Menu

Forums



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
Promote
Luis Miguel
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Peru Lima
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
7/25/2017 10:19:27 AM


Fighting halt near Damascus


2017-07-23 06:17
A general view taken from the al-Qaboun suburb of Damascus shows damaged buildings in the nearby Jobar neighbourhood. (Abd Doumany , AFP)

A general view taken from the al-Qaboun suburb of Damascus shows damaged buildings in the nearby Jobar neighbourhood. (Abd Doumany , AFP)

Damascus - Syria's army announced on Saturday a halt in fighting in parts of Eastern Ghouta after rebels and regime ally Russia agreed on how a safe zone will function for the besieged opposition enclave.

With many of its towns and villages ravaged by bombardments in the six-year conflict, Eastern Ghouta near Damascus is one of the last strongholds of rebels fighting President Bashar al-Assad's regime.

Eastern Ghouta is in one of four proposed "de-escalation zones" designated in an agreement reached by government allies Iran and Russia and rebel backer Turkey in May.

But the deal has yet to be fully implemented over disagreements on who would police the safe zones, and Eastern Ghouta is just the second zone to see a ceasefire enter into force.

The army "announces a halt in fighting in some areas of Eastern Ghouta in Damascus province from midday on Saturday (09:00 GMT)," it said in a statement carried by state news agency SANA.

"The army will retaliate in a suitable manner to any violation" of the ceasefire, the statement said, without specifying what areas were included.

Russia said earlier Saturday it had signed a deal with "moderate" Syrian rebels at peace talks in Cairo on how a safe zone would function in Eastern Ghouta.

But no rebel group said it had signed the Cairo agreement, with one influential group in the region saying it was not involved.

The Cairo meeting "follows on from the ceasefire deal for the south of Syria" that took hold on July 9, said Wael Alwan, a spokesman for Faylaq al-Rahman.

That ceasefire for southern areas of Syria was brokered by Russia, the United States and Jordan.

Borders and monitors 'defined'

Russia said it and the rebels had signed agreements under which "the borders of the de-escalation zone are defined as well as the deployment locations and powers of the forces monitoring the de-escalation".

It said the sides had also agreed "routes to supply humanitarian aid to the population and for free movement of residents".

Russia said it plans to send in the first humanitarian convoy and evacuate the wounded "in the next few days".

The two other "de-escalation zones" included in the May deal are the rebel-held province of Idlib and northern parts of the central province of Homs.

More than 2.5 million people are believed to live in the four zones.

The May accord roughly laid out the areas where rebels and government forces should halt hostilities, including air strikes, for six months, but Russia, Turkey and Iran then failed to meet a June 4 deadline to set exact boundaries for the zones.

One major stumbling block appeared to be who would ensure security in all four areas, with Turkey and Iran in particular reportedly wrangling to bolster their influence.

A new meeting in the Kazakh capital Astana is expected during the last week of August, with rebels as well as representatives from Turkey and Iran to attend, Russia has said.

Moscow has argued that the zones agreement will provide moderate rebels with security and help focus attacks against jihadist groups such as former Al-Qaeda affiliate Fateh al-Sham Front and the Islamic State group.

More than 330 000 people have been killed in Syria since its conflict broke out in March 2011 with anti-government protests.


(news24)


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
+2
Luis Miguel
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Peru Lima
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
7/25/2017 11:12:46 AM
The End of American Support for Syrian Rebels Was Inevitable

MANU BRAVO/AP
Free Syrian Army fighters take their positions, close to a military base, near Azaz, Syria, Dec. 10, 2012.

BY FAYSAL ITANI
THE ATLANTIC

JULY 22, 2017

Where the insurgency is concerned, Trump and Obama have plenty in common.

This week, the Trump administration reportedly cancelled a long-running covert program to support vetted Syrian rebels in the war against the regime of Bashar al-Assad. While this move has provoked a small outcry among Assad’s opponents, the development itself is far from surprising. Furthermore, it is incorrect, as some have insisted, to view the cancellation as a gratuitous concession to Russia—adecision like this, which aligns with years of deliberate U.S. strategy and Trump’sown stated goals, cannot be considered a concession. It is almost certainly true that Trump hopes this decision will make Russia more cooperative on ceasefires between the regime and the insurgency. But if that does not happen or if it fails to pacify Syria—a likely outcome—this would not alter an already-dismal strategic situation for the Syrian opposition, one that may well be acceptable to the United States.

The Trump administration’s decision to end this program represents the logical endpoint of years of evolution in U.S. policy. While the effort was conceived under Barack Obama, it was always at odds with America’s broader goals—a tension that Trump has long recognized and is now acting upon.

Obama first authorized the CIA-run covert program, known as “Timber Sycamore,” in early-2013. Since then, it has trained and armed thousands of insurgents who have fought regime forces and extremist groups alike. This support entailed ammunition and small arms, including rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, and valuable anti-tank guided missiles. Critically, it also entailedmoney for salaries, without which commanders could not recruit or retain fighters who would desert or defect to better-resourced extremist groups. Recipients of U.S. aid had already struggled against the Assad regime and jihadist groups.Ending the program, then, means choking off mainstream, non-extremist opposition to Assad in northern Syria where he is already very weak, and potentially in its stronger form in the south.

When Obama began this program, he conceived of it in narrow terms; he never sought to overthrow or even seriously weaken the Assad regime. Rather, he aimed to apply just enough pressure to convince him to accept a political solution, but not enough to risk the regime’s stability (which would presumably leave the United States to fix post-war Syria). It is noteworthy that this reflected U.S. policy at its peak levels of confidence and belligerence against Assad. When Iran and especially Russia entered the war, the Obama administration understood that pressuring Assad would require escalating the covert rebel program. Obama had no appetite for such an escalation: He knew the risks it entailed, including possible conflict with Russia.

Indeed, the opposite occurred. Russia’s intervention led to an agreement with Jordan, which, with its knowledge of rebel groups across its border, played a central role in supporting the insurgents. Russia agreed to curb fighting in southern Syria, where the U.S.-backed rebels have been most successful. Rebels were instead pressured to fight extremist groups only. Meanwhile, U.S.-backed rebels in northern Syria were overwhelmed by Islamist groups that either destroyed or coopted them, rendering the U.S. role there meaningless. In 2017,U.S.-backed groups have sporadically fought the regime, albeit from a weaker position and with far less support from Washington.

Thus, by the time of Trump’s inauguration, the U.S. covert program, which was never particularly bold to start with, was already a shadow of its former self. For his part, Trump had already made clear he was unenthusiastic about it. In November 2016, he told the Wall Street Journal he was likely to end support for the Syrian rebels, claiming, “We have no idea who these people are,” and suggesting that the United States should focus instead on the Islamic State. Although Trump insisted this vision was the opposite of Obama’s, the latter always shared and expressed these views, even as the intelligence community was conducting its proxy war against Assad.

There is a subtle difference between the two presidents’ views, but they concern Russia rather than the covert program itself or America’s goals in Syria. Trump seems to believe that Russia can end the violence in Syria; by contrast, the Obama administration approached the Russia option with mild and jaded desperation,having eliminated other policy alternatives for ending the war. Trump’sconfidence is likely what pushed him to end support for the rebels who could, after all, have been left on “life support” or held in reserve.

Without U.S. support, the rebels cannot
survive continued war against the Assadregime and its allies. This places the fate of opposition-held southern Syria—one of the last areas controlled by nationalist, mainstream groups close to the United States—at the mercy of Russia, which has committed to enforcing a ceasefire there. Even if Russia wanted to force the regime and Iran to respect a ceasefire,Syria belongs to factions who control the ground, which means the Assad regime and Iran-controlled fighters. They will eventually move on southern Syria when the United States grows bored with the problem, post-ISIS, and Russia capitalizes on its display of parity with the United States. A paranoid police state will not tolerate a rebel “cancer” so close to Damascus that might later metastasize into a serious security threat. As for the north, already-outmatched, U.S.-backed insurgents have effectively lost already.

Of course, Timber Sycamore could be replaced with something new. Groups may be reorganized to act as a buffer force for Jordan or even Israel, in addition to a standing anti-jihadist force (provided the regime and its allies are incapable or unwilling to challenge them). Fighters on the U.S. payroll could be folded into the Pentagon’s official counter-ISIS campaign. Unlike the covert proxy war, these actions would at least align with the policies of the Trump administration—and, it must be said, the Obama administration—with their focus on protecting allies, limiting spillover, and fighting extremists. Whether that is a wise approach for the United States is a different matter, but it does offer some coherence, at the cost of those rendered defenseless in opposition areas.

Trump has been criticized for offering Russia, and by extension Iran and Assad, a one-sided concession by ending support for the insurgency. If one accepts his publicly expressed premises, however—that the program has always been a waste of time, that Assad is acceptable because he is fighting ISIS, and that Russia is the key to ending the war—and recognizes that Russia knows neither Trump nor Obama before him cared for the rebel program, then ending it is less conceding than shedding a burden. For Trump, in the best-case scenario Russia will enforce ceasefires in some parts of the country (which still leaves Assad in control of most of “useful Syria”). In the worst-case scenario, Assad and his allies will exploit the rebels’ new weakness to destroy vulnerable groups and take more territory—an outcome both Trump and Obama before him could live with.

Faysal Itani is a resident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East. FULL BIO


(defenseone.com)

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
+2
Luis Miguel
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Peru Lima
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
7/25/2017 11:31:02 AM

Jordanian man killed, two people wounded at Israeli embassy in Jordan: police

By Suleiman Al-Khalidi

REFILE - ADDING RESTRICTIONS Policemen are seen near the Israeli embassy in Amman, Jordan July 23, 2017. REUTERS/ Stringer

By Suleiman Al-Khalidi

AMMAN (Reuters) - One Jordanian was killed and two people, a Jordanian and an Israeli, were wounded in a shooting incident on Sunday in a building inside the Israeli embassy complex in Jordan's capital Amman, police said.

The two Jordanians, working for a furniture firm, had entered the embassy compound before the shooting, the police said in a statement, adding that the dead man was killed by a gunshot and the two wounded men had been rushed to hospital.

Israel has imposed a ban on reporting the incident and has made no public comment.

Violence against Israelis is rare in Jordan, a tightly policed country that is also a staunch regional ally of the United States.

But tensions have escalated between the two countries since Israel installed metal detectors at entry points to Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem after two Israeli policemen were shot dead by three Arab-Israeli gunmen on Friday near the site.

The new security measures have triggered the bloodiest spate of Isreli-Palestinian violence for years. Jordan has called for the removal of the metal detectors and thousands of Jordanians have protested against the Israeli move.

In their statement, the Jordanian police said that after the attack they had sealed the heavily protected embassy in an affluent part of the capital and deployed dozens of anti-terrorism gendarmie forces.

Initial checks suggested the two Jordanian men had entered the embassy compound as workmen, they said.

Many of Jordan's 7 million citizens are of Palestinian origin. They or their parents or grandparents were expelled or fled to Jordan in the fighting that accompanied the creation of Israel in 1948.

Israel has in the past given repeated assurances that it understands Jordan's concerns and does not seek to alter the status quo in the Muslim holy sites of Jerusalem.

King Abdullah's Hashemite monarchy has been custodian of the sites since 1924, paying for their upkeep and deriving part of its legitimacy from the role.

(Reporting by Suleiman Al-Khalidi; Editing by Mark Trevelyan and Gareth Jones)


(Yahoo News)

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
+2
Luis Miguel
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Peru Lima
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
7/25/2017 4:10:50 PM

‘Locust plague’: Insects invade southern Russian region (VIDEO)


© ROLEX TV / YouTube

Spine-tingling footage shows a swarm of locusts traveling across a road in the southern Russian republic of Dagestan, where swaths of land have been infested by the plague.

The amateur video, filmed through the windscreen of a moving car, shows what at first seems to be a sandstorm looming on the horizon. However, as the car approaches, the dense cloud turns out to be a chaotic mass of giant bugs making their way across the road.


The infestation of locusts prompted local authorities to declare a state of emergency in parts of the republic last month, with some 114,000 hectares of agricultural land affected.

Despite measures being taken, such as fumigation from tractors and planes, the locusts have been eating their way through the republic’s farmland since early summer, destroying crops and grazing.



"They devour everything. They destroy green fields and there is nothing, just bare ground. There are the greens over there, which they have not yet reached,” a local resident told Ruptly video agency.

“It makes no difference for them: trees, shrubs or grass. If they devour it all, the cattle will have nowhere to graze. We would not know what to do then.”

According to the UN’s Agriculture and Food Organization, an average swarm of locusts can consume the same amount of food as 10 elephants or 2,500 people, as well as being able to travel distances of up to 130km in one day.


(RT)

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
+2
Luis Miguel
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Peru Lima
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
7/26/2017 1:06:20 AM

Hawaii seeks to prepare residents for threat of nuclear missile strike from North Korea

By HNN Staff




(Image: North Korea Central News Agency)

Hawaii is the first state to prepare the public for the possibility of a ballistic missile strike.

The state's emergency management agency said the threat to the islands from the rogue nation is "currently assessed to be low."

But officials added ongoing North Korean missile tests — and growing public concern — have prompted officials to work on preparedness and disaster management plans.

Vern Miyagi, administrator of the emergency management agency, stressed that the public shouldn't be alarmed by the planning.

Rather, he said, the public should see the preparation and education much like the work being done to prepare the public for hurricane and tsunami, which pose a greater risk to the state.

"We need to tell the public what the state is doing," Miyagi said. “We do not want to cause any undue stress for the public; however, we have a responsibility to plan for all hazards."

Earlier this month, North Korea tested an ICBM missile, drawing condemnation from the US and other countries. Experts say an ICBM like the one North Korea launched could reach Alaska and possibly even Hawaii.

The state plan considers what is currently a worst-case scenario: A 15-kiloton nuclear weapon detonated 1,000 feet above Honolulu.

In that scenario, public service announcements will tell residents, people should "get inside, stay inside, and stay tuned."

During the Cold War, the state said, Hawaii routinely updated plans and conducted drills related to nuclear attack scenarios. But those plans gathered dust as the threat faded.

And officials stressed, the time to plan is now — even if the threat level is low.

"We don’t know the exact capabilities or intentions of the North Korean government, but there is clear evidence that it is trying to develop ballistic missiles that could conceivably one day reach our state," Miyagi said. "Therefore, we cannot wait to begin our public information campaign to ensure that Hawaii residents will know what to do if such an event occurs."

It would take 20 minutes for an ICBM to travel to Hawaii from North Korea. The public would have eight to 12 minutes of notice before the attack started.

As part of the new campaign, the state will also start testing a new "wailing" emergency siren on the first workday of the month.

That testing will start as early as November — the normal siren will sound, followed by a second siren that would be used in the event of an attack.

The agency's new campaign is causing concern among some in the tourism industry, who worry visitors could choose other destinations for fear of a North Korea attack.

“We support the efforts of the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency to prepare for any threat to Hawaii’s well-being, be it man-made or a natural disaster," said Charlene Chan, director of communications at the Hawaii Tourism Authority.

"However, we also know from speaking to our tourism industry partners that if reports are misinterpreted about the State’s need to prepare for an attack, this could lead to travelers and groups staying away from Hawaii. The effect of such a downturn would ultimately be felt by residents who rely on tourism’s success for their livelihood.”

Miyagi is set to unveil more details on the educational campaign Friday.


(hawaiinewsnow.com)

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)
+2


Mobile Site | Stores | Contact Us | Testimonials | Become an affiliate | FAQ | Privacy | Legal | About Us
Copyright 1998 - 2024, All rights reserved.
facebook
Like us on Facebook!