10 New Messages
Digest #4798
Messages
Fri Sep 6, 2013 12:16 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://en.rian.
Russian Information Agency Novosti
September 6, 2013
Russia to Keep Helping Syria in Case of Airstrikes – Putin
ST. PETERSBURG: Russia will keep on supplying Syria with weapons and humanitarian aid and continue economic cooperation with Damascus in case of foreign airstrikes in the Middle Eastern country, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Friday.
“Will we be helping Syria? We will, same as we do now,” Putin said at a press conference at the G20 summit in St. Petersburg.
“We’re supplying arms and cooperating on economy. I hope there will be more humanitarian collaboration, including in humanitarian aid supplies to the people, the civilians who found themselves today in such dire straits,” Putin said.
Putin said he discussed the Syrian crisis at the summit with his US counterpart, Barack Obama, who has accused the Syrian government of using chemical weapons against civilians and called for airstrikes against the regime despite Russian objections.
However, Putin said he and Obama failed to agree with each other.
“We remained unconvinced by each other. But there is a dialogue, we hear each other and understand the arguments. I disagree with him, with his arguments, he disagrees with mine, but we hear [each other] and try to analyze [arguments],” Putin said.
Putin reiterated that he believed the chemical attack on August 21 in Syria was the work of anti-governmental rebels looking to incite foreign intervention. The United States blames the attack on the forces of Syrian President Bashar Assad.
G20 members Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Argentina, Brazil, South Africa and Italy oppose foreign military intervention in Syria and have voiced that position during the summit, Putin said.
He listed the United States, Turkey, Canada, Saudi Arabia and France as the countries backing an attack on Assad.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Russian Information Agency Novosti
September 6, 2013
Russia to Keep Helping Syria in Case of Airstrikes – Putin
ST. PETERSBURG: Russia will keep on supplying Syria with weapons and humanitarian aid and continue economic cooperation with Damascus in case of foreign airstrikes in the Middle Eastern country, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Friday.
“Will we be helping Syria? We will, same as we do now,” Putin said at a press conference at the G20 summit in St. Petersburg.
“We’re supplying arms and cooperating on economy. I hope there will be more humanitarian collaboration, including in humanitarian aid supplies to the people, the civilians who found themselves today in such dire straits,” Putin said.
Putin said he discussed the Syrian crisis at the summit with his US counterpart, Barack Obama, who has accused the Syrian government of using chemical weapons against civilians and called for airstrikes against the regime despite Russian objections.
However, Putin said he and Obama failed to agree with each other.
“We remained unconvinced by each other. But there is a dialogue, we hear each other and understand the arguments. I disagree with him, with his arguments, he disagrees with mine, but we hear [each other] and try to analyze [arguments],” Putin said.
Putin reiterated that he believed the chemical attack on August 21 in Syria was the work of anti-governmental rebels looking to incite foreign intervention. The United States blames the attack on the forces of Syrian President Bashar Assad.
G20 members Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Argentina, Brazil, South Africa and Italy oppose foreign military intervention in Syria and have voiced that position during the summit, Putin said.
He listed the United States, Turkey, Canada, Saudi Arabia and France as the countries backing an attack on Assad.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Sep 6, 2013 12:16 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.itar-
Itar-Tass
September 6, 2013
Russia will help Syria in case of external aggression
STRELNA, St Petersburg: The United States, Turkey, Canada, France, Saudi Arabia and Britain back the strike on Syria at the G20 summit, Russian President Vladimir Putin said.
Speaking at a final press conference, Putin said Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, South Africa and Italy came against military actions in Syria.
The U.N. secretary-general and Pope Francis also came against the use of force against Syria, the president said, adding that the population in these Western countries were against the military operation in Syria.
Putin had spoken to President Barack Obama for about thirty minutes but neither of them had changed his positions as a result of the meeting.
“This was a meaty and fruitful conversation and it took place in a friendly atmosphere but each of us remained clinging to old positions as a the result,” he said.
Putin noted that despite disagreements, he and President Obama understood each other’s arguments. “We listen to them and try to analyze,” Putin said.
The Russian leader said that he and his U.S. counterpart had agreed on ‘some options’ of a peaceful settlement of the Syrian problem. The Russian Foreign Ministry and the U.S. State Department will discuss the theme soon.
He indicated that the problem of the former CIA technology analyst Edward Snowden, whom Russia had granted asylum, was not discussed at the meeting.
Russian President Vladimir Putin also said he had spoken to President Barack Obama for about thirty minutes but neither of them had changed his stance.
At the same time, Vladimir Putin said Russia will help Syria in case of external aggression.
“Will we help Syria? We will,” the Russian leader said recalling that Russia had already been helping Syria through arms supplies and economic and humanitarian cooperation, including provision of humanitarian aid.
In reply to the question what other country in the world may theoretically be subjected to aggression similar to that Syria is facing, Putin said, “I do not want to think that any other country will be subjected to any external aggression.”
A military action against Syria will have a highly deplorable impact on international security at large, Putin emphasized.
He said he was surprised to see that ever more participants in the summit, including the leaders of India, Brazil, the South African Republic, and Indonesia were speaking vehemently against a possible military operation in Syria.
Putin cited the words of the South African President, Jacob Zuma, who said many countries were feeling unprotected against such actions undertaken by stronger countries.
“Given the conditions as they, how would you convince the North Koreans, for example, to give up their nuclear program,” he said. “Just tell them to put everything into storage today and they’ll be pulled to bits tomorrow.”
He underlined the presence of only one method for maintaining stability – “an unconditional observance of international law norms.”
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Itar-Tass
September 6, 2013
Russia will help Syria in case of external aggression
STRELNA, St Petersburg: The United States, Turkey, Canada, France, Saudi Arabia and Britain back the strike on Syria at the G20 summit, Russian President Vladimir Putin said.
Speaking at a final press conference, Putin said Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, South Africa and Italy came against military actions in Syria.
The U.N. secretary-general and Pope Francis also came against the use of force against Syria, the president said, adding that the population in these Western countries were against the military operation in Syria.
Putin had spoken to President Barack Obama for about thirty minutes but neither of them had changed his positions as a result of the meeting.
“This was a meaty and fruitful conversation and it took place in a friendly atmosphere but each of us remained clinging to old positions as a the result,” he said.
Putin noted that despite disagreements, he and President Obama understood each other’s arguments. “We listen to them and try to analyze,” Putin said.
The Russian leader said that he and his U.S. counterpart had agreed on ‘some options’ of a peaceful settlement of the Syrian problem. The Russian Foreign Ministry and the U.S. State Department will discuss the theme soon.
He indicated that the problem of the former CIA technology analyst Edward Snowden, whom Russia had granted asylum, was not discussed at the meeting.
Russian President Vladimir Putin also said he had spoken to President Barack Obama for about thirty minutes but neither of them had changed his stance.
At the same time, Vladimir Putin said Russia will help Syria in case of external aggression.
“Will we help Syria? We will,” the Russian leader said recalling that Russia had already been helping Syria through arms supplies and economic and humanitarian cooperation, including provision of humanitarian aid.
In reply to the question what other country in the world may theoretically be subjected to aggression similar to that Syria is facing, Putin said, “I do not want to think that any other country will be subjected to any external aggression.”
A military action against Syria will have a highly deplorable impact on international security at large, Putin emphasized.
He said he was surprised to see that ever more participants in the summit, including the leaders of India, Brazil, the South African Republic, and Indonesia were speaking vehemently against a possible military operation in Syria.
Putin cited the words of the South African President, Jacob Zuma, who said many countries were feeling unprotected against such actions undertaken by stronger countries.
“Given the conditions as they, how would you convince the North Koreans, for example, to give up their nuclear program,” he said. “Just tell them to put everything into storage today and they’ll be pulled to bits tomorrow.”
He underlined the presence of only one method for maintaining stability – “an unconditional observance of international law norms.”
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Sep 6, 2013 12:17 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://news.
Xinhua News Agency
September 6, 2013
News Analysis: Sluggish support in U.S. Congress for Syria strike spells trouble for Obama
WASHINGTON: Support for authorizing a military strike against Syria didn't pick up in U.S. Congress Thursday, which could mean trouble for the Obama administration as it would need to spend more time and precious political capital to cajole the undecided lawmakers, as well as the American public, to its side, experts say.
The problem even began to emerge on Wednesday, as the Senate Foreign Relations Committee delayed their public mark up of the authorization resolution for over three hours, and passed it 10-7 only after it satisfied Sen. John McCain by adding language to change momentum on the ground. But the vote tally showed bipartisan support as well as bipartisan opposition, indicating Congress' fractured state of opinion on the Syria issue.
Vote counts made by the press testifies to the point. CNN said the Senate, which is expected to vote on the resolution next week, has 24 yes votes, including the Democratic leadership and most committee chairs, and 17 no votes, with 59 still undecided. It is believed that if opponents resort to filibuster, Majority Leader Harry Reid may need to muster a supermajority of 60 votes to overcome them.
In the House, where all seats are to be contested in the election next year, there are only 26 yes votes, including both parties' leadership. There are 102 no votes, 284 undecideds and 21 unknown as of Thursday afternoon, according to the CNN. A vote count by The Washington Post yields similar results.
"Many in Congress, and not just Republicans, surely resent being called upon to authorize an action which public opinion polls indicate is widely unpopular, particularly among independent voters who can determine election outcomes in many states and congressional districts," said Michael Barone, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
According to recent opinion polls, the majority of the American public are against a military strike against Syria, and support for action typically lingers somewhere between 20 to 30 percent.
Members of Congress were acutely aware of the perils of supporting an unpopular military venture one year prior to an election. Reports indicated the House is poised to sit on any resolution after the Senate has voted on it. If it fails in Senate, the House might not take it up at all. Even if the Senate passed it, it could be the week of Sept. 16 before the House even begins to deliberate it on the chamber floor.
Faced with a war-weary nation, Congress has been complaining about the lack of administration effort to persuade the public.
During a House Foreign Relations Committee hearing Wednesday, Rep. Luke Messer asked Secretary of State John Kerry if President Barack Obama is willing to make the case for military action to the public from the Oval Office.
"I have no doubt the president will," Kerry replied.
At the St. Petersburg Group of Twenty (G20) summit, which Obama is attending, White House spokesman Ben Rhodes said Obama is mulling over the idea, and Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair Robert Menendez also supported an Oval Office address.
According to the White House, Obama has canceled his trip to California next week to shepherd the resolution in Congress. To date, the administration has reached out to about one third of the Congress on Syria in the past two weeks, reports said.
The renewed push may be because of the realization of the high stakes for Obama, both in policy and politics.
Michael Doran, a senior fellow with the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, said Thursday at a Washington event that Obama "absolutely has to do this," because the U.S. credibility is on the line, and inaction could spell more trouble in the Middle East for the administration.
Obama could also appear weak if he loses the vote in Congress for use of force against Syria and that it is a bad place to be, given his agenda in the fall to deal with issues such as debt ceiling, federal budget, Obamacare implementation and immigration reform, Doran said.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Xinhua News Agency
September 6, 2013
News Analysis: Sluggish support in U.S. Congress for Syria strike spells trouble for Obama
WASHINGTON: Support for authorizing a military strike against Syria didn't pick up in U.S. Congress Thursday, which could mean trouble for the Obama administration as it would need to spend more time and precious political capital to cajole the undecided lawmakers, as well as the American public, to its side, experts say.
The problem even began to emerge on Wednesday, as the Senate Foreign Relations Committee delayed their public mark up of the authorization resolution for over three hours, and passed it 10-7 only after it satisfied Sen. John McCain by adding language to change momentum on the ground. But the vote tally showed bipartisan support as well as bipartisan opposition, indicating Congress' fractured state of opinion on the Syria issue.
Vote counts made by the press testifies to the point. CNN said the Senate, which is expected to vote on the resolution next week, has 24 yes votes, including the Democratic leadership and most committee chairs, and 17 no votes, with 59 still undecided. It is believed that if opponents resort to filibuster, Majority Leader Harry Reid may need to muster a supermajority of 60 votes to overcome them.
In the House, where all seats are to be contested in the election next year, there are only 26 yes votes, including both parties' leadership. There are 102 no votes, 284 undecideds and 21 unknown as of Thursday afternoon, according to the CNN. A vote count by The Washington Post yields similar results.
"Many in Congress, and not just Republicans, surely resent being called upon to authorize an action which public opinion polls indicate is widely unpopular, particularly among independent voters who can determine election outcomes in many states and congressional districts," said Michael Barone, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
According to recent opinion polls, the majority of the American public are against a military strike against Syria, and support for action typically lingers somewhere between 20 to 30 percent.
Members of Congress were acutely aware of the perils of supporting an unpopular military venture one year prior to an election. Reports indicated the House is poised to sit on any resolution after the Senate has voted on it. If it fails in Senate, the House might not take it up at all. Even if the Senate passed it, it could be the week of Sept. 16 before the House even begins to deliberate it on the chamber floor.
Faced with a war-weary nation, Congress has been complaining about the lack of administration effort to persuade the public.
During a House Foreign Relations Committee hearing Wednesday, Rep. Luke Messer asked Secretary of State John Kerry if President Barack Obama is willing to make the case for military action to the public from the Oval Office.
"I have no doubt the president will," Kerry replied.
At the St. Petersburg Group of Twenty (G20) summit, which Obama is attending, White House spokesman Ben Rhodes said Obama is mulling over the idea, and Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair Robert Menendez also supported an Oval Office address.
According to the White House, Obama has canceled his trip to California next week to shepherd the resolution in Congress. To date, the administration has reached out to about one third of the Congress on Syria in the past two weeks, reports said.
The renewed push may be because of the realization of the high stakes for Obama, both in policy and politics.
Michael Doran, a senior fellow with the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, said Thursday at a Washington event that Obama "absolutely has to do this," because the U.S. credibility is on the line, and inaction could spell more trouble in the Middle East for the administration.
Obama could also appear weak if he loses the vote in Congress for use of force against Syria and that it is a bad place to be, given his agenda in the fall to deal with issues such as debt ceiling, federal budget, Obamacare implementation and immigration reform, Doran said.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Sep 6, 2013 12:18 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"mart unknown"
Forward from mart
Please Distribute Widely
*U.S. War on Syria - Update - Russian naval landing ship Nikolai Filchenkov
to the eastern Mediterranean carrying "special cargo"
*[Excerpt from the article *- "The vessel will dock in Novorossiysk where
it will take 'special cargo' on board and head to the designated area of
military service in the eastern Mediterranean,
navy source as saying. It gave no more details and Russia's Defence
Ministry declined immediate comment. Nikolai Filchenkov was not among
vessels that the ministry said last month would enter the Mediterranean as
part of a planned rotation*" ]
.-----------
Ignoring and defying Article 2(4) of the U.N Charter, which the U.S. as a
signatory to, is legally bound by - and ignoring and defying international
law, including the Nuremberg Principles, which ironically, the U.S both
helped establish and then vigorously enforced - and which all nations are
subject to , the U.S. 'world bully' and 'rogue state', is not merely just
floiting and flaunting the law and playing with fire, but is now putting
the entire world at risk and under threat of WWIII - if (and as") - it
proceeds with it's long-planned and "completely illegal under all
international law" war on Syria. When - and who in - and where - will the
world finally stand up to the bully??? - mart
------------
Additional information - see Wikipedia entries for "*Illegal War - War of
Aggression*" - http://en.wikipedia
Nuremburg Principles*" - http://en.wikipedia
------------
ca.news.yahoo.
*Yahoo News Canada - via Reuters
ca.news.yahoo.
Sept. 5, 2013*
*Russia sends another navy ship towards Syria*
*
MOSCOW (Reuters) -* Russia is sending the naval landing ship Nikolai
Filchenkov to the eastern Mediterranean, state news agency Interfax said on
Friday, reinforcing its presence near Syria.
Russia, an ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, says its vessels in
the eastern Mediterranean guarantee security as the United States considers
launching military strikes to punish Damascus for its alleged use of
chemical weapons.
"The vessel will dock in Novorossiysk where it will take special cargo on
board and head to the designated area of military service in the eastern
Mediterranean,
It gave no more details and Russia's Defence Ministry declined immediate
comment.
Nikolai Filchenkov was not among vessels that the ministry said last month
would enter the Mediterranean as part of a planned rotation.
Russia says it will not get involved militarily in Syria and opposes a
possible U.S. intervention, saying it would lack a mandate from the U.N.
Security Council, where Moscow has blocked Western-led attempts to mount
pressure on Assad.
The dispute over Syria has overshadowed a G20 summit in St Petersburg this
week and there is little expectation that world powers will be able to
overcome differences on the matter.
------------
*Photo - (www.militaryphotos
vessel Caesar Kunikov leaves the bay of the Ukrainian Black Sea port of
Sevastopol, June 19, 2012. The vessel, together with the Russian amphibious
ship "Nikolai Filchenkov"
departure on a mission to the Syrian port of Tartus, according to local
media which refer to an unidentified Russian Navy official. The media also
report that the two vessels can join the Russian-flagged bulk cargo vessel
Professor Katsman which is docked in Tartus.*"
www.militaryphotos.
- and -
http://oi48.
============
Please Distribute Widely
*U.S. War on Syria - Update - Russian naval landing ship Nikolai Filchenkov
to the eastern Mediterranean carrying "special cargo"
*[Excerpt from the article *- "The vessel will dock in Novorossiysk where
it will take 'special cargo' on board and head to the designated area of
military service in the eastern Mediterranean,
navy source as saying. It gave no more details and Russia's Defence
Ministry declined immediate comment. Nikolai Filchenkov was not among
vessels that the ministry said last month would enter the Mediterranean as
part of a planned rotation*" ]
.-----------
Ignoring and defying Article 2(4) of the U.N Charter, which the U.S. as a
signatory to, is legally bound by - and ignoring and defying international
law, including the Nuremberg Principles, which ironically, the U.S both
helped establish and then vigorously enforced - and which all nations are
subject to , the U.S. 'world bully' and 'rogue state', is not merely just
floiting and flaunting the law and playing with fire, but is now putting
the entire world at risk and under threat of WWIII - if (and as") - it
proceeds with it's long-planned and "completely illegal under all
international law" war on Syria. When - and who in - and where - will the
world finally stand up to the bully??? - mart
------------
Additional information - see Wikipedia entries for "*Illegal War - War of
Aggression*" - http://en.wikipedia
Nuremburg Principles*" - http://en.wikipedia
------------
ca.news.yahoo.
*Yahoo News Canada - via Reuters
ca.news.yahoo.
Sept. 5, 2013*
*Russia sends another navy ship towards Syria*
*
MOSCOW (Reuters) -* Russia is sending the naval landing ship Nikolai
Filchenkov to the eastern Mediterranean, state news agency Interfax said on
Friday, reinforcing its presence near Syria.
Russia, an ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, says its vessels in
the eastern Mediterranean guarantee security as the United States considers
launching military strikes to punish Damascus for its alleged use of
chemical weapons.
"The vessel will dock in Novorossiysk where it will take special cargo on
board and head to the designated area of military service in the eastern
Mediterranean,
It gave no more details and Russia's Defence Ministry declined immediate
comment.
Nikolai Filchenkov was not among vessels that the ministry said last month
would enter the Mediterranean as part of a planned rotation.
Russia says it will not get involved militarily in Syria and opposes a
possible U.S. intervention, saying it would lack a mandate from the U.N.
Security Council, where Moscow has blocked Western-led attempts to mount
pressure on Assad.
The dispute over Syria has overshadowed a G20 summit in St Petersburg this
week and there is little expectation that world powers will be able to
overcome differences on the matter.
------------
*Photo - (www.militaryphotos
vessel Caesar Kunikov leaves the bay of the Ukrainian Black Sea port of
Sevastopol, June 19, 2012. The vessel, together with the Russian amphibious
ship "Nikolai Filchenkov"
departure on a mission to the Syrian port of Tartus, according to local
media which refer to an unidentified Russian Navy official. The media also
report that the two vessels can join the Russian-flagged bulk cargo vessel
Professor Katsman which is docked in Tartus.*"
www.militaryphotos.
- and -
http://oi48.
============
Fri Sep 6, 2013 7:18 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://en.trend.
Trend News Agency
September 6, 2013
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister: Use of force in Syria to be felt worldwide
The use of force in Syria is fraught with echoes worldwide including the Caucasus, the Near and Middle East, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin said, RIA Novosti reported.
"I would not limit it with the Caucasus in the event of negative consequences that are possible in the case of an unauthorised attack on Syria without the UN. I am sure that not only the Caucasus, or Near and Middle East will be affected, but echoes resonate around the world. It is not only about the position of Russia, China, Iran and a number of countries in the Arab East," Karasin said to Russia Direct online-edition, the text of which was published in Russian Foreign Ministry'
The diplomat also stated that the Syrian issue is regularly raised in European capitals.
"Discussion of the Syrian issue in the UK House of Commons showed that the British MPs did not forget the lessons of Iraq. What Tony Blair did 10 years ago is unlikely to pass just as quietly and gently today. In a word, the world draws its conclusions,
------------
http://en.trend.
Trend News Agency
September 5, 2013
Russian Presidential spokesman: Interference in Syrian affairs may negatively affect world economy
Eventual external interference in Syrian affairs can have an extremely negative impact on the world economy, Russian Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, RIA Novosti reported.
"During the dialogue of the leaders of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) it was casually, without any specific discussion, noted that the factors that can have a negative impact on the global economic situation, can certainly include the consequences of eventual external interference in Syrian affairs. Such consequences can have extremely negative impact on the world economy," Peskov said at a briefing for journalists.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Trend News Agency
September 6, 2013
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister: Use of force in Syria to be felt worldwide
The use of force in Syria is fraught with echoes worldwide including the Caucasus, the Near and Middle East, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin said, RIA Novosti reported.
"I would not limit it with the Caucasus in the event of negative consequences that are possible in the case of an unauthorised attack on Syria without the UN. I am sure that not only the Caucasus, or Near and Middle East will be affected, but echoes resonate around the world. It is not only about the position of Russia, China, Iran and a number of countries in the Arab East," Karasin said to Russia Direct online-edition, the text of which was published in Russian Foreign Ministry'
The diplomat also stated that the Syrian issue is regularly raised in European capitals.
"Discussion of the Syrian issue in the UK House of Commons showed that the British MPs did not forget the lessons of Iraq. What Tony Blair did 10 years ago is unlikely to pass just as quietly and gently today. In a word, the world draws its conclusions,
------------
http://en.trend.
Trend News Agency
September 5, 2013
Russian Presidential spokesman: Interference in Syrian affairs may negatively affect world economy
Eventual external interference in Syrian affairs can have an extremely negative impact on the world economy, Russian Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, RIA Novosti reported.
"During the dialogue of the leaders of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) it was casually, without any specific discussion, noted that the factors that can have a negative impact on the global economic situation, can certainly include the consequences of eventual external interference in Syrian affairs. Such consequences can have extremely negative impact on the world economy," Peskov said at a briefing for journalists.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Sep 6, 2013 7:18 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.aco.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Allied Command Operations
September 6, 2013
Brillian Arrow Provides Realistic Training For Aircrew
SHAPE Public Affairs Office
One of the largest NATO air training events of the year, Exercise Brilliant Arrow, took place at Orland Airbase, in Norway from 25 Aug to 5 Sep 2013. The exercise challenged the approximately 650 exercise participants during a wide range of air missions conducted using approximately 50 military aircraft. Brilliant Arrow 2013 is the first live-fly exercise prepared and conducted by HQ AIRCOM, NATO's single Air Command in Germany.
During the two-week exercise, aircrew from ten different countries trained for both offensive and defensive missions. The exercise is the first in a series of manoeuvres taking place this fall designed to hone the skills and interoperability of NATO Response Forces (NRF), and the focus was on maintaining air readiness and interoperability. Realistic and demanding multi-national exercises like Brilliant Arrow are essential in maintaining and enhancing the effectiveness of NATO’s deployable forces.
"These exercises will keep the alliance ready and prepared to respond to any future challenges,” said Dutch exercise-director Colonel Frank Gerards. "Brilliant Arrow trains the Air Component of the NATO Response Force to deploy quickly wherever needed,” he added.
NATO Response Force Training
According to Col. Gerards, Exercise Brilliant Arrow is one component of a wider program to train the NATO Response Force. Initial training is conducted by nations at home to ensure basic standards are met, followed by deployment and initial exercises in a multinational environment, such as Exercise Brilliant Arrow. The final component is a large combined multinational training event such as Exercise Steadfast Jazz which takes place in November of this year, he said.
"When we have successfully completed those three phases we will be ready for a whole year on NRF standby, ready to deploy if required,” said Col. Gerards.
Achievements
Establishing effective command and control from HQ AIRCOM in Ramstein, Germany was a major objective for Exercise Brilliant Arrow. Col Gerards indicated that this had been achieved, which was noteworthy given that for most nations, this was the first time dealing with Ramstein as the sole Air Headquarters in NATO. He indicated that the successful deployment of aircraft and the integration of all assets into a multinational environment were other objectives that were successfully achieved during the training event.
Twice a day, aircraft took off from Orland, Norway to fly missions above the North Sea and the Norwegian mainland. Aircraft from Norway, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Turkey and the United Kingdom, participated in the exercise and in total they flew 534 sorties. Most of the participating countries flew the F-16s, while Germany employed Tornados and France utilised Mirage 2000 aircraft. The UK and France joined with AWACS aircraft and The Netherlands provided support with a KDC-10 air-to-air refuelling tanker. Several transport aircraft, helicopters, and ‘jammers’ also took part in the exercise. The role of the ‘jammer’ aircraft is to disrupt enemy electronic signals thereby hindering the opposing force in the execution of their mission.
Scenario
The missions flown during the exercise were realistic and built on experiences from previous NATO missions. The scenario was challenging and those participating in the manoeuvres felt that a great deal was learned during Exercise Brilliant Arrow.
"As a younger NATO partner, this exercise offers us a lot of benefits,” said Lieutenant-Colonel Paul, a Polish F-16 pilot and detachment commander. "Taking part in missions with 40-50 jets and working together will improve everybody’s performances. Working in this international environment, planning, executing and debriefing every mission together allows us to gain experience with our NATO partners, something which I personally enjoy,” he said.
The scenarios covered a variety of different missions including creating no-fly zones and protecting civilians on the ground.
"Exercise Brilliant Arrow will hone the skills of allied air forces in orchestrating air operations,” said General Philip Breedlove. "This level of capability and interoperability will be needed if the involved units are activated under the NATO Response Force,” he said.
Air-to-air refuelling
Air-to-air refilling was another skill that was honed during the course of Exercise Brilliant Arrow. "The KDC-10 carries 70.000 litres of fuel to fill up some thirsty aircraft,” said boom operator Sergeant-Major Ad Aanraad. The airman from the Netherlands wears 3D glasses which he says makes it much easier to put the boom in the receptacle on top of the aircraft. "If the aircraft is stable and slow, it is like a walk in the park,” he said. "With 1750 litres a minute we can quickly fill up the aircraft and have them back in the mission.” According to Sergeant-Major Aanraad, air-to-air refuelling assets are highly needed to maximise NATO’s mission capability. "We were there at Operation Unified Protector to maintain the no-fly zone above Libya. With the air-to-air refuelling capability we were able to stay in the air much longer than the normal two hours,” he said.
Brilliant Results
In the opinion of the Exercise Director, the scenarios and missions conducted during Exercise Brilliant Arrow were wide-ranging and the overall event achieved all of its objectives. "I am proud to say that we are looking back on a successful exercise,” said Colonel Gerards. "We worked together in an international setting to integrate and standardize the various national contingents, which will enable us to respond swiftly to various types of crisis anywhere in the world,” he said.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Allied Command Operations
September 6, 2013
Brillian Arrow Provides Realistic Training For Aircrew
SHAPE Public Affairs Office
One of the largest NATO air training events of the year, Exercise Brilliant Arrow, took place at Orland Airbase, in Norway from 25 Aug to 5 Sep 2013. The exercise challenged the approximately 650 exercise participants during a wide range of air missions conducted using approximately 50 military aircraft. Brilliant Arrow 2013 is the first live-fly exercise prepared and conducted by HQ AIRCOM, NATO's single Air Command in Germany.
During the two-week exercise, aircrew from ten different countries trained for both offensive and defensive missions. The exercise is the first in a series of manoeuvres taking place this fall designed to hone the skills and interoperability of NATO Response Forces (NRF), and the focus was on maintaining air readiness and interoperability. Realistic and demanding multi-national exercises like Brilliant Arrow are essential in maintaining and enhancing the effectiveness of NATO’s deployable forces.
"These exercises will keep the alliance ready and prepared to respond to any future challenges,” said Dutch exercise-director Colonel Frank Gerards. "Brilliant Arrow trains the Air Component of the NATO Response Force to deploy quickly wherever needed,” he added.
NATO Response Force Training
According to Col. Gerards, Exercise Brilliant Arrow is one component of a wider program to train the NATO Response Force. Initial training is conducted by nations at home to ensure basic standards are met, followed by deployment and initial exercises in a multinational environment, such as Exercise Brilliant Arrow. The final component is a large combined multinational training event such as Exercise Steadfast Jazz which takes place in November of this year, he said.
"When we have successfully completed those three phases we will be ready for a whole year on NRF standby, ready to deploy if required,” said Col. Gerards.
Achievements
Establishing effective command and control from HQ AIRCOM in Ramstein, Germany was a major objective for Exercise Brilliant Arrow. Col Gerards indicated that this had been achieved, which was noteworthy given that for most nations, this was the first time dealing with Ramstein as the sole Air Headquarters in NATO. He indicated that the successful deployment of aircraft and the integration of all assets into a multinational environment were other objectives that were successfully achieved during the training event.
Twice a day, aircraft took off from Orland, Norway to fly missions above the North Sea and the Norwegian mainland. Aircraft from Norway, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Turkey and the United Kingdom, participated in the exercise and in total they flew 534 sorties. Most of the participating countries flew the F-16s, while Germany employed Tornados and France utilised Mirage 2000 aircraft. The UK and France joined with AWACS aircraft and The Netherlands provided support with a KDC-10 air-to-air refuelling tanker. Several transport aircraft, helicopters, and ‘jammers’ also took part in the exercise. The role of the ‘jammer’ aircraft is to disrupt enemy electronic signals thereby hindering the opposing force in the execution of their mission.
Scenario
The missions flown during the exercise were realistic and built on experiences from previous NATO missions. The scenario was challenging and those participating in the manoeuvres felt that a great deal was learned during Exercise Brilliant Arrow.
"As a younger NATO partner, this exercise offers us a lot of benefits,” said Lieutenant-Colonel Paul, a Polish F-16 pilot and detachment commander. "Taking part in missions with 40-50 jets and working together will improve everybody’s performances. Working in this international environment, planning, executing and debriefing every mission together allows us to gain experience with our NATO partners, something which I personally enjoy,” he said.
The scenarios covered a variety of different missions including creating no-fly zones and protecting civilians on the ground.
"Exercise Brilliant Arrow will hone the skills of allied air forces in orchestrating air operations,” said General Philip Breedlove. "This level of capability and interoperability will be needed if the involved units are activated under the NATO Response Force,” he said.
Air-to-air refuelling
Air-to-air refilling was another skill that was honed during the course of Exercise Brilliant Arrow. "The KDC-10 carries 70.000 litres of fuel to fill up some thirsty aircraft,” said boom operator Sergeant-Major Ad Aanraad. The airman from the Netherlands wears 3D glasses which he says makes it much easier to put the boom in the receptacle on top of the aircraft. "If the aircraft is stable and slow, it is like a walk in the park,” he said. "With 1750 litres a minute we can quickly fill up the aircraft and have them back in the mission.” According to Sergeant-Major Aanraad, air-to-air refuelling assets are highly needed to maximise NATO’s mission capability. "We were there at Operation Unified Protector to maintain the no-fly zone above Libya. With the air-to-air refuelling capability we were able to stay in the air much longer than the normal two hours,” he said.
Brilliant Results
In the opinion of the Exercise Director, the scenarios and missions conducted during Exercise Brilliant Arrow were wide-ranging and the overall event achieved all of its objectives. "I am proud to say that we are looking back on a successful exercise,” said Colonel Gerards. "We worked together in an international setting to integrate and standardize the various national contingents, which will enable us to respond swiftly to various types of crisis anywhere in the world,” he said.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Sep 6, 2013 7:18 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://news.
Xinhua News Agency
September 6, 2013
U.S. faces divided Congress, int'l community over Syria strike
BEIJING: Support for a potential military strike against Syria didn't pick up in U.S. Congress Thursday, and world leaders failed to agree on the issue as they met in Russia's St. Petersburg for the Group of 20 (G20) summit.
The sluggish congressional support could prove problematic for the Obama administration, indicating the need to spend more time and precious political capital to persuade the undecided lawmakers, as well as the American public.
The issue seemed apparent even on Wednesday, as the Senate Foreign Relations Committee delayed their public mark up of the authorization resolution for over three hours. It was passed 10-7, including amendments from Sen. John McCain to "change momentum on the battlefield.
Vote counts made by the press appear to testify the point. CNN said the Senate, expected to vote on the resolution next week, has 24 yes votes, including the Democratic leadership and most committee chairs, and 17 no votes, with 59 still undecided. It is believed that if opponents filibuster the resolution, Majority Leader Harry Reid may need to muster a supermajority of 60 votes to overcome them.
In the House, where all seats are to be contested in the election next year, there are only 26 yes votes, including both parties' leadership. There are 102 no votes, 284 undecideds and 21 unknown as of Thursday afternoon, according to CNN. A vote count by The Washington Post yields similar results.
According to recent opinion polls, the majority of the American public are against a military strike against Syria, and support for action typically lingers somewhere between 20 to 30 percent.
Members of Congress were acutely aware of the perils of supporting an unpopular military venture one year prior to an election. Reports indicated the House is poised to sit on any resolution after the Senate has voted on it. If it fails in Senate, the House might not take it up at all. Even if the Senate passed it, it could be the week of Sept. 16 before the House even begins to deliberate it on the chamber floor.
Likewise, President Barack Obama, who is currently in St. Petersburg and plans to top the summit's agenda with Syria issue, didn't seem to get enough support from G20 leaders on Friday.
Like it or not, Obama is facing a divided international community over the military strike against Syria.
During Friday's meeting, Russian President Vladimir Putin, host of the summit and a strong objector of military action on Syria, gave a last-minute announcement for leaders to air their views during dinner.
Three hours' discussion ended in vain, with the participants finding the only thing they'd confirmed was the division among them over Syria.
Responding to a question on Syria during a press conference at the summit, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia is not blocking the work of the UN Security Council, but encourages its partners to consider the situation in Syria "in a responsible manner" and not to use the so-called fact to justify their own actions.
"We cannot accept the proof which, from our point of view, is not proof at all and that is far from being convincing," Peskov said.
The Security Council is the "only legitimate body" in international affairs that can use legitimate forces, he said, adding "neither Russia nor the U.S." can make such decisions alone.
Moscow believes that decisions should not be made before UN experts finish their probe and provide evidence on who had used the chemical weapons in Syria, he added.
Moscow saw it as unacceptable if "anyone in the world imposes its will on another state and tries to change the international law regime under which the world lives," said the spokesman.
On this regard, China believes the summit should address the concerns of the international community, coordinate the macroeconomic policy of each country, promote international economic and financial governance, free trade and the development agenda, so as to exert a positive influence on the international economy.
For his part, Chile's President Sebastian Pinera said Thursday that a military strike against Syria required the backing of the United Nations Security Council.
"I want to say that the Chilean government believes that any military action in Syria must be within the context of the multinational institutional structure that we have at the United Nations and the Security Council, and not by a unilateral decision of a single or a group of countries," said Pinera in the presidential palace of La Moneda.
On the same day, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned the U.S.that it will suffer "loss" over possible intervention in Syria.
The U.S. leaders are "trying to pretend that they want to intervene for humanitarian purposes, but nobody in the world could fancy that the Americans are after humanitarian issues" in Syria, said Khamenei, adding that the United States is making a mistake about Syria and will suffer a definite loss.
Meanwhile, in a fresh bid for international support, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Friday will kick off a weekend trip to Europe, where he plans to attend a meeting of EU foreign ministers and discuss with them issues in the Middle East, including Syria.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Xinhua News Agency
September 6, 2013
U.S. faces divided Congress, int'l community over Syria strike
BEIJING: Support for a potential military strike against Syria didn't pick up in U.S. Congress Thursday, and world leaders failed to agree on the issue as they met in Russia's St. Petersburg for the Group of 20 (G20) summit.
The sluggish congressional support could prove problematic for the Obama administration, indicating the need to spend more time and precious political capital to persuade the undecided lawmakers, as well as the American public.
The issue seemed apparent even on Wednesday, as the Senate Foreign Relations Committee delayed their public mark up of the authorization resolution for over three hours. It was passed 10-7, including amendments from Sen. John McCain to "change momentum on the battlefield.
Vote counts made by the press appear to testify the point. CNN said the Senate, expected to vote on the resolution next week, has 24 yes votes, including the Democratic leadership and most committee chairs, and 17 no votes, with 59 still undecided. It is believed that if opponents filibuster the resolution, Majority Leader Harry Reid may need to muster a supermajority of 60 votes to overcome them.
In the House, where all seats are to be contested in the election next year, there are only 26 yes votes, including both parties' leadership. There are 102 no votes, 284 undecideds and 21 unknown as of Thursday afternoon, according to CNN. A vote count by The Washington Post yields similar results.
According to recent opinion polls, the majority of the American public are against a military strike against Syria, and support for action typically lingers somewhere between 20 to 30 percent.
Members of Congress were acutely aware of the perils of supporting an unpopular military venture one year prior to an election. Reports indicated the House is poised to sit on any resolution after the Senate has voted on it. If it fails in Senate, the House might not take it up at all. Even if the Senate passed it, it could be the week of Sept. 16 before the House even begins to deliberate it on the chamber floor.
Likewise, President Barack Obama, who is currently in St. Petersburg and plans to top the summit's agenda with Syria issue, didn't seem to get enough support from G20 leaders on Friday.
Like it or not, Obama is facing a divided international community over the military strike against Syria.
During Friday's meeting, Russian President Vladimir Putin, host of the summit and a strong objector of military action on Syria, gave a last-minute announcement for leaders to air their views during dinner.
Three hours' discussion ended in vain, with the participants finding the only thing they'd confirmed was the division among them over Syria.
Responding to a question on Syria during a press conference at the summit, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia is not blocking the work of the UN Security Council, but encourages its partners to consider the situation in Syria "in a responsible manner" and not to use the so-called fact to justify their own actions.
"We cannot accept the proof which, from our point of view, is not proof at all and that is far from being convincing," Peskov said.
The Security Council is the "only legitimate body" in international affairs that can use legitimate forces, he said, adding "neither Russia nor the U.S." can make such decisions alone.
Moscow believes that decisions should not be made before UN experts finish their probe and provide evidence on who had used the chemical weapons in Syria, he added.
Moscow saw it as unacceptable if "anyone in the world imposes its will on another state and tries to change the international law regime under which the world lives," said the spokesman.
On this regard, China believes the summit should address the concerns of the international community, coordinate the macroeconomic policy of each country, promote international economic and financial governance, free trade and the development agenda, so as to exert a positive influence on the international economy.
For his part, Chile's President Sebastian Pinera said Thursday that a military strike against Syria required the backing of the United Nations Security Council.
"I want to say that the Chilean government believes that any military action in Syria must be within the context of the multinational institutional structure that we have at the United Nations and the Security Council, and not by a unilateral decision of a single or a group of countries," said Pinera in the presidential palace of La Moneda.
On the same day, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned the U.S.that it will suffer "loss" over possible intervention in Syria.
The U.S. leaders are "trying to pretend that they want to intervene for humanitarian purposes, but nobody in the world could fancy that the Americans are after humanitarian issues" in Syria, said Khamenei, adding that the United States is making a mistake about Syria and will suffer a definite loss.
Meanwhile, in a fresh bid for international support, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Friday will kick off a weekend trip to Europe, where he plans to attend a meeting of EU foreign ministers and discuss with them issues in the Middle East, including Syria.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Sep 6, 2013 7:18 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://usa.chinadai
China Daily
September 6, 2013
Obama lacks legal basis
With US President Barack Obama's push for military action against Syria passing its first hurdle in the Senate, the countdown to military intervention by the United States in a Middle East country has begun ticking again
The majority of the world's countries support political solutions to the Syria crisis, it is the US' unilateralism and defiance of international law that are really weakening its claims to global leadership.
With the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voting 10 to 7 in favor of a resolution authorizing the use of military force in Syria, it could go before the full Senate next week.
However, before proceeding any further US lawmakers may want to triple check both the legal and moral grounds on which Obama has built his case.
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Tuesday that any military attack on Syria must have the approval of the UN Security Council. He said that a US attack without the endorsement of the UN would be unlawful and could lead to further turmoil in the conflict-ridden country.
Ban said any use of chemical weapons by anyone under any circumstances will be a serious violation of international law and any perpetrators must be brought to justice.
But Obama is trying to jump the gun. The UN chemical weapons inspection team, though it has concluded its investigation into the alleged use of chemical weapons in the suburbs of Damascus last week, has yet to produce an official report confirming chemical weapons were used and if so by whom.
Without UN authorization, the US obviously lacks a legal basis to proceed with military action and the arguments it is using to justify its case do not hold water.
Obama may be driven by a self-imposed moral obligation when he insists that the regime of Bashar al-Assad should be punished for using chemical weapons.
He also linked likely strikes on Syria with the US' global leadership when he suggested over the weekend that both US' allies and adversaries will draw conclusions if the US fails to act over Syria.
In fact, as fewer allies have sided with the US this time when compared with the military interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan or even Libya, and the majority of the world's countries still support political solutions to the Syria crisis, it is the US' unilateralism and defiance of international law that are really weakening its claims to global leadership.
------------
http://usa.chinadai
China Daily
September 6, 2013
Obama echoing George W. Bush's stance
By Chen Weihua
Former US Congressman Allen West has said President Barack Obama's going to Congress for approval for military action in Syria is intended to make the lawmakers a scapegoat if things go wrong.
That is probably true.
Otherwise, it is hard to explain why Obama has suddenly changed course and taken Congress seriously. Throughout his past four years and seven months in office, Congress has repeatedly tried to block his plans with many successes. In return, Obama rails against Capitol Hill, calling it "increasingly dysfunctional"
But the heated debate in the British Parliament, which finally rejected Prime Minister David Cameron'
However, Obama has never ruled out taking military action without the authorization of Congress. He may still order missile strikes on Syria even if the House shoots down his resolution and if international law is set aside. And there is no indication that Obama will do exactly what David Cameron has done by admitting the defeat and saying, "I get that and government will act accordingly.
Whether he will act without Congress' support, we will only find out when his proposal is rejected by the House.
It is a similar situation with the United Nations.
Obama said in Sweden on Wednesday that he respects the UN process. But if that is the case, why does he insist on bypassing the UN Security Council for a vote that could legitimize military action against Syria under international law?
Even Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, who was standing next to him on Wednesday said he opposes military intervention without UN authorization.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon also said on Wednesday that under the UN Charter, US-led strikes on Syria would be illegal unless authorized by the Security Council or if made in self-defense.
The reason Obama has not gone through the Security Council is clear. His resolution stands no chance of being passed. This is not only because Russia and China want a diplomatic solution to the crisis, it is also because many countries remember how the US and NATO abused the no-fly-zone resolution on Libya two years ago to pursue regime change and they are not convinced by the US allegation that Syrian government forces used chemical weapons.
There is little confidence in US intelligence after the whole world was duped into believing Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and we are still waiting for the conclusions of the UN investigation into the allegations of chemical weapons use, which could take another two or three weeks.
While the rest of the world looks up to the UN, Obama clearly thinks that the UN Security Council is useful only when it sings the tune the US wants it to.
Obama has also tried to hijack the will of the people by saying: "My credibility is not on the line. The international community'
It reminds me of George W. Bush's words that "either you are with us, or with the terrorists"
The author, based in Washington, is deputy editor of China Daily USA.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
China Daily
September 6, 2013
Obama lacks legal basis
With US President Barack Obama's push for military action against Syria passing its first hurdle in the Senate, the countdown to military intervention by the United States in a Middle East country has begun ticking again
The majority of the world's countries support political solutions to the Syria crisis, it is the US' unilateralism and defiance of international law that are really weakening its claims to global leadership.
With the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voting 10 to 7 in favor of a resolution authorizing the use of military force in Syria, it could go before the full Senate next week.
However, before proceeding any further US lawmakers may want to triple check both the legal and moral grounds on which Obama has built his case.
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Tuesday that any military attack on Syria must have the approval of the UN Security Council. He said that a US attack without the endorsement of the UN would be unlawful and could lead to further turmoil in the conflict-ridden country.
Ban said any use of chemical weapons by anyone under any circumstances will be a serious violation of international law and any perpetrators must be brought to justice.
But Obama is trying to jump the gun. The UN chemical weapons inspection team, though it has concluded its investigation into the alleged use of chemical weapons in the suburbs of Damascus last week, has yet to produce an official report confirming chemical weapons were used and if so by whom.
Without UN authorization, the US obviously lacks a legal basis to proceed with military action and the arguments it is using to justify its case do not hold water.
Obama may be driven by a self-imposed moral obligation when he insists that the regime of Bashar al-Assad should be punished for using chemical weapons.
He also linked likely strikes on Syria with the US' global leadership when he suggested over the weekend that both US' allies and adversaries will draw conclusions if the US fails to act over Syria.
In fact, as fewer allies have sided with the US this time when compared with the military interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan or even Libya, and the majority of the world's countries still support political solutions to the Syria crisis, it is the US' unilateralism and defiance of international law that are really weakening its claims to global leadership.
------------
http://usa.chinadai
China Daily
September 6, 2013
Obama echoing George W. Bush's stance
By Chen Weihua
Former US Congressman Allen West has said President Barack Obama's going to Congress for approval for military action in Syria is intended to make the lawmakers a scapegoat if things go wrong.
That is probably true.
Otherwise, it is hard to explain why Obama has suddenly changed course and taken Congress seriously. Throughout his past four years and seven months in office, Congress has repeatedly tried to block his plans with many successes. In return, Obama rails against Capitol Hill, calling it "increasingly dysfunctional"
But the heated debate in the British Parliament, which finally rejected Prime Minister David Cameron'
However, Obama has never ruled out taking military action without the authorization of Congress. He may still order missile strikes on Syria even if the House shoots down his resolution and if international law is set aside. And there is no indication that Obama will do exactly what David Cameron has done by admitting the defeat and saying, "I get that and government will act accordingly.
Whether he will act without Congress' support, we will only find out when his proposal is rejected by the House.
It is a similar situation with the United Nations.
Obama said in Sweden on Wednesday that he respects the UN process. But if that is the case, why does he insist on bypassing the UN Security Council for a vote that could legitimize military action against Syria under international law?
Even Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, who was standing next to him on Wednesday said he opposes military intervention without UN authorization.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon also said on Wednesday that under the UN Charter, US-led strikes on Syria would be illegal unless authorized by the Security Council or if made in self-defense.
The reason Obama has not gone through the Security Council is clear. His resolution stands no chance of being passed. This is not only because Russia and China want a diplomatic solution to the crisis, it is also because many countries remember how the US and NATO abused the no-fly-zone resolution on Libya two years ago to pursue regime change and they are not convinced by the US allegation that Syrian government forces used chemical weapons.
There is little confidence in US intelligence after the whole world was duped into believing Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and we are still waiting for the conclusions of the UN investigation into the allegations of chemical weapons use, which could take another two or three weeks.
While the rest of the world looks up to the UN, Obama clearly thinks that the UN Security Council is useful only when it sings the tune the US wants it to.
Obama has also tried to hijack the will of the people by saying: "My credibility is not on the line. The international community'
It reminds me of George W. Bush's words that "either you are with us, or with the terrorists"
The author, based in Washington, is deputy editor of China Daily USA.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Sat Sep 7, 2013 6:20 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://voiceofrussi
Voice of Russia
September 6, 2013
US aggression on Syria would violate international law
As the world sits glued to their radios and TV screens and their other sources of information waiting for news of an attack on Syria other events are taking place that the nefarious planners in Mclean Virginia and Washington have successfully distracted the world’s attention from. At the cost of a couple of hundred Syrian lives, which in reality mean nothing for the Americans and their Al-Qaeda elements in Syria, the US has perhaps yet failed to launch another act of aggression and commit another crime against peace, but it has succeeded in accomplishing several other objectives.
Of the four “core international crimes” (crimes of aggression, crimes against humanity, genocide and war crimes) as determined by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the treaty which founded the International Criminal Court (ICC), the United States of America is guilty of all of them.
Crime against peace
In international law a crime against peace is defined as the “planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of wars of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing"
It is clear given the preponderance of evidence that the US attacks on Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq and now the planned attack on Syria are all crimes against peace and would be prosecuted if there was a body with the will to do so.
Crimes against humanity
Under international law another type of crime that the United States may be guilty of committing on multiple occasions and which many accuse the US of carrying out in its execution of its “War on Terror”, are crimes against humanity. These crimes are defined as "particularly odious offenses in that they constitute a serious attack on human dignity or grave humiliation or a degradation of human beings." The systematic persecution of one racial group by another, as is the case with American blacks, would be eligible for this classification.
It is arguable whether for example, the targeting of Muslims as a group, the extra judicial executions of suspected terrorists by drone, rendition, illegal detention and torture would, by themselves, meet the litmus test for being classified as crimes against humanity, but there can be little doubt that all of these crimes put together as part of a continual concerted effort in which the participants know they are committing violations of human rights, international law, the Geneva Conventions, the laws of war and other international laws and conventions, could and should be classified as crimes against humanity.
It might be argued that those behind, or in collusion with, the perpetrators of 9-11, or even those who failed to prosecute the perpetrators are also guilty of crimes against humanity, especially the consequences that those events have had on the world since that date.
War crimes
An area where there is little area for debate as to the collusion and guilt of the United States is in the area of war crimes. War crimes are generally defined as including: "murder, the ill-treatment or deportation of civilian residents of an occupied territory to slave labor camps (Guantanamo, rendition sites, Abu-Ghraib, etc), the murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, the killing of prisoners (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria), the wanton destruction of cities, towns and villages (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya), and any devastation not justified by military, or civilian necessity (all of the previous and in particular Syria).
The US Government’s institutionalized collusion in war crimes, including torture, the use of chemical weapons and indefinite detention under conditions amounting to torture have been very well documented and proven time and time again. The persecution and prosecution of Bradley Manning serving as the best example, as well as the evidence that he revealed.
Genocide
No one has called the, what could be millions, of Sunni Muslims and others killed in the illegal US wars genocide but if the numbers are in fact in the millions this would be valid.
The fact that the United States was founded on the genocide of the American Indians, something no one has ever been prosecuted for. The continuing practice of keeping the few Indians that are left living on “reservations” essentially prison zones, would be classified as a crime against humanity but no one is willing to or calling for anything to be done.
Other crimes
The number of other crimes committed by the United States since 9-11 would fill volumes and include everything from droning, to extra-judicial executions, bringing about and causing revolutions and political instability, economic manipulation, repression of dissent and protestors, attacks on media and whistleblowers and others. However the largest and most egregious offense with a truly global reach involves the revelations by Edward Snowden. It is chiefly these revelations and the backlash that the United States has avoided by threatening the world with an even greater crime. You would not tell a murderer that you have caught as he is hacking his victim to death that his car is illegally parked now can you?
Who will prosecute?
The International Criminal Court or ICC is the body that has the authority to prosecute these crimes and is supposed to do so if states can not or will not act, however they do not have arrest powers and along with the United Nations they are largely under the complete control of the United States.
So there are certainly bodies with the authority to prosecute and rein in the criminality but until they possess the independence and are pushed into taking action nothing will be done.
This has led to movements in the United States for example to prosecute George Bush for murder, for example, something easier to prove than war crimes and prosecutable in a US court, but no one has been able to pursue these attempts to a successful conclusion and apparently there is not a single body willing to arrest these criminals.
Distraction and avoidance of response
The initial response that the United States was spying on the United Nations and on allies was quickly dwarfed by the media sensation around Edward Snowden, the forced landing of the presidential aircraft of Evo Morales and now the “impending invasion” of Syria.
The initial reaction from European countries was to freeze all economic and business cooperation, when it was revealed that the United States was spying on and collecting economic, banking and financial information from even its allies in order to manipulate their markets, something that should have been a key topic for debate at the G-20, but it has successfully been for the most part ignored. This goes for other matters that the G-20 countries may have reached a consensus on as well.
Demonizing
All of these events, as well as the threat of terrorist attacks at the upcoming Sochi Olympics by the Saudi Prince Bandar have been carefully orchestrated to demonize and vilify Russia and to detract from the success and leadership on the world stage that Russia is taking and will take if the G-20 Summit, the Sochi Olympics and the internal conflict in Syria are allowed to take place and be resolved successfully.
Experts and international observers agree that by attacking Syria the US is going after one of Russia’s allies in order to decrease Russia’s possible influence in the region, and that Obama is so unstable and was so upset by Russia’s legal protection of Edward Snowden that he decided, by bombing Syria he would punish Russia. Regardless of the reasoning. With imminent threat, or a UN Resolution, any attack on Syria is a crime against peace.
The US has successfully caused a serious rift with Russia and is something they continue to do. Statements that Russia supplied Syria with chemical weapons is beyond the pale but proves that the United States will do anything to attempt to paint Russia as some supporter of terror. This is ridiculous beyond words, when Russia has, since day one, promoted a political solution to the conflict and the United States has been importing terrorists and its Al-Qaeda elements into Syria to bring about their repeated goal of a forceful regime change in Damascus.
In light of the recent threat by Prince Bandar against the Russian people and the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin with terrorist attacks at the Sochi Olympics, while failing to bribe the head of state, and the admission by the rogue prince that the Saudis control the Chechen terrorist groups, it should be time for the world community to seriously question the legitimacy of these states.
Some analysts have stated that Russia has every right to level Saudi Arabia as it has threatened Russia with terrorist acts, and some say that this is a threat for which war could be declared, but Russia has so far maintained the high moral ground and refrained from bellicose rhetoric against the supporters of cannibalterrorist
Even though Russia has every right to react in an extreme manner to such an outrageous unprecedented threat President Putin chooses to act in the most diplomatic and responsible way possible, and as the record shows, seek a diplomatic and peaceful resolution to even that affront.
The psychological aspects
The state of the world, waiting whether the US will launch another illegal war and attack yet another defenseless country that poses it no threat, is one on edge. This form of psychological
The fear of war is powerful tool to control not only its own population but to control and spread fear into the hearts of the world’s peace-loving nations. However it is these nations that must unite and that is where the United States may have finally over stepped the bounds and wandered into unknown territory. Fear can cause unexpected reactions and terrorizing the world with the constant threat of a “humanitarian” attack may bring about events that the US does not expect and is not prepared for.
United front
It is a given, I believe, that if the US does in fact unilaterally decide to attack Syria it will galvanize the world community against them, especially those countries who know they are next in line for Washington’s nefarious regime change invasion plans.
Even the fact that Obama is even considering to move ahead without the UN or even wait for the results of the UN inspection on the alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria, is having the effect of uniting countries against the United States.
Unilateral war and bombing poor defenseless countries and dictating to the world how to run its affairs may play well for the violence loving political base back in America but quite frankly the world has grown weary of American bombs and American aggression.
Iraq never threatened America, nor did Afghanistan, nor did Libya, nor did Yugoslavia and finally nor has Syria.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Voice of Russia
September 6, 2013
US aggression on Syria would violate international law
As the world sits glued to their radios and TV screens and their other sources of information waiting for news of an attack on Syria other events are taking place that the nefarious planners in Mclean Virginia and Washington have successfully distracted the world’s attention from. At the cost of a couple of hundred Syrian lives, which in reality mean nothing for the Americans and their Al-Qaeda elements in Syria, the US has perhaps yet failed to launch another act of aggression and commit another crime against peace, but it has succeeded in accomplishing several other objectives.
Of the four “core international crimes” (crimes of aggression, crimes against humanity, genocide and war crimes) as determined by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the treaty which founded the International Criminal Court (ICC), the United States of America is guilty of all of them.
Crime against peace
In international law a crime against peace is defined as the “planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of wars of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing"
It is clear given the preponderance of evidence that the US attacks on Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq and now the planned attack on Syria are all crimes against peace and would be prosecuted if there was a body with the will to do so.
Crimes against humanity
Under international law another type of crime that the United States may be guilty of committing on multiple occasions and which many accuse the US of carrying out in its execution of its “War on Terror”, are crimes against humanity. These crimes are defined as "particularly odious offenses in that they constitute a serious attack on human dignity or grave humiliation or a degradation of human beings." The systematic persecution of one racial group by another, as is the case with American blacks, would be eligible for this classification.
It is arguable whether for example, the targeting of Muslims as a group, the extra judicial executions of suspected terrorists by drone, rendition, illegal detention and torture would, by themselves, meet the litmus test for being classified as crimes against humanity, but there can be little doubt that all of these crimes put together as part of a continual concerted effort in which the participants know they are committing violations of human rights, international law, the Geneva Conventions, the laws of war and other international laws and conventions, could and should be classified as crimes against humanity.
It might be argued that those behind, or in collusion with, the perpetrators of 9-11, or even those who failed to prosecute the perpetrators are also guilty of crimes against humanity, especially the consequences that those events have had on the world since that date.
War crimes
An area where there is little area for debate as to the collusion and guilt of the United States is in the area of war crimes. War crimes are generally defined as including: "murder, the ill-treatment or deportation of civilian residents of an occupied territory to slave labor camps (Guantanamo, rendition sites, Abu-Ghraib, etc), the murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, the killing of prisoners (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria), the wanton destruction of cities, towns and villages (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya), and any devastation not justified by military, or civilian necessity (all of the previous and in particular Syria).
The US Government’s institutionalized collusion in war crimes, including torture, the use of chemical weapons and indefinite detention under conditions amounting to torture have been very well documented and proven time and time again. The persecution and prosecution of Bradley Manning serving as the best example, as well as the evidence that he revealed.
Genocide
No one has called the, what could be millions, of Sunni Muslims and others killed in the illegal US wars genocide but if the numbers are in fact in the millions this would be valid.
The fact that the United States was founded on the genocide of the American Indians, something no one has ever been prosecuted for. The continuing practice of keeping the few Indians that are left living on “reservations” essentially prison zones, would be classified as a crime against humanity but no one is willing to or calling for anything to be done.
Other crimes
The number of other crimes committed by the United States since 9-11 would fill volumes and include everything from droning, to extra-judicial executions, bringing about and causing revolutions and political instability, economic manipulation, repression of dissent and protestors, attacks on media and whistleblowers and others. However the largest and most egregious offense with a truly global reach involves the revelations by Edward Snowden. It is chiefly these revelations and the backlash that the United States has avoided by threatening the world with an even greater crime. You would not tell a murderer that you have caught as he is hacking his victim to death that his car is illegally parked now can you?
Who will prosecute?
The International Criminal Court or ICC is the body that has the authority to prosecute these crimes and is supposed to do so if states can not or will not act, however they do not have arrest powers and along with the United Nations they are largely under the complete control of the United States.
So there are certainly bodies with the authority to prosecute and rein in the criminality but until they possess the independence and are pushed into taking action nothing will be done.
This has led to movements in the United States for example to prosecute George Bush for murder, for example, something easier to prove than war crimes and prosecutable in a US court, but no one has been able to pursue these attempts to a successful conclusion and apparently there is not a single body willing to arrest these criminals.
Distraction and avoidance of response
The initial response that the United States was spying on the United Nations and on allies was quickly dwarfed by the media sensation around Edward Snowden, the forced landing of the presidential aircraft of Evo Morales and now the “impending invasion” of Syria.
The initial reaction from European countries was to freeze all economic and business cooperation, when it was revealed that the United States was spying on and collecting economic, banking and financial information from even its allies in order to manipulate their markets, something that should have been a key topic for debate at the G-20, but it has successfully been for the most part ignored. This goes for other matters that the G-20 countries may have reached a consensus on as well.
Demonizing
All of these events, as well as the threat of terrorist attacks at the upcoming Sochi Olympics by the Saudi Prince Bandar have been carefully orchestrated to demonize and vilify Russia and to detract from the success and leadership on the world stage that Russia is taking and will take if the G-20 Summit, the Sochi Olympics and the internal conflict in Syria are allowed to take place and be resolved successfully.
Experts and international observers agree that by attacking Syria the US is going after one of Russia’s allies in order to decrease Russia’s possible influence in the region, and that Obama is so unstable and was so upset by Russia’s legal protection of Edward Snowden that he decided, by bombing Syria he would punish Russia. Regardless of the reasoning. With imminent threat, or a UN Resolution, any attack on Syria is a crime against peace.
The US has successfully caused a serious rift with Russia and is something they continue to do. Statements that Russia supplied Syria with chemical weapons is beyond the pale but proves that the United States will do anything to attempt to paint Russia as some supporter of terror. This is ridiculous beyond words, when Russia has, since day one, promoted a political solution to the conflict and the United States has been importing terrorists and its Al-Qaeda elements into Syria to bring about their repeated goal of a forceful regime change in Damascus.
In light of the recent threat by Prince Bandar against the Russian people and the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin with terrorist attacks at the Sochi Olympics, while failing to bribe the head of state, and the admission by the rogue prince that the Saudis control the Chechen terrorist groups, it should be time for the world community to seriously question the legitimacy of these states.
Some analysts have stated that Russia has every right to level Saudi Arabia as it has threatened Russia with terrorist acts, and some say that this is a threat for which war could be declared, but Russia has so far maintained the high moral ground and refrained from bellicose rhetoric against the supporters of cannibalterrorist
Even though Russia has every right to react in an extreme manner to such an outrageous unprecedented threat President Putin chooses to act in the most diplomatic and responsible way possible, and as the record shows, seek a diplomatic and peaceful resolution to even that affront.
The psychological aspects
The state of the world, waiting whether the US will launch another illegal war and attack yet another defenseless country that poses it no threat, is one on edge. This form of psychological
The fear of war is powerful tool to control not only its own population but to control and spread fear into the hearts of the world’s peace-loving nations. However it is these nations that must unite and that is where the United States may have finally over stepped the bounds and wandered into unknown territory. Fear can cause unexpected reactions and terrorizing the world with the constant threat of a “humanitarian” attack may bring about events that the US does not expect and is not prepared for.
United front
It is a given, I believe, that if the US does in fact unilaterally decide to attack Syria it will galvanize the world community against them, especially those countries who know they are next in line for Washington’s nefarious regime change invasion plans.
Even the fact that Obama is even considering to move ahead without the UN or even wait for the results of the UN inspection on the alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria, is having the effect of uniting countries against the United States.
Unilateral war and bombing poor defenseless countries and dictating to the world how to run its affairs may play well for the violence loving political base back in America but quite frankly the world has grown weary of American bombs and American aggression.
Iraq never threatened America, nor did Afghanistan, nor did Libya, nor did Yugoslavia and finally nor has Syria.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Sat Sep 7, 2013 6:20 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"lemonfoundation" lemonfoundation
Award-winning documentary "BEYOND TREASON"
"What you don't know about your government could kill you...
Department of Defense documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act expose the horrific underworld of the disposable army mentality and the government funded experimentation upon US citizens conducted without their knowledge or consent.
UNMASKING SECRET MILITARY PROJECTS:
Chemical & Biological Exposures
Radioactive Poisoning
Mind Control Projects
Experimental Vaccines
Gulf War Illness
Depleted Uranium (DU)
Is the United States knowingly using a dangerous battlefield weapon banned by the United Nations because of its long-term effects on the local inhabitants and the environment? Explore the illegal worldwide sale and use of one of the deadliest weapons ever invented.
Beyond the disclosure of black-ops projects spanning the past 6 decades, Beyond Treason also addresses the complex subject of Gulf War Illness. It includes interviews with experts, both civilian and military, who say that the government is hiding the truth from the public and they can prove it."
"Beyond Treason"
http://beyondtreaso
and/or watch it free online:
http://www.youtube.
I keep these links, and 100's more about this cover-up, stored-->
www.cfsstraighttalk
"What you don't know about your government could kill you...
Department of Defense documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act expose the horrific underworld of the disposable army mentality and the government funded experimentation upon US citizens conducted without their knowledge or consent.
UNMASKING SECRET MILITARY PROJECTS:
Chemical & Biological Exposures
Radioactive Poisoning
Mind Control Projects
Experimental Vaccines
Gulf War Illness
Depleted Uranium (DU)
Is the United States knowingly using a dangerous battlefield weapon banned by the United Nations because of its long-term effects on the local inhabitants and the environment? Explore the illegal worldwide sale and use of one of the deadliest weapons ever invented.
Beyond the disclosure of black-ops projects spanning the past 6 decades, Beyond Treason also addresses the complex subject of Gulf War Illness. It includes interviews with experts, both civilian and military, who say that the government is hiding the truth from the public and they can prove it."
"Beyond Treason"
http://beyondtreaso
and/or watch it free online:
http://www.youtube.
I keep these links, and 100's more about this cover-up, stored-->
www.cfsstraighttalk
