Posted on 09/15/2015 1:04:50 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
Finnish diplomat and Nobel laureate Martti Ahtisaari suggested that there was a moment early on during Syria's hideous war when a political solution could have been thrashed out. Ahtisaari claims that in February 2012, when the conflict had claimed under 10,000 lives, Russia's envoy to the United Nations outlined a peace plan that could have led to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's exit from power.
Ahtisaari detailed the discussions in an interview with the Guardian newspaper: Vitaly Churkin, the Russian envoy, "said three things," according to Ahtisaari. "One — we should not give arms to the opposition. Two — we should get a dialogue going between the opposition and Assad straight away. Three — we should find an elegant way for Assad to step aside."
Ahtisaari, a former Finnish president who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2008 for his efforts as a negotiator and settler of conflicts around the world, was adamant about the seriousness of Churkin's proposal, which he believed had the Kremlin's backing.
According to the Guardian, Ahtisaari had been sent in February 2012 to speak with the ambassadors of the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council at the behest of the Elders, a group of senior statesmen and former world leaders focused on peace and the defense of human rights. The envoys from the United States, France and Britain apparently "ignored" Churkin's proposal. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Russia is HELPING Assad... why would they offer to do that?
I don’t think Russia wants ISIS taking over Syria
And, removing Asaad would have accomplished what? Obama wanted an overthrow like he had done in Egypt and Lybia. (sp)
Because they probably saw the writing on the wall that the crooks in Washington would allow people like ISIS to emerge if it meant getting rid of Russia’s ally.
Russia, as flawed as it is, isn’t deranged enough as Obama as to want to destroy its own country.
Russia’s policy in Syria is much simpler than ours.
We’re supporting ISIS, and fighting ISIS, and supporting Iran who is fighting ISIS while supporting Assad who we are fighting.
Our geniuses are administering a schizophrenic policy where we are on both sides at the same time.
I’d trade Putin for zero in a femto second.
It will be young Russian soldiers who will suffer, just as it was, and will be young American soldiers who will suffer for the policy failures of their respective leaders...
[It will be young Russian soldiers who will suffer, just as it was, and will be young American soldiers who will suffer for the policy failures of their respective leaders...]
Every politician is a drug store field marshal.
0bama sides more with the caliphate than not.
For guarantees like holding onto their naval base in a post Assad Syria. Russia knew 3 years ago it looked like Assad would fall eventually and Russia was trying to cut a deal with Obama but Obama and Hillary were either too stupid or too arrogant to take the deal because they thought Assad would fall quick. Trump would have taken the deal.
Tartus is deep in Allawite and I think coastal Christain lands. So no.
Tartus is a port. The Russians would not have brought BTRs and T-90s if they planned on staying port side.
Tartus is a port and between the sea and the port is Allawite lands and Christian lands. The city itself is a mixed city with lots of Christians and the core of the Assad’s regime’s fighters come from there. So I don’t think Russia’s port presence or their base nearby (fortifying an airstrip) are deep in hostile injun country is what I was saying. If Syria cracks up the Russians have a strategic hold of Syria’s only coast with a (I assume) grateful Alawite and Christian local community as support. The Americans get the Sunnis who seem to be all jihadists and I don’t know if the USA would base any troops there any way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_naval_facility_in_Tartus
Russian naval facility in Tartus
Much of the Alawitte land is not really under their control. They are short of young soldiers. Christian fighters are few and far between, many having fled to Turkey,etc.
But my point is, Russia would not be moving all this gear in if they merely intend to pull "port security."
I am sorry I misunderstood. I agree with you that this is more than port duty.
No problem. I sure would like to see what is in all these “Condor flights!” Antonov is one fascinating aircraft.
That’s because Obama and CIA’s John Brennan support ISIS.
I know Brennan spent time in Saudi Arabia and converted to Radical Islam and I strongly feel that Obama is actually a Radical Muslim as well....he just hasn’t given a press conference yet to announce to the world that he is.
That was a given noticeable way back when he was elected to the Senate. Remember when drunk Teddy inadvertently called him 'Osama" Obama. Plus, with the middle name of Hussein. That should have been a dead giveaway.
Russia has had a naval base in Syria for over 40 years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.