Epstein Secrets

hing equally hard for military intervention in Syria. After all, the regime of Bashar al-Assad has now killed significantly more of its people than Gaddafi killed of his. Cameron acknowledges that he is "immensely frustrated that we can't do more in Syria." True, "in Libya there was a United Nations r

y intervention in Libya last year. And while Obama was careful to occupy the back seat during the NATO air campaign that helped topple the dictator Muammar Gaddafi, Cameron was up front, fighting with Nicolas Sarkozy for control of the steering wheel and gas pedal. I ask Cameron why he is not pushing equally

e entire world, and countries that remain silent and indifferent and ignore or tolerate the massacre in Syria," he told deputies of his Justice and Development Party in parliament. "I am also addressing international organizations, which cannot produce solutions to this crisis and which encourage its continuati

s and, on present evidence, a bloody stalemate that further destabilizes the region. It's distasteful to contemplate dialogue with leaders such as Gaddafi and Assad who, to put it bluntly, have blood on their hands. But this approach is worth exploring if it can foster a transition to a democratic go

ning next door in Syria. Ankara would prefer a Syria ruled by a stable Sunni regime, especially one that would look to Turkey's ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) for political guidance. However, the Turks can see that Alawite leadership will not leave power without a long and bloody fight. Recreating a

ed to meet the demands of its people for far reaching reforms. Arguably, the same reversal of outlook in Ankara occurred in relation to Libya after Muammar Gaddafi threatened to massacre his opposition, leading even to extending some Turkish support to the UN-backed NATO intervention in Libya in 2011 that shap

when the Turkish government refused to allow the United States to use its territory to stage an invasion of Iraq. At the time the anti-Justice and Development Party (AKP) opposition called the decision the biggest mistake in Turkish republican history. In retrospect, it was a transformational moment that showed

d to meet the demands of its people for far reaching reforms. Arguably, the same reversal of outlook in Ankara occurred in relation to Libya after Muammar Gaddafi threatened to massacre his opposition, leading even to extending some Turkish support to the UN- EFTA_R1_00228271 EFTA01841735 backed NATO interv

when the Turkish government refused to allow the United States to use its territory to stage an invasion of Iraq. At the time the anti-Justice and Development Party (AKP) opposition called the decision the biggest mistake in Turkish republican history. In retrospect, it was a transformational moment that showed