EPTIraq & Syrian Civil Wars - Page 385
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Please guys, stay on topic. This thread is about the situation in Iraq and Syria. | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
| ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6236 Posts
The intervention from the US and the west has also been minimal at best except for bombing ISIS. Obama doesn't have the will to intervene more forcefully and Western Europe doesn't have the capability. | ||
|
Wrath
3174 Posts
On December 15 2016 04:10 Salazarz wrote: I still haven't heard any reply to my earlier post from the Assad critics. What makes you think intervening into a sovereign state's internal affairs is justified by something as abstract as 'Assad is a cruel dictator and has to go'? It's clear by now that 'stopping ISIS' was never anything more than an excuse, so what makes you think it's okay for US & allies to pick and choose which dictators 'have to go' and which get to stay? Because there was no country left. The country was already sold to Russia and Iran. And no, that did not come after US intervention, after the 2006 Hezbollah - Israel war, Iran was making a huge effort into converting people from Sunni to Shiite in Syria, Hafiz Assad (father of Bashar) at least had some power to not be pure puppet for Iran and force his own existence as independent entity, but Bashar is a joke young man. Iran completely had influence over the country since he took over and doubled its effort converting people and building Shiite temples. Assad always bitched about how he is the "resistance angle" with Hezbollah and so on that he is against Israel and US... etc. He was already loyal to Russia and Iran. You are talking about a 30 years old man that was studying medicine and had to go back to rule the country because his daddy said so and his older brother died. He doesn't know shit so it was easy to be manipulated. When things escalated in 2011. Iran did not want for its puppet to go down and lose control. Alwaite who barely form 10% controlling an 80% Sunni state, no way in hell it would allow that. Russia wants to maintain its place. It checked both Assad and the opposition. It was clearly that Assad was the better choice for them. They do not give a shit about Assad as a person but as a form of securing their influence. So in short, regarding your question: What makes you think intervening into a sovereign state's internal affairs is justified by something as abstract as 'Assad is a cruel dictator and has to go'? This "sovereign state" did not exist to begin with. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On December 15 2016 04:34 RvB wrote: Who has called on western powers to intervene to remove Assad? The reason Assad isn't a good leader for Syria is that he has caused a civil war, used chemical weapons on his own population and that he barely has any support from them .The fact that there are worse dictators (how many are worse than Assad nowadays except North Korea?) doesn't mean that he should stay. The intervention from the US and the west has also been minimal at best except for bombing ISIS. Obama doesn't have the will to intervene more forcefully and Western Europe doesn't have the capability. You have an interesting definition of minimal: NSA hacking, CIA training rebels and the continuous sending of weapons. That's not minimal in my book, at least. All these actions, in my eyes, are conducive towards a civil war and not in the slightest bit leaning towards preventing or ending one on a peaceful note. The Russian suggestion that was mentioned in this thread earlier, which was dismissed by western leaders and then - in part at least, I'm not 100% on the timeline - followed up by actions mentioned above, that suggestion was in fact one that could have helped stop this horrible nightmare from unfolding in the way that it did. But it was ignored. You say that Assad barely has any support from the Syrian people. I'm not so sure about that. I don't have any data regarding this, but if I go by this thread from people who vehemently support the opposition, I see that they are saying about 2/3rd of the Syrian army defected from Assad. That means he has the support of about 1/3rd of them, right? If those numbers are similar in civilian life, then Assad essentially has more support than Trump, who has the support of about 25% of the American people that are eligible to vote. And before you start bring in stuff like propaganda to sway public opinion in Syria -- there's been plenty of suggestions that the meagre 25% of Trump supporters were also "fooled by fake news" and "(Russian) propaganda". It's not the same, I know, but whenever people bring up the propaganda thing I feel they are just dismissing civilians that make choices based on their own situation as stupid and easily manipulated as if their opinion has no validity to their situation. I'm not disputing that Assad is a terrible leader by our standards. I'm not disputing that he used chemical weapons and killed people that acted against him. I'm not even going to dispute any numbers regarding people that he's killed. He's a monster, plain and simple. But you ask who called on western powers to intervene to remove Assad. I would point at statements from the US government officials who repeatedly said "Assad must go" in Congress discussions or elsewhere and then suggest you look at the list above for evidence of intervention to that effect. I want to see some reliable numbers regarding rebels that are classified as "moderate" (and then a strong definition of what that means) versus people who are basically just ISIS terrorists before I'm going to back any side in this civil war. I'm not about to back any group that receives and welcomes support from Saudi Arabia and happily fights alongside Al Quada without some clear evidence that they are not in fact terrorists or share the kind of sentiment regarding certain social structures that ISIS wants to enforce. That is not moderate in my excessively liberal opinion. Assad carries blame for the civil war as the leader of the country, but the west did nothing to help prevent it, ease tensions or anything of that nature. That's fine my opinion, why should we get involved? Except we (the west or the US, however you wanna put it) did get involved. We can't control Assad, Russia or the actions of the rebels, but we certainly can control our own actions. The actions taken indicate we chose to get involved in making the situation worse, nothing else. Just to provide some counter to some of the allegations I've seen in western media regarding massacres and empty buses because "people are afraid of mass executions" (on some Dutch TV channel they legitimately used a WhatsApp message from a rebel/activist as a source for some of this), here's some Russian propaganda out of Aleppo: + Show Spoiler + Edit: offtopic, I'm also sometimes seeing the footer of this website aligned all the way to left. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On December 15 2016 09:00 Yoav wrote: In fairness, reality in Syria right now has basically become Russian propaganda. Bingo. | ||
|
AssyrianKing
Australia2115 Posts
| ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On December 15 2016 08:20 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Uh, I wouldn't use RT as a source. Even our resident Russians acknowledge it as a propaganda machine. It's like you read nothing I said, clicked on none of the links, except for the last paragraph and video in the spoiler. And I even pointed out that the video is widely considered to be Russian propaganda, and yet your only contribution is to essentially repeat that statement. Should I just assume that the whatsapp message is right, then? I mean I suppose they're at least not making up the "news" entirely themselves, but I'm having a hard time thinking of anything other than liberation when it comes to the citizens that were being held there by terrorists who refused to let them leave and used them as human shields just as what happened in Mosul. I can see why the moderate rebels would be suspicious. I'm under no illusion; their lives are at risk in the hands of Assad and his people, but reporting on whatsapp messages is not particularly helpful for me when it comes to trying to assess the situation on the ground from 5000 km away. More Russian propaganda, except from the BBC this time (also from like a week ago, wtf?): There's also quite a harrowing contrast displayed in the first 5 minutes of this next video (between the old man and the lady). I didn't bother watching the rest because dear god I can only take so much of this: + Show Spoiler + WARNING THIS IS MORE RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA DON'T WATCH IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE BRAINWASHED I put a warning there to make sure Dangermousecatdog doesn't bother responding with the same one-line message again. On December 15 2016 10:14 AssyrianKing wrote: Why are people on this thread so anti-russian. Do you guys have any idea what the repercussions will be if the Sunnis got control of the state? Every single minority in the country will be persecuted The way I see it, at best, Syria will just become another Saudi Arabia if the terrorists win. As I've said before, the moderate rebels might be decent people, but I'd want to see numbers regarding the specifics (I realize I'm never going to get them). Based on the occupation of lands in Syria, the lack of ability on the US part to organize ceasefires on the side of the opposition, and, you know, the ISIS flags that were flying in eastern Aleppo, I suspect there's far more ISIS in there than there is moderation in terms of rebellion against Assad. | ||
|
Wrath
3174 Posts
On December 15 2016 10:14 AssyrianKing wrote: Why are people on this thread so anti-russion. Do you guys have any idea what the repercussions will be if the Sunnis got control of the state? Every single minority in the country will be persecuted Do you realize that Sunni represent nearly 80% of the population and what you just said is basically a direct insult to all of them? Nearly half of the population have been displaced and now live as refugees around the world for the sake of minority to continue ruling (And what a wonderful record for the past 40 years of minority ruling was for Syria). If this is the minority that the political correct wing care about so much then it is more than welcome to take them as refugees instead of Sunnis who are always treated as "inactive ISIS cells". @flayer Basically it is impossible to get trusted source to describe the situation unbiased whether from regime or rebels. I agree with that to some extent. But one thing we need to ensure is that ISIS is not part of opposition. ISIS is a third party in this war and considering both sides (Regime and Opposition) as enemies. Also people started slowly to revolt against biggest two Islamic rebel forces (Fatih Al-Sham and Ahrar Al-Sham) because they are busy fighting themselves for who will be the leader of a unified force. Basically "who has the bigger dick" contest. People have been asking non stop for months that ALL rebel organizations end their existence and form one entity to fight the regime and Shiite militants that allied with it. NEWS: Cease fire was reactivated today. Now the first wave from Aleppo is leaving and the deal will include people from Kafraya and al-Fua that are under siege by opposition (These are Shiite towns and Iran requested an exchange with opposition for people with Aleppo with those in these two towns). Source | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5281 Posts
you keep repeating 80% sunnis and i don't think anyone here cares(to put it bluntly). sunnis are not an ethnicity or race of people, it's a religious affiliation. as long as people are free to practice it, what's the problem?. why should religion dictate who rules what?. i don't see you getting traction by repeating that. i wouldn't care if someone asked me to save catholic or orthodox people because they're catholic/orthodox. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
And, really, if its a religious conflict between Muslims, WHAT THE FUCK ARE WE DOING THERE AT ALL?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? How can supposedly secular western powers possibly pick sides in something as utterly and completely retarded as that? | ||
|
Wrath
3174 Posts
I'm not the one who started the religious affiliation differentiation. Before 2003, the whole Sunni, Shiite, Alwaite issues did not exist and we never heard about them. After Iraq 2003, the state was divided between 3 parties - Shiite (Arabs) - Sunni (Arabs) - Kurds The Arabs were divided by US as Shiite and Sunni and that Shiite is majority should be ruling while Kurds as ethnic group, then it went into a complete sectarian shit whole till today. Syria is the same. People never gave a fuck about the whole sectarian issues at all and they all lived together. The regime after Bashar took control and he increased the influence of Alwaites, again Syrian people did not look at this as sectarian issue but as a corruption issue. In 2011 people revolted and Alwaties took a complete stand by Assad because they know if he falls they will be trialed for corruption. Iran did not want to lose its ground there so the whole situation turned into a sectarian war. Now Sunni's are facing annihilation war there. Whether we like it or not. This is a sectarian war and Russia is taking the Shiite side represented by regime and Iran to preserve its interests in Syria. US is taking the Shiite side in Iraq against ISIS while in fact Iraqi government is responsible for multiple violations against Sunnis based on sectarian reasons. Everyone just want to preserve its own interests. Unfortunately this issue is impossible to resolve any time soon. So the best thing is to divide based on sects to save as much as possible. @flayer What the west in general is doing there is making sure to keep its interests there. Nothing more, nothing less. Shiite side seems more profitable for the secular western powers. That's it. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
It seems to me like this shiite vs sunni stuff is being exploited by states, warlords, kings, corporations and all that. | ||
|
Wrath
3174 Posts
Pro-government militias kill at least one during attack on ambulance convoy Militias loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad have reportedly killed at least one person and injured more while firing on a convoy of injured civilians being evacuated from the remaining rebel-held pockets of east Aleppo as part of a ceasefire agreement. Speaking to Al Jazeera on Thursday morning, Ibrahim Abu Allaith of the Syrian Civil Defence said that one person was killed when pro-government militias opened fire. At least four more were injured, among them a medical worker. "There are very serious injuries," he told Al Jazeera. "There are at least three people in [medical] operations right now." Inside Story - Is the fall of Aleppo the beginning of the end of the war in Syria? Earlier on Thursday, the convoy began a journey which is intended to take patients through government territory into the rebel-held western Aleppo countryside as agreed in an evacuation deal this week, the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. As part of the agreement, the Russian defence ministry said on Thursday morning that it was preparing for the transfer of rebel fighters by buses and ambulances to Idlib city, located some 65 kilometres (around 40 miles) from Aleppo. Source | ||
|
Wrath
3174 Posts
It seems to me like this shiite vs sunni stuff is being exploited by states, warlords, kings, corporations and all that. True, this is even a better explanation than the one I provided. At the end, it does not matter who wins, it is the interests that we care for. Even more interesting point is that the arming and funding of the Sunni side is not a serious one. The Sunni side lacks anti air support and at some point during 2013/2014, the regime had small to none land control and all he had is air strikes. If Rebels / Sunnis received anti air weapons, this war would have been over years ago. | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6298 Posts
On December 15 2016 18:02 Wrath wrote: Update: Pro-government militias kill at least one during attack on ambulance convoy Source Your source is Al Jazeera, who got this story from a 'Syrian Civil Defence' activist, i.e. the white helmets. So the only evidence of this happening is the imagination of a member of an extremely compromised meme organization. | ||
|
Wrath
3174 Posts
On December 04 2016 03:15 zeo wrote: What's going on in eastern Aleppo is a hostage situation. These people from Hanano district celebrating getting evacuated from eastern Aleppo where jihadists horded all the food and medical supplies coming in don't look like they are being genocided Anyway if you do not like the Al-Jazeera you can check below: The evacuation began Wednesday morning but soon collapsed when militia fighters allied to the Syrian government and unhappy with the deal opened fire on vehicles bringing people out, according to opposition activists. www.nytimes.com Earlier, ambulances trying to evacuate people came under fire from fighters loyal to the Syrian government, who injured three people, a rescue service spokesman said. www.reuters.com The evacuation was initially delayed amid reports that Syrian government fighters opened fire on a convoy as it prepared to leave rebel-held areas. At least three people were wounded according to the rescue service. www.theguardian.com | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6298 Posts
| ||
| ||
