Civil War in Syria
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:12:50 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Civil War in Syria
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 48
Author Topic: Civil War in Syria  (Read 206226 times)
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,004
Latvia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #225 on: October 04, 2012, 06:03:05 PM »

I guess Turkey has their Tonkin/Gleiwitz incident?
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #226 on: October 04, 2012, 10:14:01 PM »

Turkey actually had pretty friendly relations with Syria until all this started in 2011, so there's no reason for them to provoke and/or fabricate incidents. They're legitimately pissed about what Assad is doing.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,078
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #227 on: October 05, 2012, 12:27:33 AM »

Turkish PM says he does not want war with Syria
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,004
Latvia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #228 on: October 05, 2012, 05:47:05 PM »

Turkey actually had pretty friendly relations with Syria until all this started in 2011, so there's no reason for them to provoke and/or fabricate incidents. They're legitimately pissed about what Assad is doing.

And that's why they have stirred the hornet's nest by giving the rebels assistance and flying their planes over Syrian airspace?
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,509
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #229 on: October 07, 2012, 12:10:39 PM »
« Edited: October 07, 2012, 12:13:38 PM by Frodo »

Heeding concerns from the White House, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and other Sunni Muslim countries in the region are scaling back aid from the Syrian rebels -particularly as it pertains to heavy weaponry- out of fear such weapons could end up in the hands of Sunni extremists -like Al Qaeda.  

Why is it we are happy to sit back while revolutions unseat pro-American dictatorships in the Middle East, but when it comes to Iran (circa 2009) and Syria (today) we suddenly get petrified of unintended consequences the moment it looks like those regimes we have long regarded as enemies could be on the precipice?  
Logged
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,004
Latvia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #230 on: October 08, 2012, 09:24:26 PM »


Is this is sitting back, I would like to know what you consider to be an appropriate response? Something more like this?

Fear of unintended consequences of the overthrow of "hostile" regimes (which previously were in the category of pro-American dictatorships) is justified, given previous experience.
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,509
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #231 on: October 08, 2012, 11:48:41 PM »

Romney seems to be of the same sentiment:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
2952-0-0
exnaderite
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,221


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #232 on: October 09, 2012, 03:31:21 AM »


Ah, yes, because funding Islamic militants in a proxy war against a strategic opponent has *never* had unintended consequences. Roll Eyes Are US politicians *that* myopic or are they taking American voters as idiots?
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,078
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #233 on: October 09, 2012, 05:31:14 AM »

(I'm going to take sh**t for this one)

Let me start by saying I DO NOT ADVOCATE THIS POSITION, but, playing devil's advocate here, Afghanistan did, it can be argued, go a long way towards hastening the Soviet Union's financial collapse.  Iran's economy is in the toilet.
Logged
後援会
koenkai
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,265


Political Matrix
E: 0.71, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #234 on: October 09, 2012, 05:41:23 AM »
« Edited: October 09, 2012, 05:43:13 AM by 後援会 »

(I'm going to take sh**t for this one)

Let me start by saying I DO NOT ADVOCATE THIS POSITION, but, playing devil's advocate here, Afghanistan did, it can be argued, go a long way towards hastening the Soviet Union's financial collapse.  Iran's economy is in the toilet.

Alright, I'll jump in so you don't have to. Though I don't actually believe Afghanistan was a huge, or even a significant factor in the economic woes of the Soviet Union.

Even in retrospect, supporting the Mujahedin was the correct choice. The vast majority of the Muhajedin groups we supported do not engage in violent activities against the United States. The Taliban was only one of many factions. A faction that is often at violent odds with the other factions that comprised the vast majority of the Mujahedin. And Al-Qaeda was really a non-player in the anti-Soviet resistance.

And about aid flowing to some people who might become future enemies...well, I don't hear anyone complaining about Lend-Lease.

No clue about the Syria rebel arms thing though. This area of the world has never been my area of expertise and the situation on the ground changes too often and is too poorly understood for me to really direct US policy or anything ridiculous. It's something very difficult from already well-understood history (eg. the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan)
Logged
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,004
Latvia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #235 on: October 09, 2012, 04:19:24 PM »


I see Romney is studying the effective winning strategies of Charles Hughes, Wendell Willkie, and Barry Goldwater. Unfortunately for us, the election had no bearing on the outcome in those scenarios, and that trend will likely continue in this election.

(I'm going to take sh**t for this one)

Let me start by saying I DO NOT ADVOCATE THIS POSITION, but, playing devil's advocate here, Afghanistan did, it can be argued, go a long way towards hastening the Soviet Union's financial collapse.  Iran's economy is in the toilet.

Alright, I'll jump in so you don't have to. Though I don't actually believe Afghanistan was a huge, or even a significant factor in the economic woes of the Soviet Union.

Even in retrospect, supporting the Mujahedin was the correct choice. The vast majority of the Muhajedin groups we supported do not engage in violent activities against the United States. The Taliban was only one of many factions. A faction that is often at violent odds with the other factions that comprised the vast majority of the Mujahedin. And Al-Qaeda was really a non-player in the anti-Soviet resistance.

And about aid flowing to some people who might become future enemies...well, I don't hear anyone complaining about Lend-Lease.

No clue about the Syria rebel arms thing though. This area of the world has never been my area of expertise and the situation on the ground changes too often and is too poorly understood for me to really direct US policy or anything ridiculous. It's something very difficult from already well-understood history (eg. the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan)

How were American interests served by the aid to the Mujahideen? Moreover, how was the issue of who controlled Afghanistan important to American interests?
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,677


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #236 on: October 14, 2012, 12:32:21 AM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzziEcWgb5M

This helpful FSA member gives you a step-by-step tutorial on how to shoot down a plane.  It's well worth the minute.

I love how "Allah Akbar" can apparently also mean "Holy s**t I'm a f**king badass!"
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #237 on: October 14, 2012, 12:43:48 AM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzziEcWgb5M

This helpful FSA member gives you a step-by-step tutorial on how to shoot down a plane.  It's well worth the minute.

I love how "Allah Akbar" can apparently also mean "Holy s**t I'm a f**king badass!"

I like how "Complete Vice Presidential Debate" is a related video on the sidebar.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,078
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #238 on: October 20, 2012, 12:19:25 AM »

Blast tears through central Beirut
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
And guess who the pro-Syrian/Iranian peeps in Lebanon blame?  DA JOOS! of course.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,417
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #239 on: October 22, 2012, 12:10:32 AM »

Meanwhile, in Lebanon...


Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://blogs.voanews.com/breaking-news/2012/10/22/protesters-continue-calls-for-lebanese-pm-to-resign/
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,509
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #240 on: November 12, 2012, 01:27:21 AM »

Syrian opposition groups finally reach a unity deal
Logged
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,004
Latvia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #241 on: November 12, 2012, 01:38:57 AM »


They have footage too
Logged
2952-0-0
exnaderite
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,221


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #242 on: November 12, 2012, 02:56:57 AM »
« Edited: November 12, 2012, 04:38:07 PM by Judäischen Volksfront »


Exactly what I thought. And the Kurds are equally opposed to Assad and the rebels, putting the Erdogan in an uncomfortable spot.

What do people think of Israel's involvement into this clusterinks? On the face of it Assad is trying to provoke an Israeli reaction to rally fence-sitters towards him, but it's so incredibly complicated. Aside from the internal sectarian factors there are now at least five foreign players in a civil war, each with disparate interests (Russia, Iran, Turkey+Gulf Arab states, US/UK/France, Israel).
Logged
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,004
Latvia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #243 on: November 12, 2012, 03:50:19 PM »


Exactly what I thought. And the Kurds are equally opposed to Assad and the rebels, putting the Erdogan in an uncomfortable spot.

What do people think of Israel's involvement into this clusterinks? On the face of it Assad is trying to provoke an Israeli reaction to rally fence-sitters towards him, but it's so incredibly complicated. Aside from the internal sectarian factors there are now at least five foreign players in a civil war, each with disparate interests (Russia, Iran, Turkey+Gulf Arab states, US/UK/France, Israel).

I don't see what Israel hopes to accomplish by taking out Assad. Are they betting that the pros of weakening Hezbollah's ally and Iran's "route to the sea" (lol) outweigh the potential cons of having Muslim extremists across the Golan Heights border? Perhaps the rightists hope that drawing the United States in will be the back-door to war with Iran?
Logged
2952-0-0
exnaderite
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,221


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #244 on: November 12, 2012, 05:23:00 PM »

Who says Israel *wants* to take Assad out? In public Assad has used da Joos to rally Syrians (and to justify the 50 year long State of Emergency), but in private he was content with the status quo. Seems like both Assad and Netanyahu waited until Obama was reelected to begin trading shots.

Part of me suspects Israel, the west, Turkey, and the Sunni Gulf Arab states are making a tacit deal to prevent the rise of an anti-western, , and actively anti-Israeli regime in Syria. There are simply no clear battle lines.
Logged
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,004
Latvia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #245 on: November 12, 2012, 05:41:04 PM »

Who says Israel *wants* to take Assad out? In public Assad has used da Joos to rally Syrians (and to justify the 50 year long State of Emergency), but in private he was content with the status quo.

That's why I found it so baffling. The current regime is the best the Israeli's can realistically hope for.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Even that premise clearly presupposes that all of those states view regime change as a desirable outcome. Really, the only rational beneficiaries of those would be the Saudis since they get to infect another country with their Wahhabist nonsense.
Logged
Benj
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 979


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #246 on: November 12, 2012, 09:22:55 PM »

The Turks are clearly peeved with Assad as well and want regime change. Unlike Israel and the Saudis, I don't think they have some sort of broader geopolitical motive; the Turks are just not interested in the broader power struggles in the Middle East except insofar as they want both Iran and the Saudis to leave them alone. They're more motivated by (1) genuine humanitarian/democratic concerns and (2) making sure the Kurds don't get uppity (which doesn't really have to do with supporting one side or the other but does encourage intervention).

One of the most interesting possible scenarios would be if Assad takes his attempts to provoke Israel too far, and Israel decides to invade in support of the Syrian opposition. What would the Arab world think?
Logged
Nhoj
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,224
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.52, S: -7.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #247 on: November 12, 2012, 09:30:38 PM »

The Israeli official statement didn't treat it as a provocation, they said something along the lines that we understand it was an accident and that's why we fired a warning shot.
Logged
2952-0-0
exnaderite
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,221


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #248 on: November 12, 2012, 10:14:41 PM »

The Turks are clearly peeved with Assad as well and want regime change. Unlike Israel and the Saudis, I don't think they have some sort of broader geopolitical motive; the Turks are just not interested in the broader power struggles in the Middle East except insofar as they want both Iran and the Saudis to leave them alone. They're more motivated by (1) genuine humanitarian/democratic concerns and (2) making sure the Kurds don't get uppity (which doesn't really have to do with supporting one side or the other but does encourage intervention).
I think Erdogan knows he's gone too far in turning against Assad so dramatically. Back then he gambled that supporting Syrian rebels would further increase Turkey's prestige among Arabs. The jury is out on that one, but at what cost? Assad has since made provocations against Turkey and is apparently deliberately allowing Kurdish rebels to carve out a statelet. Syria has become a power struggle involving all the powers of the Middle East, and the West, and Russia. It's too late for Erdogan to back down, but it's only rational for him to play a geopolitical game.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Israel won't openly support any particular side, since that's obviously the kiss of death. Maybe they'll launch airstrikes against a few weapons depot if push really comes to shove. Or maybe they'll not-so-secretly support a minority group like in Lebanon in the 80s.
Logged
Benj
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 979


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #249 on: November 12, 2012, 11:14:21 PM »
« Edited: November 12, 2012, 11:18:55 PM by Benj »

The Israeli official statement didn't treat it as a provocation, they said something along the lines that we understand it was an accident and that's why we fired a warning shot.


Obviously. At the same time, they said something to the effect of "but, if you hit a school with a missile, you're done". The question is whether Assad takes them up on the challenge.

(As far as Israeli support being the kiss of death... Not so convinced. The rebels have the sole support of the Sunni establishment and Arab popular sentiment at this point. It's very hard to see them deciding Assad is better just because Israel joins the rebels, though they would have mixed feelings about Israel's intervention, of course. OTOH, it might be a significant place for Israel to temporarily mend fences with many Sunnis while pursuing its feud with Iran. Just a thought.)
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 48  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.067 seconds with 12 queries.