Iran says will strike Turkey If it attacks Syria

Conspirator
Posts: 1225
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:03 pm

PostSun Jun 19, 2011 10:29 pm » by Ironlikealion


freeyourmindnow wrote:http://www.disclose.tv/forum/syrian-forces-enter-village-near-turkish-border-t53483.html


yeah free , i read about it ,notice that in that article they say that Assad forces
are trying to block the roads to Turkey so the refugees will not be able to reach Turkey .
they also did it few days ago when they attacked Ma’arrat an Nu’man , a city with
a population of 90000 , most of the people fled before the attack .

there have also been unconfirmed reports in the Arab press that Syrian soldiers
entered Lebanon ,with Lebanon government approval and forced refuges that
escaped into Lebanon back to Syria .
Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7642
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 7:14 am

PostSun Jun 19, 2011 10:46 pm » by 99socks


Syrian army cuts off lifeline to thousands

BOYNUYOGUN REFUGEE CAMP, Turkey – Syrian troops combing through restive villages near the Turkish border set fire to homes and a bakery Sunday, cutting off a lifeline to thousands of uprooted people stranded in miserable open-air encampments.

Activists said the military carried out mass arrests and threw up checkpoints in the village of Bdama and surrounding areas to block residents from fleeing across the frontier, as thousands of others have done.

Turkey, whose leaders have denounced the Damascus regime's deadly crackdown on dissent, began distributing food to those encamped on the Syrian side of the border, in the first such aid mission since the campaign against anti-government protesters turned into a refugee crisis two weeks ago.

People from the Syrian side were collecting food at the border to take to the stranded families, the local Turkish governor's office said.

With the 3-month-old pro-democracy uprising raging on, the Syrian government appeared desperate to put an end to the embarrassing stream of refugees fleeing their homeland. Activists said Syrian authorities at the border were making it more difficult for people to reach Turkey.

As he escaped to this area of Turkey on Sunday, one refugee from Bdama, identifying himself only as Hassan, said he could hear gunfire as he fled.

"Soldiers have blocked roads and many people are walking through fields and mountains," he said.

Clashes erupted almost two weeks ago in Jisr al-Shughour, in the northern province of Idlib, where activists reported loyalist troops fought with army mutineers who refused to take part in the continuing crackdown on protesters seeking President Bashar Assad's ouster.

Government forces retook that town a week ago, and meanwhile more than 10,500 Syrians fled and are being sheltered in four Turkish refugee camps. An estimated 5,000 others are camped out on the Syrian side of the border, with dwindling resources, trying to remain close to their homes and relatives, avoiding official refugee status that might delay their return.

The Syrian government has called on the displaced people to return, promising safety. But most are staying put as long as the army is occupying their towns, fearing arrest upon return.

Assad was expected to give a speech Monday in what would be only his third public appearance since the uprising began in mid-March, inspired by the revolutions sweeping the Arab world. Turkey, U.N. and Western leaders and others who have urged change in Syria will watch to see whether he shows any sign of bending toward demands for an easing of the Assad family's 40-year authoritarian rule.

Residents of Bdama, a village 12 miles (20 kilometers) from the Turkish border, said tank-borne troops firing machine guns were tightening their grip on Bdama, the nearby village of Rihan and surrounding areas, which had been a gateway for refugees and for their food and medical supplies, dissident sources reported.

In Bdama, several homes were set ablaze in what appeared to be revenge attacks, human rights activist Ammar Qurabi said. A man at the Bdama bakery was shot in the stomach and leg as the place was torched by troops, and he was evacuated to Turkey for treatment Sunday morning, said an activist near the border, Jamil Saeb.

The bakery was said to have been the sole source of bread for thousands stuck on the Syrian side of the frontier.

"Security forces have arrested around 100 people from those villages in the past few days. They are trying to close off border areas with checkpoints to keep people from leaving," said Syria-based activist Mustafa Osso, who expressed concern that the thousands encamped on the Syrian side might come under attack.

The anti-government activists' reports about the continuing crackdown could not be independently verified.

Syria's state-run news agency, SANA, reported Sunday that the military dismantled mines and highly explosive booby traps planted by "armed terrorist groups" along roads and bridges leading to Jisr al-Shughour.

In Geneva, the International Committee of the Red Cross said its president, Jakob Kellenberger, was flying to Syria on Sunday to discuss the humanitarian situation with Prime Minister Adel Safar and Foreign Minister Walid Muallem. Kellenberger has repeatedly urged Syria to allow the ICRC and the Syrian Red Crescent access to the wounded and detained in the crackdown.

The opposition estimates more than 1,400 Syrians have been killed and 10,000 detained as Assad's forces try to preserve his grip on power.

The pro-democracy uprising against the Assad regime has proved remarkably resilient despite the relentless campaign by the military, other security forces and pro-regime gunmen. The government has unleashed troops on mass protests in region after region over the three months, including last Friday, when activists said at least 16 civilians were killed when security forces fired on demonstrators in several cities and towns.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110619/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_syria
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/obamas-doj-silent-as-new-black-panthers-leader-incites-violence-in-ferguson_082014








I can't speak about how much of the Constitution is in effect anymore... But thank God we still somewhat resemble a Republic and not a democracy!


Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 9348
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:08 pm

PostSun Jun 19, 2011 10:46 pm » by Freeyourmindnow


ironlikealion wrote:
freeyourmindnow wrote:http://www.disclose.tv/forum/syrian-forces-enter-village-near-turkish-border-t53483.html


yeah free , i read about it ,notice that in that article they say that Assad forces
are trying to block the roads to Turkey so the refugees will not be able to reach Turkey .
they also did it few days ago when they attacked Ma’arrat an Nu’man , a city with
a population of 90000 , most of the people fled before the attack .

there have also been unconfirmed reports in the Arab press that Syrian soldiers
entered Lebanon ,with Lebanon government approval and forced refuges that
escaped into Lebanon back to Syria .

yep something big is up :think: a lot of things happening at once. i cant see the big picture yet but The Middle East Is Changing very fast. Turkey is Moving Eastward. they want to control huge territories in the Middle East, the Balkans, and Europe again

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7642
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 7:14 am

PostSun Jun 19, 2011 10:52 pm » by 99socks


freeyourmindnow wrote:yep something big is up :think: a lot of things happening at once. i cant see the big picture yet but The Middle East Is Changing very fast. Turkey is Moving Eastward. they want to control huge territories in the Middle East, the Balkans, and Europe again



:rtft:

uh-oh-rand-corporation-calls-for-iran-war-now-t52834.html
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/obamas-doj-silent-as-new-black-panthers-leader-incites-violence-in-ferguson_082014








I can't speak about how much of the Constitution is in effect anymore... But thank God we still somewhat resemble a Republic and not a democracy!


Image

Conspirator
Posts: 1225
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:03 pm

PostSun Jun 19, 2011 10:59 pm » by Ironlikealion


ironlikealion wrote:I'm guessing this theory(the one in the article that quoted the Syrian official) is going to gain
popularity on DTV very soon(well, depends on events ,but good chances) .


freeyourmindnow wrote:Turkey is Moving Eastward. they want to control huge territories in the Middle East, the Balkans, and Europe again


i knew i can count on you for spreading Syrian/Iranian propaganda heh ;)
Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7642
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 7:14 am

PostSun Jun 19, 2011 11:00 pm » by 99socks


ironlikealion wrote:
ironlikealion wrote:I'm guessing this theory(the one in the article that quoted the Syrian official) is going to gain
popularity on DTV very soon(well, depends on events ,but good chances) .


freeyourmindnow wrote:Turkey is Moving Eastward. they want to control huge territories in the Middle East, the Balkans, and Europe again


i knew i can count on you for spreading Syrian/Iranian propaganda heh ;)



:clapper: :wink:
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/obamas-doj-silent-as-new-black-panthers-leader-incites-violence-in-ferguson_082014








I can't speak about how much of the Constitution is in effect anymore... But thank God we still somewhat resemble a Republic and not a democracy!


Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 9348
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:08 pm

PostSun Jun 19, 2011 11:10 pm » by Freeyourmindnow


99socks wrote:
freeyourmindnow wrote:yep something big is up :think: a lot of things happening at once. i cant see the big picture yet but The Middle East Is Changing very fast. Turkey is Moving Eastward. they want to control huge territories in the Middle East, the Balkans, and Europe again



:rtft:

uh-oh-rand-corporation-calls-for-iran-war-now-t52834.html

sock, it is not about Iran. it is bigger than that, It is about US and Israel vs China and Russia. The U.S. is trying to hinder the Chinese expansion.


On September 20, the George W Bush administration released the National Security Strategy of the United States. A comprehensive document laying out America's foreign and security policy in the wake of last September's terrorist attacks, it vows to prevent the emergence of any future competitors, commits the US to use its military, political, and economic resources to encourage open societies and democracy, and reorients US military strategy toward preemptive actions. Analysts have likened this document to NSC-68, the blueprint by the Harry Truman administration declaring the onset of the Cold War. Nice comparison. But the circumstances are so different.

In the now famous "X" article published in Foreign Affairs in 1947, George Kennan, one of the postwar architects of US foreign policy, proposed that Washington adopt a strategy of containment against the perceived Soviet expansion beyond Eastern Europe. With the declaration of the Truman Doctrine and the introduction of the Marshall Plan, the US embarked on a global crusade against the Soviet Union on the ideological, political, and economic fronts. The Cold War ensued.

The United States was facing a formidable foe at the time. The Soviet Union controlled most of Eastern and Central Europe, had deployed predominant conventional forces against war-ravaged Western Europe, and was competing for influence vis-a-vis the US in the Middle East, the Horn of Africa, Indochina, and the Caribbean. With the Soviet Union achieving parity and even numerical superiority in strategic nuclear weapons in the 1970s, the challenge to US security and global interests were unprecedented and the stakes huge.

But the United States is facing no such foes today. The Cold War has been over for 13 years. Given its weak economy, low military morale, and endemic ethnic problems, Russia no longer poses - nor is it willing to pose - a serious challenge to US interests. Instead, the Vladimir Putin government is seeking a new type of strategic relationship with the United States. This has been clearly demonstrated by Russia's mild reactions toward the US withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, its acquiescence in US military presence in Central Asia in the anti-terrorism campaign, and the signing the Moscow Treaty.

Who, then, is the potential challenger? The attention turns to China. Indeed, while the document emphasizes that the United States "welcomes the emergence of a strong, peaceful, and prosperous China", it also admonishes Beijing not to pursue "advanced military capabilities that can threaten its neighbors in the Asia-Pacific region". As if to warn Beijing against even contemplating launching any credible threat to the US, the document states: "Our forces will be strong enough to dissuade potential adversaries from pursuing a military buildup in hopes of surpassing, or equaling, the power of the United States."

This seems to be in line with the conclusion of a July Department of Defense (DOD) report assessing China's military capabilities. The DOD report highlights a number of key findings. First, actual annual Chinese defense spending is estimated at US$65 billion, much higher than Beijing's official figure of $20 billion. Compared with Taiwan's defense budget, which has been declining over the past few years, China's defense expenditure has seen double-digit increases over a decade. In a drawn-out arms race across the Taiwan Strait, Beijing could conceivably outspend Taipei.

Second, the report identifies a doctrinal shift in the People's Liberation Army (PLA) toward preemption and surprise. Compensating for equipment and technical deficiencies, the PLA is paying greater attention to asymmetrical warfare to explore enemy weakness. It now emphasizes the importance of information and electronic warfare. It also is interested in the development of ASAT (anti-satellite) capability.

Third, Chinese ballistic missiles remain a credible and most threatening instrument of deterrent and coercion against Taiwan. They also serve to dissuade the United States from intervention in a Taiwan crisis and raise the cost of such intervention.

However, such assessments miss several important points. First, Beijing does not have the intention, let alone capabilities, to challenge US interests. While rhetorically extolling the virtue of multipolarity and a fair and equitable international political and economic order, China knows well - and is resigned to the reality - that the United States' prominent position will continue for at least several more decades.

At the same time, China has benefited from, and continues to thrive on, the existing international political and economic arrangements. China is a nuclear power and one of the five veto-holding United Nations Security Council permanent members. These titles bestow power and prestige. China's economic development is contingent upon access to markets, capital, and technology transfers. Indeed, China is the largest recipient country of international financial assistance and of foreign direct investment.

Second, China's military capabilities, while growing and improving, are a generation - if not more - behind those of the powerful US military in terms of equipment, power projection, and C4I (command, control, communications, computers and intelligence). One can use purchasing-power parity to tabulate a higher defense expenditure figure for the PLA, but the hard reality is that the Chinese military remains hamstrung by the inability of the domestic defense industry to provide advanced weapons systems, lack of sufficient training, and almost no combat experience under modern, high-tech environment. China's acquisitions of Russian weaponry are of great concern; at the same time, they also demonstrate China's own weakness.

Third, Beijing will likely remain inward-looking for the foreseeable future as the country undergoes significant changes with the leadership transition, major socioeconomic adjustments imposed upon by its accession to the World Trade Organization, and growing challenges of good governance, accountability, and institution building. With the exception of Taiwan, China's energies will be largely consumed in addressing these domestic issues.

If anything, the White House document may be seen by Beijing as a further indication of US suspicion of and hostility toward China. What China worries about is how a militarily strong, diplomatically arrogant, and politically and ideologically threatening United States can pose a serious threat to its vital interests. These would include US military strategy, its Taiwan policy, and its overall approach toward China.

On March 9, the Los Angeles Times reported the leaked US Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) that contains contingency plans to use nuclear weapons against China and six other countries. For Beijing, the revelation of the targeting list raises a serious issue about US trustworthiness: China and the United States signed a de-targeting agreement in 1997. Even before the Los Angeles Times leak, Chinese strategic analysts had already been aware of what they considered to be fundamental shifts in the post-Cold War US strategic posture.

The so-called new strategic triad of offensive systems (nuclear and non-nuclear), active and passive defenses, and the defense-industrial infrastructure and shift from deterrence to preemption represent the core of the US military strategy. This new strategic posture would thus enable the United States to reserve massive retaliatory capabilities (even after the significant reduction of its strategic nuclear force) against the other major nuclear powers, to confront and neutralize threats from the so-called "rogue" states through its missile defense systems, and to deal with any potential opponents effectively by applying precision-guided munitions. The ultimate aim, according to Chinese analysts, is to maintain US military dominance and seek absolute security.

However, what has fundamentally changed is the premise upon which nuclear weapons are to be used. The threshold for nuclear use has been lowered and, in contravention to its 1978 pledge and its negative security assurance (NSA) commitment not to use nuclear weapons against NPT NNWS (Non-Proliferation Treaty, Non-Nuclear Weapon Storage) signatory states, the new posture suggests the use of nuclear weapons against hardened, difficult-to-penetrate targets, as retaliation against WMD (weapons of mass destruction) use, and as responses in certain circumstances. Indeed, what worries China the most is nuclear use "in the event of surprising military developments", including a war between China and Taiwan. This only convinces Beijing the high likelihood of US military intervention in the event that the mainland must use force to resolve the Taiwan issue.

US policy toward Taiwan is a serious concern for China. From Washington's standpoint, how to enable Taiwan to defend itself against growing Chinese military coercion remains a critical component of overall US strategy in East Asia. That strategy envisages strong alliance relationships, forward US military presence, and forestalling the rise of any major power that may challenge vital US interests. Within this broader context, the ability and resolve to help Taiwan defend itself not only fulfills key US obligations and commitments under the Taiwan Relations Act but also demonstrates the resolve and credibility of its commitments to allies and friends.

Indeed, President Bush has moved away from a Taiwan policy anchored in "strategic ambiguity". Administration officials have emphasized US obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act, a strong preference for peaceful resolution of the issue, and explicit opposition to coercion and the use of force. In April 2001, the Bush administration approved the largest arms sales to Taiwan in more than a decade. Taiwanese Defense Minister Tang Yaoming was granted permission to travel to the United States last March and met with high-ranking US officials. The US and Taiwan are also engaged in substantive discussions on boosting bilateral defense cooperation. All of these developments add substance to Bush's controversial statement that the United States would do "whatever it takes" to help Taiwan defend itself.

Finally, the overall US China policy remains ambivalent. On the one hand, the Bush administration has dropped the "strategic competitor" rhetoric and adopted a policy of engaging China where it must but confronting the latter where it must. On the other hand, the United States has been less sensitive to core Chinese interests such as Taiwan and unnecessarily provokes Beijing. While seeking and praising China's cooperation in anti-terrorism, Washington's post-September 11 policy toward South and Central Asia also worries Beijing. China is particularly concerned that prolonged US military operations may set precedents for future interference in domestic affairs and the further erosion of the UN's authority. Expanded and permanent US military presence closer to China's doorstep could be seen by Beijing as an apparent if not real encirclement.

The US National Security Strategy sets the broad outline for America's role and objectives in the world. The global geo-strategic environment has changed and the United States must adapt to lead, not to imagine and create enemies. The US could use its enormous resources to bring stability; but it could also abuse them to alienate and anger others. The least that the Bush administration could and must do is to avoid a self-fulfilling prophecy of treating and turning China into a post-Cold War Soviet Union. That would be the worst outcome for the United States and the world as well.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/DI28Ad02.html

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 9348
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:08 pm

PostSun Jun 19, 2011 11:17 pm » by Freeyourmindnow


ironlikealion wrote:
ironlikealion wrote:I'm guessing this theory(the one in the article that quoted the Syrian official) is going to gain
popularity on DTV very soon(well, depends on events ,but good chances) .


freeyourmindnow wrote:Turkey is Moving Eastward. they want to control huge territories in the Middle East, the Balkans, and Europe again


i knew i can count on you for spreading Syrian/Iranian propaganda heh ;)

Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7642
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 7:14 am

PostSun Jun 19, 2011 11:17 pm » by 99socks


freeyourmindnow wrote:sock, it is not about Iran. it is bigger than that, It is about US and Israel vs China and Russia. The U.S. is trying to hinder the Chinese expansion.




:bang;

So WTF was that entire thread about?

:bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang;
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/obamas-doj-silent-as-new-black-panthers-leader-incites-violence-in-ferguson_082014








I can't speak about how much of the Constitution is in effect anymore... But thank God we still somewhat resemble a Republic and not a democracy!


Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 9348
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:08 pm

PostSun Jun 19, 2011 11:33 pm » by Freeyourmindnow


99socks wrote:
freeyourmindnow wrote:sock, it is not about Iran. it is bigger than that, It is about US and Israel vs China and Russia. The U.S. is trying to hinder the Chinese expansion.




:bang;

So WTF was that entire thread about?

:bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang; :bang;


it not about the religion, it is about the NEW WORLD ORDER
listen for your self


Upload to Disclose.tv



Upload to Disclose.tv



why the fuck are you blind :bang; :bang;


PreviousNext

  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook