It would be well to wait and see if this new Syrian Leopard has changed his spots. My gut feeling (pretty worthless to anyone but me) is it's going to be much of the same for Syria (if not worse).
Printable View
It would be well to wait and see if this new Syrian Leopard has changed his spots. My gut feeling (pretty worthless to anyone but me) is it's going to be much of the same for Syria (if not worse).
Thoughts and prayers Andy. Send our regards to Vlad.
Erm, I seem to recall our "political elites" complaining about his other crimes too. You know, stealing the election, gassing his own people, that sort of thing.
But why is it so important for you to whitewash his crimes now? It's over. He lost. Putin lost. Let it go.
As for the new guy... I don't see a single person in this thread saying he's turned over a new leaf. I think we're all extremely sceptical of that. You seem to be strawmanning yet again.
Not that I'm a Middle East expert but this is exactly what I thought about Israel's actions.
Meanwhile, Turkey has joined some Middle Eastern nations - including Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Egypt - in accusing Israel of exploiting the downfall of Assad. The Israeli military has acknowledged its troops are operating in Syrian territory, beyond the demilitarised buffer zone between Syria and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights
I think you misunderstood the sentence. It means that according to the elites his only real crime is that he opposed their interests in supporting Palestine.
Otherwise, to cite but one example, why did Tony Blair roll out the red carpet for him and consider petitioning the Queen for him to be knighted?
https://archive.ph/SDGnG
Ah, glad to see those paragons of virtue are on the case. They've never poked the bear for their own interests all over the ME have they?
How many immigrant workers died building the World Cup stadiums in Qatar? How many will die building the stadiums for the likely Saudi Arabian world cup 2034?
In all likelihood they're probably quite relieved that Israel are taking these assets out making them unavailable for the next iteration of ISIS or AQ as they wouldn't want to lose their privileged existence to such organisations, but they have to say something to save face.
If you quote something but don't agree with it, you need to indicate so, otherwise you're just quoting it.
As I've pointed out earlier, the statement itself is a lie - obviously our "Elites" have accused him of other crimes.
As for what Blair did, what does this have to do with anything? Do you think every time one world leader receives another, it implies total agreement with everything they subsequently do? What are you trying to say here?