FOXCon Is removing Assad in Syria the only way to destroy ISIS?

[AngryCanadian]

Someone here mentioned when John McCain and Lindsey Graham wrote a Wall Street Journal op-ed would became the talking memo point of FOX News they weren't kidding. Look at the fancy title that they came up.

If you would ask me, removing Assad in Syria as a way to destroy the manufactured ISIS suggests that the ISIS was created by the west as an excuse to remove Assad.
Removing Gaddafi has placed Libya into Chaos and forgotten, ironic that FOX news had even the guts to cite Bolton. But at least he is right.
Is removing Assad in Syria the only way to destroy ISIS? (http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/americas-newsroom/2014/10/07/removing-assad-syria-only-way-destroy-isis)



"It's hard to see how going after Assad is going to benefit us with ISIS."

Bolton also went a step further, saying he believes the Obama administration's heart isn't in the fight and that the president "wishes the whole thing would go away."

[vita3]

Assad has been fighting these fanatics for 3 years now. If we were honest about fighting ISIS we would arm the current Syrian Gov

[Zippyjuan]

I think maybe the US is starting to rethink their "get rid of Assad" campaign.

[alucard13mm]

Assad has been fighting these fanatics for 3 years now. If we were honest about fighting ISIS we would arm the current Syrian Gov

My thoughts exactly. If the USA military industrial complex is forcing us to spend money.. why not arm the syrian government to kill ISIS if ISIS is so deadly and a big threat.

Unless... MIC gets more money in the long run dragging this out as long as possible.

Killing Assad or giving support to rebels is counter productive.

[Brett85]

Removing Assad in Syria would mean that ISIS would take over Syria and come to power in Syria.

[Dianne]

Obozo gave the arms to ISIS to destroy Assad in Syria. As long as Assad refuses to enter the United Nations and turn his country's money over to the World Bank; he wears a bullseye on his back. This ISIS bullshit is all about the take over of Syria.

[twomp]

Someone here mentioned when John McCain and Lindsey Graham wrote a Wall Street Journal op-ed would became the talking memo point of FOX News they weren't kidding. Look at the fancy title that they came up.

If you would ask me, removing Assad in Syria as a way to destroy the manufactured ISIS suggests that the ISIS was created by the west as an excuse to remove Assad.
Removing Gaddafi has placed Libya into Chaos and forgotten, ironic that FOX news had even the guts to cite Bolton. But at least he is right.
Is removing Assad in Syria the only way to destroy ISIS? (http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/americas-newsroom/2014/10/07/removing-assad-syria-only-way-destroy-isis)

That someone would be me thank you. On this thread:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?460988-McCain-Graham-Editorial-quot-To-Defeat-Islamic-State-Remove-Assad-quot

I said this:


How long before this becomes a talking point on Fox News? Next thing you know, we will have all the GOP rank and file who are at home right now shitting in their pants clamoring for Assad to be removed?

Shameless self-promotion!

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Michael Savage was saying the ISIS was invented for the sole purpose of an excuse to remove Assad.

Russia won't allow it.

[AngryCanadian]

Has anyone noticed this yet?

Why weren't the ISIS placed on the most terrorist blacklist?

[Constitutional Paulicy]

Syria is a gateway to a western alliance oil pipeline proposal that was reject by Assad in favor of the construction of a Russian/Iranian favored alternative....




These strategic concerns, motivated by fear of expanding Iranian influence, impacted Syria primarily in relation to pipeline geopolitics. In 2009 - the same year former French foreign minister Dumas alleges the British began planning operations in Syria - Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar that would run a pipeline from the latter's North field, contiguous with Iran's South Pars field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey, with a view to supply European markets - albeit crucially bypassing Russia. Assad's rationale was "to protect the interests of [his] Russian ally, which is Europe's top supplier of natural gas."

Instead, the following year, Assad pursued negotiations for an alternative $10 billion pipeline plan with Iran, across Iraq to Syria, that would also potentially allow Iran to supply gas to Europe from its South Pars field shared with Qatar. The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the project was signed in July 2012 - just as Syria's civil war was spreading to Damascus and Aleppo - and earlier this year Iraq signed a framework agreement for construction of the gas pipelines.

The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline plan was a "direct slap in the face" to Qatar's plans. No wonder Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, in a failed attempt to bribe Russia to switch sides, told President Vladmir Putin that "whatever regime comes after" Assad, it will be "completely" in Saudi Arabia's hands and will "not sign any agreement allowing any Gulf country to transport its gas across Syria to Europe and compete with Russian gas exports", according to diplomatic sources. When Putin refused, the Prince vowed military action.

more here... http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/aug/30/syria-chemical-attack-war-intervention-oil-gas-energy-pipelines

[vita3]

Is there any DC politicians speaking openly & loudly about keeping Assad in power?

[Zippyjuan]

Has anyone noticed this yet?

Why weren't the ISIS placed on the most terrorist blacklist?

Their leader, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi has been on the list since 2011. http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2011/10/us_adds_al_qaeda_in.php

[acptulsa]

I think maybe the US is starting to rethink their "get rid of Assad" campaign.

Uh huh.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/john-mccain-and-lindsey-graham-to-defeat-islamic-state-remove-assad-1412636762

Sure they are.

Assad won't play ball, so we created a group to depose him, but they went off the reservation, so now we have a civil war going on in Syria and we need quadrillions of your dollars to go halfway around the world and defeat both sides in a civil war in a place smaller than Arkansas that you couldn't even find on a map.

Because they'll car bomb your house boogity boogity. If your own federally militarized police department doesn't beat them to it.

We all wish Washington was capable of rethinking this crap they do for the oil cartel and the Fed...

[vita3]

It's not a civil war in Syria, it's a foreign invasion.

[AngryCanadian]

Their leader, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi has been on the list since 2011. http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2011/10/us_adds_al_qaeda_in.php

I meant the group not a person, for example the KLA were on the blacklist before they decide to drop them from the list.

[twomp]

This was linked from the front page of yahoo.com:

We Cannot Remove ISIS Without Removing Syrian President Assad


The policies of Syrian President Assad and his regime created the conditions of civil war and state failure on which ISIS has thrived. In the long run, there will be no final defeat of ISIS or other radical groups that prey on extreme popular discontent until he is removed, and a new inclusive order is put in place in Damascus. Ironically, the rise of the Islamic State and entry into the war of the United States and its allies is creating new conditions and calculations on the ground and could create the political conditions for a final settlement of the Syrian crisis.

The article is from huffingtonpost. It looks like team blue is now in on it. Countdown till we go to war in Syria....

hxxp://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-salem/remove-isis-remove-assad_b_5953540.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

p.s. at least the comment section is encouraging

[vita3]

No wonder all of Egypt thinks Obama works for the Muslim Brotherhood.