its not about resources its about banking. Oil is traded on the world market in dollars. So if ireland wants to buy oil then they must use dollars to purchase it from what ever country. Two countries have wanted to change this. In 2000 Iraq want to sell oil in Euro’s. The UN said that they were allowed to do this. In 2002 Iraq was invaded by the US and UK because of WMD’s that were never found. After the invasion Iraq reverted to selling Oil in Dollars. Saddam was never tried and excuted by the US.
http://edition.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/10/30/iraq.un.euro.reut/

Lybia wanted to sell oil for gold and not dollars. He introduced the GOLD DINAR. The intention was for all African countries to use the gold dinar to sell oil. So instead of Dollars they recieve gold. The US and the UK bombed Lybia and similar to Iraq Gaddafi was ‘killed’ by the US and Uk supported rebels. Lybian Oil is still sold in Dollars. Syria and Iran were supporters of the gold dinar.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/apr/21/libya-muammar-gaddafi

So it’s oil and Rothschild !

Its about the Petro Dollar. US has huge debt but because oil is traded in dollars then it keeps the currency strong.

Well said diarmuid …..

Nice one Diarmuid. That’s interesting stuff. Never saw that angle to it.

Ah no Diarmuid, no, it was about bringing freedom and democracy, Bush and Blair, two upstanding members of the human species just couldn’t sleep knowing that Gaddafi and Saddam were being big meanies. Come on now ;-)

Diarmuid, it’s Libya not lybia!

Declan
That’s the only mistake he made in that post if he was wrong on anything else I’m certain and sure you would of pointed it out …… Glad you agree !!

My apologies!

Very good and balanced comments. You forgot one point though . Not only were Syria and Iran trying to distance themselves from the petro dollar similar to Iraq and Libya , they were also planning a gas pipeline from Iran through southern Iraq to the mediteranean sea. I enclose a short film from Noam Chomsky , for me a true American hero and patriot who has a great insight into what is happening to the USA today.
http://www.zcommunications.org/noam-chomsky-us-a-top-terrorist-state-by-noam-chomsky
Also I know what you mean by Vietnam, I lived and worked there, and was totally shocked at how hundreds of thousands of people are still suffering today from the effects of agent orange. Also a short documentary from Martin Sheen. Vietnam hollucast.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWcxmZxeUZU

My previous detailed reply post was deleted (censored) please look at RT stories and then look at official sites. 188 UN countries have opposed US sanctions on Cuba for the last 57 years. two countries supported it. Its headlines on the UN website. Also look up the story on Poland and the CIA.

Sorry my post is up there now.

Jason, just reading your post again you say “In reality Assad is indeed a war criminal. His army’s heavy-handed approach to putting down protests caused the civil war in the first place and the use of chemical weapons against rebel strongholds in Damascus just serves to highlight this.” Where is your proof on the cemical weapons. The UN report which is available on the UN site doesn’t lay the blame on Assad or the rebels. It merely confirms the chemical weapons have been used. Which is why the us said “Assad PROBABLY used chemical wweapons” there is no proof. Also the 1500 deaths number the US used is false. Its more like 300. There is no proof to say the rebels did it or Assad did it.

@Diarmuid
Presumably by “other media outlets” you’re referring to SANA and/or RT as your original source of information about Syria. The problem is that both are state propaganda outlets. Are you aware that Syria ranked 176th out of 179 in the most recent press freedom index? http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-index-2013,1054.html

Whilst you’re at it you could also read the Human Rights Watch Syria report which details war crimes perpetrated by all sides in this conflict – Assad is indeed a war criminal http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2013/country-chapters/syria

Unfortunately all sides in a war engage in extensive propaganda – just because you hear something that differs to the western narrative doesn’t necessarily mean it is correct. The truth probably lies somewhere in between.

There may well be an initial element of truth in much of what you hear from the likes of RT but be left in no doubt that it has undergone extensive embellishment prior to being sanctioned for release by the Russian government.

Re: Damascus gas attacks, the UN were precluded from apportioning blame thanks to a Russian veto (why would they do that again if the thought the rebels were to blame?) but if you read the UN report in full the available evidence convincingly points towards Assad, as any reasonable person would have to conclude.

“For the most part the militants in Syria are not Syrian, they are from Saudi Arabia”. Where is your evidence to back up this claim? Most neutral observers to this conflict have estimated that foreign fighters make up at most 20-25% of those fighting against Assad.

Having said all that, the destruction of chemical weapons is indeed a step forward albeit one that was forced. Let’s hope that some form of peace will come to this land soon and the ordinary Syrian people will be given the opportunity to determine their own future in free and open elections – the first since the early 1970′s.

Mattoid
CNN BBC RTE
Are all propaganda mouthpieces

That’s quite a good post. I agree with you that the truth lies somewhere in between. I am always looking for facts.

I don’t believe the western propaganda. If Europe are the US are to believe what is said in the media then we should destroy all Muslims in the middle east because they are all bad. This is not the case and I don’t for a second believe what the BBC, CNN, FOX are all saying. The also said that Saddam had WMD’s which was lies. We also told of the militants in Afghanistan who were bad. Then the Libyan government is bad and now Syrians are bad.

Can you answer me this why are the US/NATO are attacking Al Qaeda is Pakistan and Afghanistan? Why are they supporting Al Qaeda in Syria? I though Al Qaeda is the enemy. There is more to the Syria story that we are being told and I for one don’t believe the US or NATO.

We need the truth as to what’s going on in these places. Assad is coming under attack from militants because he came down hard on protestors. When Russia, Israel, Brazil, USA, Portugal, Spain, UK and Italy come down hard on protestors what happens. Why does NATO not come to their aid of the protestors there because of banking crisis and corrupt politicians. Should Syria support democracy so that they can end up bankrupt like the US and Europe. Governments having to make valuable state assets public so they can pay banking debt. The rich getting richer the poor getting poorer.

Are the ‘allegations’ of Assad any worse than what the US are doing with their drones in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Speaking of chemical weapons why has the US walked away from the ill and dying people in Vietnam because of their use of agent orange. It’s a story never reported in the US and UK.

Why does the US and NATO not threaten South Africa or Zimbabwe for genocide and corruption. Why did it not help the people of Cambodia rather than support its dictator. There is more to this story than Assad being a war criminal.

Apologies i forgot to add an important piece. Quoted from the Telegraph

“Western hopes of building a moderate Syrian opposition to President Bashar al-Assad have been set back after the Islamist militias that dominate the rebel movement said they were “going it alone” and intended to establish a sharia state.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10335138/Syrian-opposition-splits-after-Islamists-push-for-sharia-state.html

I thought the US and the UK were against countires using Sharia Law. There are more questions than answers inrelationt to the US/NATO and Syria.

@Chopstix
You’re right to a point in that they all have an editorial slant, but all still retain editorial independence from government, and that is the big difference.

For all its faults (and there are many) we are lucky enough to have a reasonably free press in the western world. Look at the rankings in the Press Freedom Index of 179 countries I referred to above – Ireland 15th, UK 29th, US 32nd, compared to Russia 148th, Iran 174th and Syria 176th. That speaks volumes and should tell you all you need to know.

When was the last time you heard RT openly criticising the Putin Government? Answer – never.
When was the last time you heard SANA openly criticising Assad? Answer – never.

@Diarmuid
Yours is also quite a good post and raises some pertinent questions about which human rights violations the west is prepared to overlook and which it is prepared to intervene in (although I can’t see how you can possibly equate the treatment of protesters in most of the countries you listed with the murderous treatment meted out to them in Syria). I agree the ‘west’ for want of a better word generally (but not always) only intervenes when its own interests are potentially at stake, but in the real world that’s not really overly surprising either although it does smack of hypocrisy.

I’m not sure which western media outlets you’ve been watching or listening to, but I’ve yet to hear one claiming that all Muslims are bad – far from it. I also don’t believe they knowingly published untruths about WMD in Iraq – they only published the line they were being fed by government at the time and were very quick to question it when the situation unravelled and it was becoming less likely.

Neither do I think you’ll find many western governments promoting a fundamentalist Islamic state in Syria which imposes Sharia law on the people. Most are simply pushing for democratic elections, wherever that takes the Syrian people – don’t you think they deserve that?

Let’s not forget Jason it was the Russians who spearheaded the destruction of syria’s chemical weapons but I note you don’t mention chemical weapons held by the US or Isreal

Chopstix, it wasn’t as if the Russians did it out of the kindness of their hearts. The only reason they did it was to keep their only Middle-Eastern ally left in power.

As for the US, they are in the process of dismantling them. However if your main rival in the world has 5 times your stockpile and is dragging their feet then wouldn’t you be a bit hesitant to fully destroy yours?

Chop, educate yourself on where the USA and Russia are in dismantling their chemical weapons stockpile.
They have been both doing it for years.
It’s been a long slow process.
Btw, Assad didn’t do it out of the kindness of his heart.
You are seriously naive about all this.

Declan
Anybody who has read you’re posts regarding Syria is very well aware of the fact you are extremely disappointed there wasn’t an escalation in this war
Shame on You

Chop, that is not true.

George, I never denied that the US has chemical weapons.
You need to educate yourself as well.

Chop, have you not noticed that the Americans have been a part of the effort to get both sides to sit down and talk to bring a end to this conflict?
Are you that ignorant?
Shame on you!!

Chop, in years to come just remember that you supported Assad.

Declan are you for real, If the US had their way they’d already be in Syria bombing the hell out of the people. for the cause of democracy!!! Russia stood in their way and told them they weren’t allowed to get involved in Syria. Syria is a sovereign state and the US not allowed to interfere.

500,000 people have died in Iraq since the US got involved there. If the US had to of left them alone and not invaded none of this would of happened. How many WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION did they find? You seem to want the same to happen to Syria. 100,000 have died, the US are currently arming the rebels prolonging the war.

Declan
Anyone who read my posts would know that I never supported Assad I supported a peaceful end to the conflict & a proper inspection and investagation into the chemical attack and I also stated if Assad was found guilty he should be dealt with accordingly

Diarmuid
Declan is well aware that the rebels are a proxy army supported by the west he chooses to argue the opposite because he wants war & mayhem either that or he is a troll or both