Page 178 of 196 FirstFirst ... 169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187 ... LastLast
Results 2,656 to 2,670 of 2935

Thread: Syrian Civil War Developments

  1. #2656
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    5,615
    I simply do not think it entirely outrageous to require our Governments which have signed up to these treaties to go after other Governments that have signed up to the same treaties but then broken them. How else is law to be upheld? If you want a world where nothing is enforced what is the point of international agreements? It becomes dog eat dog and far more lives will be lost in that. Nikki Haley was certainly talking tough at the UNSC earlier which is I suppose all she can do.

  2. #2657
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    I simply do not think it entirely outrageous to require our Governments which have signed up to these treaties to go after other Governments that have signed up to the same treaties but then broken them. How else is law to be upheld? If you want a world where nothing is enforced what is the point of international agreements? It becomes dog eat dog and far more lives will be lost in that. Nikki Haley was certainly talking tough at the UNSC earlier which is I suppose all she can do.
    It is certainly outrageous for you to require our Governments to do the work that your Government is unwilling to do herself.

    It is also outrageous that you insult Trump at every turn and then demand that he uphold your sense of justice that you're not willing to do anything about.

    The CWC obligates no one to enforce it.

  3. #2658
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    12,061
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    I simply do not think it entirely outrageous to require our Governments which have signed up to these treaties to go after other Governments that have signed up to the same treaties but then broken them. How else is law to be upheld? If you want a world where nothing is enforced what is the point of international agreements? It becomes dog eat dog and far more lives will be lost in that. Nikki Haley was certainly talking tough at the UNSC earlier which is I suppose all she can do.
    Sometimes it's like this:

    http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/sho...=1#post1038928
    "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

  4. #2659
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    5,615
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    It is certainly outrageous for you to require our Governments to do the work that your Government is unwilling to do herself.

    It is also outrageous that you insult Trump at every turn and then demand that he uphold your sense of justice that you're not willing to do anything about.

    The CWC obligates no one to enforce it.

    My country has killed more Muscovites than all you lot together ever did. I regret their deaths and ours but until you stop these goons they will not stop breaking the treaties and that in the end costs more lives than acting at the start. France could have stopped the Rhineland in 1936 - that in a way was when WW2 started. Not acting emboldens these dictators and makes the greater conflagration more likely.

  5. #2660
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    My country has killed more Muscovites than all you lot together ever did.
    Your entire history couldn't come close to the two WW Germanys, Napoleonic France and your current conflict is a picnic compared to the Crimean War and WWI Siberian Intervention.

    But what has any of this got to do with Syria?

    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    I regret their deaths and ours but until you stop these goons they will not stop breaking the treaties and that in the end costs more lives than acting at the start.
    So what? Why don't you demand the Ukrainian military go after Assad?

    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    France could have stopped the Rhineland in 1936 - that in a way was when WW2 started. Not acting emboldens these dictators and makes the greater conflagration more likely.
    What? So you wanted France to stop Germans from wanting to protect their homes. Isn't that was you're doing with DNR and LNR?

    Your double standards is staggerring.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 10 Apr 18, at 04:29.

  6. #2661
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    12,061
    More here: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-43694588

    Syria conflict: Israel blamed for attack on airfield

    The Syrian government and its ally Russia have blamed Israel for a deadly attack on a Syrian military airport.

    Monday's attack hit the Tiyas airbase, known as T4, near the city of Homs. Observers say 14 people were killed.

    Israel, which has previously hit Syrian targets, has not commented. Syria initially blamed the US for the strike.

    The incident comes amid international alarm over an alleged chemical attack on a Syrian rebel-held town. The US and France had threatened to respond.

    US President Donald Trump said there would be a "big price to pay" for the alleged chemical attack in Douma, in the Eastern Ghouta region, near the capital Damascus. He branded Syria's President Bashar al-Assad an "animal".
    "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

  7. #2662
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Jan 05
    Location
    Namibia
    Posts
    808
    "They want to test our feelings.They want to know whether Muslims are extremists or not. Death to them and their newspapers."

    Protester

  8. #2663
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,643
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    I simply do not think it entirely outrageous to require our Governments which have signed up to these treaties to go after other Governments that have signed up to the same treaties but then broken them. How else is law to be upheld? If you want a world where nothing is enforced what is the point of international agreements? It becomes dog eat dog and far more lives will be lost in that. Nikki Haley was certainly talking tough at the UNSC earlier which is I suppose all she can do.
    Go after them in what manner, though? There's a scale of escalation. It's not like there'll be no response, it'll just be a limited response. And the US response is going to be more biting than, say, the French response. But we definitely cannot remove Assad because we just don't care enough.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  9. #2664
    Regular
    Join Date
    17 Sep 08
    Posts
    68
    " But we definitely cannot remove Assad because we just don't care enough."

    Whom are you going to remove Assad with? with the kurds?

    There is no viable sunni option for the west.

  10. #2665
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,212
    prior to Putin's wholescale involvement, removing Assad wouldn't have been difficult.

    but doing so back then would probably have led to even greater ISIS gains.

    now that Putin is involved and ISIS is mostly dead, no one cares enough to remove Assad. as far as the US is concerned, if Putin wants to waste money and lives there-- well, let him.

    from a strictly Ukrainian POV, every dollar Putin spends there and every merc that Putin sends over there is one less that Kiev will need to deal with.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  11. #2666
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,434
    Nobody is going to remove Assad because nobody wants to be stuck with the responsibility for rebuilding and rehabilitating Syria. The second a missile hits Assad's palace, whoever fired it is going to be presumed responsible for putting the country back together.

    The US already has two nation building projects underway in the region with the possibility of a third if North Korea kicks off, so I don't forsee any American appetite for it.

    Who else could even afford that kind of committment?

    China and Japan don't have any interest in Syria. Germany is busy with the EU project.

  12. #2667
    Regular
    Join Date
    17 Sep 08
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    prior to Putin's wholescale involvement, removing Assad wouldn't have been difficult.

    .
    Even superpower needs ground realities and strong local allies.Right from Vietnam, the locals are crucial.


    The sunni rebel forces may have defeated him.but US options were gone long ago.

    Whatever forces the CIA labelled FSA were given support and they all splintered or went into oblivion becoming an arms/personnel source for alnusra or ISIS.

    Removing Assad also means leaving alawites at the mercy of sunni rebels and it would not be pretty at all if the vengeful rebels go across alawite villages.

    The ground realities does not favor US intervention except in the west where you made use of the kurds and a minority of rebels groups backed by CIA

    Many local sunnis were more impressed by Alnusra and ISIS as fighters.

    US has not shown an ability to come with a powerful non kuridish sunni option in Syria.

    Short of using US firepower at full throttle, you have no ally that can take the whole country


    But the vacuum left by ISIS can be an interesting time. who takes over?

    In Iraq, there is a shia majority administration but vacuum for sunnis were taken over by ISIS in the north. It is yet to be addressed,

  13. #2668
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,785
    Assad maybe guilty of war crimes but he is the only one we know who doesn't want to plant bombs in our streets. He stays.

  14. #2669
    Regular
    Join Date
    17 Sep 08
    Posts
    68
    why removal of Assad is Unlikely.

    1. HTS and ISIS are deadly threats to security and not an affordable option for US and allies. Assad deliberately released radicals at the start of the war and had succeeded
    in creating "us vs terrorists" option.

    2.Power Vacuum- Its not about replacing Gaddaffi or Saddam. But also give a voice to their supporters who are still around 20-30% of a country.
    ISIS had taken advantage of this situation to get many sunni recruits.

    Replacing assad will mean who will protect alawites from highly vengeful sunni rebels baying for blood and also who will be their voice.

    3. no viable rebel option among sunnis for the west as the more radical groups have taken initiative and control.

    Looks like a partition between govt and the kurd dominated SDF at this point.Turks to contain kurds in parts of the north for their own security. HTS yet to be destroyed in Idlib.

    Russia will be happy with its base and a partition.

  15. #2670
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,643
    The US model (possibly naive) was to have Assad admit defeat and go home and have everyone come together to form a transitional government, before moving onto whatever representative government comes next. the US would be providing security assistance and the international community would provide aid, while the US would reserve the right to bomb the hell out of whatever ISIS camp it sees.

    We aren't going to remove him ourselves because we don't want to directly own the aftermath and we don't want to just give the Sunnis enough weapons to cake-walk Assad because there are a bunch of freakin' crazy Sunnis. Russia has a much simpler game and is a lot more willing to commit direct resources, so they are going to control the flow.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Uzbekistan, and other developments in Central Asia
    By cyppok in forum Central and South Asia
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01 Aug 13,, 12:31
  2. Top Ten Chinese Military Modernization Developments
    By oneman28 in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: 23 Jun 08,, 06:49
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09 Oct 07,, 17:58
  4. Iran And Possible Developments
    By Gazi in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 26 Feb 06,, 17:02
  5. Syrian and Islamist?
    By tarek in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 19 Jan 05,, 02:46

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •