Putin faces isolation over Syria as G8 ratchets up pressure

Comments (93)
westernshame wrote:

“Obama will try to convince Putin to bring Assad to the negotiating table”

well that should be easy, seeing as Assad has said for a year now he was willing to come to the negotiating table. It is in fact the western backed and funded terrorist rebels who refuse to negotiate.

Assad has already agreed to come to the upcoming proposed peace negotiations, and yet again, the western backed and funded terrorist rebels have refused.

these FACTS have been reported and discussed in the media for months, what possible reason could there be for the US to continue with this blatant lie??

Jun 17, 2013 6:27am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Reuters1945 wrote:

@westernshame

“what possible reason could there be for the US to continue with this blatant lie? ”

Politics has always been a rather dirty game, or “business” if you prefer, involving lying, deception and blatant hypocrisy.

The difference now, it appears, is that world leaders have become so confident, and even smug, regarding the unlimited degrees of power they wield that without the slightest embarrassment they will state that “black is white”, that “down is up” and that “war is peace”. And will do so with a straight face and without so much as batting an eyelash.

Indeed, said so-called “world leaders” are additionally completely confident that those they rule over are too ignorant, too stupid, too lazy and/or too afraid to “call out” said “world leaders” on their lies and countless intentional falsehoods.

There was a time when said leaders at least made a cursory pretense of pretending to respect the will and opinions of those they ruled over but that was then and this is now.

World leaders today expect their collective subjects to accept and believe every last utterance than emanates from their mealy mouthed lips as though it were the Gospel Truth according to whichever Saint you prefer. And if you don’t- you can lump it.

Of course things might very well have been a good deal worse.
Just imagine if Senator John McCain had won The White House.

We would likely have already found ourselves involved in a nuclear war in the Middle East and seen 100,000 American “boots on the ground”.

In short, viewing the situation in Syria from the vantage point of the heights of irony, some might even choose to contend that President Obama is owed a small iota of gratitude for dragging his feet on arming the terrorists as long as he has. At least we are still far from seeing the one million dead and counting that resulted from another President’s invasion of Iraq.

But in the end, in all honesty I must concede it is “six of one and/or half a dozen of the other”.

There is very little our so-called “world leaders” do better than making wars, and burning money by the trillions of dollars, euros and rubles, whilst waving the flag and when the little people complain, and telling them to “eat cake”.

Jun 17, 2013 7:21am EDT  --  Report as abuse
reality-again wrote:

And why should Obama, or anyone else care about Putin?…

Jun 17, 2013 7:47am EDT  --  Report as abuse
hongkiejj wrote:

without china, india, brazil…g8 is a waste of time

Jun 17, 2013 8:01am EDT  --  Report as abuse
ALALAYIIIAAAA wrote:

reality-again@
1)because putin (russia )has money and obama (usa) don’t
2)because putin (russia) has S-300 and this system has extremely high velocity
3)because putin (russia) without doing anything is acceptable by the muslim world.obama (usa) is not.
we can continue untill tommorow if you like.(nsa,arab spring,afganistan iraq,monstanto etc etc).

Jun 17, 2013 8:05am EDT  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

@westernshame…the rebels have stated their sole demand in the “negotiations”: Assad must step down.

If Assad will not (as he’s made perfectly clear), then there is nothing to negotiate about.

If Obama ordered f16′s to bomb America’s largest cities indiscriminately and killed tens of thousands of American civilians, I don’t think I’d prefer him stay in office either.

Given it is likely that you created the name “westernshame” solely to troll Reuters with anti-western sentiments, I suggest you try some objectivity on for size and contemplate: Would you want to live under the rule of a dictator who is keen to use any means of military force necessary to suppress the will of his own people?

Jun 17, 2013 8:07am EDT  --  Report as abuse
susette wrote:

I strongly oppose the notion that the west should arm the rebels. They have no reason to overthrow the government, at least not one we should be able to support. We have supported many regime changes in other countries, only to see the entire fabric of their lands torn asunder. Viet Nam, Korea, Iraq, The Balkans, the Czeks, Mexico, the Caribbean, Egypt, now Syria. On both sides of the isle, we have Viet Nam vets (both ironically named John) who are itching to get us back into a world theater. I don’t believe you can make a war to cause peace. This we learned in Korea and Nam. And the mid-east.

Jun 17, 2013 8:41am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Ken1Lutheran wrote:

It seems that both sides are arming thugs. The Hezbollah thugs support the Assad government; the Al-Qaida thugs support the rebels. There are some people on both sides deserving our sympathy–the Christians whose safety in Syria ends if Assad falls, and those interested in establishing democratic government, who will see it only if he falls. A democratic government that protects its Christian citizens would be our ideal result in Syria–but it almost by definition cannot happen.

Jun 17, 2013 8:43am EDT  --  Report as abuse
reality-again wrote:

@ALALAYIIIAAAA

FYI
1. Russia is broke, and so corrupt that no one would even invest in it anymore.
2. Russian military technology has always been a joke, including in the old days of the USSR, and time after time it failed against US and Israeli technology.
3. The entire Arab (Sunni) world hates Russia for its stubborn support of Assad (Alawi / Shi’a) and Iran (Shi’a). There has never been a time in history where Russia had been so hated by Arabs as now.

Putin’s policy in Syria has destroyed Russia’s credibility among Arabs for many years to come. It’s a diplomatic disaster of epic proportions for Russia.

Jun 17, 2013 8:44am EDT  --  Report as abuse
waggg wrote:

Hopeless corruption…

Jun 17, 2013 8:44am EDT  --  Report as abuse
waggg wrote:

I don’t know how Putin can stand the stench of sulfer in the room.

Jun 17, 2013 8:45am EDT  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

@ALALALAYIIYYAA

“1)because putin (russia )has money and obama (usa) don’t”

The US DoD had a budget of about $700B last year; Russia’s military budget was $61B

2)because putin (russia) has S-300 and this system has extremely high velocity

Well they better have an extremely high QUANTITY of them as well because they can only engage 12 total targets a piece and the US is perfectly capable of lobbing thousands of missile at any one target. Please don’t act as if the S-300 is foolproof protection.

3)because putin (russia) without doing anything is acceptable by the muslim world.obama (usa) is not. we can continue untill tommorow if you like.(nsa,arab spring,afganistan iraq,monstanto etc etc).

The Muslim extremist contingent in the Chechen and Dagestani regions (amongst others) beg to differ. The mujaheddin are surely big fans of Russia as well, don’t you think?

Jun 17, 2013 8:47am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:

“At their first face-to-face meeting in a year, Obama will try to convince Putin to bring Assad to the negotiating table…”

Negotiating table here means slaughtering table…

Jun 17, 2013 9:09am EDT  --  Report as abuse
c12steven wrote:

And Oblamey, with ZERO credibility will get to argue from the weakest position diplomatically against a real LEADER in the form of Putin (also a thug of course), and ZERO will change on the ground in the Mid-East. Let the Blood Bowl continue!

Jun 17, 2013 9:10am EDT  --  Report as abuse
c12steven wrote:

And Oblamey, with ZERO credibility will get to argue from the weakest position diplomatically against a real LEADER in the form of Putin (also a thug of course), and ZERO will change on the ground in the Mid-East. Let the Blood Bowl continue!

Jun 17, 2013 9:10am EDT  --  Report as abuse
c12steven wrote:

And Oblamey, with ZERO credibility will get to argue from the weakest position diplomatically against a real LEADER in the form of Putin (also a thug of course), and ZERO will change on the ground in the Mid-East. Let the Blood Bowl continue!

Jun 17, 2013 9:10am EDT  --  Report as abuse
c12steven wrote:

And Oblamey, with ZERO credibility will get to argue from the weakest position diplomatically against a real LEADER in the form of Putin (also a thug of course), and ZERO will change on the ground in the Mid-East. Let the Blood Bowl continue!

Jun 17, 2013 9:10am EDT  --  Report as abuse
c12steven wrote:

And Oblamey, with ZERO credibility will get to argue from the weakest position diplomatically against a real LEADER in the form of Putin (also a thug of course), and ZERO will change on the ground in the Mid-East. Let the Blood Bowl continue!

Jun 17, 2013 9:10am EDT  --  Report as abuse
c12steven wrote:

And Oblamey, with ZERO credibility will get to argue from the weakest position diplomatically against a real LEADER in the form of Putin (also a thug of course), and ZERO will change on the ground in the Mid-East. Let the Blood Bowl continue!

Jun 17, 2013 9:10am EDT  --  Report as abuse
stevden wrote:

Something is wrong with the world when the only leader making any sense is Vladmir Putin?!?

Jun 17, 2013 9:27am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:

@westernshame…the rebels have stated their sole demand in the “negotiations”: Assad must step down.

One must be utterly ignorant to think that that’s rebels’ demand and not the demand of Nutyahoo, John McCain, the Jewish lobby, neocon warmongers, etc…. Rebels don’t “demand”. They try to seize power by force. They can either succeed or fail. In this case they have failed. Now, those who sent them need to spare the world unnecessary scenes of suffering. Killing innocent babies and womens for the purpose of achieving regime-change is immoral.

Frankly those who support Syria stand on moral and legal grounds while those who are attacking it stand on the blood and internal organs of innocents, Sarin gas, patriote missiles, F16s…

Jun 17, 2013 9:37am EDT  --  Report as abuse
usagadfly wrote:

The only reason for the “West” (i.e. the USA) to get involved in Syria is on orders from Israel. Period. We have no friends in that unsavory fight. In fact, if you have been paying any attention over the past 30 years or so, we have no friends in the region at all, including Israel. Israel takes and takes but never gives.

Get out and stay out! Israeli go home!

Jun 17, 2013 9:44am EDT  --  Report as abuse

We cant believe or trust Obama,We also cant believe or trust the Russians,so I guess we are all just screwed.Oh yea we cant trust these violent muslims either.this world is really f*#ked!

Jun 17, 2013 9:52am EDT  --  Report as abuse
hughrhodes wrote:

This is pretty laughable. The Assad regime, as bad as it is, didn’t start this civil war. Our position is Assad is not allowed to kill people who are revolting against his government? Just imagine if the US had taken that position in 1861. Suppose France and Great Britain had sided with the Confederacy since the North had superior firepower, was killing many rebels and civilians and was destroying property in an effort to defeat the “opposition”?

Jun 17, 2013 10:01am EDT  --  Report as abuse
hughrhodes wrote:

Russia’s debt level is 12 to 13% of their GDP, ours is over 100%. They are not broke or even close.

The price of oil continues to rise thus Russia will have a hefty surplus this year if things stay about the same. The US can only dream of running a surplus.

The “opposition” started this battle and use buildings and civilians as cover. Assad is doing what Lincoln did in the Civil War, he is destroying the opposition. Assad is a bad guy but lets quit pretending the “opposition” has noble intentions.

Jun 17, 2013 10:06am EDT  --  Report as abuse
arnoldripkin wrote:

The natural state of affairs in the middle east is killing each other. Only a strong dictator can maintain control and bring relative calm to the general population. We have to stop letting Israel call the shots and do business with any leader that didn’t come to power by preaching hatred of the west.

Jun 17, 2013 10:20am EDT  --  Report as abuse
totherepublic wrote:

hongkiejj

“g8 is a waste of time”?

The US, Britain, Canada, and Germany a waste of time? Now we see how deluded you and the rest of the world really are. Thanks we needed to know what you think. You should duck now.

Jun 17, 2013 10:21am EDT  --  Report as abuse
totherepublic wrote:

c12steven

“a real LEADER in the form of Putin” I agree there, he is a leader. And obama has lied to him twice and he will not forget that. Putin is much more devoted and loyal to Russia than obama is to the US, that will be the difference.

Jun 17, 2013 10:44am EDT  --  Report as abuse
mils54 wrote:

Syria has for as long as i can remember been a Russian satellite, It would behoove the U.S to speak softly but carry the big stick. It would come as no supprise to learn the Americans have moved their armor left in Kuwait from the Iraq war into Jordan, I have yet to find the money trail!, Very few times has the U.S gone into combat without the pot at the end of the rainbow so to speak…Humanitarian reasons?, Doubtful, Don’t think America gives a hoot about the Syrian people who have traditionally hated them for decades…Shunting Russian expansion?, Russia has been the main supplier to Syria for decades and is already well entrenched. I’m a little puzzled by the real reason the U.S is potentially about to get directly involved. Open to opinions but please save the hatred and spew.

Jun 17, 2013 10:54am EDT  --  Report as abuse
reality-again wrote:

@usagadfly

Your antisemitic disorder is blocking you from seeing the facts, which are that Israel is our true friend and our only true ally in the Middle East, and it has no particular interest in backing any of the sides in Syria, since both are its patently declared enemies.

Another fact your vitriol infected brain doesn’t grasp is that Israel’s GDP is a quarter trillion dollars, while the military support it gets from us is 2.5 billion, which is about one percent of that.

Israel doesn’t need our money, and every cent we invest in that country pays off in terms of America’s national interest, as viewed by the political left, center and right in this country, as well as by our military and intelligence services.

Hate blinds, and it stinks too.

Jun 17, 2013 11:09am EDT  --  Report as abuse
AZsparrow wrote:

No fan of Assad, or Putin, but have to go with him on this one. Obama arming yet more terrorists that really control the opposition in Syria now a mistake. The so-called original rebels have been marginalized out of the big picture. Not to mention, picking a side in what is also becoming a Sunni vs Shiite regional rumble is a lose-lose in my mind. What, does Obama really think he’ll make some new friends doing so? This is really all about further isolating Iran anyway, and arming these guys something I think we’ll again regret later.

Jun 17, 2013 11:14am EDT  --  Report as abuse
JonnyRotten wrote:

Putin is completely right. I would rather have him as dictator than Obama as president. The only choice is a savage (Assad) that keeps the other savages in line or else a bunch of brutal vicious terrorist bandits that swarm over the borders like rats and ruin everything they come into contact with. The people of Syria are Muslims. We need to go ahead and withdraw our troops, cut off our money and let Allah step up to save them. They howl their submission at him often enough. Lets go ahead and see what that’s really worth.

Jun 17, 2013 11:36am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:

The bottom line is the US has no business shoving itself down Syrians’throats. It manufactured a government from exiled Syrians and calls it a representative of the Syrian people, and organizing a meeting where the Syrian goverment will transfer power to its MANUFACTURED government. All this for the benefit of Israel. This is fraudulent and crazy.

Jun 17, 2013 12:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Tiu wrote:

The question shouldn’t be why is Russia arming the Syrian government. The question should be why is an orchestrated choir of western “leaders” calling to arm terrorists, although I’m sure Cameron would lie about only arming the good terrorists and not the one’s that don’t like the west or all it stands for.

Jun 17, 2013 12:48pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
pyanitsa wrote:

With its track record, the West has no business scolding anybody. Specially the French with their abysmal human rights record in Syria, not to mention Algeria.

Jun 17, 2013 1:07pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
blower wrote:

Headline should have been Putin rebukes western leaders over Syria.Typical Western media way of reporting the news.

Jun 17, 2013 1:29pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
QuidProQuo wrote:

Let France and Britain put skin in the game and be the UN nations that manage this fiasco. We’ve spent enough over the years on Muslim/muslim societal and economic breakdowns. I trust France and Britain to finance this together without any US dollars added.
Our power as a Nation has been defined for too long by how aggressive and dominating our military is. That’s not really all we should have to be bragging about. It’s like we get off on the deaths of the heads of state and the military gets some perverse pleasure out of it.

Jun 17, 2013 3:58pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
VultureTX wrote:

You notice Fromkin always avoids mentioning that France and the UK are also in this Syria issue. They both confirmed Chemical Weapons usage, they botyh agreeed on the provo gvot. council. But Fromkin ever the anti-semite says that Israel is controlling the US and this is all a jewish plot to destroy Assad.

So is anyone else in denial that this is a Western Issue and that like Libya , the rebels may end up being just another bunch of murdering muslims and not a stable peaceful entity.

Jun 17, 2013 4:13pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
tohidu wrote:

@ mils54
The money trail starts in Qatar with a proposed oil pipeline to Turkey. This would threatened Russia’s oil interest in Europe.

http://www.thenational.ae/business/energy/qatar-seeks-gas-pipeline-to-turkey
“The reports said two different routes for such a pipeline were possible. One would lead from Qatar through Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq to Turkey. The other would go through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey. It was not clear whether the second option would be connected to the Pan-Arab pipeline, carrying Egyptian gas through Jordan to Syria.”

Granted, the above article is a few years old as it discusses the general agreement between nations. An updated story from UK May, 2013 discusses the conflict between the Qatar pipeline, which by-passes Russia, and the more recent plans for an Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline which doesn’t.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/earth-insight/2013/may/13/1
“The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline plan is a “direct slap in the face” to Qatar’s plans for a countervailing pipeline running from Qatar’s North field, contiguous with Iran’s South Pars field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey, also with a view to supply European markets.”

Just as in 1953, when the CIA assisted the UK in overthrowing the duly elected PM of Iran Mossadeq, it’s always about oil profits.

Jun 17, 2013 4:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

Two aging fools with nothing in common while the rest of the G8 pretend to be important. Meanwhile, Syria’s importance — and future, it appears — is dictated by anti-Shi’ite and extreme Sunni oil-rich Arabs and their financial esources upon which the West and new developing nations , unfortunately, depend.

Once a new source of energy has been developed, and 3D manufacturing using non-petroleum resources become the low-cost norm, Gulf Arab countries and their skyscrapers will become skeletal versions of the economic power they yield today, and will return to their nomad roaming days where they posed little threat to anybody but themselves.

Oddly, Israel too, with its horrendous internal social and economic chasms, lack of water and resources, will also revert to nomadism, except that most Jews will rapidly abandon the country and dash to developed countries to become bankers, music composers, scientists, merchants, etc., just as they always have.

However, that may not be ideal. The developed West, like everybody else, has to deal with dramatic and rapid Climate Change which will severely alter the landscape and economies, probably resulting in an unprecedented global culling of humans, that will eventually — in the not too distant future — see all survivors becoming nomads wandering the planet with blank and angry expressions when they stumble across the ruins of the 21st Century.

The Arabs will be first to revert back to nomadism which will outlaw Islam, Christianity, and judaism as ruinous plagues — along with other religions. The rest are certain to follow in very short order.

Jun 17, 2013 4:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
kenradke11 wrote:

Assad is dead wrong on his last statement. I will tell you why. If the Americans are smart they could remotely detonate as well as track any highjacked piece of heavy armory. Makes sense does it not. Communications would do the trick and of course highly recommended.

Jun 17, 2013 4:52pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bubba19 wrote:

The easy way to resolve this is for Obama to contact the Israeli government to find out what hole Assad is sleeping in. Then we test the capability of the new MOAB device. Send over a couple of B-2 and take out Assad. Putin would then be embarrassed when his Soviet made radars couldn’t locate the B-2s until they hear the explosions.

Jun 17, 2013 4:56pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SKYDRIFTER wrote:

Assad made a goo point about the rebels. They’ll end up in Paris or London & successfully preach regime overthrow – everywhere.

Jun 17, 2013 5:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
kumar1swamy wrote:

Oh yeah ! Keep rebuking each other. Good job.

Jun 17, 2013 5:42pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
hancle wrote:

wow, what body language.

Jun 17, 2013 5:43pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
totherepublic wrote:

obama, one on one with Putin, no teleprompter and can not run away. obama’s worse nightmare. He lost before he even showed up. I doubt Putin will show much sympathy when barak starts crying. Putin looks cool and in charge-obama looks well, scared. We need a president.

Jun 17, 2013 6:11pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

“Putin Removes Shirt at G8 Summit, Punches Wall With Stolen Super Bowl Ring.”

No more erection pills for the old man.

Jun 17, 2013 6:24pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

tothesovietsocialistrepublic swoons: “Putin looks cool and in charge…”

Sounds like love at first sight :) Did you look into his eyes and see his soul?

Jun 17, 2013 6:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Sinbad1 wrote:

Just PR, the US does not want a negotiated settlement. The US intent is to bleed Iran of money supporting Syria, the Syrians are just collateral damage.

Jun 17, 2013 6:48pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Sinbad1 wrote:

@reality-again Putin is the most powerful man in the world. Obama can’t even make health care changes, Putin can do whatever he wants.

Jun 17, 2013 6:51pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Lowell_Thinks wrote:

“reality-again wrote:
And why should Obama, or anyone else care about Putin?…”

I suppose you’re right, after all Obama already got the Nobel Peace Prize…what does a potential Security Council Veto have to do with anything?

Jun 17, 2013 7:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Sinbad1 wrote:

70% of the Syrian people support Assad, why does the US reject democracy in Syria?

Jun 17, 2013 7:03pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
pyanitsa wrote:

AlkalineState wrote: Did you look into his eyes and see his soul?

No, not his soul but he’s not on alkaloids.

Jun 17, 2013 7:20pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
pyanitsa wrote:

AlkalineState wrote: Did you look into his eyes and see his soul?

No, not his soul but he’s not on alkaloids.

Jun 17, 2013 7:20pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
mils54 wrote:

Tohido….Interesting opinion, Thank you for a reasonable responce!.

Jun 17, 2013 7:24pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
DbPolk wrote:

Only the usual suspects are calling for arming “rebels”. that’s the new name for “freedom fighters”. Afghanistan. 198x. http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/1984/02/us-aid-for-afghan-freedom-fighters-overdue. NO THANK YOU.

Jun 17, 2013 7:59pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xcanada2 wrote:

70% of American people support no-intervention against Assad, the percentage who oppose arming the anti-Assad forces. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/06/17/americans-clearly-against-arming-syrian-rebels-even-after-red-line-crossed-polls-show/

This makes it ever the more clear that Obama represents somebody else than the 99%. One thing is for sure: Obama does not represent us.

That is a problem for the small group of people controlling our government: fundamentally, they are small group. It is time to throw them out of power. Our one-party system, the money-rules party with two almost identical brands, is anything but a democracy. I had hoped that Obama, freed by his re-election, would have carried out a few of his promises of hope. But NOPE: same old conniving, two-faced stuff.

How to throw our rulers out of power, given they are approaching real time NSA check on virtually all communications?: well, that is another problem. When you give away democracy, it is difficult to get it back.

Well, maybe there is hope: Russia did it. But first our country has to fall apart, rotten to the core. The ruled lose all respect for their rulers. We are getting closer. For the sake of the world, it can’t come too soon.

Jun 17, 2013 8:00pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Harleynut57 wrote:

Send’em the S300′s.

Jun 17, 2013 8:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Harleynut57 wrote:

Send’em the S300′s.

Jun 17, 2013 8:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Harleynut57 wrote:

Send’em the S300′s.

Jun 17, 2013 8:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SentientOne wrote:

“This is a man with whom we cannot do business.” – Margaret Thatcher from her grave. Just ask Robert Kraft if you need confirmation. Putin put the NFL Superbowl Championship ring he stole from the Owner of the New England Patriots into a glass display case in the Kremlin antiques museum. What would Catherine the Great have to say about the little man?

Jun 17, 2013 8:14pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
totherepublic wrote:

Good thing there were 6 others…obama could not have stood up on his own though it was his big mouth that got us into this. The poll I am looking at right now says 73% of Americans do not want us in this at all. So when all you people start slamming us for this just remember what I have been saying all along-obama and the US Government are not the same thing. At this jucture I, with the other 6 backing, give Putin one more chance. Turn over Assad to the World Court for prosecution or we move forward. The I would walk out with my stick.

Jun 17, 2013 8:20pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
HistoriCol wrote:

What an achievement – as a result of the american-led wests shameful support for al qaeda in forcing regime change in Syria, Putin has become more popular in the world than ever before. How can Obama and Cameron continue with this blatant support for terrorism in the face of such overwhelming disregard for human suffering. Unbelievably shameful !

Jun 17, 2013 8:20pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
totherepublic wrote:

xcanada2

Thanks for reaffirming that We, The American People are NOT in on this. The poll you cite is 70% the one I am looking at is 73%. I would like to see Assad out of power though.

Jun 17, 2013 8:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
totherepublic wrote:

HistoriCol

You are not paying attention. It is not America it is obama which was supported heavily by the East and Millle East in his elections. 70-73% of Americans want NO part of this. Like the libs in the US, you wanted him, you got him. Now sleep with him.

Jun 17, 2013 8:43pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
breezinthru wrote:

Assad is not worthy of Putin’s support and there are no rebels worthy of America’s support.

A lot of men are killing and dying for their God. We should not stand in their way.

Jun 17, 2013 8:53pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
notfooled2 wrote:

If he can just get the ring back, he can call the meeting a success.

Jun 17, 2013 9:42pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
pyanitsa wrote:

Emperor Jones wants another war.

Jun 17, 2013 10:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
pyanitsa wrote:

jaham wrote: “The US DoD had a budget of about $700B last year; …”

$700B of borrowed money.

jaham wrote: “The Muslim extremist contingent in the Chechen and Dagestani regions (amongst others) beg to differ. ”

If the Muslims hate Russia why are they bombing Boston?

Jun 17, 2013 10:22pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:

Putin must’ve been really annoyed listening to Obama’s lies and thinking this guy is not serious, and saying I can’t belive Americans elected him. Well, we only had a choice between him and Sarah Pelin…

Jun 17, 2013 10:24pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Slammy wrote:

@Fromking
Do you know what the Russian justification was for sending troops into Abkhazia and South Ossetia? If so, why could parts of Syria not follow this precedent and ask for help?

Jun 17, 2013 10:52pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xcanada2 wrote:

Reuters Headline: “Putin faces isolation over Syria as G8 ratchets up pressure”

Yes, Putin is facing isolation by perhaps 4 immoral, inhuman capitalist leaders of the West.

BUT, 70 percent of Americans are on his side, against US intervention. The numbers are probably similar in UK,France,Germany,Canada,etc. For most thinking, moral people, Assad, Putin and Iran get it right. But, it doesn’t look like the billions of people on Putin’s side are counted by the West, or even by Reuters. What the West is doing is clearly immoral, against any principles of simple humanity. And stupid, too!

And, there will be a Presidential election in Syria in 2014, if they can make it that far without being disemboweled by the West: http://english.almanar.com.lb/adetails.php?eid=97909&cid=19&fromval=1&frid=19&seccatid=32&s1=1

Jun 17, 2013 10:54pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Androctonus wrote:

You guys crack me up, you can’t see that this arming of both sides is simply a way for the lowering of populations in muslim countries can you? All of the super powers are in this together by the way, simply take out the leaders of semi-stable countries and watch the chaos ensue by adding weapons to all sides, sure you might make a few bucks along the way but the main goal is lowering the number of muslims before they are a majority in every country.

It’s not a case of the US vs the Russians, they are taking their own side and letting the ME lower it’s population itself with minimal effort.

Doesn’t really bother me though.

Jun 17, 2013 11:57pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ALALAYIIIAAAA wrote:

isolation? i dont think so.he plays the card of cannibalsim and it works well to the rest of the world

Jun 18, 2013 1:49am EDT  --  Report as abuse

Strange!!! Majority of USA citizens oppose to arming rebels, same goes for majority of UK citizens. Majority of Syrian population supporting Assad…
Why Obama and Cameron trying so hard to push their agenda forward?

Jun 18, 2013 3:41am EDT  --  Report as abuse
lex_70 wrote:

Everybody … let’s give three cheers for AL QAEDA…

hip hip …..

Are these guys for real?.

AL QAEDA AL QAEDA AL QAEDA… C’MON… JOIN IN ANYTIME…. AL QAEDA!

Jun 18, 2013 4:29am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Renox wrote:

Isolation?? Are there many countries wishing to savagely invade Syria?
Carpet bomb and mass murder just like in Libya, Afganistan and Iraq?

Jun 18, 2013 5:00am EDT  --  Report as abuse
satori23 wrote:

like the fact that these dudes don’t wear ties

Jun 18, 2013 5:56am EDT  --  Report as abuse
ALALAYIIIAAAA wrote:

reality-again @
I Dont think so! First things first.
1)Russians are dowing the as well as the iranians the drones like toys.
2)Russian rockets are used in american space shuttles launcing.
3)today united states bought 20 helicopters from russia to support their mission in afganistan.
4)russian HAARP system dominated the american .Hence the devastating tornados all over united states including NEW YORK’s.
5)public debt per person 2014 forecast: united states 43.192,00$ russia 1.442,38$ (economist world clock debt)
6)sunnis muslims:libya’s urge is to buy russian military equipment !(tripoli post) Russia supported gadaffi openly during the conflict.
7)sunnis muslims :murdered the american ambassador in bengazi as payback to the united states for their military support (????)

if i were american i would feel completely isolated and disapointed.

Jun 18, 2013 6:02am EDT  --  Report as abuse
GrndHstlMan wrote:

Why are we even worrying about this? Syria never once liked us and now we are offering aid to the rebels. Who cares, let the blood shed spill. 2 years ago they ask for the strong nations to witness what is going on, but it wasn’t an indirect beg for help to D.C. For a country that hated us, I really don’t want my tax dollars helping them at all.

Jun 18, 2013 6:02am EDT  --  Report as abuse
BrokenToaster wrote:

Renox wrote:

Isolation?? Are there many countries wishing to savagely invade Syria?
Carpet bomb and mass murder just like in Libya, Afganistan and Iraq?
———————————————————————–
You mean governments.Countries would imply that the governments and CITIZENS back these actions,which I would say that most of the citizens do not support it.

Jun 18, 2013 6:07am EDT  --  Report as abuse
lex_70 wrote:

@ALALAYIIIAAAA

Ummmmmaaaaahhhh…… You mentioned the H word…. Scalar weaponry.

No one wonders why they gave up on nukes?

Jun 18, 2013 6:16am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:

I guess if you are forced to deal with some immoral human beings isolation is a good place to be.

Jun 18, 2013 7:25am EDT  --  Report as abuse
ChAliGhafoor wrote:

i think america have forgot 1978 decision to weaponize afghans.
results were clear on 9/11 when they rebound to the supplier.
U shud stop syrian govt but not with weaponizing free lancers.
Longterm results shall be bad for all.

Jun 18, 2013 7:42am EDT  --  Report as abuse
ChAliGhafoor wrote:

i think america have forgot 1978 decision to weaponize afghans.
results were clear on 9/11 when they rebound to the supplier.
U shud stop syrian govt but not with weaponizing free lancers.
Longterm results shall be bad for all.

Jun 18, 2013 7:42am EDT  --  Report as abuse
ronryegadfly wrote:

Mr. Obama, why the uproar over chemical weapons? Are bullets that tear through flesh, maim, paralyze, mangle and kill their targets any kinder? Really? How about bombs rained down on people’s heads from rockets, bombers or drones? Honestly?

Jun 18, 2013 9:04am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:

@ronryegadfly

“Mr. Obama, why the uproar over chemical weapons?”

Let me seize on your question to let people know that the alleged chemical weopon deaths represent 150/93,000. That’s .0016% or 2000th of 1 %(rounded). This is hardly mass killing requiring international military intervention, even if it was true. But everybody knows it’s not true. Obama is lying because the use of chemical weapons is the only issue he can exploit to enter the war on behalf of his terrorist friends. Syrian aggressors have been trying to ride on this manufactured issue since April 2012 when the Syrian government spokesperson was tricked into answering a question about chemical weapons. And of course the whole thing was instigated by Israel.

Jun 18, 2013 9:26am EDT  --  Report as abuse
charluca wrote:

hmmm… i think if Assad goes , he’s likely to be replaced by something worse. just a feeling… (looking at what has happened with the other middle east countries)

Jun 18, 2013 9:27am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Dalmane wrote:

Putin isn’t worried about the World Clown Obama (WCO) and the World Community Organizer (WCO). Funny how those 2 abbreviations complement each other. Being the WCO hasn’t done anything but make America less safe, the laughing stock of the world and finally an embarrassment to the American people.

Jun 18, 2013 9:36am EDT  --  Report as abuse
SvenBolin wrote:

Don’t confuse the G8 – 1 as the world cause it isn’t! There is a big world out there among others the BRICS. Today we have a new ballgame with many new players, the old world order is over.

Jun 18, 2013 9:46am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Daniel77 wrote:

Putin needs to send even more advanced weapons to Assad.
The Terrorist rebels are much worse then Assad.

Jun 18, 2013 9:51am EDT  --  Report as abuse
crittertron wrote:

Game, set, match. The rebels lost last year when they were duped into launching an offensive into the cities. Seemed obvious at the time that the government troops left just enough behind in those bases to tempt them to do it. They moved in, got separated, bled all winter long and now the government breaks out & mops up. Seems clear the only officers defecting to the rebel side were those that scored below average in military school.

Jun 18, 2013 10:13am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Egor wrote:

Obama and Cameron are clearly arming the terrorists which are rebels and in that case I think Russia is right. The reason of arming the so called “rebels” is greed, as they get free weapons, and surely if they win, Obama/Cameron will sell them more weapons. I respect neither of the parties, but clearly to destroy official government and put terrorists will bring instability into that region – what Odambo and Cam-eron aim.

Jun 18, 2013 11:08am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.