Topic: U.S. policy in Syria | |
---|---|
Edited by
Ɔʎɹɐx
on
Thu 12/19/13 12:02 PM
|
|
by the way , they even aren't interested in the American attempt as they consider U.S.A as a natural enemy of their desired Islamic state
Syria's Islamic Front spurns talks with U.S.: diplomat (Reuters) - Islamist rebels fighting President Bashar al-Assad's forces in Syria have rejected overtures from the United States to sit down and talk, a senior U.S. diplomat said on Wednesday. The Syrian government said it was "reprehensible" that Washington was prepared to enter a dialogue with the Islamic Front, which comprises six major Islamist rebel groups and which Damascus considers a terrorist organization. The developments highlighted Washington's difficulties in engaging with the faction-ridden rebels in Syria's civil war. With five weeks to go before U.N. peace talks convene in Geneva, it is unclear who will represent the opposition, and the clock is ticking towards a December 27 deadline set by U.N. mediator Lakhdar Brahimi for both sides to name their delegations. "The Islamic Front has refused to sit with us, without giving any reason," U.S. Syria envoy Robert Ford told Al Arabiya television, speaking in Arabic, a day after Secretary of State John Kerry said such talks might take place. "We are ready to sit with them because we talk to all parties and political groups in Syria," Ford said. The Islamic Front has overshadowed the more moderate Free Syrian Army, which is formally led by the Supreme Military Council (SMC) and backed by Western and Arab powers. The Front has rejected the authority of the SMC, the military arm of the main political opposition in exile, and last week seized control of SMC weapons depots in northern Syria. In a video statement given to Reuters by the SMC on Wednesday, Ford described the takeover as "an extremely negative development" and urged disparate rebel groups to work together. "If there is not tight cooperation between the different armed groups that are fighting the regime, the regime is going to be successful in surviving," he said. "It is extremely important that the Supreme Military Council be able to play its role of coordinating. If it cannot do that, I do not see how the armed opposition can be truly effective." Kerry said on Tuesday a U.S. meeting with the Islamic Front was possible as part of efforts to broaden opposition representation at the Geneva peace talks, but the Front's commanders are wary of openly coordinating with Washington. Any such public engagement with the United States could put the newly formed Islamic Front on a collision course with the powerful al Qaeda-linked Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant. The Syrian Foreign Ministry said in a statement carried on the state news agency that dialogue with the Islamic Front contradicted U.S. and international commitments to combat terrorism, as well as "international pledges that terrorist organizations would not be given the chance to participate in the Geneva conference". The long-delayed talks in Switzerland are meant to discuss a political transition to lead Syria out of a 33-month-old conflict in which well over 100,000 people have been killed. The Islamic Front "agrees in principle, strategy and goals with the Nusra Front", the Syrian foreign ministry said, referring to another al Qaeda-linked rebel group that the State Department last year listed as a terrorist organization. (Additional reporting by Dasha Afanasieva in Istanbul; Editing by Alistair Lyon) http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/18/us-syria-crisis-front-idUSBRE9BH0W820131218 |
|
|
|
yeah,, and many administrations before ,,, how did Hussein get his gas again? i'm sorry, i thought barry was president now, the present... so now you wanna bring up the past? and, since you did, when that was sold to saddam, were we at war with them? no, selling weapons to an enemy is actually treason, and who are we at war with? the same terrorists that are killing our soldiers now? so barry wants to take our guns, give them to mexican cartels and the same terrorists we are fighting in afganistan... totally worthy of the "peace" prize.... ' are we at war with those who follow islam? whts your point exactly? my point is, its part of US policy,, LONG BEFORE OBAMA to sell and trade arms that go into the hands of people who,, guess what? use them sometimes to kill innocent people that's what guns do US has been in the gun industry for decades,, just wanted to clear up any dilusion that this was in some exclusive way about OBama or this administration,,, US dropped a NUCLER BOMB on innocent people US armed Hussein US has armed more 'rebels' than one can shake stick at,,,,, just using the word 'islamist' or 'rebel' doesn't tell anyone anything about who is actually being armed or for what Simply proves the corruption of gov't. This POTUS however provides arms and support to our enemies WHILE we are at war with them assuming much the article doesn't say who is being armed,, so how do we know its someone we are 'at war' with? try reading the newspaper, or reading articles on the internet.. there's plenty of sources that have documented this... and why is barry getting involved anyway? what does syria's civil war have to do with the US? its not a topic that interests me enough to seek out other articles,, this forum interests me so IM commenting on what is provided here in this forum since when did 'considering' something turn into becoming involved? since when does a president get 'involved' with anything by themselves,,,, they speak on behalf government and citizens, not for their person,,, Presidents work with their CONGRESS ,,, not alone ![]() Besides,it is NOT their Congress,on account of the Separation of Powers! |
|
|
|
yeah,, and many administrations before ,,, how did Hussein get his gas again? i'm sorry, i thought barry was president now, the present... so now you wanna bring up the past? and, since you did, when that was sold to saddam, were we at war with them? no, selling weapons to an enemy is actually treason, and who are we at war with? the same terrorists that are killing our soldiers now? so barry wants to take our guns, give them to mexican cartels and the same terrorists we are fighting in afganistan... totally worthy of the "peace" prize.... ' are we at war with those who follow islam? whts your point exactly? my point is, its part of US policy,, LONG BEFORE OBAMA to sell and trade arms that go into the hands of people who,, guess what? use them sometimes to kill innocent people that's what guns do US has been in the gun industry for decades,, just wanted to clear up any dilusion that this was in some exclusive way about OBama or this administration,,, US dropped a NUCLER BOMB on innocent people US armed Hussein US has armed more 'rebels' than one can shake stick at,,,,, just using the word 'islamist' or 'rebel' doesn't tell anyone anything about who is actually being armed or for what Simply proves the corruption of gov't. This POTUS however provides arms and support to our enemies WHILE we are at war with them assuming much the article doesn't say who is being armed,, so how do we know its someone we are 'at war' with? ![]() i think it's been established that king barry doesn't worry about that little piece of paper... that piece of paper states: congress has power To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations; To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water president has power to make treaties and that all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; other countries are also our concern, even in the Constitution,,, Actually those Treaties have to be ratified by the Senate before they become Law! |
|
|
|
yeah,, and many administrations before ,,, how did Hussein get his gas again? i'm sorry, i thought barry was president now, the present... so now you wanna bring up the past? and, since you did, when that was sold to saddam, were we at war with them? no, selling weapons to an enemy is actually treason, and who are we at war with? the same terrorists that are killing our soldiers now? so barry wants to take our guns, give them to mexican cartels and the same terrorists we are fighting in afganistan... totally worthy of the "peace" prize.... ' are we at war with those who follow islam? whts your point exactly? my point is, its part of US policy,, LONG BEFORE OBAMA to sell and trade arms that go into the hands of people who,, guess what? use them sometimes to kill innocent people that's what guns do US has been in the gun industry for decades,, just wanted to clear up any dilusion that this was in some exclusive way about OBama or this administration,,, US dropped a NUCLER BOMB on innocent people US armed Hussein US has armed more 'rebels' than one can shake stick at,,,,, just using the word 'islamist' or 'rebel' doesn't tell anyone anything about who is actually being armed or for what Simply proves the corruption of gov't. This POTUS however provides arms and support to our enemies WHILE we are at war with them assuming much the article doesn't say who is being armed,, so how do we know its someone we are 'at war' with? ![]() i think it's been established that king barry doesn't worry about that little piece of paper... that piece of paper states: congress has power To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations; To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water president has power to make treaties and that all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; other countries are also our concern, even in the Constitution,,, Actually those Treaties have to be ratified by the Senate before they become Law! The Constitution (as any high school student knows) is the "supreme law of the land" not a treaty. |
|
|
|
anyone care to post the line that mentions constitutionality,, instead of avoiding the issue with laughter and other comments ? if one posts that a link is about the consitutionality of something, surely they can post the SPECIFIC part of the link that states their claim...? but probably not,,,,if its not really there If you looked you would have found it. http://youviewed.com/2013/12/19/another-slap-at-obama-and-statism-judge-rules-against-executive-privilege-claims/ ” A federal judge Tuesday rejected the Obama administration’s sweeping claims of executive privilege and ordered the disclosure of a foreign aid directive signed by President Barack Obama in 2010 but never publicly released. U.S. District Court Judge Ellen Huvelle ruled the presidential order is not within the bounds of executive privilege and called the government’s arguments in favor of secrecy “troubling.” “The government appears to adopt the cavalier attitude that the President should be permitted to convey orders throughout the Executive Branch without public oversight … to engage in what is in effect governance by ‘secret law,’” Huvelle said. “ This ruling goes nicely with the previous finding by Judge Richard Leon earlier in the week regarding the unconstitutionality of the NSA spying program . Finally our resident “Constitutional Scholar” is getting a well-deserved lesson on the Constitution . The above is quoted again for those who pretend it didn't exist the first time. |
|
|
|
yeah,, and many administrations before ,,, how did Hussein get his gas again? i'm sorry, i thought barry was president now, the present... so now you wanna bring up the past? and, since you did, when that was sold to saddam, were we at war with them? no, selling weapons to an enemy is actually treason, and who are we at war with? the same terrorists that are killing our soldiers now? so barry wants to take our guns, give them to mexican cartels and the same terrorists we are fighting in afganistan... totally worthy of the "peace" prize.... ' are we at war with those who follow islam? whts your point exactly? my point is, its part of US policy,, LONG BEFORE OBAMA to sell and trade arms that go into the hands of people who,, guess what? use them sometimes to kill innocent people that's what guns do US has been in the gun industry for decades,, just wanted to clear up any dilusion that this was in some exclusive way about OBama or this administration,,, US dropped a NUCLER BOMB on innocent people US armed Hussein US has armed more 'rebels' than one can shake stick at,,,,, just using the word 'islamist' or 'rebel' doesn't tell anyone anything about who is actually being armed or for what Simply proves the corruption of gov't. This POTUS however provides arms and support to our enemies WHILE we are at war with them assuming much the article doesn't say who is being armed,, so how do we know its someone we are 'at war' with? ![]() i think it's been established that king barry doesn't worry about that little piece of paper... that piece of paper states: congress has power To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations; To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water president has power to make treaties and that all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; other countries are also our concern, even in the Constitution,,, Actually those Treaties have to be ratified by the Senate before they become Law! So,POTUS isn't even free to act on his own in that aspect,he needs Consent from the Senate,or there is no Cigar! |
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Fri 12/20/13 07:24 AM
|
|
Fox, I won't apologize for the good intentions of my countrymen/women in regards to your country, but I do apologize that those good intentions are convoluted by the representatives of our gov't who only "think" they know what is best for your country and ours as they take their campaign contributions and advice from the bankers and corporate CEOs of the world. Our "people" stopped, or at least slowed, them recently from their intended atrocity, I only hope we can continue to do so in the future Best of luck to you my friend |
|
|
|
same historical mistake , as done in Afghanistan and Iraq before , shaking hands with beheaders sorry to burst your bubble, but the barry admin has been giving the terrorists weapons and money for years now.. He doesn't just give guns and weapons to just terrorists, you left out the Drug Cartels and Organized Crime and other criminals. |
|
|
|
Edited by
Ɔʎɹɐx
on
Fri 12/20/13 01:18 PM
|
|
Fox, I won't apologize for the good intentions of my countrymen/women in regards to your country, but I do apologize that those good intentions are convoluted by the representatives of our gov't who only "think" they know what is best for your country and ours as they take their campaign contributions and advice from the bankers and corporate CEOs of the world. Our "people" stopped, or at least slowed, them recently from their intended atrocity, I only hope we can continue to do so in the future Best of luck to you my friend there's no need for apologies friend , Syrian people realize very well the attitude of the American people , regardless to the governmental point of view .... we contacted many friends and congress members who are against the intervention and that made difference by cancelling or delaying it ... |
|
|