Dancing in streets as Aleppo liberated from US backed terrorists

[Will Wiley]

https://www.facebook.com/sahouraxo/posts/352133891818330

BREAKING: #Aleppo is officially liberated! Residents are in the streets celebrating the end of nearly 5 years of terror. Dancing, singing, chanting and tears of joy!
Liberated Syrian men, women, children and elderly are praising their steadfast Army and President Bashar al-Assad for this historic victory. Will Western journalists cover it? I think not

Why dancing? Well as Robert Fisk reported.

There is More Than One Truth to Tell in the Terrible Story of Aleppo

Only a few weeks ago, I interviewed one of the very first Muslim families to flee eastern Aleppo during a ceasefire. The father had just been told that his brother was to be executed by the rebels because he crossed the frontline with his wife and son. He condemned the rebels for closing the schools and putting weapons close to hospitals. And he was no pro-regime stooge; he even admired Isis for their good behaviour in the early days of the siege.

 

[laughing dog]

Yes, the Russian-backed terrorists beat the US backed terrorists in clearing Aleppo of the fighting.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Yes, the Russian-backed terrorists beat the US backed terrorists in clearing Aleppo of the fighting.

The Russian backed ones have to then beat the consequences of US policy; ISIS

 

[Will Wiley]

Yes, the Russian-backed terrorists beat the US backed terrorists in clearing Aleppo of the fighting.

The Russians were invited in by the elected government. America has been illegally supporting the "rebels" , or al Nusra (al qaeda).

 

[Axulus]

Lol, yeah right. I'm sure the Sunnis (80% of the pop there is Sunni) just can't wait to be ruled by the ruthless Shia dictator Assad and Shia Iran.

If you believe this, well, what was it that Voltaire said about those who can make you believe absurdities?

 

[laughing dog]

Yes, the Russian-backed terrorists beat the US backed terrorists in clearing Aleppo of the fighting.

The Russians were invited in by the elected government. America has been illegally supporting the "rebels" , or al Nusra (al qaeda).

The Syrians used chemical weapons on civilians. They and the Russians bombed civilian sites and areas. The Syrian gov't did more damage to civilian sites and deliberately harmed and killed more civilians than the rebels. If the rebels are terrorists, then so is the Syrian gov't. You are not fooling anyone but yourself with this blatant and moronic propaganda.

 

[Will Wiley]

The Russians were invited in by the elected government. America has been illegally supporting the "rebels" , or al Nusra (al qaeda).

The Syrians used chemical weapons on civilians.

You government told you they did use Sarin but that was debunked.
https://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/pdf/possible-implications-of-bad-intelligence.pdf

 

[Axulus]

Yes, the Russian-backed terrorists beat the US backed terrorists in clearing Aleppo of the fighting.

The Russians were invited in by the elected government. America has been illegally supporting the "rebels" , or al Nusra (al qaeda).

The US support was half-assed at best. Obama blew it with the "Red Line" bluff that was called by Putin. If anything can be said about Putin, he sure knows how to capitalize on US weakness. Props to him and his team for outplaying the West.

 

[Will Wiley]

The Russians were invited in by the elected government. America has been illegally supporting the "rebels" , or al Nusra (al qaeda).

The US support was half-assed at best. Obama blew it with the "Red Line" bluff that was called by Putin. If anything can be said about Putin, he sure knows how to capitalize on US weakness. Props to him and his team for outplaying the West.

Props to him and his team for outplaying..????
You think this is a game?

Sitting safely in America you have no real stake in this, but Russia cannot afford to have Islamic extremism on it's borders or nearby. It doesn't matter to you as you're safely over the sea

 

[Axulus]

The US support was half-assed at best. Obama blew it with the "Red Line" bluff that was called by Putin. If anything can be said about Putin, he sure knows how to capitalize on US weakness. Props to him and his team for outplaying the West.

Props to him and his team for outplaying..????
You think this is a game?

Sitting safely in America you have no real stake in this, but Russia cannot afford to have Islamic extremism on it's borders or nearby. It doesn't matter to you as you're safely over the sea

Clearly a game. Putin only got agressively involved in Syria after calling US red line bluff, capitalizing on weakness.

This is pretty basic game theory stuff dude.

 

[Trausti]

The Russians were invited in by the elected government. America has been illegally supporting the "rebels" , or al Nusra (al qaeda).

The US support was half-assed at best. Obama blew it with the "Red Line" bluff that was called by Putin. If anything can be said about Putin, he sure knows how to capitalize on US weakness. Props to him and his team for outplaying the West.

The US should never have offered support. There are no moderate rebels; just an alphabet soup of ISIS-lite jihadis. Because of the bi-partisan idiocy (Obama/Clinton/McCain), the real threat - ISIS - has been more or less left alone by the Assad regime for the last few months. Though Assad is assisted by Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah, he doesn't have the strength to fight the "rebels" and ISIS at the same time. Hence, while Assad is occupied in Aleppo ISIS retook Palmyra.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

There were unconfirmed reports of chlorine attacks in Syria. Unconfirmed because even groups like Doctors without Borders have given up in the areas.

Props to him and his team for outplaying..????
You think this is a game?

Sitting safely in America you have no real stake in this, but Russia cannot afford to have Islamic extremism on it's borders or nearby. It doesn't matter to you as you're safely over the sea

Clearly a game. Putin only got agressively involved in Syria after calling US red line bluff, capitalizing on weakness.

This is pretty basic game theory stuff dude.

You misspelled pragmatism. While the 'red line' bluff showed weakness, the US had little to really support in the Syrian conflict. There is no one to replace Assad other than a Russian backed replacement. Syria was never going to be won by the US as the Russians want the warm water port access.

What Obama did help was get the WMDs under control.

 

[KeepTalking]

https://www.facebook.com/sahouraxo/posts/352133891818330




Why dancing?

Because if you don't dance they will keep shooting at your feet?

 

[skepticalbip]

The coverage of the mess in Syria by the U.S. media is far from objective. It flaunts its bias if not propaganda. The U.S., Russian, and Syrian bombing of Raqqa was reported as liberating the people of the city from Islamist radicals even though the population was being held as shields just as they were in Aleppo. However, the Russian and Syrian bombing of Aleppo is covered as a war crime. The only difference is which Islamist radical group is holding the city and whether or not the U.S. is in on the bombing.

 

[laughing dog]

Sitting safely in America you have no real stake in this, but Russia cannot afford to have Islamic extremism on it's borders or nearby. It doesn't matter to you as you're safely over the sea

Whenever I see such posts, I also wonder if these type of posters are paid in roubles or dollars.

 

[Axulus]

The coverage of the mess in Syria by the U.S. media is far from objective. It flaunts its bias if not propaganda. The U.S., Russian, and Syrian bombing of Raqqa was reported as liberating the people of the city from Islamist radicals even though the population was being held as shields just as they were in Aleppo. However, the Russian and Syrian bombing of Aleppo is covered as a war crime. The only difference is which Islamist radical group is holding the city and whether or not the U.S. is in on the bombing.

What are you smoking? Sounds like some good stuff. HRW and Amnesty Int'l does not change its conclusions based on who did the bombing.

 

[skepticalbip]

The coverage of the mess in Syria by the U.S. media is far from objective. It flaunts its bias if not propaganda. The U.S., Russian, and Syrian bombing of Raqqa was reported as liberating the people of the city from Islamist radicals even though the population was being held as shields just as they were in Aleppo. However, the Russian and Syrian bombing of Aleppo is covered as a war crime. The only difference is which Islamist radical group is holding the city and whether or not the U.S. is in on the bombing.

What are you smoking? Sounds like some good stuff. HRW and Amnesty Int'l does not change its conclusions based on who did the bombing.

You need to read more carefully.

But I haven't seen what the HRW and Amnesty said about Raqqa. Maybe you could inform us. but I have seen how the U.S. Media reported on both

 

[J842P]

Props to him and his team for outplaying..????
You think this is a game?

Sitting safely in America you have no real stake in this, but Russia cannot afford to have Islamic extremism on it's borders or nearby. It doesn't matter to you as you're safely over the sea

Clearly a game. Putin only got agressively involved in Syria after calling US red line bluff, capitalizing on weakness.

This is pretty basic game theory stuff dude.

Nonsense. Russia has clear geopolitical interest in that region. Imagine if a military coup in Central America devolved into a civil war that pitted one side of fanatical Catholic separatists who had a history of performing terrorist attacks on American soil against the government (which had an alliance with the US). OF COURSE the USA would become involved. The only reason the USA cares about Syria is sticking a thumb in Russia's eye, and doing Saudi Arabia's dirty work to keep them complacent. It's nuts. The Russians are on the right side here: Iran/Syria/Shia versus Saudi Arabia/Sunni.

 

[Harry Bosch]

https://www.facebook.com/sahouraxo/posts/352133891818330




Why dancing? Well as Robert Fisk reported.

There is More Than One Truth to Tell in the Terrible Story of Aleppo

Only a few weeks ago, I interviewed one of the very first Muslim families to flee eastern Aleppo during a ceasefire. The father had just been told that his brother was to be executed by the rebels because he crossed the frontline with his wife and son. He condemned the rebels for closing the schools and putting weapons close to hospitals. And he was no pro-regime stooge; he even admired Isis for their good behaviour in the early days of the siege.

I'm curious, does it bother you in the least that Assad rules over a population that is 80% Sunni and who hates Assad?

 

[laughing dog]

Clearly a game. Putin only got agressively involved in Syria after calling US red line bluff, capitalizing on weakness.

This is pretty basic game theory stuff dude.

Nonsense. Russia has clear geopolitical interest in that region. Imagine if a military coup in Central America devolved into a civil war that pitted one side of fanatical Catholic separatists who had a history of performing terrorist attacks on American soil against the government (which had an alliance with the US). OF COURSE the USA would become involved. The only reason the USA cares about Syria is sticking a thumb in Russia's eye, and doing Saudi Arabia's dirty work to keep them complacent. It's nuts. The Russians are on the right side here: Iran/Syria/Shia versus Saudi Arabia/Sunni.

There is no right side in this situation. And the notion that the rebels initially had some history performing terrorist attacks against Russia is far-fetched. Now they have reason.