The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2015 AFPSyria settlement should not hinge on Assad's fate: U.N. chief
UNITED NATIONS©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2015 AFP
33 Comments
Login to comment
SenseNotSoCommon
Better the devil you know.
SimondB
And the Un Chief is quite right. Iraq was all about getting Saddam (and his non-existent WMD). And they got him. Now the place is a disaster zone. Hundreds of thousands have died and the future is looking increasingly bleak. Likewise the obsession with getting Gaddafi. Libya, once an oil rich prosperous country is now a no-go area run by violent militias. It is head in the clouds stuff if people think getting rid of Assad will magically make everything ok in Syria. If anything it will make it worse. Some countries thrive better under a tough one-man rule. Also the idea that democracy is one size fits all guarantee to peace and prosperity is a complete fallacy.
Doo-Bop
I am having serious doubts as to whether he is a devil at all. They have been throwing around so many obvious lies about Assad, I wonder how many accusations, if any, are true.
And considering who are the backers of the so-called rebels, this crisis has clearly little or nothing to do with human rights. Assad's "big crimes" are that Syria's central bank is government controlled, Syria has no IMF debt, and Syria has resources that others want.
Aly Rustom
Regardless of what you may think of the man, the fact remains that the opposition is adamant that they will not accept an end to the conflict unless he leaves. So for the sake of peace, if he really wants to end the war, he can leave while keeping the institutions in place. Let him live a life of luxury in Moscow or Tehran. But as long as he insists on staying, the war will continue. Again, these are facts. Its irrelevant what one's opinion is of the man.
SenseNotSoCommon
Indeed.
Add - with Baghdad on board - a bloc stretching from the Gulf to the Med and up to the Caspian that doesn't swallow the (let's call a spade a spade) NATO/Wahhabist/Zionist alliance narrative, and any fool can see why the latter group's opposition - political and otherwise - to Daesh has been such a pantomime.
Bgood41
Ban Ki Moon would apply same to Kin Jung Un. Assad was an Shiite Iranian puppet and war criminal who terrorized the Sunni that contribute to the rise of ISIS. A new form of coalition government is needed to sustain the survival of Syria. Moon joins Putin to offer a band aid solution to crisis for own agenda. What a shame.
Aly Rustom
Bgood41
i agree 100 percent
Whatsnext
Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the USA also contributed to the rise of Isis. I'm tired of people making Assad the be all end all here. There are multiple players here with all sorts of agendas. You can't just point to Assad and think blowing him up will solve anything. This history goes deep and Assad isn't the only hand in this whole mess.
elephant200
Assad deserved all civilized countries honoured<>
Doo-Bop
Looking at who this opposition is and who their backers are, it is clear that the conditions will only worsen if Assad leaves. Look at what happened to Iraq and Libya, their leaders were removed and the countries lay in ruin. So for the sake of peace and prosperity, Assad should stay and defend his people…
Indeed.
gcbel
The UN chief has it ass-backwards. Ending the crisis hinges on a number of things including and very importantly, Assad's leaving. NO one is saying that Assad's departure, in itself, will resolve the crisis. Assad, like his main supporter Russia, is part of the problem. And, on the contrary we shouldn't allow Putin's desire to preserve Russia's client-state's chief to continue to be a major obstacle to moving toward an end to the crisis. Why should one man desperately, selfishly, hanging on to power, be allowed to continue to part of the problem? So, he can continue to be President-thug for life? So, Russia can hang on to Tartus AND stick it to the West? Assad is a brutal dictator, a terrorist, with zero legitimacy. Assad could retire to a dacha near Moscow tomorrow and we'd be one big step closer to a resolution. If Russia wanted to help they'd invite Assad to relocate.
The idea that supporting him is somehow a solution a la "better the devil you know than ISIS" is just silly, simplistic and really counterproductive.
Of course you do. The facts don't fit your preferred narrative. Have you researched them at all? Or have you just wondered? There are the facts which even just a modicum of research would have turned up and there's what you obviously want to believe. Bashar al-Assad, like his father Hafez was bet, runs a brutal, authoritarian regime that has zero legitimacy. It has stayed and continues to stay in power through the brutal repression of it's own citizens.
http://www.businessinsider.com/bashar-al-assad-is-still-the-problem-2015-9?IR=T
etc.
WilliB
One of the few times that Ban is actually right. But are Obama et al listening?
Doo-Bop
@gcbel
Oh, I see, I am just expressing my preferred narrative, while you are stating "facts". But I would like to point out that my "preferred narrative" turned out to be correct in previous regime changes (Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya..). Oh, and didn't you also state as fact the idea that Assad gassed his people? I realize that Kerry had immediately announced that he had no doubt it was Assad, but lots of evidence points to the gas coming in from Turkey and passed onto the so-called rebels, actual "facts which even just a modicum of research would have turned up".
Have you ever wondered why the so-called rebels have been funded from the very start from such freedom-loving countries as Saudi Arabia? Is the Saudi regime that concerned with the well-being of the Syrian people?
Are you also aware of the regime change plans the west had for Syria (and Libya) long before the first shots were fired?
gcbel
@ Doo-bop
You make me laugh. It's a fact that Syria had chemical weapons. Pretty sure you don't dispute this fact? Correct?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_Syria%27s_chemical_weapons
And Assad used them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghouta_chemical_attack
As far as Russian theories that the attack was a rebel false flag operation.. self-serving, and lacking credibility.
You don't dispute the barrel bombs either?
And, what I do see is you failed to address my points. Not surprisingly.
Doo-Bop
@gcbel
I checked your link you provided to prove Assad gassed his people. Quite a waste of time. The most incriminating part was:
But I often found the following odd:
So Assad invited the UN inspectors to investigate a gas attack, and soon after they arrive, we are to believe that he decided drop a large quantity of sarin gas near the inspectors.
Did you actually bother to read the link you use to support your narrative.
About the gas attack. I find the following much more compelling:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmcH3kP70LU
gcbel
@DB
Another non-answer.
Oh, I've read that and much more and for much longer than you apparently. You should try something else than Russian "media". I'm quite satisfied the evidence is there that Assad's a brutal dictator (you haven't disputed that). It's a pretty transparent tactic of yours to try to get me bogged down in a discussion about doubts raised. Read everything and you'd have to be dishonest not to come to the same conclusion. After that, if you want to stick to your narrative that's fine but you've well and truly served. Assad had the chemical weapons (you don't dispute that), Assad hasn't hesitated to use like mass destruction devices, like barrel bombs (you haven't disputed that). But somehow he would be averse to using some of the weapons he has? LOL sorry, that just beggars belief.
Your best argument is that well maybe Assad didn't use gas on his own citizens? Give it up mate, you're losing the argument but badly.
Back to the main point you're trying to deflect from, Assad, a man with no legitimacy, a brutal authoritarian despot must go.
WilliB
gcbel:
I don´t get the impression that you have been following the Syrian conflict, and I would strongly advise to read something else than the mass media with their tired anti Assad propaganda.
If you seriously suggest that the freedom-loving "rebels" would replace the secular Assad regime would be less "brutal" than Assad, you might want to take a look at Libya and what a wonderfully humanitarian place it has become since Obamas illegal removal of Gaddafi.
gcbel
Yeah... thanks for your estimable input. It's pretty clear from reading your posts that your preferred narrative (evil Islam) informs your posts more so than that actual facts. So, I'll pass on taking advice from you.
Case in point, you'd do well to read more carefully the posts you're commenting on before advising others on how what to read and where to get their information. They're all still in the thread above. Take your time.
Doo-Bop
If you have read so much, then you must be very familiar with the work of people like Sibel Edmonds, who has been talking for years about Turkey’s role in arming the terrorists (I believe including supplying gas).
RT is far better than any western medium. Anyway, my RT link gives the direct statements from a Turkish MP, describing specific evidence about the sarin gas entering Syria via Turkey. Assad did not gas his people. But people continue to lie about it, and they certainly lie about other things too.
That is your opinion. If someone has specific proof, I might address it; until then, Assad is a swell guy! And what is your fixation with “barrel bombs”, what’s your point?
Again, that is just your opinion, which is not supported by any evidence. Do you consider the Saudi regime to be freedom-loving and truly concerned about the well being of its citizens? Why would they support the so-called rebels?
Do you at least acknowledge that Syria's central bank is government controlled and Syria has no IMF debt, and Syria has resources that others want? I think this is something Syria had in common with Libya and Iraq. Hmmm...
gcbel
More deflections and non-answers sigh
C'mon RT is just propaganda mouthpiece for the Kremlin you know it, I know it. Please, be serious.
Assad is a "swell guy"? Yeah, now it's clear you can't be taken seriously.
My point? It's been clearly documented that the regime has used barrel bombs on civilian population. I understand that's an inconvenient fact for you... You can find video on your preferred medium - YouTube. So, not so "swell guy"
Actually, my opinion is very much supported by evidence. Again brutal, unelected thug with zero legitimacy. Part of the problem.
Deflection. Irrelevant to my point.
Do you at least acknowledge that Russia is protecting it's interests in Syria specifically access to Tartus..?
Now you're just wasting my time.
WilliB
Doo-bop:
It is just one of these weird media talking points that seem to take on a life of its own. Somehow, were are all to believe that the secular Assad regime is pure evil, and once we remove it, wonderful democracy will break out in Syria, following the glorious examples of Iraq and Libya.
One definition of insanity is repeating the same action multiple times, expecting a different result. That seems to fit our current politicians, and the sycophantic media.
yamashi
@gcbel"RT is just propaganda mouthpiece". At least, they can provide some valid information. You show nothing except old-fashioned anti-Russian drivel.
"that the regime has used barrel bombs"
One simple question : who cares ? Westerners have already done much worse things, including bombings of that hospital with civilian personnel in Afganistan.
gcbel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeSP4rcz0W0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxv4on_k68o
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Syrian_Civil_War_barrel_bomb_attacks
Indiscriminate killing of civilians = weird media talking point
Doo-Bop
Essentially all western media is a mouthpiece of the military industrial complex. But regardless of what you might think of RT, my link gives you the direct statements of a Turkish MP. More important is why are your sources of "information" not giving you this very relevant info?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmcH3kP70LU
And you haven't addressed Sibel Edmonds. I guess you haven't read as much as you claim. Your just repeating western talking points.
Again, we have a leader who refuses to have foreign corporations steal its resources and foreign banks to bring the population under crippling debt. And because of that, the US regime and her friends mount a campaign of lies to carry out regime change and destroy the country. We saw it with Iraq and Libya, and they are doing it now with Syria. It boggles the mind that some still can't see this obvious pattern.
SenseNotSoCommon
A UK newspaper is covering the same Turkish MP's claims that ISIS got sarin through Ankara...
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/isis-obtained-materials-chemical-weapons-7020810
Followed (only) by two Wikipedia links. Who's making who laugh?
gcbel
@DB
RT is exactly what I said, a Kremlin propaganda machine... zero credibility.
And, again, you deflect and fail to address my points. You try to bait me into totally irrelevant tangents about ISIS and sarin gas... We're discussing Assad - brutal dictator, zero legitimacy, Russian client - part of the problem. His leaving part of the solution. Better or worse than ISIS, irrelevant.
@yamashi
I'm sure the families of the murdered kids care.... any decent human being should care.
Again, Tu Quoque is not a valid argument. You could be absolutely correct with your statement and that'd still be a fallacious argument - i.e., irrelevant to the point.
example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes
yamashi
@gcbel"zero credibility"
For you, maybe. For millions of viewers around the globe it is still credible source.
"We're discussing Assad-brutal dictator, zero legitimacy"
He is legally-elected for many people and not only in Syria. And your private opinion about him has neither weight nor credibility. You are quick in sticking labels on people, in worst traditions of primitive western-style propaganda. "Saddam gassed Kurds...Assad gassed civilians" and similar absolutely worthless western balderdash.
"I am sure the families of the murdered kids care". Did you provide any help to those families except clicking a keabord? At least, Russians are fighting IS effectively and families of Syrian people are quite OK with that.
gcbel
Only if you have an extremely loose definition of "elected" (93% of the vote and being the only one on the ballot, really? seriously?) Perhaps in primitive eastern-style propaganda that's what you mean by "elected". But no intelligent person would call that legally-elected. He's in power because his father, Hafez al-Assad, seized power and picked Bashar to succeed him.
If you say so. No less than your anyway. At least the facts are on my side.
If you, in your private opinion, say so... I suppose Russian forces will end ISIS any day now, right? so, by next week?
Doo-Bop
@gcbel You continue to ignore the facts presented by the Turkish MP (not an RT staff), using as an excuse that it was shown on RT. Same points were presented years ago by Sibel Edmonds, which anyone who is truly well-read, as you claim to be, should be familiar with, but you ignore her points too. So just because it does not come from the western controlled media, it can't possibly be true? Your sources are the same ones who brought us Saddam's WMD, yellow cake, and much more; they brought us lies while RT brought us truth. That is why RT has gain popularity.
You continue to bring up the legitimacy of the Syrian election. So is that why the Saudis and Turks are major backers of the so-called rebels? And is that why so many foreigners are willing to fight, kill, and die in Syria, to bring democracy to the Syrian people?
And who is more brutal, a leader who forces its population into heavy unpayable debt to foreign bankers (e.g., all western leaders) or a leader like Assad who was able to keep his people in relative prosperity (until Saudi Arabia, Qatar, US, UK, France, Israel, and Turkey brought death and chaos)?
FizzBit
Well gcbel, looks like you're all alone now cuz even Obama has abandoned you.
Kerry says Assad can stay.
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/12/16/regime-change-turnaround-kerry-says-assad-can-stayfor-now
gcbel
@DB
This is getting a little tedious. Not sure why you're having trouble understanding the above posts. This Turkish PM-ISIS connection-Sibel Edmonds-thread you keep harping on is IRRELEVANT to my points. I understand why you would try and bait me into irrelevancies and try to direct the conversation but I don't need to waste my time. I suggest you re-read my previous post if this still isn't clear to you.
Well I just responded to BB's claim that he was legally-elected. Which is patently ridiculous. He wasn't You either agree or disagree simple as that.
Fascinating stuff, but has nothing to do with Assad's legitimacy or, case being, lack thereof.
Again, irrelevant to my point. Assad is what I said he is, a brutal, illegitimate leader who, right now, is part of the problem.
@fitbit
Funny, I read diplomatic speak for we'll put that on the back burner for the moment. In any case, doesn't change my point an iota, Ban Ki is wrong, Assad is part of the problem and needs to go...
Doo-Bop
Yeah, Assad is the problem and needs to go, if and only if you believe all the lies made up by people who have obvious ulterior motives. And any proof that they are lies is irrelevant to your point, because your point relies on people believing those lies.
The reason Obama decided to put in on the back burner is that he couldn't pull it off, most people saw right through his deception. He needs to start a brand new deceptive approach...