The Syrian Conflict Thread

[falcon786]

An orgy of lust, sex, violence and barbarism under the guise of a religion that is supposed to be the antithesis of exactly that....

Yep its saddening to hear how people are attempting to twist Islamic practices and adding things like this which are not allowed,I believe the shia's also have some weird marriage practices that I have heard of which amounts to little more than orgies,thankfully mainstream Islam remains true and pure.

 

[thestaggy]

Do some research for the answers to your facetious questions. Start by actually reading the info and links, I and others, have posted, since the start of this thread.



Here, read it all and don't cherry pick parts, that you want to make conform, to your idea of exactly what the reasons for the war, was. Note that there were many reasons and the "1991 War" never really ended...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationale_for_the_Iraq_War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War



Again, the fact remains, inspectors were prevented access and access was delayed, thus any claim that there was no WMD, or any active programs is made in ignorance.

Also, again, the fact remains, that saddam had WMD, used WMD and even at the end, stated that he planned to use nuclear WMD.

Do not ignore the info I have posted, that discuss the movement of WMD to Syria, just before the invasion.



Nope, there were many reasons, as the links above show. See above, where I just told you again, what he stated. Don't tell me what to tell you.



It's less time than 20 years, from 1991, to 2003...and the war never really ended.

Please try not to simplify the issues and do not make blanket false statements.

Donald Rumsfeld, the architect, and Colin Powell have admitted to making a mistake with regards to WMDs in their respective memoirs, biographies and in interviews. However, both have no problem with the fact that Hussein was ousted as regime change and oil were the true goals.

The former US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, admits in his memoirs that he made a mistake in claiming that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction sites round Baghdad and Tikrit, one of the main justifications for launching the Iraq invasion.

Rumsfeld says now: "I made a misstatement." What he meant to say is there were 'suspect sites'.

Straight from the horse.

20 years was in reference to the use of chemical weapons, dating from 1983 to 1988. That is 15 to 20 years before the 2003 invasion, right in the timeline I gave. By the time of invasion no chemical (or biological or nuclear) attack had been carried out in 12-years and none of the programs to manufacture such weapons were in operation. No evidence has been found to indicate that Iraq was reactivating or had reactivated her illegal weapon's programs.

Have you stopped to think that Hussein's sand-bagging and ambiguity was a possible deterrent against aggression? Why doesn't Israel deny or acknowledge a potential nuclear arsenal? ''Look bro, I'm not saying I do or do not have some big toys, but you are welcome to try and find out. Ball is in your court.'' The fact is there is no evidence that Hussein was in a position to unleash biological, chemical or nuclear warfare.

There is also a growing acceptance within the British government that WMD will not be found, according to senior Whitehall sources.

"Maybe small quantities will be found, maybe not, maybe Saddam wanted his neighbours to believe he had them," said a Whitehall source, quoting the intelligence agencies.

http://www.theguardian.com/guardianweekly/story/0,12674,1133056,00.html

The above article also highlights just how unsure the British, Americans, MI6, Powell, Blair and every other heavyweight was with regards to Iraq's WMDs. Jack Straw even admitted that Hussein's alleged capacity to launch large-scale nuclear/chemical/biological attacks within 45-minutes ''might have been untrue''. They go from ''Yes, Hussein is a bad man and will be able to do serious damage within 45-minutes'' to ''We are not even sure about quantities of weapons and we won't rule out that he may not even possess them''. The further away you move from this war the less convincing the WMD-argument gets.

 

[Lightscribe]

Donald Rumsfeld, the architect, and Colin Powell have admitted to making a mistake with regards to WMDs in their respective memoirs, biographies and in interviews. However, both have no problem with the fact that Hussein was ousted as regime change and oil were the true goals.

Straight from the horse.

Oh I see, that means inspectors were actually allowed to access everywhere they wanted to go, without delay? Oops, nope...

Allow me to reiterate...

Again, the fact remains, inspectors were prevented access and access was delayed, thus any claim that there was no WMD, or any active programs is made in ignorance.

Also, again, the fact remains, that saddam had WMD, used WMD and even at the end, stated that he planned to use nuclear WMD.

Do not ignore the info I have posted, that discuss the movement of WMD to Syria, just before the invasion.

20 years was in reference to the use of chemical weapons, dating from 1983 to 1988. That is 15 to 20 years before the 2003 invasion, right in the timeline I gave. By the time of invasion no chemical (or biological or nuclear) attack had been carried out in 12-years and none of the programs to manufacture such weapons were in operation. No evidence has been found to indicate that Iraq was reactivating or had reactivated her illegal weapon's programs.

I was just yanking your chain about the 20 years...never mind...

No evidence you say..?

Allow me to reiterate...

Again, the fact remains, inspectors were prevented access and access was delayed, thus any claim that there was no WMD, or any active programs is made in ignorance.

Also, again, the fact remains, that saddam had WMD, used WMD and even at the end, stated that he planned to use nuclear WMD.

Do not ignore the info I have posted, that discuss the movement of WMD to Syria, just before the invasion.

Have you stopped to think that Hussein's sand-bagging and ambiguity was a possible deterrent against aggression?

Yes, it's a "possibility"...Much like your argument about there being "NO WMD, NEVER EVER"...

Why doesn't Israel deny or acknowledge a potential nuclear arsenal? ''Look bro, I'm not saying I do or do have some big toys, but you are welcome to try and find out. Ball is in your court.''

Go ask them...

The fact is there is no evidence that Hussein was in a position to unleash biological, chemical or nuclear warfare.

On the contrary, I have posted enough info from the inspectors themselves admitting his ability to quickly get his WMD up and running again, as in full steam ahead...

Again, allow me to reiterate...

Again, the fact remains, inspectors were prevented access and access was delayed, thus any claim that there was no WMD, or any active programs is made in ignorance.

Also, again, the fact remains, that saddam had WMD, used WMD and even at the end, stated that he planned to use nuclear WMD.

Do not ignore the info I have posted, that discuss the movement of WMD to Syria, just before the invasion.

http://www.theguardian.com/guardianweekly/story/0,12674,1133056,00.html

The above article also highlights just how unsure the British, Americans, MI6, Powell, Blair and every other heavyweight was with regards to Iraq's WMDs. Jack Straw even admitted that Hussein's alleged capacity to launch large-scale nuclear/chemical/biological attacks within 45-minutes ''might have been untrue''. They go from ''Yes, Hussein is a bad man and will be able to do serious damage within 45-minutes'' to ''We are not even sure about quantities of weapons and we won't rule out that he may not even possess them''.

I see,you now want to try the 45 minute angle...Haha!

Again, allow me to reiterate...

Again, the fact remains, inspectors were prevented access and access was delayed, thus any claim that there was no WMD, or any active programs is made in ignorance.

Also, again, the fact remains, that saddam had WMD, used WMD and even at the end, stated that he planned to use nuclear WMD.

Do not ignore the info I have posted, that discuss the movement of WMD to Syria, just before the invasion.

The further away you move from this war the less convincing the WMD-argument gets.

On the contrary, as I have repeatedly shown, the more time passes, the more evidence of his having and moving the WMD, surfaces.

Again, allow me to reiterate...

Again, the fact remains, inspectors were prevented access and access was delayed, thus any claim that there was no WMD, or any active programs is made in ignorance.

Also, again, the fact remains, that saddam had WMD, used WMD and even at the end, stated that he planned to use nuclear WMD.

Do not ignore the info I have posted, that discuss the movement of WMD to Syria, just before the invasion.

 

[Noah]

Seems rather childish to copy and paste the same shet over and over again.

"Again, allow me to re-sperg"

 

[Lightscribe]

Seems rather childish to copy and paste the same shet over and over again.

"Again, allow me to re-sperg"

When the facts are ignored, they are repeated. Talk "shet" about saddam's WMD and you will have them repeated, until you dream those words.

 

[thestaggy]

*snip

I am not the one that used the 45-minute argument as justification for war. They said in 45-minutes he could unleash hell. In 45-minutes he probably couldn't even scramble eggs.

Scott Ritter said all but 5 - 10% of Iraq's WMD program was verifiably dismantled. Also, Hans Blix begged for a ''few more months'' to complete a full investigation but the US hard-balled, Hussein got his back up and then the war was unilaterally forced through. This indicates access was indeed given so do not spread untruths.

And please stop going on about Hussein DID do something, he USED TO have something and he MIGHT do something. Two of those statements indicate past actions and the other is an assumption or suspicion. Iraq was not invaded because he did something, used to have something and because he might do something, Iraq was invaded because he was going to do something. Subsequently, overwhelming evidence suggest he could not do a damn thing we were told he could.

The US-led Iraq Survey Group

- Iraq destroyed its chemical weapons stockpile in 1991, and only a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions were discovered by the ISG.
- Saddam's regime abandoned its biological weapons program and its ambition to obtain advanced biological weapons in 1995. While it could have re-established an elementary BW program within weeks, ISG discovered no indications it was pursuing such a course.
- Saddam wanted to recreate Iraq’s WMD capability, which was essentially destroyed in 1991, after sanctions were removed and Iraq’s economy stabilized. Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability—in an incremental fashion, irrespective of international pressure and the resulting economic risks—but he intended to focus on ballistic missile and tactical chemical warfare (CW) capabilities.
- Saddam deceived his own army and the best intelligence agencies in the world into believing he still had WMDs because he believed none of his enemies would dare attack him if he had WMDs.
- Saddam believed the U.S. and the coalition that threatened to go to war against him if the U.N. resolutions were not met was bluffing.

In March 2005 Duelfer added addenda to the original report, covering five topics:

- Prewar Movement of WMD Material Out of Iraq, stating "ISG judged that it was unlikely that an official transfer of WMD material from Iraq to Syria took place" but also acknowledging that there was evidence "about movement of material out of Iraq, including the possibility that WMD was involved," and that this evidence was "sufficiently credible to merit further investigation." IAG noted that, due to security concerns, it "was unable to complete its investigation and is unable to rule out the possibility that WMD was evacuated to Syria before the war."
- Residual Pre-1991 CBW Stocks in Iraq, concluding "any remaining chemical munitions in Iraq do not pose a militarily significant threat ... ISG has not found evidence to indicate that Iraq did not destroy its BW weapons or bulk agents".
- Residual Proliferation Risks: People, concluding "former WMD program participants are most likely to seek employment in the benign civil sector, either in Iraq or elsewhere ... However, because a single individual can advance certain WMD activities, it remains an important concern".
- Residual Proliferation Risk: Equipment and Materials, concluding "Iraq’s remaining chemical and biological physical infrastructure does not pose a proliferation concern".
- Iraqi Detainees, concluding "the WMD investigation has gone as far as feasible. ... there is no further purpose in holding many of these detainees".

There is that pattern again; We said they had this, but they didn't. Okay, they had some, but not all. Maybe they moved it? But also, maybe they didn't move anything? You see, we can't prove they moved it, but we can't say they didn't. They could of hid it though. But what we did find hidden wasn't of value. Derp, we no sure, but we make boom-boom anyway 'cause he bad, bad man.

Paul R. Pillar, the CIA official who coordinated U.S. intelligence on the Middle East from 2000 to 2005, said "If prewar intelligence assessments had said the same things as the Duelfer report, the administration would have had to change a few lines in its rhetoric and maybe would have lost a few member's votes in Congress, but otherwise the sales campaign—which was much more about Saddam's intentions and what he “could” do than about extant weapons systems—would have been unchanged. The administration still would have gotten its war. Even Dick Cheney later cited the actual Duelfer report as support for the administration's pro-war case."[58] George J. Tenet, the former director of central intelligence, stated Vice President Dick Cheney and other Bush administration officials pushed the country to war in Iraq without ever conducting a “serious debate” about whether Saddam Hussein posed an imminent threat to the United States.[59]

The US wanted war, regardless. They overstated and exaggerated the WMD issue as the primary vessel. Your argument that he had done something in the past and used to have a few things is moot because he was not attacked for that. Plain and simple, we were told he was attacked because he was imminently capable of doing something. I care not for past actions & capabilities when I am told something will happen due to present actions & capabilities. They never said we’re invading Iraq to arrest Hussein and take him to The Hague so he can face criminal charges due to past use of chemical weapons. We were told they were invading Iraq to shutdown their illegal WMD programs and seize their arsenal of deadly weapons. Joke was his programs were long since shutdown and in a near decade of occupation nothing substantial with regards to weapons or weapons programs has been found.

 

[zippy]

What happened to the Syrian thread? It's now an Iraq thread? The administrations involved aren't even around anymore.

 

[thestaggy]

What happened to the Syrian thread? It's now an Iraq thread? The administrations involved aren't even around anymore.

Iraq was dragged in due to their alleged connection via chemical weapons. However, I do agree that it has deviated and I will stop. It is going around in circles now.

 

[LazyLion]

Syrian conflict takes a toll on Palestinian aid

Displaced Palestinians are losing out to Syrians in desperate need of aid, and the United Nations is asking Arab countries to pitch in and bolster funding for its agency mandated with helping Palestinian refugees.

U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his counterpart at the Arab League, Nabil El Araby, are co-chairing a ministerial meeting Thursday in New York on the funding challenges that the U.N. Relief and Works Agency is facing.

UNRWA, which helps nearly 5 million registered Palestinian refugees in Jordan, Lebanon and Syria in addition to the West Bank and Gaza, is facing a $54 million shortfall of its roughly $600 million annual operational budget.

"Every single year of the last few years has been difficult," UNRWA's Commissioner General Filippo Grandi told The Associated Press in an interview on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly meeting in New York.

"Since 2008 and the economic downturn, aid budgets in many countries have shrunk. What we are trying to do this time is we are going especially to one group of donors: the Arab donors," Grandi said.

Arab countries have made pledges to fund 7.8% of the U.N. agency's operational budget, which is made up entirely of voluntary contributions, and not U.N. funding. So far, they have only contributed about a fourth of what they promised, and Grandi said the meeting's main goal is to push those donors to come up with the rest of the money.

The war in Syria, where over half a million Palestinian refugees live, has been complicating matters.

"Syria has drained a lot of humanitarian resources," Grandi said. "When you have two million refugees, a catastrophic situation inside, neighboring countries burdened by this huge crisis, of course this will drain a lot of resources and the Palestinian crisis will seem less urgent because it's been there for so long."

On the ground, the Syrian conflict has increased the plight of Palestinian refugees who live in 12 camps in Syria. "Seven are not accessible to us because of fighting," Grandi said. "More than half of 530,000 refugees in Syria, are displaced inside Syria and I would say 70,000 have left the country. These people are already refugees from before the (Syrian crisis) and they become refugees again."

But the agency is not limiting its outreach to Arab nations and Western states, reflecting a change in the field of global humanitarian aid.

"After New York, I am going to Brazil. Brazil is becoming an important donor. At this meeting on Thursday we have invited other donors such as Turkey," he explained adding that roughly 80% of the aid agency's funding comes from the United States, the European Union, Japan and Australia.


Source : Sapa-AP /mr
Date : 26 Sep 2013 06:50

 

[falcon786]

Seems rather childish to copy and paste the same shet over and over again.

"Again, allow me to re-sperg"

Childish or you may have a point there using the term sperg,Ive been reading up on its origins and it seems to fit rather well in this case.

Well spotted noah.

 

[Lightscribe]

*snip

Waffling about some of the reasons, of which there were many, is of no use. At least you bolded the part stating "...also acknowledging that there was evidence "about movement of material out of Iraq, including the possibility that WMD was involved"

Iraq was dragged in due to their alleged connection via chemical weapons. However, I do agree that it has deviated and I will stop. It is going around in circles now.

I agree. We are going in circles. Some have their opinion, on the movement of the WMD to Syria, and others have theirs.

Childish or you may have a point there using the term sperg,Ive been reading up on its origins and it seems to fit rather well in this case.

Well spotted noah.

Aww shame, need to resort to insults, since you cannot argue the facts...Facts are facts.

 

[thestaggy]

Waffling about some of the reasons, of which there were many, is of no use. At least you bolded the part stating "...also acknowledging that there was evidence "about movement of material out of Iraq, including the possibility that WMD was involved"

Now now, don't be selective, that bolded piece also includes; 'ISG judged that it was unlikely that an official transfer of WMD material from Iraq to Syria took place" but also acknowledging that there was evidence "about movement of material out of Iraq, including the possibility that WMD was involved'.

- First part states that it is unlikely that ''WMD material'' was moved.
- Second part states that ''material'' was moved. ISG seems to make a distinction between ''WMD material'' and ''material'' in the very same statement.
- Third part states that there was a ''possibility that WMD was involved''.

So again, nothing states definitively that WMDs left Iraq for Syria. In a single statement we get 3 stories; They didn't move them, there is evidence that they did move them and it is possible that they moved them. Yes? No? Maybe? I don't know? Can you repeat the question?

 

[falcon786]

Aww shame, need to resort to insults, since you cannot argue the facts...Facts are facts.

I'm not even in this argument,watching you argue with thestaggy......in the same circle over and over and over.

The point the Noah made was valid in my opinion.

Great that that you and thestaggy have agreed to move on from the circles.

 

[LazyLion]

Russia to guard destruction of Syria chemical arms

Russia offered on Thursday to provide troops to guard facilities where Syria's chemical weapons would be destroyed, as U.N. inspectors prepared to continue their probe on the use of such agents in the country's civil war.

Also Thursday, a mortar shell slammed into the Iraqi consulate building in central Damascus, killing one person and wounding three, Syrian state media reported.

In Moscow, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Russia is ready to ensure security and help guard facilities, once the chemical weapons are stored for destruction in Syria. He spoke just hours after another Russian deputy foreign minister, Gennady Gatilov, told The Associated Press that the U.N. Security Council is just two days away from agreeing on a resolution that would require Damascus to dismantle its chemical weapons stockpiles.

Gatilov said the resolution will include a reference to Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which allows for military and nonmilitary action in the interest of peace.

The U.S. and Russia have been at odds on how to enforce the resolution after brokering a join agreement earlier this month on the eventual destruction of Syria's chemical weapons. By agreeing to the accord, Syrian President Bashar Assad's government had narrowly escaped a punitive American strike over an August chemical weapons attack.

Meanwhile, a team of U.N. inspectors was back in Syria to investigate three alleged incidents of chemical weapons use earlier this year. They will also seek information on three other attacks last month that allegedly included chemical agents. The inspectors were seen leaving their Damascus hotel in a vehicle convoy on Thursday afternoon, but there was no immediate indication where they were going.

The U.N. inspectors first came to Damascus last month to probe a March 19 attack and two other incidents in the north when an alleged chemical attack occurred outside the Syrian capital. They returned to Syria on Wednesday.

The Aug. 21 incident in the eastern Ghouta suburb of Damascus became their focus after the United States and its allies said Assad's troops were responsible for the chemical attack that killed hundreds. The U.S. threated punitive strikes; Assad's government denied the allegations and said the rebels were behind the Ghouta attack.

Ryabkov spoke to Russian news agencies during an arms exhibition in Nizhny Tagil. He said he hoped other members of a Moscow-led military alliance of former Soviet republics, known as Collective Security Treaty Organization, would also participate in guarding the Syrian chemical weapons facilities. Along with Russia, the group includes Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.

U.N. spokesman Martin Nesirky said the inspectors will visit the site of the March 19 incident, the village of Khan al-Assal near the city of Aleppo, and two other sites in Saraqeb and Sheik Mahsood.

The mission will also discuss with the Syrian government "information that it may possess regarding allegations it reported on the use of chemical weapons" in incidents on Aug. 22, 24 and 25, Nesirky said Wednesday.

The attack on the Iraqi consulate came a day after Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari warned Western nations that support the Syrian opposition not to send military aid to the rebels for fear it could assist jihadi groups. There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the attack.

Rebels fighting to topple Assad often fire mortar rounds into the Syrian capital, targeting state institutions, military installations and diplomatic missions of countries that have supported his regime. Syria's civil war has so far killed more than 100,000 people.

According to Syria state news agency SANA, an Iraqi woman was killed and three others were wounded when a mortar shell struck the building that houses the consulate in the upscale Abu Roumanneh district of Damascus. The shell hit the consulate's hallway in which people were waiting to process their documents or visas, SANA said.

On Sunday, a mortar round landed inside the Russian Embassy compound in Damascus. That attack coincided with Moscow's announcement that it was willing to send military observers to Syria as it prepares to surrender its chemical weapons to international control.

Russia is one of Assad's closest allies.

Iraq says it has not taken any side in Syria's conflict, now in its third year. Members of Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government have repeatedly warned that Sunni extremists might dominate ruling structures in Damascus if Assad's regime falls.

--

Surk reported from Beirut.


Source : Sapa-AP /mjs
Date : 26 Sep 2013 15:39

 

[Lightscribe]

Russia offered on Thursday to provide troops to guard facilities where Syria's chemical weapons would be destroyed

Classic...

Why not just send the usual "Sarindar" team..? The chemical weapons will magically disappear, so no need to guard them then.

Oh yes, they want to "guard" the bits they kept for diversion, since they already made the WMD disappear to all over the country, with some moved to Lebanon and some back to Iraq...

Now now, don't be selective, that bolded piece also includes; 'ISG judged that it was unlikely that an official transfer of WMD material from Iraq to Syria took place" but also acknowledging that there was evidence "about movement of material out of Iraq, including the possibility that WMD was involved'.

- First part states that it is unlikely that ''WMD material'' was moved.
- Second part states that ''material'' was moved. ISG seems to make a distinction between ''WMD material'' and ''material'' in the very same statement.
- Third part states that there was a ''possibility that WMD was involved''.

So again, nothing states definitively that WMDs left Iraq for Syria. In a single statement we get 3 stories; They didn't move them, there is evidence that they did move them and it is possible that they moved them. Yes? No? Maybe? I don't know? Can you repeat the question?

Haha! Around and around we still go...

Mmm let's see...they say it's unlikely, but there is evidence...interesting... So, although they can't say it was WMD, they are willing to admit it is possible, after all, why move standard weaponry, when the issue is WMD...

So, you cannot prove that saddam did not move his WMD to Syria, whilst I posted info showing that the Russians were again involved, with yet another "Sarindar" plan. Do you think primakov was there for a quick picnic..? You even posted info from people, that admit that saddam had intentions, to get his WMD up and running again and that he could.

So, after all this arguing, the fact remains, that saddam had WMD, used WMD, more likely than not, moved his WMD to Syria and later even stated, just before being hung, that he planned to use nuclear WMD.

As you posted many times now, inspectors were prevented access, whilst access was also delayed, so any claims that there was no WMD, or any active programs, or did not move his WMD to Syria, is as usual, made in ignorance.

I'm not even in this argument,watching you argue with thestaggy......in the same circle over and over and over.

The point the Noah made was valid in my opinion.

Great that that you and thestaggy have agreed to move on from the circles.

If you want to call reposting the facts, a sperg hissy fit, since you cannot disprove the facts, go for it.

See above, he is in circle mode.

 

[thestaggy]

Most of Syria’s toxins can be destroyed more easily than officials initially thought

U.S. and Russian officials now believe that the vast majority of Syria’s nerve agent stockpile consists of “unweaponized” liquid precursors that could be neutralized relatively quickly, lowering the risk that the toxins could be hidden away by the regime or stolen by terrorists.

A confidential assessment by the United States and Russia also concludes that Syria’s entire arsenal could be destroyed in about nine months, assuming that Syrian officials honor promises to cede control of the chemical assets to international inspectors, according to two people briefed on the analysis.

...

The insights into Syria’s arsenal have been bolstered further by the Damascus government’s own accounting, which lists the types of chemical agents and delivery systems it possesses, and was presented Saturday to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in The Hague. U.S. officials have reviewed the Syrian inventory, which has not been publicly released, and “found it quite good,” a senior State Department official told reporters.

...

“If the vast majority of it consists of precursors in bulk form, that is very good news,” said Michael Kuhlman, chief scientist in the national security division at Battelle, a company that has supervised the destruction of much of the United States’ Cold War-era chemical stockpile. “Now you’re dealing with tanks of chemicals that are corrosive and dangerous, but not nerve agents. And the destruction processes for those chemicals are well in hand.”

If U.N. inspection teams can remove even one of the sarin precursors — or the equipment used for measuring and filling — they can all but eliminate Syria’s ability to launch a chemical attack even before the stockpile is completely destroyed, said Daryl Kimball, director of the Washington-*based Arms Control Association.

...

The White House briefers described the Russians as “serious and sincere,” and even more prepared that the U.S. team in addressing the legal and technical hurdles involved in bringing Assad’s arsenal under international control, one of the attendees said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...cd1ca2-26e3-11e3-b75d-5b7f66349852_story.html

Some positive information.

This little piece was an interesting read as well;

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/world/what-chemical-weapons-does-syria-have/454/

 

[LazyLion]

Extremists 'stealing revolution' : Syria rebel chief

The head of the key Syrian opposition National Coalition, Ahmad Jarba, has denounced extremists he said were trying to "steal our revolution", and blamed the regime for supporting them.

He made the comments in an address in New York to representatives from the Friends of Syria -- international backers of the rebels seeking to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad.

"The Syrian people support peace and moderation, tolerance and coexistence," Jarba said.

"The phenomenon of extremism appeared with the support and planning of the regime, which has gambled on the transformation of a revolution for freedom into a civil and sectarian war," he added.

The Syrian regime "created and armed numerous terrorist organisations and left them a place in the regions from which it has been removed," he said.

"Other groups have come across the borders to steal our revolution."

An unknown number of foreign fighters has streamed into Syria to join jihadist rebel groups such as the Al-Qaeda-affiliated Al-Nusra Front and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

They include fighters from Europe, the Middle East and Chechnya.

Rebels initially welcomed the jihadist groups and the foreign fighters who joined them, eager for weapons and battle experience.

But in recent months, relations have been tense, particularly between ISIL and non-jihadist rebel factions, which have clashed on occasion.

This week, some of the biggest non-jihadist battalions formed an alliance that includes Al-Nusra, and announced their rejection of the Coalition that Jarba heads.

He told the meeting, on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, that extremism "has increased because of the indifference of the international community, which has failed in its duties to the Syrian people".

The opposition has repeatedly called on its international backers to provide it with weapons, but the West has been reluctant to do so for fear of the arms falling into the hands of groups such as Al-Nusra, which is listed as a "terrorist" organisation by much of the West.

Despite setbacks, Jarba insisted that the only solution to the conflict would be Assad's departure.

"There is no horizon for the Syrians before the fall of the regime," he said.

"When it goes, Syrians will regain their freedom and civil peace and harmony will be restored."


Source : Sapa-AFP /pk
Date : 27 Sep 2013 09:52

 

[LazyLion]

Oil Prices Dip on Syria Breakthrough

Oil prices fell on Friday after the United States and Russia agreed a draft UN Security Council resolution on destroying Syria's chemical arms, easing Middle East supply concerns, analysts said.

Brent North Sea crude for delivery in November dropped 40 cents to stand at $108.81 a barrel in midday deals.

New York's West Texas Intermediate for November slid 46 cents to $102.57 per barrel.

"The easing of the geopolitical tensions and the plentiful supply of the market give little reason for any rise in prices," said Commerzbank analyst Carsten Fritsch.

The draft US-Russia resolution, seen by AFP, does not propose immediate measures over a chemical attack in Damascus one month ago. But it allows for possible sanctions -- after a new vote -- if there are breaches of an armament plan.

The 15-member Security Council held its first talks on the text late Thursday and a vote could be held on Friday with several top ministers taking part, diplomats said.

Investors had earlier feared that a possible US-led strike on Syria in retaliation for its alleged use of chemicals against its own people would spark a wider conflict in the crude-rich Middle East.

A thaw in ties between the West and Iran was also tempering prices, traders said.

A meeting between US Secretary of State John Kerry and his Iranian counterpart on Thursday has raised hopes of an easing of Western sanctions against Tehran over its nuclear programme. Such a move would allow the oil-rich nation to export more freely.


Source : Sapa-AFP /mjs
Date : 27 Sep 2013 13:41

 

[LazyLion]

UN Experts Probing 7 Alleged Syria Chemical Attacks

UN experts in Syria are investigating seven alleged chemical weapons attacks and expect to finish their work on the ground on Monday, the United Nations said on Friday.

In a statement issued from the Syrian capital, where the team arrived earlier this week, the UN said the experts hoped to have a comprehensive report ready "by late October".

The UN mission is separate from a team of Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons inspectors due to get to work by next week in Syria destroying its chemical arsenal.

The alleged attacks being investigated include a March 19 incident in Khan al-Assal, in northern Aleppo province, which both the regime and rebels reported, each accusing the other side of responsibility.

Other sites that will be investigated include the Sheikh Maqsud neighbourhood in Aleppo city, allegedly the site of an April attack, and Saraqeb in northwestern Idlib province.

The team is also continuing investigations into an August 21 attack in the Ghouta area in the suburbs of Damascus, which occurred during their group's first mission to Syria last month.

The experts visited the site of that alleged attack during their first trip and issued a preliminary report earlier this month confirming the use of the chemical weapon sarin there.

In addition, the team is investigating an alleged attack on August 22 in the Jubar district of Damascus, and a seventh incident reported in Ashrafiyeh Sahnaya in Damascus province on August 25.

"The UN team of investigators, which returned to Syria for a second working visit on 25th September, expects to finalise its activities in the country by Monday, 30th September," the statement said.

"In the course of performing their task, the experts have received several documents and samples and have conducted many interviews."

The statement said the team was working on a "comprehensive report that it hopes will be ready by late October".

The team's first report, issued on September 16, said there was evidence that the nerve agent sarin had been used in the August 21 attack.

But the experts are mandated only to investigate whether chemical weapons were used, not to determine who was responsible for their use.


Source : Sapa-AFP /mjs
Date : 27 Sep 2013 13:41

 

[LazyLion]

Push for Syrian war crimes court

A group of international war crimes experts is calling for the creation of a war crimes court in Damascus to try top-ranking Syrian politicians and soldiers when the country's civil war ends.

Professor Michael Scharf of Case Western Reserve University, acting as spokesman, told The Associated Press on Friday that draft statutes for such a court have been quietly under development for nearly two years.

"We believe it's playing a role in closed-door discussions throughout the U.S. government," Scharf said.

Scharf said the group is going public now to push the issue of accountability for war crimes into the ongoing international discussions over Syria, and in hopes the prospect will deter combatants from committing further atrocities, such as the violation of the Geneva Protocol in the Aug. 21 use of chemical weapons in Syria.

Syria is not a party to the International Criminal Court - the permanent war crimes tribunal in The Hague, Netherlands - so the ICC doesn't have jurisdiction over war crimes committed there. It could only be granted jurisdiction by order of the U.N. Security Council, which would likely be blocked by Russia and China.

However, conflict-specific war crime courts such as the proposed "Syrian Extraordinary Tribunal to Prosecute Atrocity Crimes" can and have been created in individual countries in recent years. Scharf himself was an adviser to judges at the Iraqi High Tribunal, which tried Saddam Hussein.

The experts who participated in creating the Syrian draft statutes, which are to be formally introduced at the National Press Club in Washington on Oct. 3, have no political power, though they are well-known figures internationally.

One of the many experts who have participated in the creation of the draft statutes is Egyptian-born legal scholar Mahmoud Cherif Bassiouni, who chaired the drafting of the ICC's statutes. Another is South Africa's Richard Goldstone, renowned for his commission investigating Apartheid-era violence in South Africa in the early 1990s, and as the first prosecutor of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.


Source : Sapa-AP /mjs
Date : 27 Sep 2013 16:09