Syria's Assad Delivers Chilling Warning To Europe And The World...

paulitician

Platinum Member
Oct 7, 2011
38,401
4,162
1,130
We should prepare for awful Blowback in the coming years. Our support for 'Rebels' in Egypt, Libya, and Syria is going to haunt us.


‘A REDRAWING OF THE MAP’: SYRIA’S ASSAD DELIVERS CHILLING WARNING TO EUROPE & THE WORLD


BEIRUT (TheBlaze/AP) — Syria’s president warned that Europe “will pay a price” if it delivers weapons to the rebels fighting him, saying in an interview published Monday that arming them would backfire as the “terrorists” return to their countries with extremist ideologies.

Assad further warned that as the conflict spills into neighboring countries, blurring borders, it will set off a domino effect.

“Nobody can imagine how the region would look like in case of a redrawing of the map. That will be a map for uncounted wars in the Middle East and possibly elsewhere, that nobody can stop,” he said.

Assad’s comments were his first since last week’s decision by President Barack Obama to authorize weapons and ammunition shipments to Syrian rebels, after confirming that Assad’s regime used chemical weapons against them.

The European Union has also allowed a weapons embargo against Syria to expire, allowing members of the 27-nation bloc to arm the rebels. France and Britain are moving in that direction, but the German government opposes such a move.

Assad’s interview with the German daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Runschau appeared aimed at reinforcing German skepticism.

“If the Europeans ship weapons, Europe’s backyard becomes a terrorists’ place, and Europe will pay a price for it,” Assad threatened in Arabic comments translated into German.

Chaos in Syria would result in “the direct export of terrorism to Europe,” he warned. “Terrorists will return to Europe with fighting experience and extremist ideologies.”

Assad also insisted that European efforts to distinguish between good and bad rebels when it comes to shipping weapons is like trying to “[differentiate] between `good’ and `bad’ Taliban a few years ago, or a `good’ and `bad’ al-Qaida.”

The interview was conducted in a government building in Damascus last week. Following the U.S. decision on Friday, the president answered a few more questions via email Sunday, the newspaper said...

Read More:
?A Redrawing of the Map?: Syria?s Assad Delivers Chilling Warning to Europe & the World | TheBlaze.com
 
Yep. We have no clue what we are doing in the Middle East anymore. Our intervention is driven by our insatiable need for oil, not for the real goal of defending freedom, or our interests here at home.
 
Yep. We have no clue what we are doing in the Middle East anymore. Our intervention is driven by our insatiable need for oil, not for the real goal of defending freedom, or our interests here at home.

Spot-On. No need to add anything. Thanks.
 
Yep. We have no clue what we are doing in the Middle East anymore. Our intervention is driven by our insatiable need for oil, not for the real goal of defending freedom, or our interests here at home.

Spot-On. No need to add anything. Thanks.

I didn't mean to kill your thread, Paul.

:(

It's cool. It won't gain much traction here anyway. Most here are still stuck in that old Republican VS. Democrat paradigm. They're not interested in anything that strays outside that box.
 
Spot-On. No need to add anything. Thanks.

I didn't mean to kill your thread, Paul.

:(

It's cool. It won't gain much traction here anyway. Most here are still stuck in that old Republican VS. Democrat paradigm. They're not interested in anything that strays outside that box.

I used to be as hard right as I could be, I was borderline neo-con. But a dramatic shift took place after the election in 2008.. now look at me, I'm a Libertarian. Good thing I saw the light. The two party system is an utter travesty. Too much bickering, not enough teamwork, not enough freedom. Lol.
 
Last edited:
Yep. We have no clue what we are doing in the Middle East anymore. Our intervention is driven by our insatiable need for oil, not for the real goal of defending freedom, or our interests here at home.

What makes you think our Syria policy has anything to do with oil?
 
Yep. We have no clue what we are doing in the Middle East anymore. Our intervention is driven by our insatiable need for oil, not for the real goal of defending freedom, or our interests here at home.

What makes you think our Syria policy has anything to do with oil?

Oh, lordy. Does the simple fact that they are our largest importer of oil mean anything? Or are you that out of touch with reality?

What makes you think it doesn't?
 
At least Bush was nice enough to come up with some explanations for his interventions. Obama doesn't even bother to try.
 
Yep. We have no clue what we are doing in the Middle East anymore. Our intervention is driven by our insatiable need for oil, not for the real goal of defending freedom, or our interests here at home.

What makes you think our Syria policy has anything to do with oil?

Oh, lordy. Does the simple fact that they are our largest importer of oil mean anything? Or are you that out of touch with reality?

What makes you think it doesn't?

Syria isn't our largest source of oil. Since the mid 90's our imports from Syria have been pretty small.
 
Yep. We have no clue what we are doing in the Middle East anymore. Our intervention is driven by our insatiable need for oil, not for the real goal of defending freedom, or our interests here at home.

What makes you think our Syria policy has anything to do with oil?

Of course, our foreign policy in the M.E. is determined by oil. What other choice do we have? It's not as if we've invested heavily enough in alternative forms of energy or anything.

If the flow of oil stops, this country ceases to function economically and militarily.
 
At least Bush was nice enough to come up with some explanations for his interventions. Obama doesn't even bother to try.

He stated quite a long time ago that the use of chemical weapons would be a red line, and that has happened and been independently verified by third part sources.

The big issue for me though (and for the Obama Administration I imagine), is the security threats that extended conflict are starting to have. Lebanon is starting to destabilize, security in the Golan Heights is starting to destabilize, large refugee problems are starting to place heavy strains on host countries (like Jordan). I think we just want to see it ended. No outcome is going to be desirable, but the long wait is just making it worse.
 
Yep. We have no clue what we are doing in the Middle East anymore. Our intervention is driven by our insatiable need for oil, not for the real goal of defending freedom, or our interests here at home.

What makes you think our Syria policy has anything to do with oil?

Oh, lordy. Does the simple fact that they are our largest importer of oil mean anything? Or are you that out of touch with reality?

What makes you think it doesn't?

If that were true and we are importing all this oil from Syria, that would be Assad's Syria, when Syria had a stable government.
 
Yep. We have no clue what we are doing in the Middle East anymore. Our intervention is driven by our insatiable need for oil, not for the real goal of defending freedom, or our interests here at home.

What makes you think our Syria policy has anything to do with oil?

Of course, our foreign policy in the M.E. is determined by oil. What other choice do we have? It's not as if we've invested heavily enough in alternative forms of energy or anything.

If the flow of oil stops, this country ceases to function economically and militarily.

We have Africa and South America. more so than ever, but really I have always found it to be rather reductionist to simply equate all Middle Eastern politics to "LOL OIL". If that were true then there is no way we would have ever supported Israel for example.
 
obama doesn't care about oil. If he thought he could get away with it, he would ban all petroleum products tomorrow. What he does care about is destabilizing the middle east.
 
What makes you think our Syria policy has anything to do with oil?

Oh, lordy. Does the simple fact that they are our largest importer of oil mean anything? Or are you that out of touch with reality?

What makes you think it doesn't?

If that were true and we are importing all this oil from Syria, that would be Assad's Syria, when Syria had a stable government.

Except we aren't. We import more oil from a country like say Angola in one month than we import from Syria in an entire year.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top