Syria War: Anger After Russia Vetoes Resolution At Un

[mikey4444]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39585071

If anybody still thinks that Russia is a benign force in the world, they can now see, quite clearly, how Putin supports his friend, Assad the Butcher. This is now the 8th time that they have vetoed resolutions at the UN.

[jim360]

Not going to argue with you that it was somewhat leading, Khandro, but really I was genuinely asking that question. If you want it to be not so leading, then the question really is "why are you surprised that he might try to deny this?"

As to your comment that he gains nothing and loses everything, doesn't it depend rather on with whom he gains or loses? It's clear that it destroys his credibility with the West -- but the people who are against him already were against him, so to speak. I should imagine that all this does is continues to strengthen people's already-entrenched views. Assad is a butcher who gasses his own people then lies about it; Assad is a persecuted innocent wrongly accused of such horrors when he is standing up against terrorism: both views only get confirmed by his interview.

A propaganda boost for his enemies it is not. Since most of those enemies seem keen to do very little other than stand aside and shout about it, I dare say that Assad's more interested in what his allies think. Twas ever thus.

[naomi24]

ichkeria, Like you, I'm not in a position to present 'evidence'. I can tell you what's being said in the media, but evidence? At the moment, no. Since unlike you and Mikey I don't harbour any particular hatred of the Russians, I simply want the truth, and so as I said, I prefer to await the outcome of investigations before condemning anyone.

[ichkeria]

The evidence reported in the media has been reported for a reason: it has not been invented in the newsrooms. Our evidence is of course the wrong evidence :-) Classic denial.
As for "hatred of the Russians", leaving aside for one moment that this is actually a Syrian affair, you've done the usual trick of confusing cause and effect. Displeasure and disapproval of the Russian government follows from its actions, and that alone. Judging by deed is what I do, and that is why I am better disposed to President Trump now: you might ask why the great white hope for "cooperation with the Russians with that nice man Mr Putin" is singing a different tune now. It surely carries more weight with you than the dreaded Hillary :-)

[naomi24]

ichkeria, //Judging by deed is what I do,//

Me too, which is why I prefer to await the outcome of investigations.

[ichkeria]

Let's look at what Assad said in his interview:
He claimed that the only evidence for a chemical attack came from Al-Nusa.
That is factually incorrect: evidence came from eye witness accounts of people who fled to Turkey. They were examined and their bodies found to contain traces of an agent identified as sarin gas, or something very like it. The examinations were carried out in ther presence of WHO officials.
His version of events contradicts even that of the Russians, who have not denied that chemical agents of war were what caused the deaths of 89 people.
He denied having chemical weapons any more and ever having used them: this despite the attack of 2013 which killed over 1000 in Damascus. Then a UN investigation was carried out and found that chenmical weapons had been used, but by then it was no longer possible to say for definite which side had used them. Although various government intelligence agencies released daming evidence, this was of course dismissed as "biased" by both Russia and Syria, which is exactly what would happen this time.

[Khandro]

jim; // It's clear that it destroys his credibility with the West //

Yes, and he would be aware of that, so I ask yet again, why would he do it? Why would he want to take innocent lives and leave isis untouched by that attack?

[ichkeria]

Sorry to sound like a cracked record khandro but the facts don't bear you out. You can argue about the unlikeliness of it all you like, although it's only unlikely if you impose a western 'civilised' morality or reason in a man who has shown to date that he possesses nothing of that. He's got Putin covering his assad and he at least thought he had a US administration that had given up bothering. What's he lost? Credibility ? He had none to start with.
His version of events even contradicts his own army!!!

[Khandro]

ichi; If this was a court of law and you were prosecuting, you wouldn't stand a chance. You are simply stating what you want to believe, you'd quite rightly be laughed out of court.

[ichkeria]

Unbelievable ...