PDA

View Full Version : Russia vetos new UN's Syria vote,China agrees


Lin Lin
Feb 5th, 2012, 12:14 AM
Good or bad?:confused:

tennisbum79
Feb 5th, 2012, 12:20 AM
Chian alos voted against the resolution I believe.
All other countries voted for it.

It is BAD
The US representative, Susan Rice was very unhappy about Russian and China; she says their arguments were empty.

France also criticised the China and Russia.

Cassius
Feb 5th, 2012, 12:20 AM
It wasn't just Russia, China vetoed at the same time.
I'm not surprised either, neither of those two countries care about human rights or democracy...

tennisbum79
Feb 5th, 2012, 12:26 AM
It wasn't just Russia, China vetoed at the same time.
I'm not surprised either, neither of those two countries care about human rights or democracy...
I don't know if Lin lin ommision was deliberate or just an oversight .

I know this sort of omission use to happen in the old China of only few years ago, because i information was limited, but on a worldwide website, that does not work.

KoOlMaNsEaN
Feb 5th, 2012, 12:27 AM
British Ambassador to the U.N. Mark Lyall said Russia and China should "ask themselves how many more deaths they are prepared to tolerate."

It is common knowledge that the Russian and Chinese governments do not give attention to such little things like civilian deaths, they kill hundreds of their own people every year..

Lin Lin
Feb 5th, 2012, 12:34 AM
Russia and China were afraid of invasion of the west and causing more killings like what happened in Lybia?:unsure:

tennisbum79
Feb 5th, 2012, 12:34 AM
Now you change the title?
So you knew China voted against the resolution and deliberately omitted that fact.

What does it mean "China agrees"?

Although you need only one country, both vetoed the resolution.

tennisbum79
Feb 5th, 2012, 12:41 AM
Russia and China were afraid of invasion of the west and causing more killings like what happened in Lybia?:unsure:
That is BS.
If that is what they were truly afraid of, they had plenty of time to persuade Assad to not to kill the protestors.

france has already accused them of being accomplice in what Assad is doing.

*JR*
Feb 5th, 2012, 01:20 AM
I told you folks so :shout: months ago, regarding "chickens coming home to roost" from the West having way exceeded the mandate on Libya in Security Council Resolution 1973:

http://www.tennisforum.com/showpost.php?p=20432489&postcount=10



And as I've also pointed out, not only did that let those in Libya who demanded "unconditional surrender" get thousands needlessly killed in places like Misrata after an (enforced) ceasefire should have been in place, but it may well have led to even a watered-down resolution on Syria being vetoed by both on October 4th.

KournikovaFan91
Feb 5th, 2012, 01:36 AM
Bad but once again China and Russia are the baddies, USA has been vetoing resolutions about Israel for decades :shrug:

When China and Russia wanna help an ally its the worst thing in the world.

Nowadays there are really only 3 members of the security council Russia, China, USA. Do the UK and France serve any purpose except agree with the US on everything.

Ashi
Feb 5th, 2012, 01:54 AM
Bad but once again China and Russia are the baddies, USA has been vetoing resolutions about Israel for decades :shrug:
When China and Russia wanna help an ally its the worst thing in the world.

Ironic.

tennisbum79
Feb 5th, 2012, 02:06 AM
I agree with K'Fan91 and others the the US has unjustly and unjustifiably vetoed some resolutions against Israel.

But I strongly disagree that China and Russia are helping Syria ..

Besides, this resolution has the backing of the Arab League, the Arab world umbrella orginization, having seen the carnage in Syria.
Thye are trying to save the people of Syria, not Assad regime.
By this action China and Russia are siding with the Assad, who is losing control of the state institutions with each passing day.

*JR*
Feb 5th, 2012, 02:41 AM
Nowadays there are really only 3 members of the security council Russia, China, USA. Do the UK and France serve any purpose except agree with the US on everything.

France did vow to veto dubya's proposed resolution authorizing the (mainly US - British) invasion of Iraq in 2003, leading to the so-called "Coalition of the Willing". (I presume that Russia and China would have done so anyway).

Regarding how Israel pwns US foreign policy, there are some big lies used to secure this. One is the 2nd Coming BS. A recent one is that Iran would try to "destroy" Israel if it got nukes. BS, they only question the legitimacy of the Israeli state. :rolleyes:

This gets conflated into the idea that they'd commit national suicide by attacking a country with 200 plus nukes (that itself isn't even a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. :rolleyes: (And was helping apartheid South Africa go nuclear, B4 Mandela took power and scrapped the program).

North Korea doesn't recognize the South (and the 2 are still technically @ war nearly 6 decades after the armistice) but nobody talks about a pre-emptive strike on the DPRK. Why? Because (and as an ethnic Jew I'm ashamed to say this) my kinsmen are maestros @ acting like they have some special claim on everything, as "The Chosen People". :o

PhilePhile
Feb 5th, 2012, 04:12 AM
British Ambassador to the U.N. Mark Lyall said Russia and China should "ask themselves how many more deaths they are prepared to tolerate."

It is common knowledge that the Russian and Chinese governments do not give attention to such little things like civilian deaths, they kill hundreds of their own people every year..

Perhaps Mark Lyall could of invited Russia and China to the party if NATO care so much about lives. You do know that Russia and China in effect vetoed a military operation?

PhilePhile
Feb 5th, 2012, 04:31 AM
France did vow to veto dubya's proposed resolution authorizing the (mainly US - British) invasion of Iraq in 2003, leading to the so-called "Coalition of the Willing". (I presume that Russia and China would have done so anyway).

Regarding how Israel pwns US foreign policy, there are some big lies used to secure this. One is the 2nd Coming BS. A recent one is that Iran would try to "destroy" Israel if it got nukes. BS, they only question the legitimacy of the Israeli state. :rolleyes:

This gets conflated into the idea that they'd commit national suicide by attacking a country with 200 plus nukes (that itself isn't even a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. :rolleyes: (And was helping apartheid South Africa go nuclear, B4 Mandela took power and scrapped the program).

North Korea doesn't recognize the South (and the 2 are still technically @ war nearly 6 decades after the armistice) but nobody talks about a pre-emptive strike on the DPRK. Why? Because (and as an ethnic Jew I'm ashamed to say this) my kinsmen are maestros @ acting like they have some special claim on everything, as "The Chosen People". :o

It appears like some of the "Jews" are doing the stereotypical "dirty" work ( was it money collection of the past in Europe?) but this time for the one trillion dollar "military complex" of the U.S.A. And the stupid fu*ckin common Persians/Arabs ... well I guess better them than "us".

cowsonice
Feb 5th, 2012, 06:32 AM
It was NID sadly....
I don't know why some people were holding out hope that they would change. Both their policies advocate the veto because they don't want to instigate a revolution in their home country, Russia being more in danger. China takes too many preemptive measures out of fear. It's not as politically unstable as some perceive it.

Lin Lin
Feb 5th, 2012, 06:42 AM
This was the 8th time china ever used its "veto" power:eek:

How many times have other members used,any statistics?

Mr.Sharapova
Feb 5th, 2012, 07:16 AM
Really sad how both of these countries do not care about Civil rights but for their sole interest.

People are dying in Syria and these two are still playing political games in order to gain something for themselves. :facepalm:.

azdaja
Feb 5th, 2012, 09:40 AM
i love it how people criticise china and russia for caring only about their interest when in reality the other 3 permanent members (and most countries in the world for that matter) are not different at all. i mean, who supported arab dictators until last year? who supports the persian gulf tyrannies still? and why?

This was the 8th time china ever used its "veto" power:eek:

How many times have other members used,any statistics?
since the security council was expanded to 15 members the us is undisputed leader in vetoing the un resolutions, followed by the uk and france. this is quite remarkable given that noone has ever tried to push any resolutions to condemn the us actions in vietnam or iraq. places where the us defended democracy and human rights rather than own interests or what?

Mynarco
Feb 5th, 2012, 10:07 AM
Chinese interest in Syria is immense (Syria's third-largest importer in 2010, according to CNN) - you just cannot expect her to do something affecting her interest without much gain at the end.

And come on, stop blaming everything on China and Russia. Which country doesn't act based on her own interest?

Monica_Rules
Feb 5th, 2012, 10:20 AM
Its a sad day. But what do you expect.

USA wants something, Russia and China veto. Russia or China want something USA will veto.

Although when has Russia or China ever tables a motion that would save people lives? I can;t speak about modern Russia but China hardly has a great record on human rights even today

Ferg
Feb 5th, 2012, 11:41 AM
Russia and China were afraid of invasion of the west and causing more killings like what happened in Lybia?:unsure:

Oh come on, planned airstrikes on tanks and weapons depots can hardly be called an 'invasion'. Besides, who knows how many people would have been killed if they let Gadaffi carry on with his attack on Misrata, and then Benghazi. The entire cities where in rebellion and he was prepared to raze the cities to the ground to hold onto power. We cant say the NATO strikes led to more killings.

KournikovaFan91
Feb 5th, 2012, 01:42 PM
Although when has Russia or China ever tables a motion that would save people lives? I can;t speak about modern Russia but China hardly has a great record on human rights even today

Every time a resolution on Israel has been presented and vetoed by the USA.

You honestly can't be that naive you think the 3 Western countries on the security council do everything for altruistic reasons.

The NATO mission in Libya clearly overstepped the mark of what was set down so now Russia and China are making sure this level of Western intervention doesn't take place in Syria.

Mr.Sharapova
Feb 5th, 2012, 02:05 PM
Every time a resolution on Israel has been presented and vetoed by the USA.

You honestly can't be that naive you think the 3 Western countries on the security council do everything for altruistic reasons.

The NATO mission in Libya clearly overstepped the mark of what was set down so now Russia and China are making sure this level of Western intervention doesn't take place in Syria.

Yeah but still, lives are being taken in Syria as we speak. How many victims has this dictator killed for a year now. Something needs to be done and quick.

*JR*
Feb 5th, 2012, 02:11 PM
Oh come on, planned airstrikes on tanks and weapons depots can hardly be called an 'invasion'. Besides, who knows how many people would have been killed if they let Gadaffi carry on with his attack on Misrata, and then Benghazi. The entire cities where in rebellion and he was prepared to raze the cities to the ground to hold onto power. We cant say the NATO strikes led to more killings.

Correct, which is why I supported those. But then (when Gadaffi realized he'd been checked, and could likely have been coaxed last spring into accepting Idi Amin - Baby Doc style exile) the rebels said no, and the American-British-French err "Axis" :o held out for a total win by the rebels. (Who are still rather undefined as to their vision for Libya).

Which BTW, the non-combatants in Misrata, etc. had no "vote" on, as they continued dying. So these Western powers eventually got to their goal in the fall, but by then Russia and China had an ironclad excuse (the wanton violation of SC Resolution 1973 (http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10200.doc.htm) by the West) to stiff said powers on Syria, both on October 4th and last week. :shrug:

Meelis
Feb 5th, 2012, 03:04 PM
How many times have other members used,any statistics?

Not up to date, but...

http://www.globalpolicy.org/images/vetotable.gif

fifty-fifty
Feb 5th, 2012, 04:00 PM
I really don't want to say this, but what is really going on in Syria is a civil war. It's not just Assad killing the protestors. There are thousands of army defectors. And who finances this? USA? Israel? Maybe even Europe?

Yes, there are reports of thousands of civilian deaths. But those are coming from the opposition. Remember Kosovo? There were reportedly 10,000 dead. But they only discovered 2,000+ dead most of whom were KLA. One of the NATO chiefs then said that they 'hope' that they discover more dead people.:spit:

Cassius
Feb 5th, 2012, 05:35 PM
I've been saying for years that having permanent council members is ridiculous. All the council seats should be rotated for a more fair and balanced approach because as things stand USA, Russia, China, UK or France can single-handedly stop a global institution from acting to save lives.

This time it's Russia and China at fault, but looking at the past (and likely in the future too) all five are as guilty as each other.

tennisbum79
Feb 5th, 2012, 05:37 PM
I really don't want to say this, but what is really going on in Syria is a civil war. It's not just Assad killing the protestors. There are thousands of army defectors. And who finances this? USA? Israel? Maybe even Europe?

Yes, there are reports of thousands of civilian deaths. But those are coming from the opposition. Remember Kosovo? There were reportedly 10,000 dead. But they only discovered 2,000+ dead most of whom were KLA. One of the NATO chiefs then said that they 'hope' that they discover more dead people.:spit:
You guys are all missing the point.

The Syrian people are dying, and you guys are discussing geopolitics.

The Arab League, which has opposed any non-Arab intervention in any Arab country, support this resolution as they tried and failed in the negotiation route.

They send a delegation and monitor in Syria, but they found themselves in danger and could persuade Assad to listen to other Arab country and stop the killings.

fifty-fifty
Feb 5th, 2012, 06:30 PM
You guys are all missing the point.

The Syrian people are dying...


...as a result of civil war. If you want to stop this you need to negotiate not only with Assad but with Free Syria Army/Muslim Brotherhood.

azdaja
Feb 5th, 2012, 06:34 PM
You guys are all missing the point.

The Syrian people are dying, and you guys are discussing geopolitics.
no, you are missing the point. it's all about geopolitics, be it on the part of the us, uk and france or china or russia. the only question is will we allow some people to abuse our benevolence and buy our support for their cynical geopolitical games just because they pretend they care about human rights or not. all this with the well-being of the people in affected countries in mind.

Mr.Sharapova
Feb 5th, 2012, 06:52 PM
I really don't want to say this, but what is really going on in Syria is a civil war. It's not just Assad killing the protestors. There are thousands of army defectors. And who finances this? USA? Israel? Maybe even Europe?

Yes, there are reports of thousands of civilian deaths. But those are coming from the opposition. Remember Kosovo? There were reportedly 10,000 dead. But they only discovered 2,000+ dead most of whom were KLA. One of the NATO chiefs then said that they 'hope' that they discover more dead people.:spit:

2000+ are not enough for you right? Do you have any facts to prove that only 2000 were found dead and most of them were from KLA? There were 10,000 + people killed in Kosova :yeah:, and there are many more victims which are yet to be found and are reported missing until today.

fifty-fifty
Feb 5th, 2012, 07:07 PM
2000+ are not enough for you right? Do you have any facts to prove that only 2000 were found dead and most of them were from KLA? There were 10,000 + people killed in Kosova :yeah:, and there are many more victims which are yet to be found and are reported missing until today.

You know, they still haven't found WMDs in Iraq

Joana
Feb 5th, 2012, 07:11 PM
There were 10,000 + people killed in Kosova :yeah:,

Interesting choice of smiley there. But it's nothing new, the Genocide Olympics are still popular in these parts. People want to have the highest possible number of their fellow nationals dead so they could be the biggest victim. :help:

MaBaker
Feb 5th, 2012, 07:28 PM
2000+ are not enough for you right? Do you have any facts to prove that only 2000 were found dead and most of them were from KLA? There were 10,000 + people killed in Kosova :yeah:, and there are many more victims which are yet to be found and are reported missing until today.
Maybe you should ask your Prime Minister, Hashim Thaçi "The snake", engaged in drug trafficking, terrorism, trafficking in human organs.. where are those people.

azdaja
Feb 5th, 2012, 07:36 PM
There were 10,000 + people killed in Kosova :yeah:, and there are many more victims which are yet to be found and are reported missing until today.
:yeah: so great :yeah: too bad it's not been 200,000 as reported during the bombing, though :( imagine how many nasty things you'd be able to say about the serbs then :drool:

PhilePhile
Feb 5th, 2012, 07:43 PM
You guys are all missing the point.

The Syrian people are dying, and you guys are discussing geopolitics.

The Arab League, which has opposed any non-Arab intervention in any Arab country, support this resolution as they tried and failed in the negotiation route.

They send a delegation and monitor in Syria, but they found themselves in danger and could persuade Assad to listen to other Arab country and stop the killings.


Millions are dying that can be intervened. What is the agenda here?

And about the Arab League ...

For the predominately Sunni Arab League, the Sunni-led revolt against the pro-Iran Alawite leadership in Syria is a heaven sent opportunity to counter Iranian influence and break the “Shi’a Crescent” that extends from Iran to Lebanon via Syria and Iraq.

- http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2011/11/29/assad-enemy-of-the-sunni-arab-world/

Brena
Feb 5th, 2012, 07:45 PM
Maybe you should ask your Prime Minister, Hashim Thaçi "The snake", engaged in drug trafficking, terrorism, trafficking in human organs.. where are those people.

If he asked him, it would be 10 billion already killed Kosovo albanians + 1 Miloti. :tears:

MaBaker
Feb 5th, 2012, 07:50 PM
If he asked him, it would be 10 billion already killed Kosovo albanians + 1 Miloti. :tears:
:yeah: Wait, inappropriate smiley. Nevermind..

Expat
Feb 6th, 2012, 05:22 AM
China and Russia are looking after their ally just as America looks after its allies. Neither veto is wrong.

Mr.Sharapova
Feb 6th, 2012, 08:22 AM
Interesting choice of smiley there. But it's nothing new, the Genocide Olympics are still popular in these parts. People want to have the highest possible number of their fellow nationals dead so they could be the biggest victim. :help:

Were 10 killed? 10 it's not enough for neither of you right?

Monsters:o

Mr.Sharapova
Feb 6th, 2012, 08:23 AM
Maybe you should ask your Prime Minister, Hashim Thaçi "The snake", engaged in drug trafficking, terrorism, trafficking in human organs.. where are those people.

Or maybe I should ask your mom since she uses them :yeah:.

Mr.Sharapova
Feb 6th, 2012, 08:24 AM
:yeah: so great :yeah: too bad it's not been 200,000 as reported during the bombing, though :( imagine how many nasty things you'd be able to say about the serbs then :drool:

How do you live with yourself. I'm sure if you had options to kill Albanians you would do it with your hands. Go fuck yourself and jump off a bridge cause you have no soul anyway :shrug:, which means you're dead already.

Joana
Feb 6th, 2012, 12:14 PM
Dude, you are happy that 10 000 Albanians were killed, not me or azdaja. And he is completely right, you probably would prefer if more had been killed, so you could enjoy your victim role more.
That's how it goes among the nationalists, Serbian Milotis are no different. :shrug:

MaBaker
Feb 6th, 2012, 01:41 PM
Or maybe I should ask your mom since she uses them :yeah:.
My mom? You know, whenever I think that you can't possibly make yourself look more stupid than you already did, you surprise me. Quite impressive.

bulava
Feb 6th, 2012, 02:05 PM
Russia and China have got it rightly, at least from the present EU economic crisis point of view. World needs to come out of this serious present recession and uncertainty so the last thing people and markets need is triggering a new war. We all saw how Iraq and Libya got screwed up. Egypt burning. Now Syria 'campaign' could snowball into a major crisis, let alone planning to bomb Iranian Nuke sites! Last but not least, there also 'exists' a new theater for the US with Pakistan! :eek:

I think this 'partnership' trend is going happen more often in future because of the shift happening in the Global power equation. India shouldn't have supported the resolution, common it got nothing to do with the Democracy because I've seen how 'big powers' play their games by (ab)using that word :tape:

Mr.Sharapova
Feb 6th, 2012, 02:34 PM
My mom? You know, whenever I think that you can't possibly make yourself look more stupid than you already did, you surprise me. Quite impressive.

Well someone murdering 10 people apparently doesn't impress you in any way, But on the other hand I do :scratch:Bye:wavey:.

Mr.Sharapova
Feb 6th, 2012, 02:36 PM
Dude, you are happy that 10 000 Albanians were killed, not me or azdaja. And he is completely right, you probably would prefer if more had been killed, so you could enjoy your victim role more.
That's how it goes among the nationalists, Serbian Milotis are no different. :shrug:

Victim role :scratch:?

Anyway done discussing these kind of things with you and other "Serbs" around here. It's pointless. Too bad it took me so much time to figure that out.

You guys are right, I'm wrong :worship:. :wavey:.

azdaja
Feb 6th, 2012, 06:44 PM
miloti :facepalm:

Dude, you are happy that 10 000 Albanians were killed, not me or azdaja. And he is completely right, you probably would prefer if more had been killed, so you could enjoy your victim role more.
That's how it goes among the nationalists, Serbian Milotis are no different. :shrug:
exactly. and it's not just serbs and albanians, i had similar experience with some iraqi kurds, for example. if you rely on sympathy from others in order to get something for yourself you will hope to be as big a victim as possible.

and it has been mentioned how some nato dude hoped they would found more dead people. that's the logic of humanitarian warriors. because in reality they are the ones escalating the violence which means they will probably end up being responsible for more deaths than the villain in question even if indirectly.

tennisbum79
Feb 7th, 2012, 03:38 AM
The thread has veered off course a little, so let return to the original topic.

The violence in Syria is getting out of control, do you guys still stick to this untenable geopolitics positions while Syria is degenerating into another Bosnia ?

It is will be a humanitarian disaster if nothing is done soon.

Again, the Arab League originally introduced an much tougher resolution which was watered down to satisfy China and Russia's demand; they vetoed the measure anyway.

CillyUltra
Feb 7th, 2012, 09:14 AM
Good or bad?:confused:
Russia and China are supporting a mass murderer because of their nationalist interests, something the U.S. hasn't done since the end of the cold war. That's the simple fact.

Correct, which is why I supported those. But then (when Gadaffi realized he'd been checked, and could likely have been coaxed last spring into accepting Idi Amin - Baby Doc style exile) the rebels said no, and the American-British-French err "Axis" :o held out for a total win by the rebels. (Who are still rather undefined as to their vision for Libya).

Stupid speculations won't become better if they are repeated.

CillyUltra
Feb 7th, 2012, 09:20 AM
I really don't want to say this, but what is really going on in Syria is a civil war. It's not just Assad killing the protestors. There are thousands of army defectors. And who finances this? USA? Israel? Maybe even Europe?

When you want to get rid of an ironclad bastard like Assad you obviously have to fight a civil war.

Lin Lin
Feb 7th, 2012, 09:27 AM
BEIJING: China says it is considering sending envoys to discuss ways to end the violence in Syria.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Weimin reiterated Tuesday that China wants the violence resolved through dialogue and said Beijing was considering sending officials to West Asian and North African countries to push forward a political solution to the Syrian crisis.

China has already defended its veto this past weekend of a UN vote on Syria, saying the vote was called before differences in the resolution were bridged.

China and Russia drew the wrath of the United States, Europe and much of the Arab world for the veto. The US and others say the veto blocked a UN attempt to end the bloodshed and raises fears the violence will escalate.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/china/China-says-it-may-send-envoys-over-Syria-violence/articleshow/11791098.cms

azdaja
Feb 7th, 2012, 09:59 AM
The violence in Syria is getting out of control, do you guys still stick to this untenable geopolitics positions while Syria is degenerating into another Bosnia ?

It is will be a humanitarian disaster if nothing is done soon.

Again, the Arab League originally introduced an much tougher resolution which was watered down to satisfy China and Russia's demand; they vetoed the measure anyway.
of course i am sticking to the geopolitics when i think about the situation. or are you silly enough to think that a country like saudi arabia is pushing for this resolution out of concerns for democracy? i have no illusions about why countries start wars. the only thing is that i think even wars started for all the wrong reasons might bring something good in the end. i was not sure about that in lybia and i am even less sure about it here.

i mean, the violence might be escalating, but as you know (or not), the oppostion uses guerilla tactics. they don't throw flowers at the government troops, they shoot at them. violence can stop only if both sides do it. another question is how much popular support the opposition enjoys? is military intervention going to lead to an even greater escalation of violence and thousands of unnecessary deaths? will the opposition troops massacre assad supporters once they gain the upper hand? and finally is the peaceful solution possible? countries which pushed for the resolution are the ones arming the opposition after. and they do it with geopolitical goals in mind.

*JR*
Feb 7th, 2012, 12:54 PM
Correct, which is why I supported those. But then (when Gadaffi realized he'd been checked, and could likely have been coaxed last spring into accepting Idi Amin - Baby Doc style exile) the rebels said no, and the American-British-French err "Axis" :o held out for a total win by the rebels. (Who are still rather undefined as to their vision for Libya).

Which BTW, the non-combatants in Misrata, etc. had no "vote" on, as they continued dying. So these Western powers eventually got to their goal in the fall, but by then Russia and China had an ironclad excuse (the wanton violation of SC Resolution 1973 (http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10200.doc.htm) by the West) to stiff said powers on Syria, both on October 4th and last week. :shrug:



Stupid speculations won't become better if they are repeated.

UR welcome to take potshots @ my analysis, with regards to Syria, though the way the West ovaplayed its hand in Libya is quite clear. (And led to the certitude of many civilian deaths there after the two African Union peace missions led by President Jacob Zuma of South Africa, where ceasefires were @ least possible).

Might Russia and/or China found another reason to block all the UN Resolutions? Yes, but they also might have gone along with one of (US Ambassador to the UN) Susan Rice's "fallback" ones, either last October 4th, or last week. And we now @ least might have been on the road to some peaceful resolution.

CillyUltra
Feb 7th, 2012, 02:46 PM
of course i am sticking to the geopolitics when i think about the situation. or are you silly enough to think that a country like saudi arabia is pushing for this resolution out of concerns for democracy? i have no illusions about why countries start wars. the only thing is that i think even wars started for all the wrong reasons might bring something good in the end. i was not sure about that in lybia and i am even less sure about it here.
Do you know anything about the Arab world? :lol:

The Saudis may stick to a traditional Wahhabist authoritarianism, but they are far away from being an Assad/Saddam/Gaddafi like terror regime. And they are anxious about their people who are feeling more and more connected to other Arab countries via new media and satellite channels.

UR welcome to take potshots @ my analysis, with regards to Syria, though the way the West ovaplayed its hand in Libya is quite clear. (And led to the certitude of many civilian deaths there after the two African Union peace missions led by President Jacob Zuma of South Africa, where ceasefires were @ least possible).

Might Russia and/or China found another reason to block all the UN Resolutions? Yes, but they also might have gone along with one of (US Ambassador to the UN) Susan Rice's "fallback" ones, either last October 4th, or last week. And we now @ least might have been on the road to some peaceful resolution.

Whether or not the west outplayed its hand in Libya, the main reason for Russia's veto is to maintain their considerable influence in Syria which is inextricably tied to the Assad regime. And Putin's desire to kick the west's ass during his presidential campaign. ;)

wayitis
Feb 7th, 2012, 03:22 PM
I didn't know Dick Cheney had an account in tennisforum...

azdaja
Feb 7th, 2012, 05:41 PM
Do you know anything about the Arab world? :lol:

The Saudis may stick to a traditional Wahhabist authoritarianism, but they are far away from being an Assad/Saddam/Gaddafi like terror regime. And they are anxious about their people who are feeling more and more connected to other Arab countries via new media and satellite channels.
compassionate tyranny? frankly, i thought compassionate conservativism sounded already dumb enough.

ys
Feb 9th, 2012, 03:02 AM
Opposition.. Lets start with the fact that the opposition did not grow up in Syria. It was planted and grown by foreign destabilizing force. Plain and simple. This massacre was not organized by Syria or Russia. It was organized by Western services and their satellites from Arabian peninsula.

Target. Obviously. First and foremost, U.S. and Israel want to break a strategic regional triangle Iran-Syria-Hezbollah. That's primary objective. Secondary objective is , of course, a removal of Russian influence. Who the fuck cares about anything else. Humanitarian outcry is just pretext and tool to achieve two mentioned goals.

Outcome. Unclear. Syria is not Libya. After just receiving - a month ago - a state-of-the-art Bastion/Yahonth coastal defense system from Russia, it will make any outside force think twice before attacking Syria. And will also make anyone think twice about further destabilizing the Syria regime. Just think about possible chaos and those supersonic cruise missiles getting into someone's hands..

Interesting puzzle this is..

bulava
Feb 9th, 2012, 01:48 PM
Opposition.. Lets start with the fact that the opposition did not grow up in Syria. It was planted and grown by foreign destabilizing force. Plain and simple. This massacre was not organized by Syria or Russia. It was organized by Western services and their satellites from Arabian peninsula.

That's a well known fact. Remember Georgia's misadventure with Russia in 2008? It was clearly a trouble orchestrated by 'some' western countries in the name of Democrazy to push Russia to the corner. Germany and France smelled that game quickly. As a BBC documentary rightly put it, Putin was always one-step ahead of them! Eventually, Georgian plan got exposed and also those 'special forces' who were actually arming and training the Georgian units! What I can't believe is, the same democrazy forces are getting deluded and trying hard by pumping (everything) into the heart of Russia to stop Putin coming to power as 3rd time President lol :angel:

Interesting puzzle this is..

Sorry, it's not a puzzle. It's about innocent human life getting killed, caught and families getting uprooted in name of self-serving interests, in the name of democracy and so on! What we all should remember is, bad guys could be 1/4th or 1/3th, but not all people can never be bad in any country.

Lin Lin
Feb 17th, 2012, 07:59 AM
A new resolution yesterday?what's difference from last time?why it is a yes despite China and Russia oppose?

fifty-fifty
Feb 17th, 2012, 01:25 PM
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2017517939_syria16.html

Syria's new constitution would enshrine freedom of speech and worship, along with other basic liberties, and end the current monopoly on power held by President Bashar Assad's Baath party, which has ruled for four decades.

By Patrick J. McDonnell










BEIRUT — With his nation plunging toward civil war, Syrian President Bashar Assad said Wednesday that a nationwide referendum would be held this month on a new constitution that is the centerpiece of what he says is a plan to reform the country.

The opposition dismissed the announcement as an effort to buy time, and it was not clear how the a vote could be carried out in a country torn by violence. Large areas of Syria are no longer under government control.

The new constitution would enshrine freedom of speech and worship and end the current monopoly on power held by Assad's Baath party, which has ruled for four decades. The state-run Syrian Arab News Agency said it could "turn Syria into an example to follow in terms of public freedoms and political plurality."

Assad's foes say the government regularly tramples rights guaranteed in the current constitution. They scoffed at the proposed changes as a sign of desperation.

"This shows Assad is living in an alternate reality," said Rafif Jouejati, a U.S.-based spokeswoman for the Local Coordinating Committees, a Syrian opposition network. "It's completely impractical."

White House spokesman Jay Carney labeled the proposed referendum "laughable. ... It makes a mockery of the Syrian revolution," Carney said.

The referendum is probably meant in part to please Syria's dwindling list of foreign allies, notably Russia, which along with China vetoed a Security Council resolution this month for Assad to give up power. Russia has pressed Assad to push ahead with reforms.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, speaking in The Hague, Netherlands, called the plan for a referendum "a step forward."

As Assad announced the referendum, a thick plume of smoke billowed from a fuel pipeline in the city of Homs, which has become a focus of the escalating conflict. The government and the opposition accused each other of attacking the pipeline in Syria's third-largest city.

Opposition activists said the government had launched new assaults on Homs and other rebel strongholds. The opposition reported at least 32 people were killed across the country, reported Al-Jazeera, the pan-Arab satellite network.

Syrians fleeing the violence have flooded into Lebanon, though not in the numbers the United Nations had expected. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has registered more than 6,000 Syrian refugees in Beirut and northern Lebanon and estimates 2,000 to 3,000 more are living in the Bekaa Valley, in eastern Lebanon.

Lebanese activists who have formed a coalition of groups to aid refugees estimated the number of Syrians that have fled since mass demonstrations against the Syrian government began nearly one year ago could be as high as 20,000. They said many of those don't bother to register with the U.N. because they don't need aid. Others avoid registering out of fear of being identified by the Syrian government.

At the U.N., diplomats were working on a General Assembly resolution condemning the Syrian government, which may come Thursday. General Assembly action carries less weight than a Security Council resolution, but cannot be vetoed.

*JR*
Feb 17th, 2012, 01:58 PM
A new resolution yesterday?what's difference from last time?why it is a yes despite China and Russia oppose?

There are no vetoes in the General Assembly (unlike in the Security Council, where each of the 5 permanent members has veto power). A GA Resolution can't authorize the use of force, however.

The 5 permanent members of the Security Council are the US, Britain, France, Russia, and China. Russia got the old Soviet seat in 1991 and China got the one the Taiwan government had held as the recognized Chinese "government in exile" in 1971. (None of the 10 rotating members of the SC has a veto).

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2017517939_syria16.html

Syria's new constitution would enshrine freedom of speech and worship, along with other basic liberties, and end the current monopoly on power held by President Bashar Assad's Baath party, which has ruled for four decades...

Constitutions are only worth how they're interpreted and enforced. :shrug:

Lin Lin
Mar 12th, 2012, 02:52 PM
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/middleeast/view/1188474/1/.html

BEIRUT: The bodies of 47 women and children have been found in the Syrian city of Homs, where security forces have been fighting raging battles against armed rebels, the opposition and activists said on Monday.

Hadi Abdallah, a Syrian activist in Homs, told AFP the bodies of 26 children and 21 women, some with their throats slit and others bearing stab wounds, were found after a "massacre" in the Karm el-Zaytoun and Al-Adawiyeh neighbourhoods of the besieged central city.

"Some of the children had been hit with blunt objects on their head, one little girl was mutilated and some women were raped before being killed," he said.

The main opposition group, the Syrian National Council (SNC), called for an emergency UN Security Council meeting to discuss the "massacre", which it said took place on Sunday.

"The Syrian National Council is making the necessary contacts with all organisations and countries that are friends with the Syrian people for the UN Security Council to hold an emergency meeting," the SNC said in a statement.

And in a clear reference to Russia and China, the SNC said that allies of Syria's President Bashar al-Assad shared responsibilty for the "crimes" committed by his regime.

State television blamed "armed terrorist gangs" for the killings, saying they had kidnapped residents of Homs, killed them and then made video footage of the bodies in an attempt to discredit Syrian forces.

-AFP

Lin Lin
Mar 12th, 2012, 02:53 PM
OMG,who really did this?

Please stop playing politics by killing these innocent civilians:fiery:

Londoner
Mar 12th, 2012, 03:23 PM
OMG,who really did this?

Please stop playing politics by killing these innocent civilians:fiery:

Every country at some point has done exactly the same. On many occasions even worse.

Why do we always have to 'do something' ? It always comes back and bites. Best to leave alone in my view. It will end up where it's going to end up whatever anyone does. Then you can say you got what you want and it ain't nothing to do with us.

Beat
Mar 12th, 2012, 04:19 PM
Every country at some point has done exactly the same. On many occasions even worse.

ah, alright. i guess it's okay then.

HippityHop
Mar 12th, 2012, 04:36 PM
There are no vetoes in the General Assembly (unlike in the Security Council, where each of the 5 permanent members has veto power). A GA Resolution can't authorize the use of force, however.

The 5 permanent members of the Security Council are the US, Britain, France, Russia, and China. Russia got the old Soviet seat in 1991 and China got the one the Taiwan government had held as the recognized Chinese "government in exile" in 1971. (None of the 10 rotating members of the SC has a veto).



Constitutions are only worth how they're interpreted and enforced. :shrug:

Absolutely.

Londoner
Mar 12th, 2012, 06:43 PM
ah, alright. i guess it's okay then.

Not saying its ok. I'm saying the West are not going to solve it. But when the so called Arab Spring turns into Arab civil war and/or extremism we will pay if we have interfered and got it wrong.

Ferg
Mar 12th, 2012, 07:25 PM
Complete massacre of everyone in those cities by the sounds of it. Shocking stuff. I would favour action from the West but doubt its forthcoming.

HippityHop
Mar 12th, 2012, 10:05 PM
Complete massacre of everyone in those cities by the sounds of it. Shocking stuff. I would favour action from the West but doubt its forthcoming.

Of course not. It's called realpolitik. Libya was easy. Syria is not.

tennisbum79
Mar 12th, 2012, 10:41 PM
Russia and China have got it rightly, at least from the present EU economic crisis point of view. World needs to come out of this serious present recession and uncertainty so the last thing people and markets need is triggering a new war. We all saw how Iraq and Libya got screwed up. Egypt burning. Now Syria 'campaign' could snowball into a major crisis, let alone planning to bomb Iranian Nuke sites! Last but not least, there also 'exists' a new theater for the US with Pakistan! :eek:

I think this 'partnership' trend is going happen more often in future because of the shift happening in the Global power equation. India shouldn't have supported the resolution, common it got nothing to do with the Democracy because I've seen how 'big powers' play their games by (ab)using that word :tape:

Do you think, God forbid, something happen in India, and people dying and appealing to the international community for help, something should be done?
Unfortunately, you are not alone locked in this game of geopolitics, congratulating Russia and China for sticking it to the west, while Syrian people are dying pleading for the rest of the world to come save them.

I am not even advocating military force immediately, pressure along with diplomacy would be exercised first.
There is strong indication that Russia or/and China are supplying Syria government with the weapon they are using on the Syrian people.
If these 2 countries were to stop, that could save more people, allow Red Cross and Red Crescent to take care of the wounded and feed the hungry, while at the same time putting the Syrian government in a position where they could be more amenable to talks.