus.pdf

Why it is not unlikely that the rebels could have used chemical weapons

radioyaran Syria , , , , , , , ,

Here a couple of reasons:
1. There is no single rebel entity with a top down commando structure and a clear political agenda. With hundreds of „battalions“ and „brigades“ operating all around the country none can rule out that the other could have used chemical weapons
2. Rebel units mostly composed of Jihadis and/or foreign militants do not feel much affinity with ordinary Syrians. It might be that for them the end (removing Assad and establishing an islamist state) justifies the means (massacring pro- but also anti-regime civilians and blaming it on the government)
3. Why should a massacre with chemical weapons be „too barbaric“ to have been carried out by the rebels? After all these are the same people, who:
– have executed disarmed soldiers and pro-regime civilians (at times presenting the throat-cut bodies of victims as civilians killed by the „Shabiha“ while they had filmed the same people in another video as captured „Shabiha“ of Assad!)
– have killed state workers and bombed factories, railways, gas and oil pipelines, water supply infrastructure, power plants, etc.- have kidnapped people
– have tortured and beheaded civilian and military captives or kidnapping victims
– have cannibalized dead enemies
– shot children for being „blasphemous“
– fired at civilian airliners
– bombed and burned mosques, captured it on video and proudly celebrated it
– committed sectarian massacres on many occasions
– used poisonous gas against army soldiers (killing 16 of them) in Khan al Assal
– dehumanize their opponents by declaring them infidels and apostates whose blood can be spilled lawfully

Why it´s unlikely the syrian army used chemical weapons

radioyaran Syria , , , , , , , ,

There are at least four valid reasons why the syrian army is unlikely to have fired chemical weapons:
1. The army has made gains in the last months and is in no desperate situation2. The UN inspectors have just arrived in Syria, at invitation of the government
3. If the alleged chemical attack is explained as „revenge for rebel massacres in Lattakia“ it would make much more sense to attack their strongholds far away from the capital such as Rastan, Azaaz or Anaden
4. The syrian government and army have undertaken at times extreme measures to avoid foreign intervention and subsequent annihilation. The best example is the army´s non-reacting to Israeli attacks that destroyed facilities and killed soldiers.

All this makes it appear quite unlikely that the army would attack mostly civilian areas close to the capital with weapons of mass destruction

Here some media quotes:

BBC: „the timing is odd, bordering on suspicious. Why would the Assad government, which has recently been retaking ground from the rebels, carry out a chemical attack while UN weapons inspectors are in the country?…The BBC’s Middle East Editor Jeremy Bowen says many will ask why the government would want to use such weapons at a time when inspectors are in the country and the military has been doing well militarily in the area around Damascus.“
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23777201

The Independent: „there are questions as to why the regime would want to take recourse to WMDs at a time when it was making gains using conventional arms and with the knowledge that UN inspectors were present in the country“

„If you look at the way they have sought legitimacy through having the UN team there, in a carefully orchestrated fashion, with the help of the Russians and the Iranians, the use of chemical weapons does not make sense,“ said a Western European diplomat. Robert Emerson, a security analyst, added: „Assad has not been doing too badly in the publicity stakes with the excesses of Islamists among the rebels like the cannibal commander, et cetera. Deploying WMDs at this stage would be a hell of an own goal.“
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syrias-darkest-day-opposition-says-up-to-1300-killed-inchemical-weapons-attacks-by-assad-forces-on-damascus-8777527.html

Maliki must be nuts if…

radioyaran Iraq, Middle East, Syria , , , , , , , ,

really avoids iranian weapons from reaching the syrian army.

How brazen and stupid is the american foreign policy, especially in person of John Kerry?

They keep demanding the Iraqi authorities to do everything to stop the Iranians from arming the syrian army. But why the hell should the Iraqis do that when the Syrians are fighting the same salafist/jihadist criminals who have killed thousands of (predominantly Shiite) Iraqis?

“The weapons provided to those killers in Syria have been smuggled to Iraq and those wolves that came from different countries to Syria are now sneaking into Iraq,” he [Maliki] said during a youth gathering.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/officials-attacks-on-security-checkpoints-kill-7-soldiers-in-central-iraq/2013/08/17/df22c3ea-0727-11e3-bfc5-406b928603b2_story.html

Bahrain: The „international communities“ silence or why suppressing Shia muslims is OK

radioyaran Bahrain, Islam, Saudi Arabia, Syria , , ,

I don´t think that it is automatically wrong or illegitimate if a country is governed by a person belonging to the minority religious community, because religion itself should not be the benchmark for qualification.

The truth in Bahrain unlike all the lies told about and against Syria is that not only the Shia majority does not rule the country, it does not play a role at all in the higher political ranks, in the military and security services and the judiciary.

The US and UK should be ashamed for their silence on Bahrain:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/journalists-arrested-in-bahrain-as-shia-population-protests-its-sunni-monarchy-8760125.html