Garden of Eden Escorts
Toronto Escorts

France's Macron sees no legitimate successor to Syria's Assad

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,353
4,778
113
France's Macron says sees no legitimate successor to Syria's Assad


President Emmanuel Macron said on Wednesday he saw no legitimate successor to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and France no longer considered his departure a pre-condition to resolving the six-year-old conflict.
He said Assad was an enemy of the Syrian people, but not of France and that Paris' priority was fighting terrorist groups and ensuring Syria did not become a failed state.
His comments were in stark contrast to those of the previous French administration and echo Moscow's stance that there is no viable alternative to Assad.
"The new perspective that I have had on this subject is that I have not stated that Bashar al-Assad's departure is a pre-condition for everything because nobody has shown me a legitimate successor," Macron said in an interview with eight European newspapers.
"My lines are clear: Firstly, a complete fight against all the terrorist groups. They are our enemies," he said, adding attacks that killed 230 people in France had come from the region. "We need everybody's cooperation, especially Russia, to eradicate them."

FAILED STATE
He said the second priority was ensuring the stability of Syria so that it did not become a failed state.
In more than six years, the Syrian conflict has killed hundreds of thousands of people and driven more than 11 million from their homes.
Until now, France has been a backer of the Syrian opposition. It has demanded the conflict be resolved through a credible political transition based on U.N. Security Council resolutions negotiated between Syria's warring parties with the United Nations in Geneva.
However, Macron's election victory has offered an opportunity for Paris to re-examine its policy on Syria with some considering the previous administration's stance too intransigent and leaving it isolated.
Macron made no mention of the United Nations' role in the interview.

"My deep conviction is that there needs to be a diplomatic and political roadmap. We will not resolve this solely militarily," he said.
France's Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian was in Moscow on Tuesday pushing for closer co-operation with Russia as part of what he said could drive relations to a renewed "spirit of trust". Macron appeared to put his faith firmly in convincing Russian President Vladimir Putin to seek a solution.
"I don't think he has an unshakeable friendship with Assad. He has two obsessions, fighting terrorism and avoiding a failed state, and so that's why convergent views on Syria appear," Macron said.
He said he believed it would be possible to work with Putin to fight terrorism and find a solution to the crisis, although he made clear Paris would no longer let the use of chemical weapons in Syria go unpunished.
"The use of chemical weapons will see a response, including by France alone," he said. "France will therefore be completely aligned with the United States on this."
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,812
3,468
113
Hmmmm. France first? No regime change? Work with Putin to resolve this?

Sounds a bit like Trump policy to me......
 

HungSowel

Well-known member
Mar 3, 2017
2,706
1,619
113
Hmmmm. France first? No regime change? Work with Putin to resolve this?

Sounds a bit like Trump policy to me......
In order for Macron's policy to sound like Trump policy, it would mean that Macron would have to constantly contradict himself about his policies on Syria. I read your post, and then I googled what trump's policy is on Syria, nobody knows what the f*ck his policy is because he is constantly contradicting himself.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,812
3,468
113
In order for Macron's policy to sound like Trump policy, it would mean that Macron would have to constantly contradict himself about his policies on Syria. I read your post, and then I googled what trump's policy is on Syria, nobody knows what the f*ck his policy is because he is constantly contradicting himself.
Actions vs words. So far no regime change right? National interests first right? Try to work with Putin to fight terrorism right?

All things Trump did say.

Considering all the players on the ground and the fluidity of the situation, I don't think anyone can come up with a consistent and coherent policy and can be stuck to.

Real politik in real time probably applies best for awhile.
 

HungSowel

Well-known member
Mar 3, 2017
2,706
1,619
113
Actions vs words. So far no regime change right? National interests first right? Try to work with Putin to fight terrorism right?

All things Trump did say.

Considering all the players on the ground and the fluidity of the situation, I don't think anyone can come up with a consistent and coherent policy and can be stuck to.

Real politik in real time probably applies best for awhile.
Did Trump not launch like 25 tomohawk missles at Syria? Did the US not just shoot down a Syrian jet?

Canada has a consistent and coherent policy on Syria, stay the f*ck out, we have been doing that for quite awhile.

Edit: I spoke too soon, I did not realize Canada did participate in bombing Syria. Please substitute Canada for any other country that has not bombed Syria.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,812
3,468
113
Did Trump not launch like 25 tomohawk missles at Syria? Did the US not just shoot down a Syrian jet?

Canada has a consistent and coherent policy on Syria, stay the f*ck out, we have been doing that for quite awhile.

Edit: I spoke too soon, I did not realize Canada did participate in bombing Syria. Please substitute Canada for any other country that has not bombed Syria.
Tomahawk were specific to use of gas.

But like I said, NO one has had a specific policy that has lasted due to the number of players on the ground. Even Canada's policies have changed as you noted.

Its a mess. Blaming Trump for the situation on the ground is ridiculous. Or any other Western leader. So many factions fighting. Best thing IMO is get rid of Isis first. Then support the Kurds. Then see where things are.

And get the People home so they can rebuild.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
Hmmmm. France first? No regime change? Work with Putin to resolve this?

Sounds a bit like Trump policy to me......
Yes, but served with a French accent and truffles. That makes it easier to swallow.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
Did Trump not launch like 25 tomohawk missles at Syria? Did the US not just shoot down a Syrian jet?

Canada has a consistent and coherent policy on Syria, stay the f*ck out, we have been doing that for quite awhile.

Edit: I spoke too soon, I did not realize Canada did participate in bombing Syria. Please substitute Canada for any other country that has not bombed Syria.
Sticking half-your ass in as Trump did, then saving your ass by leaving all the suffering you shed the big lizard tears about is not a policy. It's just made things worse.

It's the height of evil stupidity to join a war — even for the far-away momentary thrill of ordering up Tomahawks — without the foggiest idea of what winning it should look like.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
Sticking half-your ass in as Trump did, then saving your ass by leaving all the suffering you shed the big lizard tears about is not a policy. It's just made things worse.

It's the height of evil stupidity to join a war — even for the far-away momentary thrill of ordering up Tomahawks — without the foggiest idea of what winning it should look like.
So you blame the Canadian bombers then?
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
So you blame the Canadian bombers then?
Obviously you didn't read or absorb what I said, but rather than argue my clear point about responsibility for entering a war, I'll pass onward to your question: I don't blame pilots or bomb-aimers or their support personnel.

Presumably your unstated 'point' is that you imagine I should. And should single out Canadians when I do. Why, pray tell?
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
Some people will argue that the Kurds are a bunch of terrorists.
But they'd be the sort who say stupid stuff like "Muslims are terrorists"; not worth the time of day.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
Obviously you didn't read or absorb what I said, but rather than argue my clear point about responsibility for entering a war, I'll pass onward to your question: I don't blame pilots or bomb-aimers or their support personnel.

Presumably your unstated 'point' is that you imagine I should. And should single out Canadians when I do. Why, pray tell?
You singled out Trump but not Canada?
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
I don't see any US national interest in Syria.

I wouldn't expend any US resources or political capital (red lines ....).

I'd let Europe deal with it, and if they don't leave it to the Russians.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
You singled out Trump but not Canada?
Trump personally decided his country would get into the war in Syria. The Canadian bombers you asked about just followed the standard rules of engagement for the conflict they'd were despatched to quite some time ago. The parallel you're groping for would be blaming the American Tomahawk missile system for blasting that warehouse, and I won't be doing that.

You really have to try to control the sneering impulse; it so often mucks up whatever point you're trying to get at.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
Of course those'd be the Asian-Russkies, wouldn't they Sky? The Euro-Russkies like Putin will be safely contained, once you explain how we get them into those paper-bags.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,012
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
I don't see any US national interest in Syria.

I wouldn't expend any US resources or political capital (red lines ....).

I'd let Europe deal with it, and if they don't leave it to the Russians.
Defeating ISIS? Stable middle east?

But since you think there is no US interest there you must have no objection to the US taking its fair share of refugees from the war there.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts