TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

"I'm not interested in being a heel clicking, cork sniffing ambassador." No regime change. No more boots on the ground. "There is no plan b. Plan b is chaos and a return to worse than what the Assad regime was." "The issue isn't the weapons. The issue is the utilization of the weapons." We must "empower LAP. Give them more resources, give them more people, give them more training, and give them more money." "America first, and everybody gather their own crowd around them, and let's figure out how we put them back together." "I trust him. I believe him. I'm certain that his objectives today are aligned with our objectives." "There are three and a half million in Turkiye. We have a million and a half in Jordan. You have a million and a half in Lebanon." There are "22,000,000 diaspora Lebanese outside of Lebanon." "The buffer zone of economic prosperity for the South is the answer." "Sovereignty is not that. Sovereignty is the heart and soul of the people." Hezbollah is "becoming less and less influenced by Iran, or what I would like to say is, like, less of an Iranian proxy and more of a Lebanese political party." The issue is "dialogue." The US "removed the bounty on the Syrian president when he became president not long after."

Speaker 0: For a fact that he's poisoned his own people. He doesn't believe in the worth of each individual. We must do everything we possibly can to stop the terror. Now watch this drive. The tyrant has fallen, and Iraq is free.

We admire your fight for your homeland and promise to support you. In 2017, we will push against Russian aggression and make sure they pay a heavier price. Our fight is not with the Russian people, but with Putin. We will take your calls to Washington, inform the American people of your bravery, and make the case against Putin to the world. We believe you will win and will provide whatever you need to succeed. The world is watching because we cannot allow Vladimir Putin to succeed here.

Mister President, the U.S. is pushing for regime change in Syria, seeking a new leader and isolating you diplomatically. What are your thoughts on this? I am confident because my identity is rooted in Syria, not the U.S. Decisions about Syria should be made by the Syrian people alone. What if there were an alternative to you? Who could that be? Any Syrian could be an alternative; there are many eligible candidates. However, no one who is influenced by foreign powers should hold the presidency. This is a fundamental principle for us.

I've looked into both Assad and the opposition, but the problem is we don't know who the opposition really is. They could be even worse than Assad. We supply them with weapons and resources, but we're essentially in the dark about who they are. Why are we involved in this conflict at all? Of course, getting rid of ISIS is important, but Assad seems like the lesser of two evils. We've backed the wrong side before, and it ended in disaster. Russia seems to support Assad, so maybe we should let them handle ISIS and let them fight it out.

In 2011, Obama suggested overthrowing Bashar al Assad, leading to years of war in Syria. The US attempted regime change, obstructing a UN peace agreement. Motives for overthrowing Assad remain unclear, possibly due to arrogance or financial interests. Similar actions in Libya resulted in chaos. These decisions lack transparency and have long-lasting consequences.

The Assad regime in Syria has fallen after 13 years of civil war, marking a historic opportunity for the Syrian people to build a better future. The United States will work with regional partners to manage the transition and ensure stability. Iran, Hezbollah, and Russia, previously Assad's main supporters, have weakened significantly due to recent conflicts, including the war in Ukraine and attacks on Israel. The U.S. will maintain its military presence to counter ISIS and support a political transition towards a sovereign Syria with a new government. Vigilance is necessary as some rebel groups have troubling histories. The U.S. remains committed to humanitarian relief and the safe return of American citizens, including Austin Tice. This moment presents both risks and opportunities for a more secure Middle East.

The speaker states that sanctions against Syria were once important but are now being removed, expressing optimism about Syria's future success. The speaker hopes Syria will "show us something very special," similar to Saudi Arabia. The administration is pursuing peaceful engagement and offering friendship to those who accept it in good faith. The speaker claims unprecedented strides and progress have been made, envisioning a bright future for the Middle East. The speaker suggests that if nations in the region set aside differences and focus on shared interests, the world will be amazed. The speaker believes the Middle East, the "geographic center of the world and the spiritual heart of its greatest faiths," will transform from a place of turmoil to a land of opportunity and hope.

I believe our role, including sanctions and threats, partly forced Yanukovych from office. We've been very involved in supporting the new government in Ukraine. The clear US position has aided this regime change. If this is a peaceful transition, the US will be seen as a great friend. This is about supporting Ukraine in determining its future. While some see this as a US-Russia conflict, it's about supporting Ukraine's wishes. The US has an economic interest too. We're negotiating a trade agreement with Europe. With Ukraine potentially joining the EU, it could mean billions in economic opportunities for the US. We shouldn't hide this interest.

Wanna get on to Ukraine. But, given that Israel is signaling it doesn't like the, Al Qaeda operative, Jelani in Damascus, and we know Tulsi Gabbard is something of an expert on Syria because she exposed the lies and the, phony war in Syria when The United States was supporting the ISIS and Al Qaeda rebels there. How do you and Trump has been very brave arguably saying, he's not gonna, start sending loads of money like Britain is to Tchelani. There's still thousands of American troops, though, in Syria. What is American Syrian policy Syria policy? America's policy towards Syria is basically Israel's policy. And what The United States was bent on doing was wrecking Syria and keeping it wrecked. That's the Israeli objective here. This is what the Israelis wanna do with Iran. They don't simply wanna do away with Iran's nuclear capability. They surely do wanna do that, but they wanna wreck Iran. They wanna turn Iran into Syria. And what the Israelis are doing in Syria is going to great lengths to make sure that Syria remains, a dysfunctional state. They don't want Syria to become, a formidable adversary. They want it to remain broken. And, of course, The United States will support the Israelis in that regard. So, of course, the Israelis are not gonna allow the Americans to give huge amounts of aid to Jalani so that he can produce a viable Syrian state because that's not Israeli policy. Just look at what they're doing in Iran. I mean, excuse me, what they're doing in Lebanon. It's a similar situation.

We will inform our colleagues about Russia's actions in the Baltics, Ukraine, and Georgia. We plan to make 2017 a year of offense against Putin, who we believe hacked our elections and is undermining democracy worldwide. We advocate for new sanctions targeting Putin personally, his energy and banking sectors. We just visited Ukraine, where we witnessed the impact of Russian interference. We will push for tougher sanctions on Russia for attacking the US through hacking, treating it as an act of war. We urge stronger sanctions on Russia for their attack on the US.

We believe our sanctions and the threat of more sanctions played a role in Yanukovych leaving office. We've been actively involved in supporting the new government, and the US has been seen as a friend in helping this transition happen peacefully. This is about supporting Ukraine in determining its own future. While it might seem like a US versus Russia situation, it's about supporting Ukraine's wishes. The US also has an economic interest, as Ukraine's potential inclusion in the EU could greatly benefit our trade agreement with Europe. Yanukovych lost legitimacy by using force against peaceful protests. Foreign leaders were there to stand up for the right to protest. While some radical elements exist within the opposition, the movement largely rejects those ideas. We're confident the new government will be inclusive, and we'll work to ensure those radical elements don't dominate.

Speaker 0: In gears to Syria. Our president has said that you're backing an evil guy there. He said Assad is an evil guy. Do you believe that? Speaker 1: what? That Assad is an evil person? Speaker 0: Yes. Speaker 1: Let's talk objectively. Has Assad made mistakes? Yes, probably. And more than a few. What about the people who oppose him? Are they angels or something? Who is it that's killing people over there? Executing children? Who's cutting off heads? Are these the kind of people we should support? Speaker 0: We all saw the video of the suffering, dying children. Do you deny? Because Assad denies that those tapes are real. Do you believe those tapes are fake? Speaker 1: That's false information. As of now, we're absolutely convinced that this was a provocation. Assad did not use those weapons, and all of this was done by people who then wanted to blame him. Speaker 0: The bodies of the victims were autopsy. The autopsies were witnessed by officials from the World Health Organization and from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, and they concluded that the victims were attacked with sarin gas. Are are we really to believe that the whole thing was staged, that everybody was in on it? Speaker 1: The answer is very simple, and you know it. It could have been used by someone, but not Assad.

I believe our sanctions and threats played a role in Yanukovych's departure. We've been actively involved in Ukraine, and our clear stance has aided the change in regimes. If this transition is peaceful, the U.S. will be seen as a great friend. This is about supporting Ukraine's self-determination. While some see it as a U.S.-Russia struggle, it's about supporting Ukraine's wishes. We also have an economic interest, as Ukraine's potential inclusion in the EU could boost trade with the U.S. Yanukovych was elected, but he lost legitimacy by using force against peaceful protests. Our presence, like that of foreign ministers, was to defend human rights. While radical elements exist within the opposition, the movement largely rejects them. We'll work to ensure these elements don't dominate the new government.

"Hopefully, what we're trying to do is bring about a peaceful transition here that would stop the violence, would give the Ukrainian people, what they unfortunately have not with different revolutions that have taken place, a real legitimate society. This is a grassroots revolution here. It's been peaceful except for when the government tried to crack down on them, and the government hasn't done that since. Well, I don't think that we would be taking on Russia. I am very pleased with secretary Kerry's statement, our deputy secretary Victoria Newland who was here. We're not talking about military action. We're not talking about blockades. We are talking about the possibility of sanctions if they continue to brutally repress their people. That that would require some action on our part just because that's what The United States Of America is all about."

"the CIA and Saudi Arabia together, in covert operations tried to overthrow Assad." "It was a disaster" and it "also brought in Russia." The speaker calls this "the permanent state" and says "We have made a proxy war in Syria" that has "killed 500,000 people, displaced 10,000,000," and "I predicted it seven years ago that there was no way to do this and that it would make a complete chaos." He urges, "get out." Another speaker adds, "six hundred thousand dead and 14,000,000 displaced," and says the United States should be part of the solution. He notes this happened because of us, cites "timber sycamore"—"The CIA operation together with Saudi Arabia"—"shrouded in secrecy" and "never debated by Congress, never explained." Ending the fight means stopping overthrow of a government and rebel support; "contrary to international law, contrary to the UN Charter"; risk of "an imminent confrontation with Russia." "Go to the UN Security Council ... with Russia on a strategy for ending the fight."

We believe our sanctions and threats played a role in Yanukovych's removal. Now, we must support the new government. The US has been actively involved, with senators and State Department members present. Our clear stance has aided regime change. While some criticize our selective involvement, a peaceful transition in Ukraine will position the US as a key ally. This is about enabling Ukraine to determine its future. While it may seem like a US-Russia conflict, it's about supporting Ukraine's wishes. The US has an economic interest too as Ukraine potentially joining the EU could significantly benefit US trade. Yanukovych's use of force against peaceful protests is the reason we engaged. While radical elements exist within the opposition, the movement largely rejects them. We are confident the new government will be inclusive, and we'll ensure radical elements don't dominate.

She is unqualified to be DNI, with positions that are far outside mainstream American politics. Her visit to Assad in Syria, who was aligned with Russia and Iran, was justified by her claim that Syria wasn't a direct threat to the U.S., which is incorrect. The alliance between Syria, Iran, and Hezbollah poses direct threats to Americans in the region and to key allies like Israel and Jordan. It will be interesting to see what information may emerge from the Syrian government if the rebels capture Damascus, particularly regarding Americans involved.

The United States will collaborate with partners in Syria to manage risks following the recent decline of support for Assad from Iran, Hezbollah, and Russia. This shift stems from Iran's miscalculations after the October 7 attacks on Israel and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, which has weakened Russia's ability to assist Assad. The U.S. has maintained sanctions on Assad, supported military operations against ISIS, and backed Israel's actions against Iranian networks. Moving forward, the U.S. will support Syria's neighbors, ensure stability in Eastern Syria, engage with Syrian groups for a political transition, and remain vigilant regarding the actions of rebel groups. Humanitarian relief efforts will also be prioritized to aid Syria's recovery from years of conflict.

You wanted it to end immediately, and I wanted a ceasefire now, but he doesn't want a ceasefire. Now, he's a big shot because he has the US to decide. Either we end it, or we let him fight it out. Without us, he doesn't win. I'm not saying what I'm considering; I'm just telling you what I saw today. That wasn't a man who wanted to make peace, and I'm only interested if he wants to end the bloodshed.

I was honored to be the first president to welcome Aung San Suu Kyi to the White House and to visit this remarkable country. This marks a new chapter in U.S.-Burma relations. Last year, I asked Secretary Clinton to explore ways the U.S. could support reform efforts in Burma. We need to identify the necessary steps forward, focusing on the rule of law and ending civil conflict. All hostilities must cease promptly. Democracy has always been our goal, and while the path has been challenging, we see new opportunities today. The United States is committed to partnering with Burma as you continue your journey toward democratization.

In a leaked 2012 email, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated that the best way to help Israel is to use force in Syria to overthrow the government. The speaker questions why the American secretary of state would be willing to use American troops and money to overthrow the Syrian government, asserting there is no American interest in doing so. The speaker claims she is doing it to help Israel. The speaker believes this should be considered treason.

I'm aligned with the US and the world, and I want to end this conflict. It's hard to make a deal with so much hatred. I could be tough, but that won't get us anywhere. For four years, tough talk didn't stop Putin. Diplomacy is the path to peace. Others didn't stop Putin from occupying parts of Ukraine since 2014. We signed ceasefire and gas contracts, but he broke them, killing people and not exchanging prisoners. I am trying to end the destruction of your country. Everyone has problems during war, even you. You've allowed yourself to be in a bad position. You're gambling with lives and World War III, and that's disrespectful to the US. You haven't said thank you, and campaigned against us. Your country is in trouble and not winning. If we are out, you will be fighting on your own.

Speaker 1 argues that the United States has repeatedly engaged in illegal military actions and regime changes in multiple countries, starting with the bombing of Belgrade for 78 days to change borders of a European state, with the aim of breaking Serbia and installing Bondsteel, a large NATO base in the Balkans, under Clinton. They claim this was done without UN authority and described as a NATO mission. Speaker 1 continues, alleging that the US has subsequently waged war in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, where, according to them, the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton tasked the CIA with overthrowing Bashar al-Assad. They also claim NATO illegally bombed Libya to topple Muammar Gaddafi, and that in Kyiv in February 2014 the US overthrew Yanukovych together with right-wing Ukrainian military forces, noting that the overthrow happened the day after EU representatives had reached an agreement with Yanukovych for early elections, a government of national unity, and a stand-down of both sides. They assert that the US supported the new government immediately afterward, despite that agreement and without addressing it as unconstitutional. Speaker 1 asserts that Russia, the United States, and the EU were parties to the 2015 Minsk two agreement, which was unanimously voted on by the UN Security Council, signed by the government of Ukraine, and guaranteed explicitly by Germany and France. They contend that Minsk II was dismissed as a holding pattern by inside-US government circles, despite the UN Security Council approval. They claim Angela Merkel later said Minsk II was a holding pattern to allow Ukraine time to build its strength, countering the assertion that Minsk II was meant to end the war. The speaker emphasizes distrust of the United States government and calls for all sides to sit down publicly to agree on terms, with both the United States and Russia committing to specific boundaries, and for NATO not to enlarge, so that a written, global judgment can be made. Speaker 2 adds that there has been an ongoing effort to create an anti-Russian platform in Ukraine, describing it as an enclave, and accusing the US and its allies of lying about not expanding NATO multiple times. Speaker 3 states that President Putin sent a draft treaty asking NATO to promise no more enlargement as a precondition for not invading Ukraine, and notes that this draft was not signed.

If you're on Twitter, be warned: gruesome videos from Syria are circulating, a result of CIA intervention and tax dollars funding "moderate rebels." These rebels are now attacking minority communities that Bashar al-Assad used to protect. Figures like Barry Weiss, John Bolton, the Bushes, Obama, and Hillary Clinton bear responsibility, as this was their CIA project under the Obama administration, aimed at turning Syria into another Libya. They achieved their goal: a failed state with torture and human sacrifice. This could have been prevented, as past interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya failed. The situation worsened after Trump's election. Biden gave the green light before Trump took office. The CIA approached Trump in 2016 to overthrow Assad, but he refused. The corporate media and establishment are also culpable in this disaster.