Tuesday, September 3, 2013

Tell me again about how bombing Syria is a "humanitarian mission." These are the folks that Obama seeks to give aid and comfort to by attacking Assad regime.

Ethnic cleansing aimed at the Syrian Kurds: Al-Qaeda militants kill 24 civilians near Ras al-Ain.
Al-Qaeda linked terrorists in Syria have beheaded all 24 Syrian passengers traveling from Tartus to Ras al-Ain in northeast of Syria, among them a mother and a 40-days old infant.
Gunmen from the terrorist Islamic State of Iraq and Levant stopped the bus on the road in Talkalakh and killed everyone before setting the bus on fire.
According to media reports, the attack was carried out because the passengers who were from three different villages in Ras al-Ain, supported anti-terrorist Kurdish groups which were formed recently to defend Kurdish population against anti-Syria terrorists.
Bodies of a mother and her 40-days infant were also seen among the dead, which were recognized by their relatives.


Anonymous said...

Assad must be very relieved that the Sunnis have opened a second front, having the arabs/sunnis/foreign jihadis off fighting the Kurds will take a lot of pressure off of his army.

Like every sane person the USA (without money to be made off of it, at least), I'm not interested in having the USN and USAF provide an airforce for the Sunnis. If the Saudis and Israelis want Assad destroyed, let them send their own air forces and troops.

JMB1776 said...

Remember, there's no reason not to believe that the chemical attack conducted in REBEL territory, rebels whom have connections with Al-Qaeda and other international jihadist organizations, wasn't conducted by rebels in an attempt to draw the US into the war.

Anonymous said...


Actually, there ARE a few reasons....none of them particularly good.

If you want to know the "official" version by the USG....read here:


Hardly what I'd call iron clad proof but it is at least ever so slightly more likely Assad is behind this than the "rebels"....though I still say the rebels have the most to gain and therefore would with hold judgement (and action) until there was much better proof....and even then, it's not a threat to US security so why don't we respect national sovereignty?

Ed said...

Two-person mutually destructive domestic violence is ugly.
On a national scale in a civil war, it is even uglier.
Why do we, as a nation, want to step into the middle of this?
What do we gain?
What do we lose?
What do the other warring parties gain?
What do the other warring parties lose?
I can understand the compulsion that "we must do something", not to stand by. However, that "something" may be far uglier than doing nothing, with far worse repercussions.
Throwing a grenade at the two mutually-destructive partners in domestic violence will stop their violence, but at the cost of both their lives and those within the radius of exploded fragments.