MANAF TLASS, a brigadier general and childhood friend of Syria's president Bashar Assad, has defected and left the country. He was previously head of the Republican Guard, an elite unit situated on Mount Qassioun overlooking Damascus, the capital city it was charged with guarding.
French officials have confirmed that Mr Tlass is on his way to Paris, where Friends of Syria, a collection of Mr Assad's foes, are meeting for the third time. His wife is already there and his businessman brother, Firas, is also believed to be outside the country.
Defections by high ranking soldiers have increased over the past fortnight but Mr Tlass is the highest and most significant so far; he is the first defector from the regime's inner circle and comes from a family long intertwined with the ruling Assad clan. Mr Tlass's father, Mustafa, was defence minister from 1972 to 2004, during which Mr Assad's father, Hafez, put down an uprising led by the Muslim Brotherhood, killing at least 20,000 people in Hama in 1982. Mustafa also helped the younger Assad inherit power on his father’s death in 2000. The family is part of the country's power-broking Sunni backbone.
But Mr Tlass is not necessarily representative of the inner circle of Assads and security chiefs. An attractive, shaggy-haired man who looks more like an artist than a military chief, he has long been thought of in Damascus circles as a reformer (as was Mr Assad and his wife). Before the crisis he was less aloof than most of the out-of-touch security men, sometimes seen walking around listening to music and talking to the people on the street.
His dissent has been a topic of discussion amongst the Damascus intelligentsia since May last year, when he was put under house arrest for having expressed opposition to the regime's crackdown. During the initial months of the uprising, he was sent to Damascus’s suburbs to negotiate with protesters. But a deal he brokered with local leaders and protesters in Rastan, a rebellious city close to Homs and his hometown, was later undermined by an army assault.
This reputation may allow him to assume a role in the opposition despite his longstanding connections with the regime. Mr Assad's enemies will be hoping that Tlass’s departure will help secure further defections (especially as his ability to escape suggests weak links in Syria’s security apparatus). In any case, the symbolism has not been lost on Damascus, where relative quiet in the centre is broken by thuds from ongoing military operations in the suburbs. Many here, irreversibly lost to the regime, are hoping that a spiral of defections will signal a swift end to the bloodshed.



Readers' comments
The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
Sort:
Strange to see how every article about Syria is boiling down to the Western - Eastern conflict...
Well, in case you haven't noticed, apart for the Sunni-Shiite struggle raging in Syria now, Syria is also the stage where the cold war resurrects..
How to elevate the scale of complexity, and genociding Arabs people? It is an Israeli show.
The Zionists can do anything to profit from others as they believed that they have been promised in the covenant,
You say:
'How to elevate the scale of complexity, and genociding Arabs people? It is an Israeli show.'
Apparently Arabs are 'very good' job genociding themselves; No need for Israeli involvement, isn't it?
The Benghazi scenario underway in Syria. However the pulses of renegade within the body of mrs Golan' Height is also underway. The curses of God underway to the state that plays lies and tricks in the name of Jews. it is not Jews who's rockin Syria, it is, as always, Israeli spec-ops.
Remember, your victim is developing country, Syria. Your victim is developing country, Syria. Your victim is developing country, Syria. Your target is developing country, Syria, a member of UN.
You say:
'it is not Jews who's rockin Syria, it is, as always, Israeli spec-ops.'
Apart for the fact that no serious person connects Israel to the events in Syria, such a claim is an insult to the rebels, who seek to free themselves from a fellow Syrian butcher... or is he really a 'fellow' Syrian?
What is Syria? - As it turns out, it is a fake nation, composed of sects that are willing to genocide each other. That's not a nation. Syrian's real hope is to be split between the sects.
"Syrian's real hope is to be split between the sects."
That's not a terribly hopeful hope. Ethnic/sectarian partitions are messy. Look at India and Pakistan, for instance. 15 million displaced, 1 million killed just in the immediate aftermath.
Assuming similar percentages in Syria, that works out to around 1 million displaced and 100,000 dead. It's a solution, maybe, but an unpleasant one.
Now, that being said, if there really is no such thing as a Syrian national consciousness, there's pretty much no hope of Syria staying together.
You say:
'That's [Syrian's real hope is to be split between the sects] not a terribly hopeful hope. Ethnic/sectarian partitions are messy.'
One thing is clear: The situation NOW IS very messy. If the communities are separated fast, with the Alawites going to their coastal area, Druze going their mountains, and the Sunni left alone - They won't meet each other and have the opportunity to kill. It might be better than now..
After the blood bath that now rages, I can't see how they keep living happily together ever after..
Brief note- when I use the term 'ethnic' in this post, I mean 'ethnic/sectarian'.
To clarify- ethnic partitions might be necessary. However, it's hardly going to prevent ethnic conflict. Look at almost any map of ethnic groups- it doesn't much matter if it's one of Syria- you'll notice that ethnic borders are messy. There are going to be a lot of people stuck on the wrong side of the borders. It'd be more along the lines of just getting it all over with quickly (a decade's worth of violence in under a year) than actually preventing further ethnic violence. Basically, if partition happens between the Alawites and Sunnis, it's going to be open season on the Alawites in Sunniland or whatever, and vice versa.
So while it might be the best solution (might be), it's not a good solution.
When it gets to a civil war, it's never a walk in the park.
Anyway, it is the Syrians who eventually will decide which way they wish to go. The only remaining question is how many of them will survive to make that decision..
In the Houla massacre, perpetratrors killed 108 to boycott UN's effort for Peace. Only Mrs Golan'Height who wants instability of Syria or the ruin of Syria. The World now witness an Israeli show. A dark show covered by dark conspiracy to genociding Arabs. Look their way in detail. Liberate your views from established media. Read the lips of ex CIA. From 911 till now.
The mother of lie, again. After Iraq. The war addictive. Israel and her new occupation land, the United States of America. Very clear.
The benefit for The West is an attempts helped by Mrs Golan'Height to upset their economc downturn.
You speak about the Golan Heights, IllegalOccupier. You nshould know that Israel legally owns tens of thousands of acres in the Houran. It is about time Syria returns to Israel its stolen land..
As a compromise, Israel may agree to have a land swap, where Israel will give up its rights in the Houran, and get its presense in the Golan Heights recognized.
"If you've met Manaf, you know he's a decent person and more will now leave Assad until he's friendless."
Richard Michael Abraham
www.redii.org
It is widely unlikely that the Syrian opposition has no support nor influence from global powers what so ever. Of course the main opposition is the suppressed part of the population, the sunni majority. The fact that there is a significant dislike for the regime is not a stranger. But to say that there is no other powers affecting the situation is just a sign of naivety and foolishness. History has many times proved itself about this particular problem. Take Lebanon for example, it is wellknown now that the Saudi Arabia payed large amounts of money for the people to take their demonstrations to the streets. Libya, Kuba, well i could make this list very comprising but i think everyone gets the picture. The fact that the opposition in Syria has put up a real fight against its suppressors is very interesting, since the opposition has no resources. The resources that is required for this situation is very comprising it is very naive to think that the opposition has done this trough defections.
You are right that the rebels have support form global powers, but can you really say that they are unjustified in doing so? Especially when Assad's regime is letting its militias rape and kill the opposition, who as you have stated are the bulk of the population. The real embarrassment is that their has been no more proactive intervention than some covert arms supplies.
The fact is no global power wants to be involved in this, aside from in a token way, thus Assad keeps killing and the population is radicalised by the civil unrest. The really interesting thing about events in Syria is not the supply of arms to rebels, nor the supply of Russian weapons to Assad's forces, but the fact that all the global powers are trying to avoid any direct large scale intervention due to their fears of getting sucked into a larger sectarian quagmire.
First of all, i never said that it was justified or not. Second of all, a very important aspect of the first period in the uprising is described in this article http://www.voltairenet.org/Presidency-of-Arab-League-seeks-to. My point in this context is that if the uprising is justified it should be a mather of change and not just a shift of power. When the uprising is characterized of terrorist groups and terrorist actions it is very likely that the minority of the population (shiite) will end up discriminated, which means that it is just a shift of power and will be benifited by the sunni population. Another aspect that should be highlighted is the time of the uprising, is it just a coincident that the situation occur during a very hostile situation between Iran and the west?
Which point are you referring to in the article? I assume the claim that armed terrorist groups have become involved in the rebel cause and are just as brutal as Assad.
This may be true but you fail to consider that these groups have been able to come to Syria to wage war as the Syrian regime gave no space for legitimate opposition, crushing what opposition there was. The evidence of this brutality is clear, For example see Al Jazeera, a news company known for being unfriendly to the West http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/05/2012525133112667140.html
This civil war is the result of the Syrian government's actions, and I don't see the need of many posters including yourself to link the violence to an outside force, be it Iran, Saudi Arabia or the West.
In addition I don't believe you can actually dismiss the rebels as being made up of terrorists. I am sure are some outside insurgents within the rebel forces, but most of these people are scared Syrians fighting against a government that shows them no mercy. There is a body of evidence you can easily find that suggests that the Syrian government is itself responsible for stirring up Sectarian discord, by using sectarian militias. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18240460
By painting the rebels as foreign terrorists you are not only misrepresenting the situation but absolving the Syrian regime of all guilt. I call shenanigans.
ps; When in the last decade have the West and Iran not been involved in a hostile situation?
See it from the angle that this report has a significant mather in the situation but still it has not been any big western news agency reporting about it. And if the report has no meaning then why was it tryied to be inrevealed? And the fact that neither the arab leauge nor the UN has determined who is responsible for this atack. And the most important aspect of the article that i reffered to is the fact that alot of the violence connected to the friendly demonstrations that triggered the whole situation was performed by terrorist if you may, or as i think. External powers.
Rebel killings of innocents have been covered by the western media, see the bbc; http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18551693
terrorists joining the war has been reported, for example see; http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10817570
The problem here is the western media do not report on this matter much as the killings that Assad and his regieme have carried out are far worse and far more troubling.
You have also not proved that terrorists inspired the protests, at best you have shown that terrorist groups are trying to use the war for their own ends, and that the rebels are so desperate that they have utilized terrorist help.
If the Arab nations decided to bury this report it is because they know how the West might look on it, and how much it would reduce the chances of the West intervening.
In addition the article you have linked to does not quote this supposed report, does not give a link to it and gives no real verifiable evidence. How trustworthy can I take it to be, especially if I follow your advice and doubt the media. How could i actually know what is in this report?
your articel is so mileading and missing so much information. the shaggy haired, talking to people on street man you described was drugged out of his head. every sysrian knows how munaf talas was a drug addict and a womanizer just as his father before him was. he and his brother ammassed a fortune from questiionable defence contracts they obtained while father was defense minister. when their privilages started to dwindle by assad and family, they reovlted. just as khadam before them did.
IT IS NOT ABOUT DISENCHANTMENT WITH POLICY, LOVE OF DEMOCRACY, OR ANY OF THE CRAP YOU TRIED TO CONVEY...GET IT RIGHT
According to you this guy and his family, who have been key players in the regime for decades, are corrupt drug addicts. What does that say about the regime?
I have to say... The argument that "the Syrian regime isn't doing anything wrong, they're just dispersing protesters." sort of fails as an argument.
Dispersing protesters with live ammunition is more along the lines of an atrocity, not police action.
This is directed at the pathetic supporters of the criminal Assad regime, not The Economist, whose coverage is excellent as usual.
This particular person does not have any substantial meaning to the situation since he was removed from his position more than a year ago. He was regarded as inreliable after failing to complete his tasks in strategic important areas of the country.
For the complete picture of the situation it seems as it´ll be very difficult to remove assad from his position if the grounds and conditions of his step down is not set by himself. If the battle continues on the ground it will be very difficult to remove assad. Well known facts shows that Russia is providing the regime with not only comprising amount of weapons and ammunition, but radar systems, flight machines and important information as well. And lets not forget the symbios the government has with its islamic republic neighbor, Iran. These to are higly dependent of each other and will make all actions in their power to remain so.
As always, as usual, Israel. She wants Golan Height for new settlements. A darkest show ever. Barbaric.
The first suspect of Arabs genocide, only you Israel.
Sabra Shatila, right? Now Houla.
Syria is Israeli project. We wisely separate the Israelis and the Jews. The Jews is clean, honest in nature. Israel even anti UN in settlements probe. Golan Height is very delicious. Arabs' people is very delicious in zionist perspective for many years. Good. Good curses.
You say,
'Israel...wants Golan Height for new settlements.'
By the way, it is about time Syria returns to Israel its tens of thousands of acres in the Houran, legally owned by Israel.
As a compromise, Israel may agree to have a land swap, where Israel will give up its rights in the Houran, and get its preens in the Golan Heights recognized.
Many more such defections can be expected to escape the wraths of the King of the West. During the Friends of Syria conference in Paris, Hilliary stumped that the "To The King of the North and your sycophant - we the King of the West and Caliph of the South will make sure that you pay dearly for both your reprehensible stance."
History is actually now repeating itself. In 1204 AD the crusading army of King of the West raped Constantinople in order to soften the ground for its eventual capture by the invading King of the South. As only reported in non-Western Media in RT, the few remaining Orthodox communities in Syria are putting the last stand before their eventual genocide and capitulation to the Al Queda invading ally of the King of the West.
Its rather hard to understand your rather hysterical and one sided view. Syria has long been a basket case and has finally errupted into a long overdue civil war. This would have occurred regardless of the Western nations. Syria has been split in sectarian lines by the brutal Syrian Government, who have mismanaged their country and radicalised the masses through their extreme actions, attacking their own people with disgustingly vicious violence.
The western nations have not intervened as a crusading force but have actually kept themselves distant from all of this, just as they tried to do at Libya. Rather than intervene the Western nations would rather keep themselves distant from this mess, as they lack the resources to be drawn into another conflict, and are fully aware that they would be castigated by people like yourself, regardless of the benefits of them doing so.
In addition to this Russia (which has large orthodox Christian communities) blocks the idea of any Western intervention, beyond providing arms and supplies. I would imagine that Russia Today never bothers to cover this vital point.
you are just a regime stooge..pathetic commenting on EVERY web site with irrational illogical and downright non sensical dumb biggoted remarks...SICK AND TIRED OF YOU GENOCIDAL FREAKS..go to Russia where you might be appreciated keeping Putin in power for ever..his reason for supporting Assad
The guy is trolling us good.
In fact, most folks like myself will feel safer in Russia than in US where we will never know whether the next plane-load is holding the Jihadi bombers from your Wahhabi allies to crash into those skyscrapers.
Would this be the same Russia which has its own well documented problems with terrorism? The Beslan school incident or the suicide bombing at Domodedevo airport, not to mention the violence in the unstable caucus regions. Terrorism is a global problem Russia suffers from as much as anywhere else.
That's "stooges" -- plural. happyfish18 is a group ID, as shown by the huge variations in the quality of analysis and the quality of English used in posts at that ID.
But otherwise, you are generally correct that they are pretty obviously in the employ on one of the PRC's government agencies.
Who is commited Arab genocide in modern history? Including Syria (mostly perpetrators victims). Only Israel do it well barbaric. Hold some quotes from Israeli leaders since 1948. Dangerous adventures.
Open 911. It is Israeli trick. See ex CIA's and others' rationale.
Are you sure? I get the impression that it is Romulan plot; or a Klingon one. It is so devious that, it must be out of this world... I just cannot figure out what it is that the Romulans, or the Klingons, got against poor Assad? Can you explain it to us, please?
And with that Star Trek reference, you became my favorite person on this website.
wejpuH, buy' ngop
(Klingon)
hann'yyo
(Romulan)
SO MANY NEWS ON SYRIA AND I STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT IS THE PROBLEM THERE !!!
i am not kidding the media forgot to mention the problem.
The problem is the crony stands between the Hegemon getting to the King of the East.
In other words, Syria is preventing Israel and NATO from attacking Iran. They need to try and destabilize Iran's Strongest Middle East Ally before trying to invade. I know it sounds Psycho, but the sad thing is it is really taking place. OPEN YOUR EYES!
Really? It's clear that Syria has fallen apart without western intervention. This is civil unrest, not part of some larger Western plot. The civil unrest has been caused by sectarian division and a brutal government, not a western bogeyman.
You are disrespecting the dying innocents in Syria by trying to alter the meaning of their deaths, excusing Assad and his cronies. Assad is not fighting a western led plot, he is fighting his own people, with an inexcusable brutality.
"Crony stands between the Hegemon getting to the King ?"
IS THAT FROM HARRY POTTER ?
The civil unrest in Syria is being caused by Armed Rebels firing on the Army while they are dealing with protestors. The international media then blames it on the Army, because they want it to seem like it is all the Governments fault. NATO can't get involved yet because the uprising and confusion has not spread enough for them yet. Why did the Humanitarian Effort for Peace and Cease Fire in Libya quickly turn into an Eliminate Ghadafi's Army mission???? There was a western led plot there, and there is here. You can be blind if you want.
There are protests in every country, the difference is in America there aren't Rebels firing on the Cops and Army when they break them up.
In America the cops and army do not fire on the innocents with live ammunition. In America they do not shell towns in response to legitimate protest. I don't understand why you are trying to excuse the Syrian government who have blatantly chosen to act in an undeniably inhumane, brutal and callous fashion.
I never said the rebels had committed no crimes. in contrast you have denied the crimes of Assad and his regime. the army is blamed as their is a large body of evidence incriminating them. Look on youtube or Jazeera.
You say that their is a NATO plot, and refuse to acknowledge that this unrest is internal, caused by internal Syrian factors. Also Gaddafi was ousted due to internal civil unrest due to the oppression of his people, with Western forces only getting involved once international pressure shamed them into action.
Western forces do not want to get drawn into more middle eastern conflicts. The one thing they learned from the mess of Iraq and Afghanistan is that regime change does not work, and that democracy cannot simply be imported to hostile countries.
Excellent point. Well respected Presidents become brutal dictators overnight.
PR BUBBLES are created.
1st create the good and the bad guys.
1. President of a country becomes a brutal dictator.
Start soft: Details about his luxurious lifestyle emerge.
He is brutal and tortures people.n . Bad Guy
2. He kills opposition.
3. He kills women and children - fabricated massacres with horror pictures are being circulated on YOUTUBE - taken as truth to be shown on CNN.
4. He bombs and his army flattens entire cities
5. Let the UN throw in some numbers telling us that the BAD GUYS killed some 5000 innocent people and it is rising by the second.
Now the opposition.
1. CIA and MI 6 were present for many years in the respective countries: carefully orchestrating and recruiting people. Muslim Brotherhood, Salafists, ex soldiers, criminals etc... . Just brainwashed people that are not afraid to kill their neighbours.
What is happening in Syria now?
Al CIA-Duh ( Al Qaida ) butchering hand in hand with the Muslim brotherhood sponsored by Quatar and Saudi Arabia, who have stationed their own troops in Jordan alongside the Syrian border.
3. The West organizes conferences with their puppies as future heads of state.
4. UN jumps in makes the MASTER-SUPERDUBER-PEACE PLAN sends observers. Oh it is too dangerous, but wait a minute who could not guarantee their safety??? The OPPOSITION!
Urusei,
They are still all about that Regime Change. They just do not like the formula that they used in Iraq and Afghanistan with American Troops on the ground. They like what they did in Libya as it resulted in a very minimal amount of foreign troops on the ground just to communicate between Rebels and NATO. Iraq and Afghanistan went on for 10 years, Libya went on for 1 to 2 years. How many American lives were lost in Libya?? Under 20 I would guess if it is even that high. How many America lives were lost in Iraq and Afghanistan?? Between 3500 and 4000. The same planes were used, just different Ground Troops. Whatever.
Yet again you have avoided mentioning and acknowledging the crimes of Assad and his regime, focusing on the crimes of others. Why will you not admit that his regime has committed atrocities?
I am sure the rebels are not much better, I have never denied this, but the West have little choice but to support them as it the least bloody option. Assad has bloodied his hands too much, and a leader who has committed such blatant atrocities must be stopped. Having committed an atrocity once he will do so again.
You claim that this is all a Western plot for regime change but there is no real benefit in replacing Assad for the West, as there is no guarantee that the regime that replaces Assad will be friendly to the West, unlike Assad who was actually surprisingly pro West.
Their is no real benefit for the West in this war, and they have only intervened as they have no choice. They have been shamed by the media over their inaction, and forced to act. They did not go into this war willingly due to some conspiracy.
Additionally it is true that their where few deaths in Libya, but it was not a cheap war, and it didn't play well to domestic voters. It also had few no real benefits to the West, hence their hesitance in getting involved in this Syrian war. If anything Libya explains Western reluctance to intervene.
Minority rule by the Alawites.
what a pile of cack you and happy racist fish 18 are talking..go to Syria and live in a brutal dictatorship and then see how you feel..and as for Happyfish, you really are a fascist, racist, nasty regime stooge
This is truly bizarre.
What your quasi propaganda piece failed to mention IS "Tlass was sidelined by the regime more than a year ago, after he was deemed unreliable" AND IM QUOTING YESTERDAYS AFP STORY HOW CAN HE 'DEFECT" if he was out of the power circle for one year? GOING BY THE AFP REPORT .General Munaf Tlass was no longer in the inner circle. I quote a sentence from this report 'Tlass was sidelined by the regime more than a year ago, after he was deemed unreliable.' 2. he gave up his military uniform and opted for civilian clothing 3. He was denied promotion. I quote again 'Tlass was furious when Assad refused to promote him from the rank of brigadier general to divisional general or commander, when the yearly promotion list was published on July 1' 4. His cousin 'Abdel Razzak' defected long time back. In middle east, that would black the entire family. 5. France is highlighting this they need some positive news. ............GOEBBLES WOULD HAVE LIKED THIS PIECE
Intercepted Txt Msgs:
Bashar, You've changed.
I have not changed!
You no longer want to go out dining and clubbing.
No, its been a little hectic recently. Kofi came. The UN breathing down my neck. The Iranian delegation demands. Russian ammunition delivery no-showed. I promise next weekend. Pencil me in.
You shell cities, torture student leaders, rape the women, and execute suspects.
See! I have not changed! Same old fun guy! Meet me at the Casbah, Eight sharp!
The Casbah is in Algiers. The song "Rock the Casbah" is actually about the Algerian uprising against the French.
i.e. if Assad was actually to go to the Casbah, the problem would be solved as he would be out of Syria.
Humor must be a foreign concept to you. Would you get the joke if "Casbah" were replaced by "souq" ? If the joke is still not apparent, the problem was not with the usage of "Casbah"...
While you are in a didactic mood, tell us about Gillo Pontecorvo's film, too, please. Pretty please.
Sorry, my comment was meant to be humorous more than nit picky but I can see how it's read that way. I liked your bit and recommended it.
New Conservative:
8:38 => 8:45
Do you work at a Laundry Service? ....because you fold far too quickly.
With hindsight, there is frequently a point where one defection looks like the tipping point for a regime's collapse. But at the time, things are rarely so obvious. This one may be the tipping point for Assad, and we can all hope so. But we won't know until the regime is gone.
He left because he saw what happend to Ghaddafi in Libya, and he knows that the U.S. and NATO will make sure it happens to Assad as well with their Al Qaeda Foot Soldiers and NATO Planes.
The Rebels fire on the Syrian Army when they try to break up a protest, and international media blames it on the Army in stead of Rebels. Just like in Libya. People are so blind.
Care to share what you think might have led him to decide now (as opposed to some months ago) that this was in prospect? If there is significant movement towards NATO planes getting involved, I'm not seeing it. (Unless Turkey runs out of patience, which is admittedly possible. But even then, it seems likely to be Turks without any particular involvement from the rest of NATO beyond moral support.)
Even though Assads army has stepped up their attacks to retake lost ground as of late, the Rebels have stepped up theirs as well and held their ground which means they are well funded and well equipped(MINUS ANY AIR SUPPORT?!?!). The Defected General saw this and knew what was happening, and despite being a friend to Assad, had a moment of Cowardice and flees from what is a sure death if he stays. This rebellion seems to mirror the one in Libya almost exactly, minus one big factor, there was no NATO State which bordered Libya, Turkey however is a NATO State and borders Syria. Abdel Hakim Belhaj was the Rebel Army General in Libya, and he was in Turkey recently making Arms Deals and Pledging Men to the Rebel Cause. Belhaj commanded the ground in the Lbyan Revolution, and NATO guided the Air. It was a NO FLY ZONE for Humanitarian Reasons that quickly turned into a kill Ghadafi mission. There had to be some communication there between Belhaj's Rebels and NATO. There are several news articles that even speculate that the weapons being used in Syria by the Rebels, are from Ghadafi's plundered warehouses.
NATO is using these Rebel Arab armies to expedite the process of Regime Change in countries that they don't like. The Rebels open fire on the Army and Protesters at peaceful demonstrations, and the International Media is told that the Army fired on their own citizens sparking international outrage. This formula worked great for them in Libya (even though it is descending into civil war), much better then Iraq and Afghanistan where American Soldiers had to be on the ground.
Is this the definitive theory? Or should we wait for the latest update on the latest conspiracy theory on the news at eleven?...
Its pretty definitive Garaboncias. Just look at the middle eat countries the United States and Israel have fought with in the last 10 years. Saddam and Iraq. Ghadafi and Libya. Hezbollah (Hassan Nasrallah) and Lebanon. Assad and Syria. These are all Regimes that NATO wanted to change because they are not good friends to Israel. In the future it will be Iran and Ahmadenijad.
It is not like it hasn't been done before, with Arafat and Eqypt, The Shah and Iran, and Karzai in Afghanistan. They don't know what to do with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt now that their pupper Mubarak is gone. America's foreign poliy is all about destabilizing any potential threat to Israel. Besides Jordan, none of the other border countries with Israel are fond of them and NATO has worked tirelessly to drive these regimes into chaos before they bring it it Jerusalem.
You have to do a little reading between the lines I know but it all adds up.....
" Just look at the middle eat countries the United States and Israel have fought with in the last 10 years. Saddam and Iraq. Ghadafi and Libya. Hezbollah (Hassan Nasrallah) and Lebanon. Assad and Syria. These are all Regimes that NATO wanted to change because they are not good friends to Israel. In the future it will be Iran and Ahmadenijad."
This is all so confusing. I did not know that Israel fought Saddam and Iraq, Ghadafi and Libya; or that the US fought Assad and Syria. When did all that happen? I missed all those wars.
You are saying that "These are all Regimes that NATO wanted to change because they are not good friends to Israel. In the future it will be Iran and Ahmadenijad." Am I to understand that, in the past, before Ahmadenijad Iran was a good friend of Israel? This is all so complicated for my simple mind. But having read your incisive explanation of the events in the Middle East, I am beginning to see what you are trying to say: it is all Israel's fault, right? Did I understand you correctly? All those wonderful peace-loving characters you mention just want to live in peace and prosper, but NATO, the US and Israel just won't let them, right? Oh, how could we miss that? Your clarification of the events was a great help. What else need we be enlightened about?
Marcus Luttrell if that is your real name even, you are another regime stooge...why does the Syrian army need to break up a protest anyway.? like the children in Deraa arrested for example ?
I'm trying to figure out why NATO, or anybody else outside Syria, might have a huge stake in regime change. OK, Lebanon would doubtless be far better off with Assad gone. But Lebanon is not a member of NATO, and has minimal capability to project power into Syria. And other than them, the only people with a big stake in the outcome are the Syrians themselves.
Granted, the world will be a better place without Assad and his regime. But the world would also be a better place without, for example, Mugabe and his regime -- and nobody is launching attacks on Zimbamwe. So, since Syria has pretty much nothng that the rest of the world wants (e.g. minimal oil, no minerals, etc.), why assume that anybody else is involved in any significant way?
:) Your humor, be it never so over the top and ironic, sounds so much like the Russian and Chinese propaganda that they will just assume you are supporting them!)
But good luck in your efforts, your parody of their inept agitprop is ever so funny.
I'm not a regime stooge, i'm actually from America you herb. I'm from the outside looking in and I can read between the lines. Can you answer why Al Qaeda is in Syria?? And why numerous news articles speculate the weapons being used are from Ghadafi's exterminated Army??
The rebels are coming in to Syria from where?? Turkey and Iraq! Turkey is a NATO State. NATO has an advantage with Syria over Libya, because they have a State that borders it. They can act like all the confrontation is between those two countries when the NO FLY ZONE COMES INTO EFFECT.
Do you really think Turkey wants a Syrian civil war? It has enough problems with the kurds. The last thing it wants is more kurdish problems.
In addition the weapons you refer are no doubt from Libya but its hardly a surprise. Russian weapons flooded the world for decades after the fall of the USSR. Weapons from major conflicts are often passed around. No need for a conspiracy, just a sad reality that people resell arms.
Al-Qaeda appear at all wars involving Muslims, like the vultures they are. Are you trying to suggest Al-Qaeda and America are allied or something equally lunatic?
Thanks, but comrade, please, don't spoil the fun.
I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of any anti-revolutionary organization. I have never, ever, committed a thoughtcrime against the Party. As a matter of fact, I love all parties; and have only good thoughts for/about them - although I must confess that I had not joined all the parties I was invited to join in my life, but it was not because I am an anti-revolutionary and against the Party; or parties. I just did not have the time...
Can you explain why you believe the Assad government claim that everything is the work of Al Qaida and outside terrorists?
I mean, do you always believe the criminal who tells you the other guy started it when the criminal is large, blood covered and the victim is relatively unarmed?
When Assad tells you it is all the work of thugs and terrorists, it IS the truth, because the thugs and terrorists [a.k.a. Shabiha] are under his command.
so you would rather see evenmore children and innocent people slaughtered by the shabiha and Syrian army, who the UN and all NGOS say are respoinsible for the vast majority of the deaths? and i hope to god a no fly zone DOES come into effect however reticent Western powers are..If Al Qaeda is in Syria....and their power far less than Assad states there, as it suits him to call all opposition terrorists, then they are definately not welcomed by the main opposition and people, and, as for Libian weapons, how else are Syrians meant to protect themselves?
so you would rather see evenmore children and innocent people slaughtered by the shabiha and Syrian army, who the UN and all NGOS say are respoinsible for the vast majority of the deaths? and i hope to god a no fly zone DOES come into effect however reticent Western powers are..If Al Qaeda is in Syria....and their power far less than Assad states there, as it suits him to call all opposition terrorists, then they are definately not welcomed by the main opposition and people, and, as for Libian weapons, how else are Syrians meant to protect themselves?
so you would rather see evenmore children and innocent people slaughtered by the shabiha and Syrian army, who the UN and all NGOS say are respoinsible for the vast majority of the deaths? and i hope to god a no fly zone DOES come into effect however reticent Western powers are..If Al Qaeda is in Syria....and their power far less than Assad states there, as it suits him to call all opposition terrorists, then they are definately not welcomed by the main opposition and people, and, as for Libian weapons, how else are Syrians meant to protect themselves?
Yes they are allied. Al Qaeda had the ground in Libya, while NATO had the air. Right now that is what their building up to in Syria. Do you remember that Humanitarian Mission in Libya that quickly turned into Genocide on Ghadafi's Army? Because I do.
Libyan Arms aren't the only thing crossing into Syria through Turkey. There are a lot of rebel fighters as well. You can believe what you want, but the mere fact that these rebels have been able to sustain a fight with the Syrian Army, who is supplied by Russia, means they are well equipped, and they have done it thus far without any air support. When Turkey and NATO get involved, its probably over for Assad just like it was for Ghadafi. Ghadafi had no chance and his skies were completely overrun by foreigners. Are you going to tell me that those foreign planes had no contact with the Rebels on the ground???
The United States fought Saddam and Iraq from 2003 through 2011. NATO and Al Qaeda Rebels fought Ghadafi and Libya from. Israel fought Lebanon and Hezbollah. The Al Qaeda Rebels are fighting Assad and Syria right now. Don't try to twist words, the fact is the entire U.S. foreign policy is built around destabilizing countries they perceive as a threat to Israel.
Why is Hilary Clinton and the U.S. so pressed to put Sanctions on Syria?? Because they border Israel and aren't an ally. It also weakens Iran in some aspects if Syria is in the midst of its own civil war.
The United States fought Saddam and Iraq from 2003 through 2011. NATO and Al Qaeda Rebels fought Ghadafi and Libya from. Israel fought Lebanon and Hezbollah. The Al Qaeda Rebels are fighting Assad and Syria right now. Don't try to twist words, the fact is the entire U.S. foreign policy is built around destabilizing countries they perceive as a threat to Israel.
Why is Hilary Clinton and the U.S. so pressed to put Sanctions on Syria?? Because they border Israel and aren't an ally. It also weakens Iran in some aspects if Syria is in the midst of its own civil war.
The rebels are sustaining a war against the army as they have the support of the vast bulk of the Syrian population.
It is well known that in Libya the planes had contact with rebel troops on the ground. So what? Those planes where only sent after Gaddafi began committing atrocities. It is also well known that most Libyans supported the rebels, and supported Western intervention, and that Gaddafi ran a repressive regime that committed atrocities.
Both Gaddafi and Assad stoked a rebellion by their own actions. I do not see why you are so desperate to absolve them with a conspiracy theory.
I also do not see why you do not acknowledge Western hesitance to get involved, or the atrocities committed by Assad and Gaddafi's respective regimes. Is it because these facts undermine your theory?
In addition why say that Libyan rebels are Al Qaeda led. Where is your evidence? The way libya is going now is not perfect, but it is transitioning into a democratic state. Would this be happening if the rebels were all the radicalised Muslims that you believe them to be?
" Don't try to twist words, the fact is the entire U.S. foreign policy is built around destabilizing countries they perceive as a threat to Israel."
I wouldn't dream of it. Minds - not only yours - that produce such brilliant statements, need no more twisting...
No. I can't agree with you. Assad just doesn't possess enough 'dependable' troops. Why should a Sunni soldier risk his life for the Assad family, the Alawites and minority rule? It makes no sense. Nazi Germany made remarkable progress with its invasion into the Soviet Union for a similar reason. Who wanted to fight for Stalin or the Soviet Union until it became quite apparent that Hitler wanted to kill them all. Then it became advisable to join with them against the invasion. Kill or be killed. Unfortunately for Assad there is no foreign invasion or ideology to rally the support of the masses in Syria. Russian embarrassment can only be growing. For years they have been seen as supporters of the oppressed by the people of the region until now. Their support of Assad has poisoned the well for them in the Middle East with the Arabs. You're witnessing the implosion of a police state. So are the Russians.
When you read between the lines, all you are getting is blank space. US is in the Middle East primarily because of her own interest, not because of Israel. If you look at US Middle Eastern policy through Israel, you are going to get a lot of things wrong. In fact the Israel's would very much like Assad, the military in Egypt to be in power. IF the US was following Israel's lead than would it not make sense to prop them up.
If the US was acting in the interest of Israel, wouldn't it be better if they just supported the wholesale slaughtering of civilians. Its easy, just say they are terrorist.
The way I look at it, the US is merely trying to manage the situation. US power in the Middle East is really limited. Of all the uprisings, the only place where the US had any influence was Egypt. They have very little influence in Libya or in Syria. The Libyan intervention in largely about the Oil, not necessarily for the US, but her European allies. If Syria had the oil reserves of Saudi Arabia / Libya, there West would have intervened already.
I'l give you a hint why. Its a country thats nearby. It starts with an I and ends with a L.
The only country which fits that description a) is not a member of NATO (and doesn't get along all that well, under the current government, with most NATO members; especially the close ones), and b) has had a comfortable modus vivendi with Assad. Which situation, judging from events in Egypt, seems likely to change should Assad be toppled. So what is their motivation to attack him?
Al Qaeda had the ground in Libya, while NATO had the air.
Which is, no doubt, why it appears that the secularist parties are beating out the Muslim Brotherhood in the elections just held. (And al Qaeda shown no visible presence at all.)
One might almost think that maybe, just maybe, Libya wasn't all about al Qaeda after all....