Cyprus-Forum.com

[Lordo]

there was a peace meeting in vienna recently with an interesting concept. only one syrian was allowed to attent. the waiter. can you believe it. a peace meeting about syria but no other syrian in sight. so who exactly is in control in syria.


yanks go home you b'stards.

[Get Real!]

there was a peace meeting in vienna recently with an interesting concept. only one syrian was allowed to attent. the waiter. can you believe it. a peace meeting about syria but no other syrian in sight. so who exactly is in control in syria.

A few years ago Turkey invented the “friends of Syria” group where all the participants were those criminal countries that sought to destroy Syria such as the Saudis, Qatar, the US, Britain, Jordan, and Turkey of course.

Have a guess how many Syrians were invited to these meetings…

[Lordo]

this was for the friends of syrians not the syrians gr be reasonable. this peace is for syrians and yet the only syrian in the room is the waiter. now that speaks volumes about america.

now here is another. the new amerikant ambassador has given a party in trnc and invited the terggish officers. what does this mean. can anybody explain this.

[Get Real!]

this was for the friends of syrians not the syrians gr be reasonable. this peace is for syrians and yet the only syrian in the room is the waiter. now that speaks volumes about america.

It's what I said it is, not what is convenient to you!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friends_of_Syria_Group

[Lordo]

gr you are being illogical. a friends of syrian group cannot include syria because they are not friends of syria. by its nature it excludes syria.

where as discussion of peace in syria must include the warring parties in syria including isil if it wants to succeed. its just common logic.

[Paphitis]

gr you are being illogical. a friends of syrian group cannot include syria because they are not friends of syria. by its nature it excludes syria.

where as discussion of peace in syria must include the warring parties in syria including isil if it wants to succeed. its just common logic.

Sorry! ISIL are expired by decree of the Western Coalition.

But we include them in our cluster bombings whilst our pilots enjoy some menthol minties!

[Garavnoss]

No power in history has ever defeated a "Guerrilla" force that rose up in opposition to those who sought to impose their will upon them [or as representatives of their countrymen, albeit that not ALL of those countrymen be dissidents] and the fact that "Peace" may be reported at the end of the conflict, it is always achieved at severe cost to the aggressor.

Of course, the usual "Cop-out" is for the imposer to declare itself victor as a "Face Saver" but invariably, the truth is that their failure is consigned to the pages of history and kept out of the reach of the those who did not participate in resistance.

Problem NOW is, the forces of IS have attained a level of strength and capability not anticipated by those forces of the West that imagined they would be fighting a handful of disgruntled Arabs who could be dispersed by forceful threats of military superiority, they have burned their fingers this time and there is much talk of "Negotiation" in high places.........[watch this space].

Ultimately, there WILL be a "Caliphate", it WILL be ruled by "Sharia Law" and it WILL be the result of the efforts of the forces of IS.

Better to get used to the idea, the writing is on the wall.

[Paphitis]

No power in history has ever defeated a "Guerrilla" force that rose up in opposition to those who sought to impose their will upon them [or as representatives of their countrymen, albeit that not ALL of those countrymen be dissidents] and the fact that "Peace" may be reported at the end of the conflict, it is always achieved at severe cost to the aggressor.

Of course, the usual "Cop-out" is for the imposer to declare itself victor as a "Face Saver" but invariably, the truth is that their failure is consigned to the pages of history and kept out of the reach of the those who did not participate in resistance.

Problem NOW is, the forces of IS have attained a level of strength and capability not anticipated by those forces of the West that imagined they would be fighting a handful of disgruntled Arabs who could be dispersed by forceful threats of military superiority, they have burned their fingers this time and there is much talk of "Negotiation" in high places.........[watch this space].

Ultimately, there WILL be a "Caliphate", it WILL be ruled by "Sharia Law" and it WILL be the result of the efforts of the forces of IS.

Better to get used to the idea, the writing is on the wall.

That's because the ideology will remain. It can never be broken completely.

But ISIL as an organisation which will be destroyed and it will be very difficult for them to get a foothold in Syria once again when there is a peace treaty and the recruitment supply to the conveyor belt of death ceases! In the mean time, our pilots celebrate with their own minties as we speak.

It always depends on how you define defeat. For the USA, most people come up with outrageously unnachievable definitions of what a defeat against an opponent should be, even though our strategists already knew it was unnachievable from the set go and as such had more reasonable and attainable objectives which are met 9 times out of 10. Our objectives are clear. It will be apparent to most reasonable analysts that these objectives will be met. We never claimed to end the global ideology of the Salafists.

Oh well, whatever makes you feel good I suppose!