EPTOn September 06 2013 20:09 riyanme wrote:
nuclear launch detected...
nuclear launch detected...
Considering the tensions I would just like to point out that no nukes have actually been launched.
Iraq & Syrian Civil Wars - Page 124
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Please guys, stay on topic. This thread is about the situation in Iraq and Syria. | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4783 Posts
Considering the tensions I would just like to point out that no nukes have actually been launched. | ||
|
Taefox
1533 Posts
| ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On September 06 2013 16:17 zatic wrote: What exactly about "the situation" am I not understanding? In Europe, France and the UK are the only countries who would ever help anyway. Everyone else is either too weak, or too unwilling (Germany, Italy, Spain) to do anything. All the rest of them staying out of it has very little to do with the UK staying home. The US had virtually zero involvement in Mali from the very beginning, so of course France didn't have to wait for a US reaction, since there wasn't one going to come ever. That France didn't hesitate there only strengthens my point. I can only repeat: Not embarrassing Obama is one reason France is waiting. That it would be difficult for France to do anything effective without the US is of course another important factor. But the main reason they are hesitating right now is not military impotence but political considerations towards mainly the US. You think the US trained the Malian army for shits and giggles ? Their former prime minister worked for the NASA btw... Afaik the US was way more involved in Mali than they are in Syria (by involved i mean having "ties" with the country). I think you have a very naive way to look at IR and Geopolitics tbh. | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/FFdv1iX.png) And a very telling slip of the tongue: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/r0j09bm.png) The more likely interpretation: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Yyx5rEV.png) | ||
zatic
Zurich15361 Posts
On September 06 2013 23:08 Boblion wrote: You think the US trained the Malian army for shits and giggles ? Their former prime minister worked for the NASA btw... Afaik the US was way more involved in Mali then they are in Syria (by involved i mean having "ties" with the country). I think you have a very naive way to look at IR and Geopolitics tbh. Alright, and I think I am done being talked to in such a condescending tone. If you seriously believe that political situation before the French Mali engagement is comparable to the one we have right now before a (possible) US/French Syrian engagement there is little common ground for us to discuss on anyway. | ||
|
Pika Chu
Romania2510 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On September 06 2013 07:19 TanGeng wrote: Probably the strongest case for missile strikes against Syria #symbolicgesture http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/09/05/the-real-case-for-syria-strikes-makes-sense-so-why-isnt-anyone-making-it/ This actually makes sense to me. Don't actually try to sway the civil war, just cripple chemical weapons and punish the Syrian government. Of course, I'm trusting US/France intelligence on this one. yes it's a symbolic, even venting gesture. but presenting it to the outside like this would portray the u.s. as ingenuine and whimsical. under the enforce chemical weapons ban claim, the U.S. is just going to fire some missiles into syria and it's not exactly taking out assad. they prefer assad over the islamists for sure. the situation would look like someone going on a killing spree, and you ignore it. but when he pulls out a flamethrower and killed a couple more people, now you go and beat him up a bit, then tell him to continue at it. so this kind of action would not merely be symbolic, but it would appear to be obviously symbolic and empty. they have to put some more substance behind it. | ||
|
hzflank
United Kingdom2991 Posts
And for now, the rebels are working together to achieve a common goal -- toppling al-Assad's government. Here's how one local al-Nusra front leader put it to CNN in April: "In the period after the regime falls, our main goal is to create an Islamic state that is ruled by the Koran. It can have civilian institutions, but not democracy. We look at the other Free Syrian Army rebels as one of many groups defending religion, so we support them. In the future, we will handle this differently." That quote also hints that the fall of Assad would not be the end of the war in Syria, as Al-Nusra would then want to handle the FSA differently. | ||
|
zatic
Zurich15361 Posts
On September 06 2013 23:43 Pika Chu wrote: It's not just US, Zatic, France is willing to bandwagon if US does another illegal military action, which will upset a lot of people. They are not stupid to take all that heat alone. If US won't attack, France is not going to either. Mali was a different fish food, no one was opposing the intervention (Russia even helped as far as i know). I didn't claim anything contrary. I am saying Mali and Syria are in no way comparable, and political decision over engagements in either are not comparable. | ||
|
BioNova
United States598 Posts
On September 06 2013 23:43 Pika Chu wrote: It's not just US, Zatic, France is willing to bandwagon if US does another illegal military action, which will upset a lot of people. They are not stupid to take all that heat alone. If US won't attack, France is not going to either. Mali was a different fish food, no one was opposing the intervention (Russia even helped as far as i know). Sneaking a Ghandi signature back in to the discussion. /impressed. Mali is highly underreported. Did anyone catch Brown Moses trying to pin Cluster Bomb usage on Syria. I spat my coffee... At least let a country that doesn't use them proudly lead the way. Incredible. The Yemeni reporter would like to have a chat. | ||
|
Rassy
Netherlands2308 Posts
Wonder whats next, atm i have no clue but will prob figure something out this weekend. | ||
|
jellyjello
Korea (South)664 Posts
| ||
|
forestry
95 Posts
On September 06 2013 23:47 hzflank wrote: Something that really stands out for me from that CNN link as it reinforces what I have said previously, which is that if NATO removes Assad then we also need to remove some of the rebel groups. Also, many people in this thread think that we should intervene in Syria to install democracy. That quote also hints that the fall of Assad would not be the end of the war in Syria, as Al-Nusra would then want to handle the FSA differently. How differently in your opinion? What would these friendly Al-Nusra men do with the FSA? Is an Islamic not good for the Syrian people? They will finally have the country as they envisioned centuries ago. You fear they will become a communist state? On September 07 2013 00:21 Rassy wrote: So rusia making clear that they also have a stake in this deal, as expected.. Wonder whats next, atm i have no clue but will prob figure it out this weekend. And Obama does not? | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
Latest poll: 68% against military intervention ewww.... | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
| ||
|
dsousa
United States1363 Posts
US strike on Syria to be 'significantly larger than expected' | ||
|
hzflank
United Kingdom2991 Posts
On September 07 2013 00:50 forestry wrote: How differently in your opinion? What would these friendly Al-Nusra men do with the FSA? Is an Islamic not good for the Syrian people? They will finally have the country as they envisioned centuries ago. You fear they will become a communist state? And Obama does not? That depends on whether the FSA will allow Al Nusra to rule. Al Nusra will look favorably on Sunni's who agree to a theocratic state ruled by them or their allies, They will not become communist at all, more like a Sunni version of Iran I would think. | ||
|
forestry
95 Posts
On September 07 2013 02:14 dsousa wrote: http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Report-US-strike-on-Syria-to-be-significantly-larger-than-expected-325389 US strike on Syria to be 'significantly larger than expected' Would you say this is good news? Will the US aim some of these towards the Terrorists? | ||
|
Shake n Blake
Canada159 Posts
On September 07 2013 03:17 forestry wrote: Would you say this is good news? Will the US aim some of these towards the Terrorists? The contrary in my honest opinion. If the US strike on Syria is supposedly going to be "significantly larger than expected," than I fear a no-fly zone may be in the works. | ||
|
dsousa
United States1363 Posts
On September 07 2013 02:51 hzflank wrote: That depends on whether the FSA will allow Al Nusra to rule. Al Nusra will look favorably on Sunni's who agree to a theocratic state ruled by them or their allies, They will not become communist at all, more like a Sunni version of Iran I would think. A large part of why the US is intervening is because of our ally Israel. Israel, while mostly unmentioned, is a huge factor in this event and is essentially whom the US is protecting from the use of chemical weapons. The US will not leave Syria in a worse position relative to Israel. Israel is by far our closest ally in the region (maybe the world at this point) and they have significant sway with the US congress/government. Israel does not want chemical weapons in the hands of crazy people right off its borders. They also don't want a desperate Assad regime to get a parting shot on them. If you are in Israel, I imagine a chemical weapon attack 200km away is a scary thing. Its always a bag a tricks when you talk about Israel, some people view it as invitation for anti-semitism and some view it as anti-semitism... then we have that tangent. But sometimes Israel is a factor, they border the nation in question, they need to be discussed rationally and dispassionately. Here's hoping. That beings said, I think that if the US military acts, it will primarily be to support Israels concerns and that will not include leaving them a greater, or crazier, adversary than they already have in Syria. Why risk intervention if you don't control the outcome? Which begs the questions, who is it they plan to leave in charge? I think they have to have planned it that far. | ||
| ||
