OFFLINE

Saudi Arabia withdraws ambassador from Syria
BBC News
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14439303

Saudi Arabia says it is withdrawing its ambassador from Syria in protest against the crackdown on Syrian anti-government demonstrators.

In a statement broadcast across the Arab world, King Abdullah said the violence was "unacceptable".

It came hours after the Arab League issued its first official condemnation of the repression in Syria.

The BBC's Middle East correspondent says the move is a major escalation in international pressure on Damascus.

"The kingdom of Saudi Arabia... demands an end to the death machine and bloodshed and calls for acts of wisdom before it is too late," King Abdullah said in a statement broadcast by al-Arabiya television.

"What is happening in Syria is not acceptable for Saudi Arabia. Either it (Syria) chooses wisdom on its own or it will be pulled down into the depths of turmoil and loss."

BBC Middle East correspondent Jon Leyne says the statement seems to be a co-ordinated move, following the Arab League's own communique on Syria.

The 22-member league said it was "alarmed" by the situation in the country and called for an immediate end to the violence.

The six-nation Gulf Co-operation Council also issued its first comments about the unrest on Sunday, condemning the "excessive use of force" and calling for an "immediate end to the violence".

Our correspondent says the latest developments leave Syrian President Bashar al-Assad even more isolated.

Tough messages

More than 80 people were reported killed as violence continued across Syria on Sunday.

Activists said at least 50 people died when troops stormed Deir al-Zour, the largest city in the east of the country.

Other deaths were reported in central Homs province and in Idlib in the north-west.

The Local Co-ordination Committees, an activist group that documents and organises protests in Syria, said that after sunset on Sunday, thousands of protesters poured on to the streets in towns and cities including the capital Damascus, its suburbs, the central city of Homs, Latakia on the Mediterranean coast and northern city of Aleppo.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu is to visit Damascus on Tuesday.

In a sign that diplomatic tension between the two neighbours was rising, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Mr Davutoglu would deliver a "tough message".

But one of Mr Assad's top advisers said he would be given an even tougher message to take home.

President Assad has insisted that his government is enacting reforms. He blames the violence on "armed" gangs" which he says are backed by foreign powers.

"Syria is on the path to reform," he was quoted as telling Lebanese Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour by the state news agency, Sana.

"To deal with outlaws who cut off roads, seal towns and terrorise residents is a duty of the state, which must defend security and protect the lives of civilians," he added.

OFFLINE

cool. funny how gadaffi had to go for all his atrocities, yet assad is rolling tanks through the streets, and blockading entire cities, and it's just a diplomatic effort. if the u.s. ever really wanted to score political points, all it would take was a first strike operation, similar to that launched in libya, against assad's military and command assets, and then just leave it to the syrians. that would send more of a message than anything to the arab world. you'll have help against tyrants, but you have to do all the fighting and reforming.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dødherre Mørktre:
cool. funny how gadaffi had to go for all his atrocities, yet assad is rolling tanks through the streets, and blockading entire cities, and it's just a diplomatic effort. if the u.s. ever really wanted to score political points, all it would take was a first strike operation, similar to that launched in libya, against assad's military and command assets, and then just leave it to the syrians. that would send more of a message than anything to the arab world. you'll have help against tyrants, but you have to do all the fighting and reforming.

It would be more in the US's interest to topple the Syrian regime than to take down Gadaffi as it would make it impossible for Iran to aid Hezbollah or Hamas.  Only thing is if Obama launched a strike pundets would raise hell.  Besides, so far as I can tell unlike Libya the protests haven't turned into open rebellion.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:

Originally Posted by Dødherre Mørktre:
cool. funny how gadaffi had to go for all his atrocities, yet assad is rolling tanks through the streets, and blockading entire cities, and it's just a diplomatic effort. if the u.s. ever really wanted to score political points, all it would take was a first strike operation, similar to that launched in libya, against assad's military and command assets, and then just leave it to the syrians. that would send more of a message than anything to the arab world. you'll have help against tyrants, but you have to do all the fighting and reforming.

It would be more in the US's interest to topple the Syrian regime than to take down Gadaffi as it would make it impossible for Iran to aid Hezbollah or Hamas.  Only thing is if Obama launched a strike pundets would raise hell.  Besides, so far as I can tell unlike Libya the protests haven't turned into open rebellion.

woops, picked the wrong battle. actually, i don't think the west wants any part of syria right now. ever hear of a full plate?

OFFLINE

Obama to Call for Assad to Step Down, Official Says

WASHINGTON — President Obama will call on Thursday for the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad, to step down, and will issue a new executive order providing for additional sanctions, an official said. It will be the first time the United States has explicitly called for Mr. Assad’s departure from power.

The actions come in response to the deadly crackdown Syrian forces have been waging against pro-democracy protesters across the country.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is scheduled to speak at 10 a.m. Eastern time about the sanctions, which the official said would be much sterner than previous measures. “We believe that this very tough action will lend additional force to the president’s words,” the official said.

The United States had notified its Arab and European allies of the impending announcement, news services reported.

There have been signs for days that the United States may be close to making such a call, but until Thursday, officials had pushed back against the reports, as Secretary Clinton appeared to do as recently as Tuesday.

“It’s not going to be any news if the United States says Assad needs to go,” she said then, during an appearance at the National Defense University in Washington. “O.K. Fine. What’s next? If Turkey says it, if King Abdullah says it, if other people say it, there is no way the Assad regime can ignore it.”

Intensive diplomatic negotiations have been under way for days, variously involving Syrian, Turkish, American and other officials. The Turkish foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, spent six hours last week with Mr. Assad, appealing to him to end the crackdown, one of the bloodiest in the Arab uprising.

Turkey, which has had close relations with Syria, said that its message was that it had run out of patience. But Mr. Assad rebuffed the appeal, saying that he would continue his fight against protesters he has dismissed as militant Islamists and terrorists.

American diplomats had said they were aware that they had limited influence with Syria and that an American statement alone was not likely to have much impact on Syrian behavior.

But pressure has been building against the Damascus government. Tunisia recalled its ambassador from Damascus on Wednesday, as Saudi Arabia had done earlier.

Does this make any real difference, other than being a symbolic step? The US has no real pull over Syria, and Assad knows that the US won't be putting "boots on the ground" in his country as well.

OFFLINE

This interview with UN Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, eventually gets into Syria v. Libya.  Sorry for only posting a link, as its not off Youtube Facebook won't let me embed it.

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/394652/august-15-2011/exclusive---susan-rice-extended-interview-pt--1

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:

Originally Posted by Dødherre Mørktre:
cool. funny how gadaffi had to go for all his atrocities, yet assad is rolling tanks through the streets, and blockading entire cities, and it's just a diplomatic effort. if the u.s. ever really wanted to score political points, all it would take was a first strike operation, similar to that launched in libya, against assad's military and command assets, and then just leave it to the syrians. that would send more of a message than anything to the arab world. you'll have help against tyrants, but you have to do all the fighting and reforming.

It would be more in the US's interest to topple the Syrian regime than to take down Gadaffi as it would make it impossible for Iran to aid Hezbollah or Hamas.  Only thing is if Obama launched a strike pundets would raise hell.  Besides, so far as I can tell unlike Libya the protests haven't turned into open rebellion.

Thats a pretty cool point!  Question, would you advocate us sending in troops, airstrikes or trying to topple Syria covertly?  

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Kieran Colfer:
Obama to Call for Assad to Step Down, Official Says

WASHINGTON — President Obama will call on Thursday for the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad, to step down, and will issue a new executive order providing for additional sanctions, an official said. It will be the first time the United States has explicitly called for Mr. Assad’s departure from power.

The actions come in response to the deadly crackdown Syrian forces have been waging against pro-democracy protesters across the country.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is scheduled to speak at 10 a.m. Eastern time about the sanctions, which the official said would be much sterner than previous measures. “We believe that this very tough action will lend additional force to the president’s words,” the official said.

The United States had notified its Arab and European allies of the impending announcement, news services reported.

There have been signs for days that the United States may be close to making such a call, but until Thursday, officials had pushed back against the reports, as Secretary Clinton appeared to do as recently as Tuesday.

“It’s not going to be any news if the United States says Assad needs to go,” she said then, during an appearance at the National Defense University in Washington. “O.K. Fine. What’s next? If Turkey says it, if King Abdullah says it, if other people say it, there is no way the Assad regime can ignore it.”

Intensive diplomatic negotiations have been under way for days, variously involving Syrian, Turkish, American and other officials. The Turkish foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, spent six hours last week with Mr. Assad, appealing to him to end the crackdown, one of the bloodiest in the Arab uprising.

Turkey, which has had close relations with Syria, said that its message was that it had run out of patience. But Mr. Assad rebuffed the appeal, saying that he would continue his fight against protesters he has dismissed as militant Islamists and terrorists.

American diplomats had said they were aware that they had limited influence with Syria and that an American statement alone was not likely to have much impact on Syrian behavior.

But pressure has been building against the Damascus government. Tunisia recalled its ambassador from Damascus on Wednesday, as Saudi Arabia had done earlier.

Does this make any real difference, other than being a symbolic step? The US has no real pull over Syria, and Assad knows that the US won't be putting "boots on the ground" in his country as well.

I think its mostly symbolic for a president to add his voice on a situation like this.  Assad most likely wont quit because Obama asked him to.  I suspect Obama has lost a lot of influence in the eyes of world govt leaders.  But its possible that our State Dept is working behind the scenes (probably with a those of other govts) to get a regime change.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:

Originally Posted by Dødherre Mørktre:
cool. funny how gadaffi had to go for all his atrocities, yet assad is rolling tanks through the streets, and blockading entire cities, and it's just a diplomatic effort. if the u.s. ever really wanted to score political points, all it would take was a first strike operation, similar to that launched in libya, against assad's military and command assets, and then just leave it to the syrians. that would send more of a message than anything to the arab world. you'll have help against tyrants, but you have to do all the fighting and reforming.

It would be more in the US's interest to topple the Syrian regime than to take down Gadaffi as it would make it impossible for Iran to aid Hezbollah or Hamas.  Only thing is if Obama launched a strike pundets would raise hell.  Besides, so far as I can tell unlike Libya the protests haven't turned into open rebellion.

Thats a pretty cool point!  Question, would you advocate us sending in troops, airstrikes or trying to topple Syria covertly?  

The people have got to want your help.  In Libya they begged for it, but I'm yet to hear anything from Syria (media?).  That said, I would have loved it had the 6th fleet sunk the ships that shelled Latakia.  I'm not sure what the diplomatic outcome would be, but I think from a humanitarian stand point it would have been justified.  I would not recommend sending troops, even if the people of Syria were in open revolt.

OFFLINE

I agree.Personally I get so exhausted with it all and it makes me want to thrown up my hands in disgust and walk away from all of it.  I dont think any of them over there respect or like us, yet they want our help.

Question:  What do we get out of it?

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:
I agree.Personally I get so exhausted with it all and it makes me want to thrown up my hands in disgust and walk away from all of it.  I dont think any of them over there respect or like us, yet they want our help.

Question:  What do we get out of it?

limited jihad?

OFFLINE

I'm not sure it is in our interests to get involved in yet another battlefront.  From what I can tell, our only interest in the region is Israel.  Perhaps we should limit our involvement to that.  LEt the rest go up in flames.