United Nations (CNN) -- As international anger grows over reports of mass carnage at the hands of the Syrian regime, a U.N. Security Council draft resolution condemning Syria failed to be adopted Saturday after veto-wielding members Russia and China voted against it.

Ambassadors from the other permanent members of the council -- the United States, France, and the United Kingdom -- said they were furious at Russia and China for failing to halt the worsening, bloody violence that has consumed the Middle Eastern nation.

Thirteen Security Council members voted in favor of the resolution.

Some Syrians have cried out for international action to stop attacks on civilians, more so after opposition groups said at least 321 civilians were killed and hundreds wounded after in the city of Homs in the past two days.

The opposition Syrian National Council blamed government forces for the attack in Homs, calling it one of the most "horrific massacres" since the start of the Syrian uprising. It said residential buildings and homes were "randomly and heavily bombed," the group said.

The Local Coordination Committees, a Syrian opposition group, said 90 people had been killed in Syria on Saturday, including 61 in Homs, 10 in Idlib, and 19 in a Damascus suburb.

Some Syrian residents accused the international community of sitting idle as bodies mount in the streets.

"The U.N. isn't doing anything about it. The Arab League isn't doing anything about it. ,  While they're having their little discussion, people are sitting here and they're dying," said an activist identified as Danny.

Homs resident Abu Abdo Alhomsy described continuous bombing and snipers perched throughout the city.

"There are so many people on the streets that are wounded and they need help, but we can't reach them to help them," he said. "They're ready to kills us all. They have no problem with doing that. Please, we call (on) the international community for help."

Syria's U.N. ambassador, Bashar Jaafari, said his country has been "targeted by some powers seeking to punish it."

Jaafari called the crisis "manufactured" and said there is a media campaign to make the Syrian regime look bad.

In a strongly worded statement before the vote, U.S. President Barack Obama said Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has lost all legitimacy and that the international community "must work to protect the Syrian people from this abhorrent brutality."

He pointed the finger directly at al-Assad and what he called his "killing machine."

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said the vote was a lost opportunity to halt the violence. The resolution would have demanded that al-Assad stop the killing and answer international calls aimed at finding a Syrian-led solution to the crisis.

U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice said the United States was "disgusted" at the veto by Russia and China.

Referring to Russia, she said, "This intransigence is even more shameful when you consider that one of these members continues to deliver weapons to Assad."

The Russian foreign minister has spoken in defense of Russian arm sales to Syria, saying they did not affect the regional balance of power.

Russia, which counts Syria as a major weapons client, has made clear that it will not accept an arms embargo or economic sanctions.

The Russian foreign minister has spoken in defense of Russian arm sales to Syria, saying they did not affect the regional balance of power.

Russia, which counts Syria as a major weapons client, has made clear that it will not accept an arms embargo or economic sanctions.

British Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant said the United Kingdom was "appalled" at the veto.

"Those who blocked the council action today must ask themselves how many more deaths they will be prepared to tolerate," Lyall Grant said.

It effectively means Russia and China "support tyranny rather than the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people," he said.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague said the resolution supported Arab League efforts to resolve the crisis in Syria.

"It did not impose any sanctions, nor did it authorize military action," Hague said. "There was nothing in the draft to warrant opposition."

Jaafari said such statements "fan the flames of escalation of the violence and bloodshed" and "betray the true hostile, genuine intentions against Syria, the people of Syria, and the government of Syria."

All along, he said, "the tone of their statements was not diplomatic ,  when they describe the government of Syria as a 'regime' and addressed the president of the state of Syria with inappropriate language."

Speaking after the vote, ambassadors from both Russia and China said they do support an end to the violence but felt the resolution did not address the crisis properly.

Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said the text "did not adequately reflect the real state of affairs and sent an unbalanced signal" to the various sides in Syria. He noted that the minister for foreign affairs will visit Damascus to hold a meeting with al-Assad in three days.

Chinese Ambassador Li Baodong called on all parties in Syria to stop the violence and restore order as soon as possible. But he said the text would have served only to "complicate the issue" and would "prejudge the result of dialogue."

China and Russia vetoed another Security Council resolution in October that would have called for an immediate halt to the crackdown, which United Nations officials have said has resulted in an estimated 6,000 deaths since protests began nearly a year ago.

"Since these two members last vetoed a resolution on Syria, an estimated 3,000 more civilians have been killed," Rice said Saturday.

Earlier Saturday, Tunisia said it would expel the Syrian ambassador from Tunis in response to the killings in Homs, while British Foreign Secretary William Hague and his French counterpart Alain Juppe condemned the violence.

Obama noted the violence in Homs came as the Syrian people were celebrating the birth of the Prophet Mohammed and marking 30 years since al-Assad's father oversaw a massacre in the city of Hama.

The resolution voted on Saturday had dropped demands from an Arab League plan for Syria to form a unity government and for al-Assad to delegate power to his deputy.

U.N. diplomats said the changes reflected a big concession to Russia, which had been reluctant to sign on to any plan that could be seen as a mandate for regime change in Damascus.

The Syrian National Council said it hopes Syria can "democratically elect a regime that ensures freedom and dignity for all Syrians." It called for Russia to change its stance, condemn the Syrian regime and hold it accountable for mass killings.

CNN cannot independently confirm opposition or government reports from Syria because the regime has restricted journalists' access to the country.

But news of the violence in Homs led to protests breaking out at Syrian embassies in Cairo, Berlin, Washington, Kuwait and London on Friday and Saturday.

CNN's Yousuf Basil, Becky Brittain, Pierre Meilhan, Richard Roth, Mick Krever, Elise Labott, Salma Abdelaziz and Amir Ahmed, and journalist Mohamed Fadel Fahmy

[center]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/04/world/meast/syria-unrest/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

[/center]

Please what I am saying here is subjective. My confusion is that why do all African countries in the security council always voted alongside of their Western counterpart especially the UN vote on Syria today while Russia and China always vote based on their common sense.  I'm still waiting for a day a Nigeria president will vote at the security council based on our interest. Let's take for example, during the Libya crisis, Africa resolution was not even put to the table or even look at  based on the ground that Westerner said that most Africa countries receives paycheck from Gaddafi. On the other hand, the only reason NATO are there is to put Ghadaffi out and not to even protect civilians, which they even killed when their bloody airstrike began. After their bloody crackdown and recognizing the NTC, they send delegates to A.U to get the support from those Africa presidents they shun their own proposal. And one of the first people to jump on the wagon was GEJ. 

A.U is just a joke like most people put it. How can Arab League take responsible of what happens on our continent instead of A.U. This is just  a degradation of black race to the highest level.


Moreover,  when the resolution is being drafted, only EU, USA, Russia, China, and Arab League were consulted. I would say the only consultation we have was when Obama or Cameron called our dear African president including  GEJ and said, " We will be voting on a resolution tomorrow, I know you sabi wetin you go do", and they will replied, "of course, we know we sabi raise our hand whenever we see your hands raised up"  . Besides, Saudi Arabia, and Isreal have the worst record of human rights and civilian violence  respectively, but you never get any condemnation of them from the United States. United States even cracked heavy on occupy movement let alone allowing pronounce regime change.

To say the truth, the only reason I still have faith in the U.N is because of China and Russia. Most of their votes are based on common sense which  includes: respect for country sovereignty, Not based on Hatred. Syria problem is an internal problem, which is even funded  by USA and their allies to weaken Iran, and even Russia.

Ok, my overall point is that having Russia and China on the security council help break the hegemony of the West and U.S. Africa is just there for a count. I am sorry for Syria people that they are been used by those dogs to destroy their society which they will regret when the whole thing is over. Secondly African countries in the security council should please try to read any resolution even if no one consulted you when it's being drafted.

Like I said, this is subjective.

I actually notice that! Although I don't really care much about U.N because it's all about white folks passing laws that favors them. Your are right Africa is just their for the West to raise their vote.

Nothing concern me with Syria problem, GEJ should solve this Boko issue before voting like mugu for UN.

after veto-wielding members Russia and China voted against it.

Thank God for these two countries.
Thank God!!!

Lasinoh:

Thank God for these two countries.
Thank God!!!

The only countries I will say that cast their vote in the security based on formality and laws is China and Russia others are just using U.N as a place to justify their foolish motive. Russia and China have learnt not to abstain like they did in Libya. If they had done, those west would have the vote a reason to invade and topple Syria government like they did in Libya. Africa leaders in the council are just there to increase number or make council look diverse

The only people that I am sorry for are the Syria people who are caught in this mess. No government even United State would allow a group of thugs to cause havoc to the society!

I do not follow anything I see in CNN to make a judgement. If I use to see what's happening then make further research on the topic. If you ask a a typical newsreader he/she will the regime has been killing people. Go carry gun even in Lagos and see whether you will live to tell how many police did it to you. Before you criticize people, look at where you get those news, the people behind those propaganda.

I dey free sorry for Syria but all government has the right to protect it sovereignity from Thugs.

chyed:

The only countries I will say that cast their vote in the security based on formality and laws is China and Russia others are just using U.N as a place to justify their foolish motive. Russia and China have learnt not to abstain like they did in Libya. If they had done, those west would have the vote a reason to invade and topple Syria government like they did in Libya. Africa leaders in the council are just there to increase number or make council look diverse

Gbam!
+100

How contradictory can you get? You love that the UN could not pass a resolution asking a non-elected leader whose people have tired of rulership passing from father to son. Don't you see exactly why China and Russia will veto it?

They are not trying to protect Syria's sovereignty the individuals that are monopolizing rulership in these two countries are trying to protect their selfish interest. China does not have a democracy. Russia on the other hand has a so-called democracy - for PUTIN till death. Putin was president for two terms, then exchanged that position to be prime minister. His plan, which is currently generating the Russian version of occupy Russia, is to once again exchange the prime minister position for the presidency. We know that China's pro-democracy protest is long-standing, but has gathered steam of recent.

Forget about African rulers or the fact that the UN is just another bureaucracy, and focus on the Syrian people. So, is Russia and China given Assad the go ahead, after many months of opportunity to act different, to mow down the people that desire change from a feudalistic system. Assad fools himself if he fails to realize that the end is near. The only choice he has is either go peacefully or be given the Khaddafi treatment.

Lasinoh:

Thank God for these two countries.
Thank God!!!

donedy:

The only people that I am sorry for are the Syria people who are caught in this mess. No government even United State would allow a group of thugs to cause havoc to the society!

I do not follow anything I see in CNN to make a judgement. If I use to see what's happening then make further research on the topic. If you ask a a typical newsreader he/she will the regime has been killing people. Go carry gun even in Lagos and see whether you will live to tell how many police did it to you. Before you criticize people, look at where you get those news, the people behind those propaganda.

I dey free sorry for Syria but all government has the right to protect it sovereignity from Thugs.

The only choice he has is either go peacefully or be given the Khaddafi treatment.

In one sentence, this is your point?

Till then.

[flash=500,500]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MRrCblkG2c&feature=relmfu[/flash]

Bravo!

Why didn't the so called freedom loving West propose a security council resolution to punish the tyrannical regimes of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar and Yemen for their ongoing crackdown on their people? Why did the US quickly sell tens of billions of dollars worth of arms to those brutal regimes to crush the aspirations of their own people?

why is  the Western Media currently blacking out  the ongoing bloodshed in Bahrain, Saudi and Yemen? Are those countries not ruled by iron fisted dictatorships? Who is arming, training and  funding the "peaceful protesters" in Syria? Why has the western Media failed to mention that more than 2500 Syrian law enforcement agents have lost their lives to the guerrillas running rampant in the country?

Whose interest does the "Syrian Free Army" serve? Why one set of rules for US client regimes and another set of rules for independent regimes? Why are we constantly bombarded by events in Syria and Iran but those in Saudi, Bahrain, Qatar, Jordan, Yemen blacked out by the so called free press? Who is fooling who? I support the action of Russia and China!

First of all, most if this people are thugs who were paid by CIA to instigate violence. They were even told not put down their weapon unless Assad step down, and you call them peaceful protesters. Go do am for GEJ na your death you don sign.


USA cracked heavily on peaceful Occupy  Movement, let alone letting thugs with weapon to demonstrate. Russia and China bring balance to the United Nation. That is why I like security council, and not when all members vote in the same direction.

Most of the Killings are done by those thugs but you always hear in CNN, Assad regime kill women and children. Its only a fool will believe a government will mindfully kill children and women like they did in Libya.

This Africa president should stop disgracing us for world stage. The least you can do is to abstain from the vote. The only countries that never question a resolution is Africa countries. Just vote yes because WEST and US vote YES

kalokalo:

Why didn't the so called freedom loving West propose a security council resolution to punish the tyrannical regimes of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar and Yemen for their ongoing crackdown on their people? Why did the US quickly sell tens of billions of dollars worth of arms to those brutal regimes to crush the aspirations of their own people?

why is  the Western Media currently blacking out  the ongoing bloodshed in Bahrain, Saudi and Yemen? Are those countries not ruled by iron fisted dictatorships? Who is arming, training and  funding the "peaceful protesters" in Syria? Why has the western Media failed to mention that more than 2500 Syrian law enforcement agents have lost their lives to the guerrillas running rampant in the country?

Whose interest does the "Syrian Free Army" serve? Why one set of rules for US client regimes and another set of rules for independent regimes? Why are we constantly bombarded by events in Syria and Iran but those in Saudi, Bahrain, Qatar, Jordan, Yemen blacked out by the so called free press? Who is fooling who? I support the action of Russia and China!

Thank you so much! You just said the whole thing. Some Idiot after watching CNN will come out and start talking Dictator, Dictator just because its on the News.
Saudi Arabia has the worst human right record in the world both women right and oppression but you never hear it on the table.

So those of you who are supporting the action of Russia and China will also support a similar action in the case of Nigeria when the time come right?

Let's say the Religious sectarian violence in Nigeria gets so bad, that the West via the UN calls for granting the Southern Christians plea to separate from the Islamic ruled North of the nation, but in a simple effort to be complicating to the will of the West as is always the case, China and Russia decide to vote against it.

Now based on what you are saying in regard to the Syrian situation and that of Libya, you will support China's and Russia's decision, correct?

Negative analogies are a loser any day. Because a thief goes scot-free is no basis for another to contest his sentence. When the people of Saudi Arabia stand up they would expect your support, but just like you are here today praising those opposing support for the Syrian people you will find some other negative analogy to not grant the people's wish. We need to come off this attitude.

Even those countries responded in some way to the events that swept the Arab world in recent times. Saudi Arabia for one immediately put in a place a program of measures that will see about $30 billion more going to the people. Bahrain saw protests and is moving to make reforms. Don't know much about the others. No justification for their maintaining feudalistic rules, but if the people of Syria fails, as Russia and China wants, then there is no hope for those of Saudi Arabia. So your point is self-defeating.

Most of the Islamic countries are closed to the rest of the world not just these nations. They get exposed to the worldwide news media when they interact with the rest of the world. By the way Al Jazeera is the one exposing them to the rest of the world more than CNN.

kalokalo:

Why didn't the so called freedom loving West propose a security council resolution to punish the tyrannical regimes of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar and Yemen for their ongoing crackdown on their people? Why did the US quickly sell tens of billions of dollars worth of arms to those brutal regimes to crush the aspirations of their own people?

why is the Western Media currently blacking out the ongoing bloodshed in Bahrain, Saudi and Yemen? Are those countries not ruled by iron fisted dictatorships? Who is arming, training and funding the "peaceful protesters" in Syria? Why has the western Media failed to mention that more than 2500 Syrian law enforcement agents have lost their lives to the guerrillas running rampant in the country?

Whose interest does the "Syrian Free Army" serve? Why one set of rules for US client regimes and another set of rules for independent regimes? Why are we constantly bombarded by events in Syria and Iran but those in Saudi, Bahrain, Qatar, Jordan, Yemen blacked out by the so called free press? Who is fooling who? I support the action of Russia and China!

Please, go on.
I think I am enjoying reading for a change.
See wahala.
Meanwhile. . . Nigeria dey burn.

*adjusting my pillows*

Time for a snack!

DaRapture:

So those of you who are supporting the action of Russia and China will also support a similar action in the case of Nigeria when the time come right?

Let's say the Religious sectarian violence in Nigeria gets so bad, that the West via the UN calls for granting the Southern Christians plea to separate from the Islamic ruled North of the nation, but in a simple effort to be complicating to the will of the West as is always the case, China and Russia decide to vote against it.

Now based on what you are saying in regard to the Syrian situation and that of Libya, you will support China's and Russia's decision, correct?

The people demonstrating are bunch of thugs, any government including USA will crash just the way they did to small Occupy movement. Syria government have made many reforms but what those US-backed thug want is to overthrown Assad just to weaken Iran, and Russia. Politics is complicated. Do not read news without understanding what's going on. Al jazeera is better than CNN. They do not force their opinion on anyone. Al Jezeera report things they see without siding with anyone like CNN.

Yes I will always support China and Russia on any of their votes than the USA. And also, I would never support a vote going to the United Nation for Nigeria seperation.

DaRapture:

So those of you who are supporting the action of Russia and China will also support a similar action in the case of Nigeria when the time come right?

Let's say the Religious sectarian violence in Nigeria gets so bad, that the West via the UN calls for granting the Southern Christians plea to separate from the Islamic ruled North of the nation, but in a simple effort to be complicating to the will of the West as is always the case, China and Russia decide to vote against it.

Now based on what you are saying in regard to the Syrian situation and that of Libya, you will support China's and Russia's decision, correct?

Just Imagine how you reason. You think the WEST will support south breaking out from North. They would have done during CIVIL WAR when the greatest massacre of Igbo, the biggest horror in Nigeria history, occurred in the North. The WEST will always one a united Nigeria cos they know that Once South seperate the issue of them having monopoly over Nigeria oil will be over

Guys the world is a twisted place and you must learn to play twisted. Now let's look at the dynamics.
Russia and china are the biggest trade partner of Syria- so I understand their veto
The west are out to remove Assad for two reason, one two get access to Syrian oil no matter how small it is, an to weaken Iran because Syria is it's no one ally in the region- so I understand their rush to pass a resolution

BUT IN WHOSE INTEREST IS NIGERIA VOTING IN FAVOR? Certainly not in our national interest and don't tell me for global peace or Syrian people because:

1. Why the US assist in stifling similar revolt in Bahrain? Because it is home to the US fifth fleet? And america has uninterupted oil supply from them?
2. Why wasn't the west not this vocal in condemning the Yemeni brutality on it's people, instead president Saleh was rewarded with treatment vacation in the US and an immunity from prosecution for his crime against humanity even AS THE YEMENI PEOPLE ARE CRYING OUT FOR HIM TO FACE JUSTICE.
3.who supply the Syrian rebels with arms to fight the government? So you expect the Syrian authorities to sit back and watch law and order fail.

SO IN A TWISTED WORLD OF POLITICAL HYPOCRICY/DIPLOMACY WE NEED TO GET OUR INTEREST STAIGHT AND FOLLOW THEM THROUGH, OTHERWISE SIT BACK, WHICH IS ANOTHER SYRATIGIC FORIEGN POLICY.

China and Russia will lick their wounds pretty soon, when[b] al-Assad[/b] is gone, they will kiss good bye to all their interest in Syria, i don't see this conflict ending without al-Assad regime losing its grip on power then Russia and China will have eggs on their faces.

so happy to know that there are people who toll the sameline of reasoning wit me. damn America and the west with sick democrazy

UN security is based on political interest. African countries are just there for nothing. They are only good in raising their hands when USA or WEST raise their. You can see how SA ambassador raised his hand higher than others. Afican better abstain from the votes than disgracing us.

[size=18pt]Most Syrians back President Assad, but you'd never know from western media[/size]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jan/17/syrians-support-assad-western-propaganda

Assad's popularity, Arab League observers, US military involvement: all distorted in the west's propaganda war


Jonathan Steele
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 17 January 2012 18.40 GMT


A demonstration in support of Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, in Damascus. 'Some 55% of Syrians want Assad to stay, motivated by fear of civil war.' Photograph: Hussein Malla/AP

Suppose a respectable opinion poll found that most Syrians are in favour of Bashar al-Assad remaining as president, would that not be major news? Especially as the finding would go against the dominant narrative about the Syrian crisis, and the media considers the unexpected more newsworthy than the obvious.

Alas, not in every case. When coverage of an unfolding drama ceases to be fair and turns into a propaganda weapon, inconvenient facts get suppressed. So it is with the results of a recent YouGov Siraj poll on Syria commissioned by The Doha Debates, funded by the Qatar Foundation. Qatar's royal family has taken one of the most hawkish lines against Assad – the emir has just called for Arab troops to intervene – so it was good that The Doha Debates published the poll on its website. The pity is that it was ignored by almost all media outlets in every western country whose government has called for Assad to go.

The key finding was that while most Arabs outside Syria feel the president should resign, attitudes in the country are different. Some 55% of Syrians want Assad to stay, motivated by fear of civil war – a spectre that is not theoretical as it is for those who live outside Syria's borders. What is less good news for the Assad regime is that the poll also found that half the Syrians who accept him staying in power believe he must usher in free elections in the near future. Assad claims he is about to do that, a point he has repeated in his latest speeches. But it is vital that he publishes the election law as soon as possible, permits political parties and makes a commitment to allow independent monitors to watch the poll.

Biased media coverage also continues to distort the Arab League's observer mission in Syria. When the league endorsed a no-fly zone in Libya last spring, there was high praise in the west for its action. Its decision to mediate in Syria was less welcome to western governments, and to high-profile Syrian opposition groups, who increasingly support a military rather than a political solution. So the league's move was promptly called into doubt by western leaders, and most western media echoed the line. Attacks were launched on the credentials of the mission's Sudanese chairman. Criticisms of the mission's performance by one of its 165 members were headlined. Demands were made that the mission pull out in favour of UN intervention.

The critics presumably feared that the Arab observers would report that armed violence is no longer confined to the regime's forces, and the image of peaceful protests brutally suppressed by army and police is false. Homs and a few other Syrian cities are becoming like Beirut in the 1980s or Sarajevo in the 1990s, with battles between militias raging across sectarian and ethnic fault lines.

As for foreign military intervention, it has already started. It is not following the Libyan pattern since Russia and China are furious at the west's deception in the security council last year. They will not accept a new United Nations resolution that allows any use of force. The model is an older one, going back to the era of the cold war, before "humanitarian intervention" and the "responsibility to protect" were developed and often misused. Remember Ronald Reagan's support for the Contras, whom he armed and trained to try to topple Nicaragua's Sandinistas from bases in Honduras? For Honduras read Turkey, the safe haven where the so-called Free Syrian Army has set up.

Here too western media silence is dramatic. No reporters have followed up on a significant recent article by Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer who now writes for the American Conservative – a magazine that criticises the American military-industrial complex from a non-neocon position on the lines of Ron Paul, who came second in last week's New Hampshire Republican primary. Giraldi states that Turkey, a Nato member, has become Washington's proxy and that unmarked Nato warplanes have been arriving at Iskenderum, near the Syrian border, delivering Libyan volunteers and weapons seized from the late Muammar Gaddafi's arsenal. "French and British special forces trainers are on the ground," he writes, "assisting the Syrian rebels, while the CIA and US Spec Ops are providing communications equipment and intelligence to assist the rebel cause, enabling the fighters to avoid concentrations of Syrian soldiers …"

As the danger of full-scale war increases, Arab League foreign ministers are preparing to meet in Cairo this weekend to discuss the future of their Syrian mission. No doubt there will be western media reports highlighting remarks by those ministers who feel the mission has "lost credibility", "been duped by the regime" or "failed to stop the violence". Counter-arguments will be played down or suppressed.

In spite of the provocations from all sides the league should stand its ground. Its mission in Syria has seen peaceful demonstrations both for and against the regime. It has witnessed, and in some cases suffered from, violence by opposing forces. But it has not yet had enough time or a large enough team to talk to a comprehensive range of Syrian actors and then come up with a clear set of recommendations. Above all, it has not even started to fulfil that part of its mandate requiring it to help produce a dialogue between the regime and its critics. The mission needs to stay in Syria and not be bullied out.

Oaining.

Also before one say Al-jazeera is better than the almighty CNN,the qatari family owns it or abi a member. And same qatar wants assad to go. So don't claim to watch a balanced news in al-jazeera. Besides,jounalists aren't allowed inside syria.

Me am just waiting for 2015. Nigeria was not one b4 1914 and it can't be one forever.

How could UN condemns Bashar al-Asaad but ingnores the armed groups that have been killing the government forces. US ambassador to UN  Susan Rice accused Russia of selling arms to Syrian government, she should tell  the world  who arms the militants?
Last time they deceived Russia and China on Libya but this time, the only two countries in UN that are ready to checkmate US and EU refuse to be deceived.
When the western media reports about the armed groups in  syria they sound as  is the report is hunded  percent accurate, but on government you would hear 'we cannot verify' or 'alleged'.
No government in the world would allow some militants to take over power without fighting back.

i really wonder why people will suspend their reasoning faculty just to be seen to be anti west and anti America, the issue in syria is not about the agenda of a country or group of countries,it is about the inordinate ambition of one man to hang on to power no matter the cost in human lives of the same people he supposedly wants to rule over.Cant we see why russia vetoed the resolution? they are the arms suppliers, the world have moved from the era of non interference in the internal affairs of a country to a time of non indifference. how many more pepole must die before the conscience of these two countries will be aroused?

terrykarl:

i really wonder why people will suspend their reasoning faculty just to be seen to be anti west and anti America, the issue in syria is not about the agenda of a country or group of countries,it is about the inordinate ambition of one man to hang on to power no matter the cost in human lives of the same people he supposedly wants to rule over.Cant we see why russia vetoed the resolution? they are the arms suppliers, the world have moved from the era of non interference in the internal affairs of a country to a time of non indifference. how many more pepole must die before the conscience of these two countries will be excited?

Someboody is talking. West condnmed the killings,they complain. They don't,they still whine. They enter,una shout like cocaine smokers. They abstain,moan lik some1 with deme.tia.

Gerrard59:

One thing i will say is that when the times comes for assad to leave,he will syrely leave. You assad frnds seem to forget that china and Israel r/ship is getting ever closer. Tell your arabs brothers not to always concede to the west demands. BTW,it was just condemnation and not sanctions. Assad has not shown compassion like starting reforms like in saudi where women would soon start to vote in local elections. Assad is like his father. You also forgot the HAMA raid in the 80s. HABA! He should simply step aside. They mentioned iran,the same iran,china is reducing its oil imports from and s shifting towards the saudis. No b so wadafi do? Where is he now? Syria is not assad property. BTW,which kind oil syria get sef When compared to its arabian brothers. As far as am concerned,let them kill them self. The west is not even entering @ all and you people are whining. French FM said they aren't entering. So stop complaining.

please dont talk trash.are you comparing syrian women to saudi women? that is a big mistake.

do you know how free (below islamic standards) syrian women are compared to the saudi women (who are caged and maltreated away from islamic standards)?

the two cannot be compared.the syrian president is supported by christians who see themselves as a minority fearing that his ousting could result to christians like what happened to christians in iraq after the fall of saddam.

Gerrard59:

Someboody is talking. West condnmed the killings,they complain. They don't,they still whine. They enter,una shout like cocaine smokers. They abstain,moan lik some1 with deme.tia.

but why is the west only condemning the government and holding it responsible for all the attrocities committed in syria? why is the west not condemning the militias that are being supported by western Wahhabi allies like qatar and saudi (ruled by dictatorial monarchies) to topple the syrian government? doesn't that show that the west is complacent and has a hand in the unrest in syria?

this isn't even about oil.syria is a strategic player in middle east politics and opposes israel by supporting resistance to occupation movements in palestine (hamas) and in lebanon ( Shia hezbollah,an ally of Iran).also syria itself is a very close and important ally of Shia Iran,a rival of the west.the politics and importance of syria as a strategic player in middle east politics outweighs the importance of oil and resources syria possesses in the eyes of the west.

so let us dont fool ourselves here.

Some Nigerians are bunch of hypocrites, the same pple who cried their eyes out when police used force to control protesters during fuel subsidy demonstration are here supporting China and Russia for supporting a govt who is killing his own people for demonstrating.

Onyocha:

but why is the west only condemning the government and holding it responsible for all the attrocities committed in syria? why is the west not condemning the militias that are being supported by western Wahhabi allies like qatar and saudi (ruled by dictatorial monarchies) to topple the syrian government? doesn't that show that the west is complacent and has a hand in the unrest in syria?

this isn't even about oil.syria is a strategic player in middle east politics and opposes israel by supporting resistance to occupation movements in palestine (hamas) and in lebanon ( Shia hezbollah,an ally of Iran).also syria itself is a very close and important ally of Shia Iran,a rival of the west.the politics and importance of syria as a strategic player in middle east politics outweighs the importance of oil and resources syria possesses in the eyes of the west.

so let us dont fool ourselves here.

So the west controls the whole of Arab league countries that initiated the resolution at the first place?