NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen today ruled out ending military threats against Syria, insisting that diplomatic progress depended entirely on continued threats of imminent attack.
“Irrespective of the outcome of the deliberations in the UN Security Council, the military option will still be on the table,” Rasmussen added, during comments made at the conference.
Efforts by the US, Britain and France to get NATO to authorize a war against Syria have so far failed, and despite Rasmussen’s determination to keep the threat “open” the reality is that there is strong opposition to the war among NATO members and that will make an aggressive war by the alliance virtually impossible.
Rasmussen’s comments reflect a popular narrative among Western officials which attempts to attribute the Syrian disarmament deal to their threats to attack, despite the US simultaneously claiming that the proposal was something they’d secretly been working on since the 2012 G20.
This man is the beginning of what is known as Nordic Neo Fascism in Denmark, as prime minister he was one of the organizer of Balkan war, to Afghanistan then Iraq and now Syria, he gladly would kiss the hand and even the asses of Saudis and UAE because of Danish milk product manufactured and sold there, he simply was elected as head of NATO not because of his experience in managing such entity of warmongers in Europe, but because of his ignorant to human life, being against all and every kind of democracy that he knows of, and his known brutality toward other nations then Danish supremacy in both economical and political terms. In the other hand such "illegal" organization needs people as such managing it.
Here he got what he deserves:
NATO / Libya: Anders Fogh Rasmussen – called as war criminal, covered with red paint
Rasmussen is one of the worst of the worst with a war crimes record going back to the Iraq war.
As for the use of force, why not keep open a threat to attack Denmark?
Another wannabe war criminal. He looks like he is doing a Tony Blair impression.
I bet this butt wipe is on AIPAC payroll.
So… Is Fogh going to lead this military option if it comes to pass? And lay out UN funds to support it? Does he have some missles stowed away we don't know about? Or does he have his hands in my pockets? He sure doesn't have the UN behind him.
Rasmussen is a warmonger and a war criminal. He invaded Iraq with Blair and Bush and filled us with lies. He is a war criminal, he invaded Iraq against the UN SC. Have they promised him shares in Lockheed ?
also supported AlQaida in the Balkans Seems some NATO countries are begining to see the 3rd reich in NATO .
foggy rossclott has spoken. The guy seems to take the "NATO CHIEF" seriously, ha ha ha ha.
Attacking Israel option must be left open too. There isn't another country on the planet (besides the US) who has as much nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, flouts international law, and threatens to use these weapons.
A blow to Israel is a blow for all mankind's future safety and prosperity.
When did Syria attack any NATO country?
In the ninties the north atlantic treaty organization found they had no one to fear invading them , no real reason to exsist any more . Yet the military industrial complex needs war to survive . The United Nations refused to act as often as some people wanted them too . So NATO decided maybe Hitler was right after all . . NATO attacked Yugoslavia using NAZI propaganda , false fabracated atrocities invented and exagerated masacures evrey trick Adolph used and than some . NATO has been doing the same thing in country after country untill now finally Russia and China felt they have to standup again .
Why distributing this fraud news?
USA/NATO is attacking Syria for two years now with its killer mercenaries !
This whole terrorist attack was planned long ago according the former French Foreign minister Dumas and US presidency candidate and 4 stars general Wesley Clark:
see the first video + text sources here:
http://08oo.wordpress.com/2012/05/30/key-reasons-…
NATO / Libya: Anders Fogh Rasmussen – called as war criminal, covered with red paint
NATO has long ago outlived is relevance and usefulness and Europe should stop paying for its upkeep.
I woner if the USA might have the biggest expense
How does NATO justify selecting as its leader a man who openly advocates violation of the UN Charter's collective-security ban on unilateral (unauthorized by the Security Council) use of force OR THREAT OF FORCE by any nation against any other nation (excepting only in response to an actual or imminent attack by the other nation)?
well NATO is not the UN . It is many times more agressive than the UN . The UN is supposed to promote peace , where NATO is more a force for world order . We just don't know yet what order