Famed Palmyra temple destroyed

rza said:
Nope, you have your history mixed up. When the US wanted to dethrone Assad about three/four years back they hired ISIS to do it. Not only did they supply weapons to ISIS, they also helped it in its war with Assad which helped them win many towns in Syria.
Click to expand...

Wrong still.
 
Xarog said:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...ed-isis-tool-overthrow-syrias-president-assad
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...cret-pentagon-report-proves-us-complicity-cre

But don't worry, I don't expect you'll read or research either link. :)
Click to expand...

How about posting from a source with even a smidgen of credibility? Articles posted under the pseudonym Tyler Durden, really?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge

Zero Hedge is not quite the NaturalNews of economics, but not for want of trying.
Click to expand...
 
Cray said:
How about posting from a source with even a smidgen of credibility? Articles posted under the pseudonym Tyler Durden, really?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge
Click to expand...
Because firstly Tyler Durden didn't write it, and you can clearly see at the bottom who the author of the piece is. I quote it for your convenience:

Dr Nafeez Ahmed is an investigative journalist, bestselling author and international security scholar. A former Guardian writer, he writes the ‘System Shift’ column for VICE’s Motherboard, and is also a columnist for Middle East Eye. He is the winner of a 2015 Project Censored Award, known as the ‘Alternative Pulitzer Prize’, for Outstanding Investigative Journalism for his Guardian work, and was selected in the Evening Standard’s ‘Power 1,000’ most globally influential Londoners.
Click to expand...
And then there's the fact that the core claim in the Zerohedge article is echoed by The Guardian in the one mainstream report I could find of the DIA document in question.
 
Pitbull said:
Maybe read your own sources before posting them. Again, please provide us with proof that the US is supplying/supporting ISIS or have ever done so.
Click to expand...
Which part of :
A revealing light on how we got here has now been shone by a recently declassified secret US intelligence report, written in August 2012, which uncannily predicts – and effectively welcomes – the prospect of a “Salafist principality” in eastern Syria and an al-Qaida-controlled Islamic state in Syria and Iraq. In stark contrast to western claims at the time, the Defense Intelligence Agency document identifies al-Qaida in Iraq (which became Isis) and fellow Salafists as the “major forces driving the insurgency in Syria” – and states that “western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey” were supporting the opposition’s efforts to take control of eastern Syria.

Raising the “possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality”, the Pentagon report goes on, “this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran)”.

Which is pretty well exactly what happened two years later. The report isn’t a policy document. It’s heavily redacted and there are ambiguities in the language. But the implications are clear enough. A year into the Syrian rebellion, the US and its allies weren’t only supporting and arming an opposition they knew to be dominated by extreme sectarian groups; they were prepared to countenance the creation of some sort of “Islamic state” – despite the “grave danger” to Iraq’s unity – as a Sunni buffer to weaken Syria.
Click to expand...
...do you have an issue with?
 
Xarog said:
Which part of :

...do you have an issue with?
Click to expand...

Do you suffer from comprehension sickness or something?

I have ALREADY said the US supported and funded Al Qaida. No one on earth is ever disputing that. The fact that ISIS stemmed out of all the chaos was a chance the US was willing to risk. They expected the possibility that due to lawlessness sects might pop up. They never anticipated it to happen on this scale.

Now I ask you once again for the last and final time:
Where has the US ever supported ISIS/ISIL?
 
Pitbull said:
Do you suffer from comprehension sickness or something?

I have ALREADY said the US supported and funded Al Qaida. No one on earth is ever disputing that. The fact that ISIS stemmed out of all the chaos was a chance the US was willing to risk. They expected the possibility that due to lawlessness sects might pop up. They never anticipated it to happen on this scale.

Now I ask you once again for the last and final time:
Where has the US ever supported ISIS/ISIL?
Click to expand...

A revealing light on how we got here has now been shone by a recently declassified secret US intelligence report, written in August 2012, which uncannily predicts – and effectively welcomes – the prospect of a “Salafist principality” in eastern Syria and an al-Qaida-controlled Islamic state in Syria and Iraq. In stark contrast to western claims at the time, the Defense Intelligence Agency document identifies al-Qaida in Iraq (which became Isis) and fellow Salafists as the “major forces driving the insurgency in Syria” – and states that “western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey” were supporting the opposition’s efforts to take control of eastern Syria.

Raising the “possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality”, the Pentagon report goes on, “this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran)”.

Which is pretty well exactly what happened two years later. The report isn’t a policy document. It’s heavily redacted and there are ambiguities in the language. But the implications are clear enough. A year into the Syrian rebellion, the US and its allies weren’t only supporting and arming an opposition they knew to be dominated by extreme sectarian groups; they were prepared to countenance the creation of some sort of “Islamic state” – despite the “grave danger” to Iraq’s unity – as a Sunni buffer to weaken Syria.
Click to expand...
The bold helps, yes?
 
Pitbull said:
I thought so :D

You clearly have a lack of comprehension skills. You and rza are wrong.
Click to expand...
My comprehension is fine. Your logic, on the other hand, leaves much to be desired.

What a group calls themselves isn't really important if all the key members of the group are still in control after the name change. You claiming that ISIS is not the same as Al Qaeda when the people who now call themselves ISIS used to call themselves Al Qaeda in Iraq is like claiming that the WWF and the WWE are completely different wrestling companies.
 
marine1 said:
Bud you are assuming it was an accident and I am convinced isis is the fked up plan once again that the US screwed up.
Click to expand...

By all means, the US created what is now called ISIS. No one is disputing that. And because of that the US must end it. But making a bold claim as: The US is supporting ISIS as these 2 have been making is nothing but a straight out LIE.
 
Pitbull said:
By all means, the US created what is now called ISIS. No one is disputing that. And because of that the US must end it. But making a bold claim as: The US is supporting ISIS as these 2 have been making is nothing but a straight out LIE.
Click to expand...
The United States wants Assad gone. ISIS wants Assad gone. The United States hates ISIS but at the same time ISIS gives them good propaganda coverage and ISIS is attacking Assad which the Americans want. So the Americans spend a lot of time fighting the "good" fight against ISIS for the media coverage while ISIS devours Syria and turns it into a living hell.

I really don't see how you can deny the truth of this given what you've already admitted to be true.
 
Pitbull said:
By all means, the US created what is now called ISIS. No one is disputing that. And because of that the US must end it. But making a bold claim as: The US is supporting ISIS as these 2 have been making is nothing but a straight out LIE.
Click to expand...

Don't think there is evidence of them deliberately supporting them but with a person like Obama and Clinton and what happened in benghazi. .........conspiracy theory is the ambassador was murdered because he knew about the weapons being supplied to isis from the white house
 
Xarog said:
The United States wants Assad gone. ISIS wants Assad gone. The United States hates ISIS but at the same time ISIS gives them good propaganda coverage and ISIS is attacking Assad which the Americans want. So the Americans spend a lot of time fighting the "good" fight against ISIS for the media coverage while ISIS devours Syria and turns it into a living hell.

I really don't see how you can deny the truth of this given what you've already admitted to be true.
Click to expand...

I think you need to get out more and remove that tinfoil hat tbh.
 
Pitbull said:
I think you need to get out more and remove that tinfoil hat tbh.
Click to expand...
And you need to get your head out of the sand.

It's clear as day that the United States has been trying to get rid of Assad. The only reason ISIS had room to grow in the first place was because the United States wanted to get rid of Assad. Syria and Iran are Shiite allies and Iran is the Shiite hegemon in the Middle East. Syria and Iran and Russia are attempting to build a common energy network to supply oil and gas to Europe. This is the one thing that the Ukraine and Syria have in common (Russian energy to Europe), and it is the single biggest danger the Americans perceive to their economic hegemony as far as Russia is concerned.

Russia just created a forward operating base inside Syria, so it looks like they're going to get involved propping up Assad sooner or later. So ask yourself, why would the Russians stick their necks out for Assad like that? What do they have to gain, and what does the United States stand to gain by styming the Russians?

All of this information is publicly available on mainstream news sites if you care to dig a bit and get past the soundbites, no tinfoil hat required.
 
Pitbull said:
Rather that than more people being beheaded.
Click to expand...

Beheaded Syrian scholar refused to lead Isis to hidden Palmyra antiquities

Islamic State militants beheaded a renowned antiquities scholar in the ancient Syrian city of Palmyra and hung his mutilated body on a column in a main square of the historic site because he apparently refused to reveal where valuable artefacts had been moved for safekeeping.

The brutal murder of Khaled al-Asaad, 82, is the latest atrocity perpetrated by the jihadi group, which has captured a third of Syria and neighbouring Iraq and declared a “caliphate” on the territory it controls.
It has also highlighted Isis’s habit of looting and selling antiquities to fund its activities – as well as destroying them.

1439968191-khaled-asaad_1440035733.jpg
A 2002 picture of Khaled al-Asaad in front of a rare sarcophagus from Palmyra depicting two priests dating from the first century. Photograph: Marc Deville/Gamma-Rapho via Getty Images

More here....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X