|
Please guys, stay on topic.
This thread is about the situation in Iraq and Syria. |
On October 05 2012 02:33 Roflhaxx wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2012 02:20 zalz wrote:On October 05 2012 01:13 ahappystar wrote:On October 05 2012 00:51 zalz wrote:On October 04 2012 22:57 ahappystar wrote:On October 04 2012 14:58 zalz wrote:
Yes, and last week my bike broke. Who stood to gain? The bike repairman that earned money when I paid him to repair the bike.
OMG! THE BIKE REPAIRMAN HAS DESTROYED MY BIKE! IT ALL MAKES SENSE!
You rationalize like a bunch of tinfoil crazies. You know why the Syrian army attacked Turkey? The same reason they did all those massacres.
You look at the Syrian army like its the army of a western nation, it isn't. It isn't controlled top down, it has large elements that have gone essentially rogue, with a carte blanche of the Syrian government. Some fragements are barely more than groups of criminals that go around looting and murdering, tolerated because they fight the protesters.
Can't there just be one topic where the conspiracy morons don't polute everything? Stop with the idiotic "who stands to gain" bullshit, that isn't how the world works.
As for the war, it hasn't been going in anyone's favor. There is literally no change that would even suggest that the rebels were so desperate that they would resort to attacking the Turkish army in some idiotic ploy that only an internet tinfoil could conjure up. Yeah, Poland DID attack those poor German soldiers and start WWII, how could we have all been so blind. Oh the anguish! "If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." - U.S. President James Madison What about those of us that live in 2012, not 1939? Why should we learn from the past? Unbelievable... threads in the General section make me sigh How about the Turkish government being caught bombing its own and blaming it on a rebel group to justify a crackdown on that group? But oh, I guess that's sooooooo 2006. Kids these days don't learn about history from before Lady Gaga, like totally http://www.whale.to/c/court_says.html You confuse learning from the past with presuming history is cyclical. False flags have taken place in the past, but that doesn't prove anything about the present. In the real world you need things like evidence. What you did is convict several states of false flag attacks (you don't know who yet, you just know someone did it, typical tinfoil), because 1939 Nazi-Germany committed a false flag. You literally have no evidence, all you say is that because Nazi-Germany did it, modern day Turkey must have done a false flag. You whine about the level of discourse in general, but you make use of arguments that wouldn't have stood up in elementary school. I have been reading your posts in this thread and I think I speak for everyone when I tell you to shut up. It would actually not be very "tinfoiley" to suggest Turkey might be behind this. I really hate people who scream of conspiracy theories, saying how we are all to blind too see it etc etc. But what I hate even more is people who abstantly deny everything. Example. its not like USA would fund insurgents after afghanistan right?..oh wait... :| History is a very important tool, do not look down on it!
Do not presume to speak for everyone. Also all the evidence that people have presented so far that it was engineered by the west or Turkey has all been speculation. The arguments people have presented have boiled down to two parts. A: That Assad has nothing to gain from this while the west and Turkey has a lot to gain therefore Assad wouldn't attack turkey. Zalz then countered this by saying that their are rogue military units that might have taken their own initiative on their own without Assad approval (instead of countering this point you merely tell him to shut up). The second point is that it has happened in the past therefore it could happen now. This doesn't prove that this is what happening now merely that it could of been what happened. I don't think Zalz is denying that countries can make engineer reasons for justifications for war merely that this isn't what happened in this case based on the reasons he gave.
|
On October 05 2012 02:33 Roflhaxx wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2012 02:20 zalz wrote:On October 05 2012 01:13 ahappystar wrote:On October 05 2012 00:51 zalz wrote:On October 04 2012 22:57 ahappystar wrote:On October 04 2012 14:58 zalz wrote:
Yes, and last week my bike broke. Who stood to gain? The bike repairman that earned money when I paid him to repair the bike.
OMG! THE BIKE REPAIRMAN HAS DESTROYED MY BIKE! IT ALL MAKES SENSE!
You rationalize like a bunch of tinfoil crazies. You know why the Syrian army attacked Turkey? The same reason they did all those massacres.
You look at the Syrian army like its the army of a western nation, it isn't. It isn't controlled top down, it has large elements that have gone essentially rogue, with a carte blanche of the Syrian government. Some fragements are barely more than groups of criminals that go around looting and murdering, tolerated because they fight the protesters.
Can't there just be one topic where the conspiracy morons don't polute everything? Stop with the idiotic "who stands to gain" bullshit, that isn't how the world works.
As for the war, it hasn't been going in anyone's favor. There is literally no change that would even suggest that the rebels were so desperate that they would resort to attacking the Turkish army in some idiotic ploy that only an internet tinfoil could conjure up. Yeah, Poland DID attack those poor German soldiers and start WWII, how could we have all been so blind. Oh the anguish! "If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." - U.S. President James Madison What about those of us that live in 2012, not 1939? Why should we learn from the past? Unbelievable... threads in the General section make me sigh How about the Turkish government being caught bombing its own and blaming it on a rebel group to justify a crackdown on that group? But oh, I guess that's sooooooo 2006. Kids these days don't learn about history from before Lady Gaga, like totally http://www.whale.to/c/court_says.html You confuse learning from the past with presuming history is cyclical. False flags have taken place in the past, but that doesn't prove anything about the present. In the real world you need things like evidence. What you did is convict several states of false flag attacks (you don't know who yet, you just know someone did it, typical tinfoil), because 1939 Nazi-Germany committed a false flag. You literally have no evidence, all you say is that because Nazi-Germany did it, modern day Turkey must have done a false flag. You whine about the level of discourse in general, but you make use of arguments that wouldn't have stood up in elementary school. I have been reading your posts in this thread and I think I speak for everyone when I tell you to shut up. It would actually not be very "tinfoiley" to suggest Turkey might be behind this. I really hate people who scream of conspiracy theories, saying how we are all to blind too see it etc etc. But what I hate even more is people who abstantly deny everything. Example. its not like USA would fund insurgents after afghanistan right?..oh wait... :| History is a very important tool, do not look down on it!
Syria is already going through the dirt, saying sorry for the mortar attacks.
Look down on history? Honestly, you people are really stretching it. I have three bookcases with nothing but history books, I just understand its proper place, which is neither a glass orb, nor a source to draw justification from for your little bigotries.
Again, you people seem to fail to realize that you still need evidence before you scream stuff.
That is why, despite you wanting me to "shut up" it turns out I was the one that had it right. The syrian army was behind the mortar attacks.
|
On October 04 2012 09:34 NeMeSiS3 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 09:30 hooahah wrote:On October 04 2012 07:44 Blanke wrote:On October 04 2012 04:28 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Turkish armed forces have launched artillery attacks against Syria in response to a Syrian mortar strike, which has killed five members of the same family in southeastern Turkey.
In a statement issued on Wednesday, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, said the attacks, carried out following radar tracking, were within the rules of engagement.
Western officials, from Anders Fogh Rasmussen, NATO secretary-general, to Hillary Clinton, US secretary of state, have condemned the attack that struck a house in the southeastern border town of Akcakale.
Clinton said the White House was "outraged" by the "very dangerous situation" created by the attack.
Witnesses said policemen have also been injured in the shelling, which originated only kilometres away from the Syrian border.
Ahmet Davutoglu, Turkish foreign minister, briefed Ban Ki-Moon, secretary-general of the United Nations, on the situation shortly word of the attack reached Ankara.
Martin Nesirky, spokesperson for Ban Ki-moon, secretary-general of the United Nations, issued a statement in response to the attack saying: "the secretary-general expressed his condolences at the tragic loss of life and encouraged the Minister to keep open all channels of communication with the Syrian authorities with a view to lessening any tension that could build up as a result of the incident". Source It would not surprise me the slightest bit if NATO promoted this attack as a justification for western "intervention" of Syria. They've been fishing around in search of a solid excuse/false flag attempt for months now, while the funded & western-supplied rebels spearhead this operation in the meantme. oh ffs I dunno, I always like to be skeptical and ask questions. What would Syria gain from attacking the strongest nation in the region, a nation that is connected to NATO which means all of NATO now has the right to butt fuck Syria? The hierarchy of Syria may be bat shit crazy, but crazy =/= stupid and no one would randomly drop a few motor shells on another nation and go "well, hopefully no one will notice!". It has no logical pathing, Syria is also in the middle of a Civil War, why would they try anything with Turkey? None of it makes sense. If we line up pros/cons Syria has 0 pros and NATO/Turkey have all pros, unless you can correct me on what Syria could gain from this? Seems strange.
Syria has said it would use weapons of mass destruction (Chemical/Biological weaponry) in the case of NATO intervention... even ALL of the UN falling on Syria would require a least 5 years to take control of all of the stockpiles that Syria has scattered all over itself/would scatter to anyone willing to take a briefcase of Sarin gas.
So Syria can basically say "Fuck you guys we can do whatever the fuck we want".... and the UN has to take it up the ass. Poor Syrians...
EDIT: A link to what I'm talking about for those who're PM'inh me for "Facts or STFU"
http://www.realclearworld.com/2012/09/28/clearing_syria_wmd_requires_massive_war_140594.html
|
A Turkey/NATO intervention would be a very good option.
Major fightings would be over in about two-three weeks when turkey forces thrust through the center regions of the Assad Regime.
This land based assault would be supported by NATO air strikes.
Pockets of resistance in the outer region would then crumble within another 1-2 weeks.
Assad would be shot hiding in a tunnel or some waterpipe and that would be the last to hear about him.
An interim government would be established following the first elections in Syria in about 1 to 1 1/2 years.
|
On October 05 2012 04:22 Holy_AT wrote:
A Turkey/NATO intervention would be a very good option.
Major fightings would be over in about two-three weeks when turkey forces thrust through the center regions of the Assad Regime.
This land based assault would be supported by NATO air strikes.
Pockets of resistance in the outer region would then crumble within another 1-2 weeks.
Assad would be shot hiding in a tunnel or some waterpipe and that would be the last to hear about him.
An interim government would be established following the first elections in Syria in about 1 to 1 1/2 years.
You are kidding right? And the Russian fleet there would do what in the meantime?!
|
So anyway... What do you guys think about Turkey annexing Syria and creating a Neo-Ottoman state? Would it bring stability to the region if all of the countries were gobbled by an Islamic super-power?
Good thing certain people above me completely ignored Turkey going through with multiple false flag operations in resent times. Well played.
What the terrorist opposition needs is a massacre blamed on the government. The more they lose ground the more desperate they will get. I just hope as many citizens as possible can escape the rebel controlled areas 
|
On October 05 2012 08:27 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2012 04:22 Holy_AT wrote:
A Turkey/NATO intervention would be a very good option.
Major fightings would be over in about two-three weeks when turkey forces thrust through the center regions of the Assad Regime.
This land based assault would be supported by NATO air strikes.
Pockets of resistance in the outer region would then crumble within another 1-2 weeks.
Assad would be shot hiding in a tunnel or some waterpipe and that would be the last to hear about him.
An interim government would be established following the first elections in Syria in about 1 to 1 1/2 years. You are kidding right? And the Russian fleet there would do what in the meantime?!
it certainly wouldn't try to fight. there isn't a sane person that would seriously argue Russia would go to war to defend Syria against an intervention.
and to the guy above me...no...this isn't a total war game. you can't annex a sovereign nation.
|
On October 05 2012 08:38 ahappystar wrote:So anyway... What do you guys think about Turkey annexing Syria and creating a Neo-Ottoman state? Would it bring stability to the region if all of the countries were gobbled by an Islamic super-power? Good thing certain people above me completely ignored Turkey going through with multiple false flag operations in resent times. Well played. What the terrorist opposition needs is a massacre blamed on the government. The more they lose ground the more desperate they will get. I just hope as many citizens as possible can escape the rebel controlled areas
Mind blown. But you know, many in central Europe might not be too keen on allowing the resurrection of the ottoman empire, based on the events of 6.5 of the last 8 centuries. Still, I think it would be a fantastic stabilizing and civilizing force in the middle east, as it was for most of its former existence, but how to get there?!
|
On October 05 2012 08:38 ahappystar wrote:So anyway... What do you guys think about Turkey annexing Syria and creating a Neo-Ottoman state? Would it bring stability to the region if all of the countries were gobbled by an Islamic super-power? Good thing certain people above me completely ignored Turkey going through with multiple false flag operations in resent times. Well played. What the terrorist opposition needs is a massacre blamed on the government. The more they lose ground the more desperate they will get. I just hope as many citizens as possible can escape the rebel controlled areas
You should Robert Kaplan's book, revenge of geography. The man has some very good predictions about what will happen in the middle East.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Revenge-Geography-Conflicts-Against/dp/1400069831/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
|
On October 05 2012 08:38 ahappystar wrote:
So anyway... What do you guys think about Turkey annexing Syria and creating a Neo-Ottoman state? Would it bring stability to the region if all of the countries were gobbled by an Islamic super-power?
Turks and Arabs are not the same, and don't feel the same.
Islamic super-power is impossible. Saudi-Arabia and Iran are too powerful in the region, and a Sunnia/Shia alliance isn't going to work when either government is so totalitarian that it will stomp out opposition.
Iran, in turn, is Persian and Persians have very little interest of being compared to Arabs, or be incorporated into a caliphate, which is, regardless of the ideal, an Arab-power structure.
But the differences don't only exist in government and religion. The people of Iran are relatively modern for the region, and probably have the most in common with Westerners (excluding Israel). Saudi-Arabia on the other hand has a very conservative population that is perfectly fine with its current form of government.
Good thing certain people above me completely ignored Turkey going through with multiple false flag operations in resent times. Well played. What the terrorist opposition needs is a massacre blamed on the government. The more they lose ground the more desperate they will get. I just hope as many citizens as possible can escape the rebel controlled areas
There were many massacres committed by the Syrian army, all properly documented.
There have been a dozen legitimate reasons for the UN to intervene, or for Turkey to invade. You, like most tinfoils, just don't have a grasp on how the real world operates, so you continue to fabricate these Dan Brown-stories.
|
God the word insurrection makes my nipples so fucking hard.
Syrian stability won't be achieved until a consensus is reached within the UN's Security Council. Russia and China have strong political interests in the region, and are unwilling to compromise with the West.
|
On October 05 2012 10:21 Elegy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2012 08:27 -Archangel- wrote:On October 05 2012 04:22 Holy_AT wrote:
A Turkey/NATO intervention would be a very good option.
Major fightings would be over in about two-three weeks when turkey forces thrust through the center regions of the Assad Regime.
This land based assault would be supported by NATO air strikes.
Pockets of resistance in the outer region would then crumble within another 1-2 weeks.
Assad would be shot hiding in a tunnel or some waterpipe and that would be the last to hear about him.
An interim government would be established following the first elections in Syria in about 1 to 1 1/2 years. You are kidding right? And the Russian fleet there would do what in the meantime?! it certainly wouldn't try to fight. there isn't a sane person that would seriously argue Russia would go to war to defend Syria against an intervention. and to the guy above me...no...this isn't a total war game. you can't annex a sovereign nation.
I think you are underestimating Russia. If west was sure Russia would not interfere they would have bombed Syria long time ago.
Russians brought their fleet there for sole reason to show they will not allow attacks.
BTW, any conflict with Russia would doom Europe as we are dependant on their Oil and Gas. Also Russia unlike US and EU didn't suffer from economic crisis.
|
On October 05 2012 21:01 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2012 10:21 Elegy wrote:On October 05 2012 08:27 -Archangel- wrote:On October 05 2012 04:22 Holy_AT wrote:
A Turkey/NATO intervention would be a very good option.
Major fightings would be over in about two-three weeks when turkey forces thrust through the center regions of the Assad Regime.
This land based assault would be supported by NATO air strikes.
Pockets of resistance in the outer region would then crumble within another 1-2 weeks.
Assad would be shot hiding in a tunnel or some waterpipe and that would be the last to hear about him.
An interim government would be established following the first elections in Syria in about 1 to 1 1/2 years. You are kidding right? And the Russian fleet there would do what in the meantime?! it certainly wouldn't try to fight. there isn't a sane person that would seriously argue Russia would go to war to defend Syria against an intervention. and to the guy above me...no...this isn't a total war game. you can't annex a sovereign nation. I think you are underestimating Russia. If west was sure Russia would not interfere they would have bombed Syria long time ago. Russians brought their fleet there for sole reason to show they will not allow attacks. BTW, any conflict with Russia would doom Europe as we are dependant on their Oil and Gas. Also Russia unlike US and EU didn't suffer from economic crisis.
Russia won't start a war over Syria, they simply will not do it.
As for Europe, only Eastern Europe suffers from that to any serious extent, and even then, "doom" is a big word. They might need to draw on alternative, more expensive sources. Hardly doom.
The claim that Russia did not suffer from the economic crisis is just devoid from any connection to reality.
|
On October 05 2012 21:25 zalz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2012 21:01 -Archangel- wrote:On October 05 2012 10:21 Elegy wrote:On October 05 2012 08:27 -Archangel- wrote:On October 05 2012 04:22 Holy_AT wrote:
A Turkey/NATO intervention would be a very good option.
Major fightings would be over in about two-three weeks when turkey forces thrust through the center regions of the Assad Regime.
This land based assault would be supported by NATO air strikes.
Pockets of resistance in the outer region would then crumble within another 1-2 weeks.
Assad would be shot hiding in a tunnel or some waterpipe and that would be the last to hear about him.
An interim government would be established following the first elections in Syria in about 1 to 1 1/2 years. You are kidding right? And the Russian fleet there would do what in the meantime?! it certainly wouldn't try to fight. there isn't a sane person that would seriously argue Russia would go to war to defend Syria against an intervention. and to the guy above me...no...this isn't a total war game. you can't annex a sovereign nation. I think you are underestimating Russia. If west was sure Russia would not interfere they would have bombed Syria long time ago. Russians brought their fleet there for sole reason to show they will not allow attacks. BTW, any conflict with Russia would doom Europe as we are dependant on their Oil and Gas. Also Russia unlike US and EU didn't suffer from economic crisis. Russia won't start a war over Syria, they simply will not do it. As for Europe, only Eastern Europe suffers from that to any serious extent, and even then, "doom" is a big word. They might need to draw on alternative, more expensive sources. Hardly doom. The claim that Russia did not suffer from the economic crisis is just devoid from any connection to reality.
I guess your sources are different then mine then.
And yes Russia will not start a war, but NATO won't either.
|
As both my parents are from Syria and I've been there several times, I guess it's my time to have a say in this thread.
As a christian in Syria, really the biggest fear is what comes next. There has already been a massacre in Turkey of Assyrians and Armenians (pretty much the christians in the middle-east), and my grandparents were forced to immigrate to Syria.
What we found in Syria was comfort. The dictator not only suppressed us, but the entire population. That may sound crazy, but it means equality. It means that everyone is just as suppressed and lives just as rough. It ment that we could live in peace, as long as we don't open our mouthes of course.
But if the dictator now falls, what will happen? A vast majority of the Syrian population is very islamist, and trust me there are a lot of extremists. Will this lead to another massacre? Or will my relatives there have to live quiet and suppressed?
Excuse me if I said anything offending or biased. I also haven't read the posts before me so I might be repeating others. Anyway thats my two cents.
|
On October 05 2012 22:57 anastacia wrote:
As both my parents are from Syria and I've been there several times, I guess it's my time to have a say in this thread.
As a christian in Syria, really the biggest fear is what comes next. There has already been a massacre in Turkey of Assyrians and Armenians (pretty much the christians in the middle-east), and my grandparents were forced to immigrate to Syria.
What we found in Syria was comfort. The dictator not only suppressed us, but the entire population. That may sound crazy, but it means equality. It means that everyone is just as suppressed and lives just as rough. It ment that we could live in peace, as long as we don't open our mouthes of course.
But if the dictator now falls, what will happen? A vast majority of the Syrian population is very islamist, and trust me there are a lot of extremists. Will this lead to another massacre? Or will my relatives there have to live quiet and suppressed?
Excuse me if I said anything offending or biased. I also haven't read the posts before me so I might be repeating others. Anyway thats my two cents.
Why would anyone be offended? Its your country. That's exactly why a military intervention would be a disaster, turning the country over to extremists and terrorists leads to failed bottomless pit states like the new Libya. Russia and China are the only forces left protecting the Syrian people, whether the NATO side of the UN likes it or not. In a world where war mongering and killing people is more democratic than dialog, its a miracle there is some hope left for Syria, however small.
|
On October 05 2012 23:38 ahappystar wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2012 22:57 anastacia wrote:
As both my parents are from Syria and I've been there several times, I guess it's my time to have a say in this thread.
As a christian in Syria, really the biggest fear is what comes next. There has already been a massacre in Turkey of Assyrians and Armenians (pretty much the christians in the middle-east), and my grandparents were forced to immigrate to Syria.
What we found in Syria was comfort. The dictator not only suppressed us, but the entire population. That may sound crazy, but it means equality. It means that everyone is just as suppressed and lives just as rough. It ment that we could live in peace, as long as we don't open our mouthes of course.
But if the dictator now falls, what will happen? A vast majority of the Syrian population is very islamist, and trust me there are a lot of extremists. Will this lead to another massacre? Or will my relatives there have to live quiet and suppressed?
Excuse me if I said anything offending or biased. I also haven't read the posts before me so I might be repeating others. Anyway thats my two cents. Why would anyone be offended? Its your country. That's exactly why a military intervention would be a disaster, turning the country over to extremists and terrorists leads to failed bottomless pit states like the new Libya. Russia and China are the only forces left protecting the Syrian people, whether the NATO side of the UN likes it or not. In a world where war mongering and killing people is more democratic than dialog, its a miracle there is some hope left for Syria, however small.
WTF?! Russia is protecting its own interests in Syria. Just like US is trying to bring down Syria current leader so they would weaken Iran.
Nobody that owns guns ever wants to protect others, especially not countries like US and Russia which are worlds biggest weapon sellers.
|
On October 05 2012 23:48 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2012 23:38 ahappystar wrote:On October 05 2012 22:57 anastacia wrote:
As both my parents are from Syria and I've been there several times, I guess it's my time to have a say in this thread.
As a christian in Syria, really the biggest fear is what comes next. There has already been a massacre in Turkey of Assyrians and Armenians (pretty much the christians in the middle-east), and my grandparents were forced to immigrate to Syria.
What we found in Syria was comfort. The dictator not only suppressed us, but the entire population. That may sound crazy, but it means equality. It means that everyone is just as suppressed and lives just as rough. It ment that we could live in peace, as long as we don't open our mouthes of course.
But if the dictator now falls, what will happen? A vast majority of the Syrian population is very islamist, and trust me there are a lot of extremists. Will this lead to another massacre? Or will my relatives there have to live quiet and suppressed?
Excuse me if I said anything offending or biased. I also haven't read the posts before me so I might be repeating others. Anyway thats my two cents. Why would anyone be offended? Its your country. That's exactly why a military intervention would be a disaster, turning the country over to extremists and terrorists leads to failed bottomless pit states like the new Libya. Russia and China are the only forces left protecting the Syrian people, whether the NATO side of the UN likes it or not. In a world where war mongering and killing people is more democratic than dialog, its a miracle there is some hope left for Syria, however small. WTF?! Russia is protecting its own interests in Syria. Just like US is trying to bring down Syria current leader so they would weaken Iran. Nobody that owns guns ever wants to protect others, especially not countries like US and Russia which are worlds biggest weapon sellers.
Maybe you didn't understand what I was trying to say. Of course there are interests at work here, but Chinese and Russian interests wont bring about the destruction of a people and a country.
Hey, we are neighbors, so I get what you are trying to say but that was not what I was talking (writing) about 
|
On October 06 2012 00:26 ahappystar wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2012 23:48 -Archangel- wrote:On October 05 2012 23:38 ahappystar wrote:On October 05 2012 22:57 anastacia wrote:
As both my parents are from Syria and I've been there several times, I guess it's my time to have a say in this thread.
As a christian in Syria, really the biggest fear is what comes next. There has already been a massacre in Turkey of Assyrians and Armenians (pretty much the christians in the middle-east), and my grandparents were forced to immigrate to Syria.
What we found in Syria was comfort. The dictator not only suppressed us, but the entire population. That may sound crazy, but it means equality. It means that everyone is just as suppressed and lives just as rough. It ment that we could live in peace, as long as we don't open our mouthes of course.
But if the dictator now falls, what will happen? A vast majority of the Syrian population is very islamist, and trust me there are a lot of extremists. Will this lead to another massacre? Or will my relatives there have to live quiet and suppressed?
Excuse me if I said anything offending or biased. I also haven't read the posts before me so I might be repeating others. Anyway thats my two cents. Why would anyone be offended? Its your country. That's exactly why a military intervention would be a disaster, turning the country over to extremists and terrorists leads to failed bottomless pit states like the new Libya. Russia and China are the only forces left protecting the Syrian people, whether the NATO side of the UN likes it or not. In a world where war mongering and killing people is more democratic than dialog, its a miracle there is some hope left for Syria, however small. WTF?! Russia is protecting its own interests in Syria. Just like US is trying to bring down Syria current leader so they would weaken Iran. Nobody that owns guns ever wants to protect others, especially not countries like US and Russia which are worlds biggest weapon sellers. Maybe you didn't understand what I was trying to say. Of course there are interests at work here, but Chinese and Russian interests wont bring about the destruction of a people and a country. Hey, we are neighbors, so I get what you are trying to say but that was not what I was talking (writing) about
You mean apart from the city levelling destruction that Bashar has already wreaked on his population due to the Chinese and Russians refusing to intervene in any meaningful way (apart from giving Bashar weapons from "long standing contracts" or some bullshit like that)?
The only ones who are not just looking out for themselves are the Americans and Europeans, much like Libya, the new leaders will likely be Islamic extremists, who usually are not big fans of the west (which arguably might still be better for them then being best friends with the russians, kind of a moot point though as they had no problem removing one of their own dictators for far less then Assad has done).
|
I'm curious what people in this thread think of the current intrade markets related to the Syrian insurrection.
Bashar al-Assad to no longer be President of Syria before midnight ET 31 Dec 2012
29.4%
Bashar al-Assad to no longer be President of Syria before midnight ET 30 Jun 2013
48.8%
Bashar al-Assad to no longer be President of Syria before midnight ET 31 Dec 2013
70%
For those of you unfamiliar with how intrade works; I advise reading this;
https://www.intrade.com/v4/misc/howItWorks/theBasics.jsp
I currently think the odds for Basar al-Assad to no longer be President by Dec 31 2013 are way too high and will be trading accordingly. The Battle of Aleppo is currently a stalemate although Assad's regime has hinted that it may use its large stockpiles of chemical weapons if it will lose the city. It is true that the rebels may eventually succeed, but I don't think that its going to be any time soon, and the odds of Assad retaining power through next year are surely greater than 30%...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
