Wednesday, September 30, 2015

Saudi Arabia's foreign minister said Syrian President Assad must give up power


Looks like no more guessing required.




10 comments:

lastgreek said...

Russian Embassy, UK ‏@RussianEmbassy · 6h6 hours ago

US does not speak of unconditional ousting of Assad any more – definitely a step in the right direction.



Tom Hickey said...

Begs the question of whose is worse, Assad or the Saudi royal family. Add to that the question of US national interests and it is obvious, since the Saudis are the sponsors of Wahhabism , which a major factor in terrorism. While Wahhabism and Salfism are not synonymous, they overlap and the jihadis are the most extreme. There is also the question of where the funding of terrorists is coming from.

Just who is the real adversary here?

Matt Franko said...

Tom I'd like to think I usually can figure stuff out but this one is beating me at this time for sure...

Ignacio said...

Geez, Syria is shaping up great for a total war, with half the population gone from there soon enough they cna all put the big guns out and massacre their respective armies. Maybe then they all can ramp up military spending to offset the not-so-new recession-depression the world seems about to enter.

I don't think the cozy decadent Saudi will do anything for now, though, but with depressed oil prices they may go ahead. The problem with removing Assad is who you put in power, an other failed state (well, it already is, but half-failed state for now) in the making! If Russia & USA can come to an agreement to leave the MENA is a permanent state of chaos they are doomed anyway. The way things are shaping, for geopolitical reasons I believe both nations have reasons to pursue a chaos strategy, it's all about supplying Europe and building a permanent outside evil to fight, and Islamic terrorism is a perfectly manageable thread for all the big power blocks shaping up and a great excuse to build up military spending and their respective deep state machines.

All pretty Orwelian if it's the case...

Bob said...

What would Lawrence of Arabia do?

Bob Salsa said...

And on the same day, Putin launches the first of his many coming airstrikes in Syria - not against ISIL but the moderate rebels in Homs that threaten Assad; essentially, the students who in 2010 held street protests and where met by Assad's thugs who beat them to death, and then the relatives who came out and met with bullets from the Syrian army. The ones Assad first gassed and is now barrel bombing.

One can understand the Saudis geopolitical interest in getting rid of Assad and even Russia's motivation of keeping its warm water port at Tartus. But it's amazing how easily the usual US-can-do-no-right-and-Putin-no-wrong forget such recent events and instead turn to word salads of horse manure of US empire building.

I wonder as the Russians do their 1980s Afghan thing all over again and drive all Syrian opposition into ISIL's hands - will the Putin lovers get a clue? And as Czar Putin quagmire begins to erode his domestic sheeple support - will he resort to blowing up apartment buildings in Saint Petersburg and Moscow again as done to support his Chechnya campaign? I wonder how long, if ever, die-hard Putin apologists are going to continue to confuse his ruthlessness for brains - the guy is dumb as a brick.

Tom Hickey said...

@ Bob Salsa

Russian and Eurasian Politics
Russian Military Intervention in Syria
Gordon M. Hahn

Bob said...

Russia is backing the losing side. It's not a quagmire so long as they stick to air strikes (which change nothing).

Tom Hickey said...

New Eastern Outlook
US Complains As Russia Bombs its Terrorists
Tony Cartalucci

Bob said...

"Fighting ISIS" is only legitimate when the US or its allies does it.
I disagree that this is a doomed position, for when there are no moderates, no amount of carnage will dissuade this from continuing.