Syria's violence relentless, crossing borders...

[jbg]

The article below points out some rather sickening atrocities that are getting some minor attention now, but which will be soon forgotten, the next time Israel or the U.S. needs to defend itself.

Syria's violence relentless, crossing borders

(link to article, excerpts below)

(AP) BEIRUT - Syrian forces killed at least five people when they raided a Sunni farming village on Sunday, torching homes and looting shops in what activists said is a sign of worsening relations among the country's religious groups.

Tensions stemming from the 14-month-old uprising against President Bashar Assad also touched off clashes across the border in Lebanon as the revolt threatened to morph into a broader conflict.

The relentless violence further undermines a U.N.-backed peace plan that is supposed to bring an end to Syria's deadly crisis. A cease-fire that was supposed to begin on April 12 has had only a limited effect, throwing into doubt the rest of the plan that calls for talks between Assad's regime and those seeking to end his rule.

The raid against the impoverished village of al-Tamana, about 35 miles northwest of the city of Hama, began late Saturday and continued through the early hours on Sunday. The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said five people were killed in the raid and government troops were setting fire to homes.

I do note that the U.N. has tried to broker a ceasefire. But will there be follow-up? Will there be U.N. investigations similar to those conducted after the so-called "Jenin Massacre" where a few civilians were collaterally killed? Will there be probes similar to Gladstone's screed after Cast Lead? Will the randomly torched houses received the same loving attention from the world press that that the IDF receives when it bulldozes empty houses of Palestinian "fighters" (usually suicide bombers)?

Why does the Western press hate the West so much?

Why do we fund the U.N. to attack the West verbally?

The answer my friend is blowing in the wind.

Edited May 16, 2012 by jbg

[Signals.Cpl]

The article below points out some rather sickening atrocities that are getting some minor attention now, but which will be soon forgotten, the next time Israel or the U.S. needs to defend itself.

Syria's violence relentless, crossing borders

(link to article, excerpts below)

(AP) BEIRUT - Syrian forces killed at least five people when they raided a Sunni farming village on Sunday, torching homes and looting shops in what activists said is a sign of worsening relations among the country's religious groups.

Tensions stemming from the 14-month-old uprising against President Bashar Assad also touched off clashes across the border in Lebanon as the revolt threatened to morph into a broader conflict.

The relentless violence further undermines a U.N.-backed peace plan that is supposed to bring an end to Syria's deadly crisis. A cease-fire that was supposed to begin on April 12 has had only a limited effect, throwing into doubt the rest of the plan that calls for talks between Assad's regime and those seeking to end his rule.

The raid against the impoverished village of al-Tamana, about 35 miles northwest of the city of Hama, began late Saturday and continued through the early hours on Sunday. The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said five people were killed in the raid and government troops were setting fire to homes.

I do note that the U.N. has tried to broker a ceasefire. But will there be follow-up? Will there be U.N. investigations similar to those conducted after the so-called "Jenin Massacre" where a few civilians were collaterally killed? Will there be probes similar to Gladstone's screed after Cast Lead? Will the randomly torched houses received the same loving attention from the world press that that the IDF receives when it bulldozes empty houses of Palestinian "fighters" (usually suicide bombers)?

Why does the Western press hate the West so much?

Why do we fund the U.N. to attack the West verbally?

The answer my friend is blowing in the wind.

Because the UN is irrelevant and on its way out, it will not last much longer it has outlived all of its potential and needs to die and hopefully be reborn in to something more useful.

[jbg]

Because the UN is irrelevant and on its way out, it will not last much longer it has outlived all of its potential and needs to die and hopefully be reborn in to something more useful.

My response is a bit off-topic but why do we need it reborn? How about an organization devoted to liberal democracies instead?

[Signals.Cpl]

My response is a bit off-topic but why do we need it reborn? How about an organization devoted to liberal democracies instead?

My personal opinion is that we need a world government just not this world government. If the UN was properly run and was capable of action, any action other then sending in peacekeepers journalists to record a genocide and report to the rest of the world after the fact.

[jbg]

My personal opinion is that we need a world government just not this world government.

For what purpose?

[Signals.Cpl]

For what purpose?

It might make me naive but I believe in peacekeeping, not the kind that the UN has been doing for the last 60 years but the real and effective peacekeeping/peacemaking that gets results. I know that as a race we are a long way from world peace but one way to limit war, at least in my opinion is by getting countries to commit to collective security. When country x knows that attacking country y would result in 190 countries standing up and protecting country y it might make people think twice about war. I understand that we have already failed twice on global collective security but I can have my dream. I know it sounds naive but I think it is the only way short of world domination by one power or a group of powers to achieve something in the way of long lasting peace.

[jbg]

Signal, interesting discussion. But your thoughts on Syria?

[Signals.Cpl]

Signal, interesting discussion. But your thoughts on Syria?

The only thing we can do is let them die, because if the west does anything we will be blamed for starting this mess over oil or whatever other reason people come up with. In an Ideal world we would move in and stop this massacre but our hands are tied.

Edited May 16, 2012 by Signals.Cpl

[dre]

OH great. More retarded rants about the UN by people that have no idea what the organization does.

Never mind the 10 year effort that irradicated smallpox.

Never mind the negotiation of almost 300 different treaties related to everything from human rights to education, to international fishing treaties.

Never mind their large contribution to bringing down aparthied in South Africa.

Never mind helping 1.3 billion people get access so safe drinking water that didnt have it before.

Never mind the negotiation of dozens of peaceful settles that ended or eased regional conflicts.

Never mind a huge contribution to the universal immunization of polio, tetanus, measles, whooping cough, diphtheria and tuberculosis, which combined save the lives of 3 million children per year.

Never mind the huge effort to help fledgling democracies run fair elections.

Never mind the clearing of hundreds of thousands of landmines left over from previous wars and the lives that saved in places like Afghanistan, Angola, Cambodia, El Salvador, Mozambique, Rwanda and Somalia.

Never mind their contribution to the global protection of intellectual property rights.

Never mind the 2 million tons of food that helped 30 million people in 36 countries in the last year alone.

Never mind the manage of global air and sea travel standards that has made travellers around the world safer.

Never mind considerable efforts to fight censorship and promote free press around the world.

And about 1000 other things.

Edited May 16, 2012 by dre

[jbg]

OH great. More retarded rants about the UN by people that have no idea what the organization does.

Excuse me, sir. Up front I gave them credit for trying to broker a cease-fire.

[dre]

The only thing we can do is let them die, because if the west does anything we will be blamed for starting this mess over oil or whatever other reason people come up with. In an Ideal world we would move in and stop this massacre but our hands are tied.

Oh please... Like worrying about the accusations of starting messes over oil has ever stopped us before. Theres two major reasons why we havent gotten involved over there... 1. No compelling interest in it for us. 2. Its not at all a simple conflict. The sitting government has a lot of support and this is basically a sectarian conflict between different ethnic groups in the region. Furthermore the FSA isnt any more trustworthy than Assad so if we DID go in we wouldnt even know which side to drop bombs on.

But the biggest thing is simply the lack of a compelling self interest.

[Signals.Cpl]

OH great. More retarded rants about the UN by people that have no idea what the organization does.

Never mind the 10 year effort that irradicated smallpox.

Never mind the negotiation of almost 300 different treaties related to everything from human rights to education, to international fishing treaties.

Never mind their large contribution to bringing down aparthied in South Africa.

Never mind helping 1.3 billion people get access so safe drinking water that didnt have it before.

Never mind the negotiation of dozens of peaceful settles that ended or eased regional conflicts.

Never mind a huge contribution to the universal immunization of polio, tetanus, measles, whooping cough, diphtheria and tuberculosis, which combined save the lives of 3 million children per year.

Never mind the huge effort to help fledgling democracies run fair elections.

Never mind the clearing of hundreds of thousands of landmines left over from previous wars and the lives that saved in places like Afghanistan, Angola, Cambodia, El Salvador, Mozambique, Rwanda and Somalia.

Never mind their contribution to the global protection of intellectual property rights.

Never mind the 2 million tons of food that helped 30 million people in 36 countries in the last year alone.

Never mind the manage of global air and sea travel standards that has made travellers around the world safer.

Never mind considerable efforts to fight censorship and promote free press around the world.

And about 1000 other things.

Rwanda, Somalia, Yugoslavia, Cyprus, Congo, Liberia, Sierre Leone, and pretty much every other mission. And most of the accomplishments you speak of were done despite the UN rather then because of them.

[dre]

Rwanda, Somalia, Yugoslavia, Cyprus, Congo, Liberia, Sierre Leone, and pretty much every other mission. And most of the accomplishments you speak of were done despite the UN rather then because of them.

No actually thats complete horse shit.

[Signals.Cpl]

No actually thats complete horse shit.

I think 800,000 Rwandans might disagree. Oh wait, thanks to the UNs incompetence they are dead... Lets ask the Croatians that were massacred darn it they are dead too... I guess we can ask the Bosnian's? Well the once that are left. How about the people in Darfur? you know, the once that survived, go ahead ask them what the UN did to protect them. What about Somalia? Those bastards are still dying...Good job in keeping peace in Vietnam. Or preventing the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, or the American Invasion of Iraq. Good job keeping the peace in the Iran-Iraq War. And Once again good job stoping the first Sudanese civil war... did I miss anything? Probably about a few thousand events I couldn't remember. The UN Failed in its primary mission of stopping wars and preventing repetitions of the Holocaust, it failed miserably. The League of Nations was an abysmal failure just like the UN and we all know how well that ended.

[dre]

I think 800,000 Rwandans might disagree. Oh wait, thanks to the UNs incompetence they are dead... Lets ask the Croatians that were massacred darn it they are dead too... I guess we can ask the Bosnian's? Well the once that are left. How about the people in Darfur? you know, the once that survived, go ahead ask them what the UN did to protect them. What about Somalia? Those bastards are still dying...Good job in keeping peace in Vietnam. Or preventing the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, or the American Invasion of Iraq. Good job keeping the peace in the Iran-Iraq War. And Once again good job stoping the first Sudanese civil war... did I miss anything? Probably about a few thousand events I couldn't remember. The UN Failed in its primary mission of stopping wars and preventing repetitions of the Holocaust, it failed miserably. The League of Nations was an abysmal failure just like the UN and we all know how well that ended.

Hard to tell who youre event responding to at this point... I never said that the UN has solved all the worlds problems, I just said theyve accomplished a whole lot.

[waldo]

OH great. More retarded rants about the UN by people that have no idea what the organization does.

.

.

.

And about 1000 other things.

a powerful list... bookmarked for the next time another, "useless UN" retarded rant starts up!

[waldo]

I think 800,000 Rwandans might disagree. Oh wait, thanks to the UNs incompetence they are dead...

there's blame all around; however, the principal blame doesn't rest with the UN proper... not at all.

... I expect as you are aware, or if I might, should be aware, the

official OAU report

: It was the US/Allbright that did all in its power to undermine the effectiveness of the UN deployment from the very start. Clinton in a self-serving manner, years later, spoke to his personal failures in not responding urgently and forcefully... claiming not to realize the urgency, the severity - ya, sure!

[Signals.Cpl]

Hard to tell who youre event responding to at this point... I never said that the UN has solved all the worlds problems, I just said theyve accomplished a whole lot.

Why was the UN created? Answer that question and review your evidence. It was not created to "solve a lot of the worlds problems". The UN was clreader to prevent a repetition of World War 1 and 2.

Your view is that a paramedic who has the primary job to bring sick people from the street to the hospital failed miserably and over 20 years all of the people he drove to the hospital died....but hey he is a good cook and he can clean ignoring the fact he did not and cannot do the primary job.

The UN is unable to do because the security council was designed 60+ years ago and thus now we have 5 nations with their own agendas tripping progress. What happened in Rwanda? The General on the ground asked for 5,000-10,000 soldiers to stop the Genocide and what he got was nothing but promises while the Security council was debating if the events in Rwanda were genocide or ethnic cleansing. Having the security council is great, having permanent members is great, having permanent members with veto power no so much especially because the US, China and Russia rarely see eye to eye on how to deal with things and the only time that the UN worked fine was when one side was boycotting(mostly the russians). If you want to defend an organization that cannot fulfill its most basic of duties go right ahead. In peacekeeping missions when the UN tells one or both sides not to do something it carries no weight because the UN is renowned for not backing up their peacekeepers, as was evident in the do not fire unless fired upon ROE's without regard to the fact that the peacekeepers were witnessing execution of children and rapes of women.

The World can have a strong UN type organization that does what it is designed to do or you can have a weak UN that is used to make people feel good about them even though the organization is unable to do anything.

[Signals.Cpl]

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED

-to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and

FAIL

-to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

FAIL

-to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and

FAILED

-to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Irrelevant when you are getting raped and/or killed.

AND FOR THESE ENDS

-to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and

FAIL

-to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and

FAIL

-to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and

FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL ........

-to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples,

Ask the Africans wether they want to be poor and safe or little less poor but dead.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/preamble.shtml

OH great. More retarded rants about the UN by people that have no idea what the organization does.

Never mind the 10 year effort that irradicated smallpox.

People will not die from smallpox but will die from a bullet...great save

Never mind the negotiation of almost 300 different treaties related to everything from human rights to education, to international fishing treaties.

Human rights? How many of those human rights treaties are honoured?

Never mind their large contribution to bringing down aparthied in South Africa.

good job

Never mind helping 1.3 billion people get access so safe drinking water that didnt have it before.

Unfortunately they didn't give them access to food.

Never mind the negotiation of dozens of peaceful settles that ended or eased regional conflicts.

Like?

Never mind a huge contribution to the universal immunization of polio, tetanus, measles, whooping cough, diphtheria and tuberculosis, which combined save the lives of 3 million children per year.

Irrelelvant if they have no peace. My children not getting sick would be the least of my worries if I knew someone was out there trying to kidnap my daughter as a sex slave and my son as child soldier.

Never mind the huge effort to help fledgling democracies run fair elections.

Bullsh*t. Being a monitor for an election is useless if your opinion is quickly disregarded.

Never mind the clearing of hundreds of thousands of landmines left over from previous wars and the lives that saved in places like Afghanistan, Angola, Cambodia, El Salvador, Mozambique, Rwanda and Somalia.

While letting millions of people die in wars that could be easily prevented.

Never mind their contribution to the global protection of intellectual property rights.

So intellectual property is more important then peace? I mean ask Somalian kids wether they want protection of Intellectual property or to grow up in Peace. You would be surprised how irrelevant this point becomes. And just to ask one question, how is it working in China?

Never mind the 2 million tons of food that helped 30 million people in 36 countries in the last year alone.

Did it get to the people? Or was is stolen by warlords as a means of controlling the population.

Never mind the manage of global air and sea travel standards that has made travellers around the world safer.

This one is actually good, although I am pretty sure the sea standards were there before the UN.

Never mind considerable efforts to fight censorship and promote free press around the world.

Where has this one ever worked?

And about 1000 other things.

highly doubt that

[Signals.Cpl]

there's blame all around; however, the principal blame doesn't rest with the UN proper... not at all.

The Blame stands 100% at the feet of the UN Security Council because it is designed in such a way that nothing ever will be done on time. Nothing useful in Rwanda and the world already busy with Yugoslavia and reeling from the fiasco in Somalia to even care. Right now the Security Council needs 9/15 votes, and 5 of those votes have to be from the Permanent members. It could be 14/15 and only the US or Russia or China or England or France voting against it and it does not pass.

You say its not the fault of the UN? When the system was designed in such a way to prevent all action I would disagree.

Edited May 16, 2012 by Signals.Cpl

[Anti-Am]

U.S is arming the rebels. Russia is arming the government. Gee, where have we seen this before?

[DogOnPorch]

U.S is arming the rebels. Russia is arming the government. Gee, where have we seen this before?

How come both rebel and government are carrying AK-47s and RPG-7s if America is arming sides? Where are these weapons?

[Anti-Am]

How come both rebel and government are carrying AK-47s and RPG-7s if America is arming sides? Where are these weapons?

Probably arming them with AK-47s and RPG-7s. They work.

[GostHacked]

How come both rebel and government are carrying AK-47s and RPG-7s if America is arming sides? Where are these weapons?

The US would experience something called blowback if US made weapons were found in Syria. It's not like backing rebels in a foreign country garnered any negative reactions in the form of terrorism.

Buy AKs by proxie and deliver them to the rebels. I suspect some non-profit charity in the USA tied to muslim extremists fronted by the CIA.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/30/world/africa/30diplo.html

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is engaged in a fierce debate over whether to supply weapons to the rebels in Libya, senior officials said on Tuesday, with some fearful that providing arms would deepen American involvement in a civil war and that some fighters may have links to Al Qaeda.

Or France might step in, if the USA is not willing .....

http://world.time.com/2011/06/29/french-military-admits-supplying-arms-and-ammo-to-libyan-rebels/

U.S. President Barack Obama soon won’t be alone in taking flack about the legality of certain moves he’s made on Libya. On Wednesday, French military officials confirmed press reports that France has dropped arms and ammunition to Libyan rebels in what will doubtless spark protests that such action violates limitations the United Nations mandate set for the NATO-led air intervention. It’s also likely to further raise fears in the Arab world that the international operation it initially backed to prevent the slaughter of Libyan civilians is steadily escalating towards full and active foreign intervention in yet another Muslim country.

Or the weapons could be proxied through another friendly country.. like Qatar. France has been busy.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/14/libya-rebels-weapons-qatar

Qatar is secretly supplying anti-tank weapons to the Libyan rebels as part of its strategy of working to overthrow the Gaddafi regime, it has emerged. Officials in Doha confirmed that the Gulf state's military had been shipping French-made Milan missiles to the rebel stronghold of Benghazi.

Qatar's prime minister and foreign minister, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem, made clear on Wednesday that UN resolutions on Libya permitted the supply of "defensive weapons" to opposition forces struggling to fight Libyan armour.

[Guest Peeves]

Hard to tell who youre event responding to at this point... I never said that the UN has solved all the worlds problems, I just said theyve accomplished a whole lot.

And have failed miserably at others. When Mugabe becomes a poster boy for the UN, there's little to defend.