The ISIS Supply Assad Regime With Energy!

[Freeman]

The opposition defy the terrorists of ISIS who control oil stations of Palmyra to cut the supply of energy, ISIS refuse and continue supplying the regime in Damascus.

Evident coalition between terrorists of Daesh and Assad in Syria.

REVEALED The oil middleman between the Syrian regime and ISIS - Business Insider

 

[Bleipriester]

The opposition defy the terrorists of ISIS who control oil stations of Palmyra to cut the supply of energy, ISIS refuse and continue supplying the regime in Damascus.

Evident coalition between terrorists of Daesh and Assad in Syria.

REVEALED The oil middleman between the Syrian regime and ISIS - Business Insider

Nonsense. While the West imposes sanctions on Syria, it buys oil from ISIS.
EU States Buying Islamic State Oil - Global Agenda - News - Arutz Sheva

ISIS has recently destroyed a gas pipeline supplying Damascus.
ISIS blows up Syrian gas pipeline - Business Insider

 

[Tehon]

Lol, now we are supposed to believe that Assad is in cahoots with ISIS. The West is getting desperate.

 

[Bleipriester]

Lol, now we are supposed to believe that Assad is in cahoots with ISIS. The West is getting desperate.

That has been a Nato-Al-Qaeda claim for long time now. However, it is the "Syrian opposition" and ISIS that share the same views.

 

[Tehon]

Lol, now we are supposed to believe that Assad is in cahoots with ISIS. The West is getting desperate.

That has been a Nato-Al-Qaeda claim for long time now. However, it is the "Syrian opposition" and ISIS that share the same views.

I don't believe that claim is readily accepted here in America. But I do believe that our media might start pushing that narrative more vociferously ahead of a potential US- Western invasion. That seems to me where this is all headed.

 

[Bleipriester]

Lol, now we are supposed to believe that Assad is in cahoots with ISIS. The West is getting desperate.

That has been a Nato-Al-Qaeda claim for long time now. However, it is the "Syrian opposition" and ISIS that share the same views.

I don't believe that claim is readily accepted here in America. But I do believe that our media might start pushing that narrative more vociferously ahead of a potential US- Western invasion. That seems to me where this is all headed.

Possible. But I think an invasion against the Syrian government is not on the table. The US is officially still supporting "moderate rebels" in the framework of fighting ISIS, instead.

 

[Freeman]

Lol, now we are supposed to believe that Assad is in cahoots with ISIS. The West is getting desperate.

That has been a Nato-Al-Qaeda claim for long time now. However, it is the "Syrian opposition" and ISIS that share the same views.

I don't believe that claim is readily accepted here in America. But I do believe that our media might start pushing that narrative more vociferously ahead of a potential US- Western invasion. That seems to me where this is all headed.

It is evident.
- Why ISIS puppets doesn't cut energy supply to regime in Damascus and close pipeline?!
- Why the terrorists of Hezbollah don't fight ISIS like Syrian opposition do?
- Why the regime bomb civilians in Raqqa and avoid ISIS bases?


Assad s strategy don t fight Daesh direct it

 

[Bleipriester]

Lol, now we are supposed to believe that Assad is in cahoots with ISIS. The West is getting desperate.

That has been a Nato-Al-Qaeda claim for long time now. However, it is the "Syrian opposition" and ISIS that share the same views.

I don't believe that claim is readily accepted here in America. But I do believe that our media might start pushing that narrative more vociferously ahead of a potential US- Western invasion. That seems to me where this is all headed.

It is evident.
- Why ISIS puppets doesn't cut energy supply to regime in Damascus and close pipeline?!
- Why the terrorists of Hezbollah don't fight ISIS like Syrian opposition do?
- Why the regime bomb civilians in Raqqa and avoid ISIS bases?


Assad s strategy don t fight Daesh direct it

This is just more nonsense.

Look here:

 

[Tehon]

Possible. But I think an invasion against the Syrian government is not on the table. The US is officially still supporting "moderate rebels" in the framework of fighting ISIS, instead.

Yea, I'm just postulating about what the US policy for the future might be. It wouldn't be a full scale invasion. Just enough force to help create "safe zones". This idea has been expressed publicly by the Brookings Institute. You may find it interesting.
Deconstructing Syria Towards a regionalized strategy for a confederal country Brookings Institution

 

[Tehon]

Lol, now we are supposed to believe that Assad is in cahoots with ISIS. The West is getting desperate.

That has been a Nato-Al-Qaeda claim for long time now. However, it is the "Syrian opposition" and ISIS that share the same views.

I don't believe that claim is readily accepted here in America. But I do believe that our media might start pushing that narrative more vociferously ahead of a potential US- Western invasion. That seems to me where this is all headed.

It is evident.
- Why ISIS puppets doesn't cut energy supply to regime in Damascus and close pipeline?!
- Why the terrorists of Hezbollah don't fight ISIS like Syrian opposition do?
- Why the regime bomb civilians in Raqqa and avoid ISIS bases?


Assad s strategy don t fight Daesh direct it

I fail to see the logic in your reasoning. Assad has nothing to gain from ISIS presence in Syria.

 

[Bleipriester]

Possible. But I think an invasion against the Syrian government is not on the table. The US is officially still supporting "moderate rebels" in the framework of fighting ISIS, instead.

Yea, I'm just postulating about what the US policy for the future might be. It wouldn't be a full scale invasion. Just enough force to help create "safe zones". This idea has been expressed publicly by the Brookings Institute. You may find it interesting.
Deconstructing Syria Towards a regionalized strategy for a confederal country Brookings Institution

Sounds to me like nonsense that people create to fill the mess the ME policy has created.

 

[Tehon]

Possible. But I think an invasion against the Syrian government is not on the table. The US is officially still supporting "moderate rebels" in the framework of fighting ISIS, instead.

Yea, I'm just postulating about what the US policy for the future might be. It wouldn't be a full scale invasion. Just enough force to help create "safe zones". This idea has been expressed publicly by the Brookings Institute. You may find it interesting.
Deconstructing Syria Towards a regionalized strategy for a confederal country Brookings Institution

Sounds to me like nonsense that people create to fill the mess the ME policy has created.

Maybe, Brookings has a fairly long history in this country, I don't discount what they say that easily.

 

[Bleipriester]

Possible. But I think an invasion against the Syrian government is not on the table. The US is officially still supporting "moderate rebels" in the framework of fighting ISIS, instead.

Yea, I'm just postulating about what the US policy for the future might be. It wouldn't be a full scale invasion. Just enough force to help create "safe zones". This idea has been expressed publicly by the Brookings Institute. You may find it interesting.
Deconstructing Syria Towards a regionalized strategy for a confederal country Brookings Institution

Sounds to me like nonsense that people create to fill the mess the ME policy has created.

Maybe, Brookings has a fairly long history in this country, I don't discount what they say that easily.

I don't know them.
But there are no such people as "moderate rebels" so thus all that policies regarding those "moderates" are nonsense as well. And speculations basing on that policies, anyway.

 

[Tehon]

But there are no such people as "moderate rebels" so thus all that policies regarding those "moderates" are nonsense as well.

I know this as well but the government and those who advise the government (Brookings) cling to their lies in order to justify their actions. They can't tell the people outright that they are supporting terrorism in Syria. And the people, by and large, lack the intellectual honesty to admit it so they are willing to accept the government lies.

 

[Bleipriester]

But there are no such people as "moderate rebels" so thus all that policies regarding those "moderates" are nonsense as well.

I know this as well but the government and those who advise the government (Brookings) cling to their lies in order to justify their actions. They can't tell the people outright that they are supporting terrorism in Syria. And the people, by and large, lack the intellectual honesty to admit it so they are willing to accept the government lies.

But what can they tell the people after they have created a terror state in Syria?

 

[Tehon]

But there are no such people as "moderate rebels" so thus all that policies regarding those "moderates" are nonsense as well.

I know this as well but the government and those who advise the government (Brookings) cling to their lies in order to justify their actions. They can't tell the people outright that they are supporting terrorism in Syria. And the people, by and large, lack the intellectual honesty to admit it so they are willing to accept the government lies.

But what can they tell the people after they have created a terror state in Syria?

Again, the government is not admitting to, and the media is not pointing out, any role for the turmoil in Syria. The people don't acknowledge it,they accept the lies, so there is nothing to explain. When it is discussed it is usually on the level of partisan politics.

 

[Bleipriester]

But there are no such people as "moderate rebels" so thus all that policies regarding those "moderates" are nonsense as well.

I know this as well but the government and those who advise the government (Brookings) cling to their lies in order to justify their actions. They can't tell the people outright that they are supporting terrorism in Syria. And the people, by and large, lack the intellectual honesty to admit it so they are willing to accept the government lies.

But what can they tell the people after they have created a terror state in Syria?

Again, the government is not admitting to, and the media is not pointing out, any role for the turmoil in Syria. The people don't acknowledge it,they accept the lies, so there is nothing to explain. When it is discussed it is usually on the level of partisan politics.

That works only due to the media plot. But in case terrorists create a state in Syria that is labelled a democratic state by the US gov´t, that lie cannot be maintained for long.

 

[Tehon]

But there are no such people as "moderate rebels" so thus all that policies regarding those "moderates" are nonsense as well.

I know this as well but the government and those who advise the government (Brookings) cling to their lies in order to justify their actions. They can't tell the people outright that they are supporting terrorism in Syria. And the people, by and large, lack the intellectual honesty to admit it so they are willing to accept the government lies.

But what can they tell the people after they have created a terror state in Syria?

Again, the government is not admitting to, and the media is not pointing out, any role for the turmoil in Syria. The people don't acknowledge it,they accept the lies, so there is nothing to explain. When it is discussed it is usually on the level of partisan politics.

That works only due to the media plot. But in case terrorists create a state in Syria that is labelled a democratic state by the US gov´t, that lie cannot be maintained for long.

I would think not.

 

[Tehon]

But there are no such people as "moderate rebels" so thus all that policies regarding those "moderates" are nonsense as well.

I know this as well but the government and those who advise the government (Brookings) cling to their lies in order to justify their actions. They can't tell the people outright that they are supporting terrorism in Syria. And the people, by and large, lack the intellectual honesty to admit it so they are willing to accept the government lies.

But what can they tell the people after they have created a terror state in Syria?

Again, the government is not admitting to, and the media is not pointing out, any role for the turmoil in Syria. The people don't acknowledge it,they accept the lies, so there is nothing to explain. When it is discussed it is usually on the level of partisan politics.

That works only due to the media plot. But in case terrorists create a state in Syria that is labelled a democratic state by the US gov´t, that lie cannot be maintained for long.

BTW, I don't believe the plans are to leave Syria intact as a State. I believe the plan will be for the balkanization of Syria.

 

[Bleipriester]

But there are no such people as "moderate rebels" so thus all that policies regarding those "moderates" are nonsense as well.

I know this as well but the government and those who advise the government (Brookings) cling to their lies in order to justify their actions. They can't tell the people outright that they are supporting terrorism in Syria. And the people, by and large, lack the intellectual honesty to admit it so they are willing to accept the government lies.

But what can they tell the people after they have created a terror state in Syria?

Again, the government is not admitting to, and the media is not pointing out, any role for the turmoil in Syria. The people don't acknowledge it,they accept the lies, so there is nothing to explain. When it is discussed it is usually on the level of partisan politics.

That works only due to the media plot. But in case terrorists create a state in Syria that is labelled a democratic state by the US gov´t, that lie cannot be maintained for long.

BTW, I don't believe the plans are to leave Syria intact as a State. I believe the plan will be for the balkanization of Syria.

Probably. That is also what they did to Libya. But they did not make provisions for the steadfastness of the Syrian army.