Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Syrian Civil War Developments

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • /\ ya beat me 2 it Dreads ,Coventry was non existent , and lets face it , they started the freakin conflict having that bohemian megalomaniac syphilitic short arsed corporal as their leader .

    Comment


    • It is not about the who started first, but if there was better ability to pinpoint the desired targets, ie, does Assad have means to target and neutralize the rebels.

      If we go into who started first... it was all nice and dandy before rebels showed up :red:
      No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

      To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Doktor View Post
        It is not about the who started first, but if there was better ability to pinpoint the desired targets, ie, does Assad have means to target and neutralize the rebels.

        If we go into who started first... it was all nice and dandy before rebels showed up :red:
        I wasnt referring to civil unrest m8 , im talking world war conflict and it matters 100% who started it .

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Doktor View Post
          It is not about the who started first, but if there was better ability to pinpoint the desired targets, ie, does Assad have means to target and neutralize the rebels.

          If we go into who started first... it was all nice and dandy before rebels showed up :red:
          Maybe its time for free elections. Anyone that disagrees with a dictatorship is a rebel. That doesnt make them criminal. If there were free and open elections in that country then chances are they could atleast find common ground and not have what we are watching today. Assad wants rule absolute.

          Irresitable force against an imovable object.
          Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Dreadnought View Post
            Maybe its time for free elections. Anyone that disagrees with a dictatorship is a rebel. That doesnt make them criminal. If there were free and open elections in that country then chances are they could atleast find common ground and not have what we are watching today. Assad wants rule absolute.

            Irresitable force against an imovable object.
            There has been a litany of articles in the news media about the preponderance of Jihadi groups in the rebel ranks. Why are you still convinced that the rebels are just common people who just want democracy and free elections? If they manage to defeat Assad on their own, fine. But helping them defeat Assad by providing money and weapons or worse, troops, is absolute folly.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Firestorm View Post
              There has been a litany of articles in the news media about the preponderance of Jihadi groups in the rebel ranks. Why are you still convinced that the rebels are just common people who just want democracy and free elections? If they manage to defeat Assad on their own, fine. But helping them defeat Assad by providing money and weapons or worse, troops, is absolute folly.
              Then what would you say about Iranian soldiers and their proxy Hezbolla being there fighting against the Syrians?

              You cannot mention one side of this without mentioning the other. And we all know how they (mentioned above) feel about free and open elections and dictatorships.

              And just think, You have Hezbollah that tries to order Hamas out of Lebannon because they support the opposition in Syria.

              http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/orig...e-enemies.html
              Last edited by Dreadnought; 04 Jun 13,, 17:51.
              Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Dreadnought View Post
                Maybe its time for free elections.
                Let's say there are free election. Monitored by all relevant international organizations that usually do such things. Is the west ready to accept the results? What if AQ comes to power?

                Anyone that disagrees with a dictatorship is a rebel. That doesnt make them criminal.
                Since English is not my native language, i looked at the dictionary:

                reb·el /ˈrebəl/
                Noun: A person who rises in armed resistance against an established government or ruler.



                You are right they are not criminals. When they hide behind civvies they become ones.

                If there were free and open elections in that country then chances are they could atleast find common ground and not have what we are watching today.
                Syria never been a democracy. Best option is post communism Poland, worse case post-war A-stan or Iraq. Assuming the system wont just crumble.

                Assad wants rule absolute.
                He was raised to be a ruler. Not stellar at this job, but he doesn't know to do anything else. I don't want to lose my job, do you? (rhetorical question).

                Irresitable force against an imovable object.
                Totally agree. My point was if Syrian Army had better and more precise weapons would it be this way?
                No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                Comment


                • This conflict has made Hamas side with the opposition against Iran.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Agnostic Muslim View Post
                    Dreadnought, Troung, Parihaka and company:

                    "The panel cited increasing use of indiscriminate weapons, including cluster munitions, barrel bombs and surface-to-surface missiles as evidence of the “flagrant disregard” of government forces for the distinction between combatants and civilians demanded by international law. “There is a strong element of retribution in the government’s approach, with civilians paying a price for “allowing” armed groups to operate within their towns,” the report said."
                    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/05/wo...yria.html?_r=0

                    I believe all three of you defended civilian casualties in US drone strikes in Pakistan by arguing that 'if you lie with dogs you get fleas' (or something similar) - would you therefore apply the same logic in this case, and defend Assad's killing of civilians in areas that the rebels are operating in/from?
                    Well gosh skippy, the last time I checked my country was fighting on the Afghan civilians behalf against terrorists housed, trained, equipped and reinforced from Pakistan, NOT against any faction in Syria, so I'll just leave the vacuous moral equivalencies to you, m'kay? :)
                    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                    Leibniz

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                      Well gosh skippy, the last time I checked my country was fighting on the Afghan civilians behalf against terrorists housed, trained, equipped and reinforced from Pakistan, NOT against any faction in Syria, so I'll just leave the vacuous moral equivalencies to you, m'kay? :)

                      So essentially your position is that civilian casualties at the hands of the US are completely acceptable because of their proximity to allegedly 'legitimate targets/combatants/imminent threats', but not so when civilians are killed by Assad due to their 'proximity to allegedly legitimate targets/rebels/combatants' - got it 'skippy'.
                      Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission - Jinnah
                      https://twitter.com/AgnosticMuslim

                      Comment


                      • France said on Tuesday it was "certain" that the nerve agent sarin had been used in Syria, underlining a United Nations report that said the civil war had reached “new levels of cruelty and brutality.”

                        Tests carried out on samples showed the gas had been used "several times in Syria in limited areas," Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said in a statement, according to Reuters.

                        The results of the tests have been handed to the U.N., Fabius added - although details of the French claims were not immediately available. It was not clear which side had supposedly used the chemical weapon.

                        It came hours after a U.N. report said investigators had "reasonable grounds" to believe that limited amounts of chemical weapons had been used in Syria in a conflict where brutality was now a tactic of war.

                        France is 'certain' sarin gas was used in Syria; UN condemns 'brutality' of conflict - World News
                        If we read the French investigation results in conjunction with the comments of one of the UN investigators, it would appear (though not conclusively) that it is the Syrian rebels who have resorted to using chemical weapons.


                        “Our investigators have been in neighboring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals and, according to their report of last week which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated,” Del Ponte said in an interview with Swiss-Italian television.

                        “This was use on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities,” she added, speaking in Italian.

                        Damascus - UN Strongly Suspects Syrian Rebels Used Sarin Gas -- VosIzNeias.com
                        Does Obama have a 'red line' with respect to the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian rebels, similar to his 'red line' with respect to the Syrian Government's use of chemical weapons?
                        Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission - Jinnah
                        https://twitter.com/AgnosticMuslim

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Dreadnought View Post
                          Then what would you say about Iranian soldiers and their proxy Hezbolla being there fighting against the Syrians?

                          You cannot mention one side of this without mentioning the other. And we all know how they (mentioned above) feel about free and open elections and dictatorships.

                          And just think, You have Hezbollah that tries to order Hamas out of Lebannon because they support the opposition in Syria.

                          Hamas, Hezbollah Take Opposite Sides in Syria - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East
                          You miss my point. I'm not saying Assad is a saint. He is not. And we all know what the Hezbollah is. I'm trying to disabuse you of the notion that the other side is any better. The rebellion might have been started by common non-Alawite Syrians with legitimate grievances against Assad. But they are no longer in control. The Gulf state sponsored Jihadis (who seem to be extremely chummy with AQ) are the ones that Assad's forces are fighting now and they are the ones who will inherit Syria when Assad falls and they won't think twice about slaughtering the Christians and Alawites to consolidate their power. If, despite understanding this, you still want to extend material help to the rebels instead of letting the fight play out on its own, that is your prerogative of course. Just keep in mind that the decision may come back to bite you in the a$$ a few years down the line.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                            Let's say there are free election. Monitored by all relevant international organizations that usually do such things. Is the west ready to accept the results? What if AQ comes to power?


                            Since English is not my native language, i looked at the dictionary:

                            reb·el /ˈrebəl/
                            Noun: A person who rises in armed resistance against an established government or ruler.



                            You are right they are not criminals. When they hide behind civvies they become ones.


                            Syria never been a democracy. Best option is post communism Poland, worse case post-war A-stan or Iraq. Assuming the system wont just crumble.


                            He was raised to be a ruler. Not stellar at this job, but he doesn't know to do anything else. I don't want to lose my job, do you? (rhetorical question).


                            Totally agree. My point was if Syrian Army had better and more precise weapons would it be this way?
                            To be fair,the Syrian Army is not on a genocidal rampage.They issue warnings,that kind of stuff.But it's also from a culture with a much higher tolerance for losses.That without going into the normal effects of the chaos of war.
                            As for democracy in this places,it's getting tiresome to argue again and again it's not possible.Right now at least.I may change my mind in 50 years.
                            Those who know don't speak
                            He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                              He was raised to be a ruler. Not stellar at this job, but he doesn't know to do anything else.
                              No he wasn't, his brother was raised to be the ruler. Then his brother died in a car wreck and this Assad got plucked away from being a doctor.


                              If the UNSC wanted a "no fly" zone, trust me when I tell you those S-300's wont make one bit of difference in changing that.
                              The same UNSC that Russia, the people selling the S-300, has a veto on? :))

                              Dreadnought: If there were free and open elections in that country then chances are they could atleast find common ground and not have what we are watching today.
                              How do you guarantee free and open? If I'm a person that doesn't want the other side to win, which there are many of those people inside and outside Syria, I go find everyone voting for the other side and shoot them. I go find everyone counting ballots and threaten to shoot them if they don't stuff the ballots and report inflated numbers. You're not going to have international observers because their security can't be guaranteed because no neutral country is going to send troops there. And if the result goes the way people don't like, they'll ignore it and continue shooting. While international powerbrokers that want a certain status quo to continue or want their own guy to win (oh, hi Vladimir Putin) will say something like "the election results were highly flawed with great conflict and can not be taken seriously". On what fucking planet are free and open elections possible? Who's going to be there, the UN to guarantee the election monitors? Look at this thread, it's been going on for 2 years. The UN still isn't there with boots on the ground because the western world are a bunch of pussies, the local actors don't want the western world to be in there doing anything, the local actors themselves are backing their own sides in the fight, the Russians and Chinese don't want anyone to go in, and the rest of the world doesn't give a shit.

                              Jesus H. Christ, "free and open elections".



                              Any person saying there should be elections now is a dumbass showing they have no clue how anything works. These dumbasses when they were in charge is why Hamas now runs Palestine, "hey, let's have an election!". It really scares me and explains the world the past decade when you have these kinds of people that are supposed to be intelligent due to the power they wield that are so naive.


                              This war is going to continue until some international organization like the United Nations grows some balls. Fat chance of that happening. So then we go to major local actors in the scene and whether they directly impose themselves, Turkey/Iran/Saudi Arabia/Israel. And if not that/no escalation after that occurs, it'll be when the local forces have exhausted themselves, their weaponry, and their manpower.
                              Attached Files
                              Last edited by rj1; 04 Jun 13,, 20:50.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Agnostic Muslim View Post
                                So essentially your position is that civilian casualties at the hands of the US are completely acceptable because of their proximity to allegedly 'legitimate targets/combatants/imminent threats', but not so when civilians are killed by Assad due to their 'proximity to allegedly legitimate targets/rebels/combatants' - got it 'skippy'.
                                Wow, your'e as stupid as a box of frogs aren't you?
                                Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                                I've got to say, it's looking more and more like the west's best interests are in fact supporting Assad. Wonder how the liberals would take that one
                                In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                                Leibniz

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X