LIS

Monday, 26 September 2016

Britain, France & US accuse Russia of Barbarism and war crimes in Syria at UN security council session

The UK and France, during an emergency security council session on the conflict in Syria on Sunday bluntly and repeatedly accused Russia of collaborating with Syria to perpetuate war crimes in Aleppo.

According to the UK, Russia has carried out widespread use of bunker-busting and incendiary bombs on the 275,000 civilians living in the rebel-held Aleppo in Syria, saying this weapons were dropped by Russian aircraft.
Russia and US had agreed to stop air attacks on Aleppo last week so that food,water, medicine and clothing could safely reach those suffering in the area but any hopes of a ceasefire were bashed last week when the UN aid convoy and warehouse were attacked viciously. 
More worryingly, the bombardment of Aleppo entered a fifth consecutive day on Monday, after 95 people were killed in the east of the city on Sunday, according to doctors with the number of wounded totaling 398, including 61 children.
“Bunker-busting bombs, more suited to destroying military installations, are now destroying homes, decimating bomb shelters, crippling, maiming, killing dozens, if not hundreds,” Matthew Rycroft, the UK ambassador to the UN, said during the emergency security council session on Syria on Sunday
“Incendiary munitions, indiscriminate in their reach, are being dropped on to civilian areas so that, yet again, Aleppo is burning. And to cap it all, water supplies, so vital to millions, are now being targeted, depriving water to those most in need. In short, it is difficult to deny that Russia is partnering with the Syrian regime to carry out war crimes.”
French ambassador Francois Delattre said :
 “They must not be unpunished,” he said. “Impunity is simply not an option in Syria. Aleppo is to Syria what Sarajevo was to Bosnia, or what Guernica was to the Spanish war,” the French envoy said. “this week will go down in history as the one in which diplomacy failed and barbarism triumphed”.
US ambassador Samantha Power said: “What Russia is sponsoring and doing is not counter-terrorism. It is barbarism,” 
“History will not look kindly on security council members who stay silent in the face of this carnage,” 'It's time to say who is doing the bombing'
After Britain’s ambassador to the UN, Matthew Rycroft made the accusations, himself, US ambassador Samantha Power and French ambassador Francois Delattre walked out of the emergency security council session when the Syrian ambassador began speaking.
What has happened over the last three days is indescribable,” said Mohammad Abu Rajab, a doctor in one of the largest hospitals in eastern Aleppo. 
“Words fail, pictures fail, everything fails. Imagine the dead lying in the corridors, corpses and wounded and blood flowing everywhere,” he said. “We are standing before inhumanity, real massacres, extraordinary weapons whose blasts we never heard before, never heard before ever, they make the ground shake beneath our feet.”




Source: Independent/ Guardian UK/ Al Jazeera

23 comments:

Ogenah Boris said...

Russia is proving tough to handle

edDREAMZ said...

a.k.a EDWIN CHINEDU AZUBUKO said...
.
All this big nations playing people like ludo... Very dangerous something though.
.
.
***CURRENTLY IN JUPITER***

dj banti said...

Godtakeover

OSINANL said...

OKAY!

Saphire Muna said...

World War loading.. Only Jesus that can settle this matter....











............ Liber maniac.........

Juliet Iwuno said...

Na wa o! Linda take note!

Julius Idowu said...

Please free syria o.

Lube-section said...

Changes nothing. Assad may stay for a very long time if Trump wins and I foresee that

livingstone chibuike said...

Dis russia self

Eddy Ogbunambala said...

Hmmm

Jamila Shaibu said...

Hmmmmmm

benito said...

Didn't the US break the peace truce by killing 60 Syrian soldiers. Now they are claiming high morality. Putin knows clueless wimpy Obama won't do shit but draw another red line. This is another of Obama's failed foreign policies. Obama will always be Putin's bitch and there's nothing he can do about it and he knows it.

Get traffic to your blog said...

Get Traffic to your Blog

Vivian Reginalds said...

hmm
-D great anonymous now as Vivian Reginalds

Olotu Fidelis said...

Sometimes I laugh at the greediness that pushes these western countries into commuting some dubious act. They caused the problem in Syria and middle east and hence should restore order. God is watching!

Oshare said...

Benito ur well informed, God bless you. And why is this biased report not carrying the Russian emissary's response to the said allegations? This must be payback after Russian president revealed that the US and western allies created ISIS. In carrying out A. Pike's instructions. #WOKE

Eleojo Blessing said...

Their business

Anonymous said...

OK not far from the truth






Ilovemywife

Anonymous said...

USA and her allies are responsible for massacre in Syria not Russia .. they are only blaming Russia because of her opposite view on their games.
They own the media so they can mislead the world about the real happening.
Imagine Linda self...Only concentrating on one side of the story.

Anonymous said...

“The crux/aim of the Syrian war is starving Russia of its gas exports to Europe by enabling the Qatar/Syria pipeline project. Therefore Russia has to support Assad and either clear the country of headchoppers or maintain the status quo.”

It is firmly established that the only plausible reason/ground/raison d’etre of the Syrian conflict was President Assad refusal to allow the transit of a Qatari gas pipeline aimed at the European market through Syrian territory. If you believe in the “Arab Spring” and Assad’s “chemical attack” narrative you need to have your head read and there is a plethora of written material on the subject to remedy that deficiency.

There may other considerations and motivations but the green light for external intervention into Syrian’s sovereign right to decide what goes through the country was the refusal for the pipeline which, by the way, was planned to go through Turkey as well on its way to the EU through the Bosphorus. So, Turkey was from the beginning part of the consortium, from which it would obtain substantial benefits in transit fees, construction projects and replace current imports of Russian gas with cheaper Qatari gas.

Syria’s refusal for the Qatari gas project was based on the fact that Syria has friendly relations with Russia in spite of Syria’s loss of economic benefits from the project.

The US has a declared policy of cutting off Russia from Europe which is part of its encirclement and blockade policy, particularly Russian trade of strategic goods like gas and oil. The supply of Qatari gas to Europe is part of that policy and so was the US policy leading to the Ukrainian debacle: to control, limit or shut off Russian gas/oil to Europe.

Gas and oil exports to Europe are a substantial benefit to the Russian economy and state budget; without them Russia would sustain a severe crisis, perhaps as much as 15% of export earnings, although I have not checked the exact figure.

Without going any further and provide a comprehensive list of factors influencing Russia’s participation in the defence of Syria, I believe that the above ingredients are more than sufficient to state that the predominant, if not sole, reason for such intervention, was to protect Russian interests.

President Putin or anyone in his place would be in serious dereliction of duty if he did not intervene in support of President Assad to protect Russian’s interests.

There is nothing ethically wrong with a country’s choice of policy based on self-interest if such policy does not involve interfering in other countries’ affairs without the consent of its legitimate government.

It is wrong though for such countries as Australia throwing their weight around to steal the resources of poor countries like Timor Leste in breach of international law.

Anonymous said...


“The crux/aim of the Syrian war is starving Russia of its gas exports to Europe by enabling the Qatar/Syria pipeline project. Therefore Russia has to support Assad and either clear the country of headchoppers or maintain the status quo.”

It is firmly established that the only plausible reason/ground/raison d’etre of the Syrian conflict was President Assad refusal to allow the transit of a Qatari gas pipeline aimed at the European market through Syrian territory. If you believe in the “Arab Spring” and Assad’s “chemical attack” narrative you need to have your head read and there is a plethora of written material on the subject to remedy that deficiency.

There may other considerations and motivations but the green light for external intervention into Syrian’s sovereign right to decide what goes through the country was the refusal for the pipeline which, by the way, was planned to go through Turkey as well on its way to the EU through the Bosphorus. So, Turkey was from the beginning part of the consortium, from which it would obtain substantial benefits in transit fees, construction projects and replace current imports of Russian gas with cheaper Qatari gas.

Syria’s refusal for the Qatari gas project was based on the fact that Syria has friendly relations with Russia in spite of Syria’s loss of economic benefits from the project.

The US has a declared policy of cutting off Russia from Europe which is part of its encirclement and blockade policy, particularly Russian trade of strategic goods like gas and oil. The supply of Qatari gas to Europe is part of that policy and so was the US policy leading to the Ukrainian debacle: to control, limit or shut off Russian gas/oil to Europe.

Gas and oil exports to Europe are a substantial benefit to the Russian economy and state budget; without them Russia would sustain a severe crisis, perhaps as much as 15% of export earnings, although I have not checked the exact figure.

Without going any further and provide a comprehensive list of factors influencing Russia’s participation in the defence of Syria, I believe that the above ingredients are more than sufficient to state that the predominant, if not sole, reason for such intervention, was to protect Russian interests.

President Putin or anyone in his place would be in serious dereliction of duty if he did not intervene in support of President Assad to protect Russian’s interests.

There is nothing ethically wrong with a country’s choice of policy based on self-interest if such policy does not involve interfering in other countries’ affairs without the consent of its legitimate government.

It is wrong though for such countries as Australia throwing their weight around to steal the resources of poor countries like Timor Leste in breach of international law.

AGB said...

Don't mind the goats.

RareSpecie Z said...

Dope!!
Hit me on g+.

Recent Posts