| ABC News | - |
Obama is currently working to form a global coalition to confront the Islamic State group, which controls large parts of Syria and Iraq. The U.S. meanwhile has been conducting airstrikes against Islamic State fighters in Iraq since August. Obama last ...
Syria Blasts Coalition Against Islamic State
Syria's parliament speaker said Sunday that the U.S. should work with Damascus to battle the Islamic State extremist group rather than allying with nations which he accused of supporting terrorism.
Speaker Jihad Laham was apparently referring to Saudi Arabia and other countries backing rebels trying to overthrow Syrian President Bashar Assad.
Obama is currently working to form a global coalition to confront the Islamic State group, which controls large parts of Syria and Iraq. The U.S. meanwhile has been conducting airstrikes against Islamic State fighters in Iraq since August. Obama last week authorized strikes against the group in Syria.
U.S. officials have ruled out direct coordination with Assad's government, a move which has infuriated Syrian officials who say any airstrikes without their consent would be a breach of the country's sovereignty.
They also appear to be concerned that an anti-Islamic State group coalition might ultimately shift targets to assist rebels in overthrowing Assad.
During a parliament session, Laham, the speaker, said those "who really want to combat terrorism, must cooperate with Syria in accordance with long-term plans and not by supporting terrorist organizations under false titles."
The Assad government has repeatedly pitted the country's conflict as a battle against terrorism. The armed, chaotic rebellion against Assad began after security forces violently cracked down on demonstrators during an uprising that began in March 2011. Syria's rebel groups range from al-Qaida linked extremists, to ultraconservative Muslims to relatively moderate groups.
Laham's comments came as Syria's Foreign Ministry warned in a statement that opposition fighters could use chemical weapons in order to blame government forces to create a pretext to call for international involvement.
The statement said that Damascus did not possess chemical weapons after it implemented its obligations regarding the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
The OPCW said earlier this month that a toxic chemical, almost certainly chlorine, was used "systematically and repeatedly" as a weapon in attacks on villages in northern Syria earlier this year. But the OPCW did not apportion blame for the chlorine attacks on three villages in northern Syria. Rebels and government forces have blamed each other for using chlorine gas.
Last year, President Barack Obama gave a speech in which he was widely expected to announce punishing U.S. airstrikes against Assad's forces after blaming them for a deadly chemical weapons attack near Damascus that killed hundreds. Damascus blamed opposition fighters for the attack.
"The Syrian Arab republic has repeatedly confirmed... that it will never use chemical weapons under any circumstance and warns simultaneously of the possibility that some regional and international parties ... might supply armed terrorist groups with chemical weapons," the Foreign Ministry said.
Meanwhile, at least 15 people in government-held areas across Syria were killed by rebel-fired mortar shells, state-run media said. Rebels often indiscriminately fire mortars into civilian areas controlled by the government, but such a high death toll is unusual, suggesting rebels have inched closer to government-controlled cities or improved their weaponry, much of which is made in local workshops.
State-run media said six people were killed in the southern Syrian province of Daraa, another three in Damascus and six in the northern city of Aleppo.
Another 17 people were killed in government airstrikes on the northeastern rebel-held town of Saraqeb, reported the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. The Observatory said the number was likely to rise, as many civilians were still buried under the rubble of their destroyed homes.
———
end quote from:
Syria Blasts Coalition Against Islamic State
My thought is that the world needs to ask itself a question: And the question is: What happens to Syria if Assad is gone?
And does the world like that answer?
If Assad is gone the Islamic State is going to be ruling Syria. What does Turkey think about that?
What does Iraq think about that? What does Jordan think about that? What does Israel think about that?
IF people are realistic they are going to see that if Assad goes ISis rules Syria.
Also, I think it is disingenuous of the western world to talk about hitting ISIS in Syria because Russia might shoot down U.S. and NATO planes too, not just Syria. This is something to think about too.
Even thought Russia hates ISIS maybe even more than Syria and IRaq and Iran do, still Syria is Russia's "Sphere of Influence" so it is a point where World War III could begin with nukes. So, this is something to think about too for all of us.
IF Iraq or Turkey ruled Syria this might be okay. Or if Nato or the UN ruled Syria this might be okay but i don't think anyone is going to put up enough money for that to actually happen with Putin taking over Ukraine and "How many other countries eventually?"
No comments:
Post a Comment