ISIS in Iraq and Syria

[PedroMendez]

it is bild, so what do you expect? They don´t do journalism.
Still you are obviously right. The USA+allies executed about 2500 air-strikes in Syria and nobody really cares about the collateral damage, but when any other nations do it, they are the bad guys. It is one of many glaring double standards of American foreign policy. America is "exceptional", so they play by different rules.

 

[Kaos]

The original photo might not even be contextual, its the SNHR which has been notorious for faking stories to cement its pro-FSA bias. They've actively used photos and footage from Iraq for their anti-regime propaganda.

 

[LeChuck]

The original photo might not even be contextual, its the SNHR which has been notorious for faking stories to cement its pro-FSA bias. They've actively used photos and footage from Iraq for their anti-regime propaganda.

Can you provide evidence?

 

[Kaos]

Can you provide evidence?

Of course:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...Iraq-photo-to-illustrate-Syrian-massacre.html
The notorious propaganda photo was sourced from the SOHR.

Lets not forget that the SOHR is simply one man, who's a self proclaimed member of the FSA and is actively trying to overthrow Bashar, hardly the most ideal set up for an impartial observatory organisation. He's also funded by the European union...yes - one man, a member of the FSA is funded by the European union to provide 'evidence' of regime crimes.

Remind you of Iraq's curveball?

Its also fitting that almost every footage or photo provided to news outlets from the SOHR is unverified.

 

[LeChuck]

Of course:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...Iraq-photo-to-illustrate-Syrian-massacre.html
The notorious propaganda photo was sourced from the SOHR.

Lets not forget that the SOHR is simply one man, who's a self proclaimed member of the FSA and is actively trying to overthrow Bashar, hardly the most ideal set up for an impartial observatory organisation. He's also funded by the European union...yes - one man, a member of the FSA is funded by the European union to provide 'evidence' of regime crimes.

Remind you of Iraq's curveball?

Its also fitting that almost every footage or photo provided to news outlets from the SOHR is unverified.

1. There is no evidence that the photo was sourced from SOHR. Did you read the article? There's no mention of SOHR.
2. It is not one man.
3. The funding comes as...well, again, he's not one man, and the organisation is highlighting the crimes of a murderous and inhumane regime. Why would you have a problem with that? Would you have a problem with an EU funded organisation highlighting depraved crimes of IS? You have double standards, and it's sad to see.

 

[Kaos]

1. There is no evidence that the photo was sourced from SOHR. Did you read the article? There's no mention of SOHR.
2. It is not one man.
3. The funding comes as...well, again, he's not one man, and the organisation is highlighting the crimes of a murderous and inhumane regime. Why would you have a problem with that? Would you have a problem with an EU funded organisation highlighting depraved crimes of IS? You have double standards, and it's sad to see.

The photos listed above in addition to almost every unverified footage pretty much comes from them. And yes he is one man with a 'team' thats feeding him information in Syria.

I don't need a glorified FSA news outlet to tell me that Bashar is a brutal and murderous dictator, I've grown up in the middle east knowing the region is polluted with his type. What I don't appreciate though is some FSA charlatan in Coventry using the guise of 'human rights observation' to help justify violent incursions by the West, just as it was the case with curveball lying about WMDs in Iraq so he could have Saddam overthrown.

Not sure where the accusations of me having double standards comes from?

 

[LeChuck]

The photos listed above in addition to almost every unverified footage pretty much comes from them. And yes he is one man with a 'team' thats feeding him information in Syria.

I asked for evidence that the SOHR use fake photos. You've provided me with an article highlighting the BBC using a wrong photo. So again - where is the evidence? I've had a quick look on the net myself in the last 20 mins, and the only evidence I can find of SOHR being phony is pro-Assad/regime blog writers ranting online. There is nothing of any substance out there. Can you find anything?

I don't need a glorified FSA news outlet to tell me that Bashar is a brutal and murderous dictator, I've grown up in the middle east knowing the region is polluted with his type. What I don't appreciate though is some FSA charlatan in Coventry using the guise of 'human rights observation' to help justify violent incursions by the West, just as it was the case with curveball lying about WMDs in Iraq so he could have Saddam overthrown.

How exactly is he helping justify violent incursions? Have you been on the website? All it does is detail new developments taking place in the civil war. It doesn't offer any insight or opinion on anything. In fact, most of the articles are poorly translated and a few lines long. It is not a mouthpiece of the FSA. It is not a mouthpiece of anyone. The articles are pretty much "x people died in a bomb in y." There is no opinion or insight into it. It's more akin to a news highlighter than anything. This is why I don't really understand the basis of your argument.

And yes, one guy founded it, but the way you were commenting - you made it seem as if it's one guy in a darkened room typing this up. There's a pretty large and diverse group of individuals behind it.

Not sure where the accusations of me having double standards comes from?

I think me saying you had double standards was a little unfair (apologies), but it was more that you seem to have a problem with an EU funded organisation highlighting Assad's crimes, but I can't imagine you having the same problem if it was highlighting IS's crimes...(which the SOHR do anyway, btw). Hence my comment.

 

[Kaos]

I asked for evidence that the SOHR use fake photos. You've provided me with an article highlighting the BBC using a wrong photo. So again - where is the evidence? I've had a quick look on the net myself in the last 20 mins, and the only evidence I can find of SOHR being phony is pro-Assad/regime blog writers ranting online. There is nothing of any substance out there. Can you find anything?

I double checked and can't find the source either, so apologies on my part. I only brought this to attention because I recalled it from a couple years back when that famous photo circulated social media and major news outlets, only to be debunked as FSA propaganda. The photo likely didn't source from them, but I'd noticed a trend from their sources almost always being 'unverified' yet treated as gospel by major news outlets. That frustrated me. As did the dozens of other similar examples.

How exactly is he helping justify violent incursions? Have you been on the website? All it does is detail new developments taking place in the civil war. It doesn't offer any insight or opinion on anything. In fact, most of the articles are poorly translated and a few lines long. It is not a mouthpiece of the FSA. It is not a mouthpiece of anyone. The articles are pretty much "x people died in a bomb in y." There is no opinion or insight into it. It's more akin to a news highlighter than anything. This is why I don't really understand the basis of your argument.

Not through its/his/their journalism, but rather the fact its dangerously giving credence to the hawks of the west who want nothing more but to jump at a chance in militarily compromising Syria or Iran. Like I said the exact same thing happened in Iraq (curveball) and to a similar extent in Libya. He himself has admitted that he's working to overthrow the regime and supports the FSA in their efforts. That makes him an FSA mouthpiece by association.

And yes, one guy founded it, but the way you were commenting - you made it seem as if it's one guy in a darkened room typing this up. There's a pretty large and diverse group of individuals behind it.

Well it literally is one guy in his Coventry appartment armed with a mobile phone and laptop. He has contacts in Syria feeding him information, but its still him as the sole harbinger of the group. Regardless, the structure hardly constitutes a credible human rights organisation.

I think me saying you had double standards was a little unfair (apologies), but it was more that you seem to have a problem with an EU funded organisation highlighting Assad's crimes, but I can't imagine you having the same problem if it was highlighting IS's crimes...(which the SOHR do anyway, btw). Hence my comment.

If they were dubious I would very much have a problem with it, though having unfortunately seen the footage of what they're capable of, I have little reason to doubt their evil. Furthermore, I hated Saddam with a passion yet I still doubt most the propaganda that had undermined him, even from the Kurds. And we saw how his image and threat was excessively manipulated to justify the destruction of Iraq.

 

[MUFAN79]

it is bild, so what do you expect? They don´t do journalism.
Still you are obviously right. The USA+allies executed about 2500 air-strikes in Syria and nobody really cares about the collateral damage, but when any other nations do it, they are the bad guys. It is one of many glaring double standards of American foreign policy. America is "exceptional", so they play by different rules.

Typical.

Nobody really cared about civilians when western countries bombed the shit out of Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Yemen etc. That was just collateral damage.

But when the Russians are actually doing something useful everyone is so worried about them.
This amount of hypocrisy in western media is simply amazing.

 

[Kakeru]

He's not likely to stop since this sort of thing diverts domestic attention from his rubbish economic conditions. When the quality of life and value of the Ruble are plummeting and costs of living are soaring, what better way to change the subject than to appeal to nationalism and security fears by invading Ukraine and Syria. A clear signal of weakness on his part.

I don't think Putin and his faithful can divert domestic attention for that long from the moment Russian forces sustain combat casualties or, worse, whoever captures Russian prisoners does the same kind of shit we saw with American prisoners during the Iraq War (i.e. beheadings and filmed executions).

Anyway, Putin should have gone a long time ago. Hell, the whole leading party that was there since Ieltsin should be kicked out for a while with fresher faces and new ideas.

 

[antihenry]

I don't think Putin and his faithful can divert domestic attention for that long from the moment Russian forces sustain combat casualties or, worse, whoever captures Russian prisoners does the same kind of shit we saw with American prisoners during the Iraq War (i.e. beheadings and filmed executions).

Anyway, Putin should have gone a long time ago. Hell, the whole leading party that was there since Ieltsin should be kicked out for a while with fresher faces and new ideas.

What leading party? What are you talking about?

 

[Kakeru]

What leading party? What are you talking about?

You don't have any clue or what? Since the fall of the USSR, it's the same group of politicians (a party if you like) that sits in power with Yeltsin on top. And then Putin became president after Yeltsin's resignation.

 

[holyland red]

Typical.

Nobody really cared about civilians when western countries bombed the shit out of Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Yemen etc. That was just collateral damage.

But when the Russians are actually doing something useful everyone is so worried about them.
This amount of hypocrisy in western media is simply amazing.

Serbia is missing from that list, to be fair.

 

[holyland red]

I don't think Putin and his faithful can divert domestic attention for that long from the moment Russian forces sustain combat casualties or, worse, whoever captures Russian prisoners does the same kind of shit we saw with American prisoners during the Iraq War (i.e. beheadings and filmed executions).

Anyway, Putin should have gone a long time ago. Hell, the whole leading party that was there since Ieltsin should be kicked out for a while with fresher faces and new ideas.

I think all the fresh faces are dead.

 

[VidaRed]

I generally don't because most of the arguments advanced around here are so critical of various US policies that its more rational to take the US position that those supporting the likes of Iran, Hezbollah, Russia, Al-Qaeda, or Assad. I do agree with the likes of Kaos in that the US needs to be more level in its foreign policy by pressuring reforms in Bahrain, Saudi, and Yemen in addition to Syria, Iraq, and Libya.

Thats the odd one out amongst that group since iran, hezbollah, russia and assad are fighting against al-qaeda while the west is supporting it.

 

[antihenry]

You don't have any clue or what? Since the fall of the USSR, it's the same group of politicians (a party if you like) that sits in power with Yeltsin on top. And then Putin became president after Yeltsin's resignation.

Putin did become the president after Yeltsin, that's true. The rest of your post is nonsense.

The current ruling political party which is basically Putin's creation and is called United Russia has a majority in the Russian Parliament (Duma). It was founded in 2001, Yeltsin was long gone by then. Virtually all of the Yeltsin's people are gone, too. During Yeltsin's reign the country was run by a few oligarchs, Putin got rid of them all, and with their political influence gone, the people at the top that were put there by those oligarchs followed them on the way out.

You really need to research the subject before posting.

 

[LeChuck]

I double checked and can't find the source either, so apologies on my part. I only brought this to attention because I recalled it from a couple years back when that famous photo circulated social media and major news outlets, only to be debunked as FSA propaganda. The photo likely didn't source from them, but I'd noticed a trend from their sources almost always being 'unverified' yet treated as gospel by major news outlets. That frustrated me. As did the dozens of other similar examples.

Ok - so we can both agree that to the best of both of our knowledge, the SOHR specifically haven't used fake photos or fake stories etc? And the fact that they explicitly say that it is 'unverified' is surely a good thing right? I mean, it's not their fault that other news outlets will make it seem verified when they themselves say it is unverified.

Not through its/his/their journalism, but rather the fact its dangerously giving credence to the hawks of the west who want nothing more but to jump at a chance in militarily compromising Syria or Iran. Like I said the exact same thing happened in Iraq (curveball) and to a similar extent in Libya. He himself has admitted that he's working to overthrow the regime and supports the FSA in their efforts. That makes him an FSA mouthpiece by association.

Do you have evidence for this? (Here we go again...amirite).

Well it literally is one guy in his Coventry appartment armed with a mobile phone and laptop. He has contacts in Syria feeding him information, but its still him as the sole harbinger of the group. Regardless, the structure hardly constitutes a credible human rights organisation.

I found this press release from SOHR - it might clear some confusion:

Syrian Observatory for Human Rights

"Dear Sir/Madam
We would like to apologise for any confusion that you may be currently experiencing with regards to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR).
We would like to take this opportunity to give you some background information for your benefit.
Firstly, there is NO individual by the name of Rami Abdulrahman. This is just an alias that was being used by all SOHR members and mainly by the founders of the SOHR when articles were being originally published.

There is however a gentleman based in Coventry whose primary profession is installing satellite dishes who volunteered at the SOHR in late 2010. This gentleman is called Mr. Osama Ali Suleiman and as a volunteer he contributed in publishing the Arabic language news articles on the SOHR website syriahr.net. This was the full extend of his remit and contribution, as a volunteer of this organisation. It is worth noting that Mr. Osama is unable to communicate in the English language and only had a very modest level of education in Syria.

In August 2011 the board of trustees asked Mr. Osama to cease publishing news articles onto the syriahr.net website as it was alleged that he had established links with Mr. Rifaat Al Assad (the uncle of the current Syrian President Bashar Al Assad). The very nature of the articles being published were also controversial as they were not verified by any other member of SOHR and they referred to incidents and deaths suffered by the Syrian regime security forces. The reasons as to why this raised suspicions is because the Observatory does not have any links with Syrian regime members in order to be able to state or verify any such incidents.

When Mr. Osama was asked to give up his volunteer post he retaliated by changing all the username and password details of the syriahr.netwebsite so that only he could access it and publish material and subsequently declared himself chairman. He started using the Rami Abdulrahman alias which the rest of the trustees abandoned as it was decided after the eruption of the Syrian uprising on the 15 march 2011 that, in the interest of transparency, only real names were to be used from that point on when communicating with the press.
The rest of the organisation decided that due to the swift developing nature of the Syrian uprising no time should be wasted in altercating with Mr. Osama as the website that he was controlling doesn't ever hold any useful/recent information on Syria and that he would not be able to actually engage in any activity with the English speaking press. As a result syriahr.org was established and it gets regularly updated (in both Arabic and English) with the developments on the ground in Syria.
Ignoring Mr. Osama for this length of time appears to have been a misjudgment by the rest of the SOHR members as it appears that Mr. Osama has since sought and acquired some support from fellow friends in order to boost his claims and spoil the reputation of the SOHR. We are deeply concerned as we have been informed that Mr. Osama himself is a member of the PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party) and these friends are suspected to be affiliated with same organisation as well.
Further proof of the isolation of Mr. Osama is given by the fact that he currently has no operational team and that he acts authoritatively with no peers to verify, support or challenge his work.
You will already be aware that the SOHR is London based. This is because the majority of our members are based in London whereas Mr. Osama is solely based in Coventry. We would like to take this opportunity to confirm that the Trustees of the SOHR are:
* Mr. Fadi Al-Haddad (Co-founder of SOHR, Based in London)

* Mrs. Maya Fateh (Co-founder of the SOHR and Writer - Now in Syria)

* Dr. Lina Jamoul (Team Leader with Citizens UK in East London)

* Mr. Husam Aldin Mohammed (Chief Editor of the Alquds Newspaper in London)

* Mr. Mohammed Antabli (Businessman and Writer Based in London)

* Mr. Ghassan Ibrahim (Chairman of the Arab Global Network in London)

* Mr. Abdul Sayed Omar (Project Manager & Human Rights Activist Based in Wolverhampton and Works in London)

* Dr. Mousab Azzawi (Consultant Pathologist & Human Rights Activist Based in London)
We at the SOHR are now seeking legal advice and are preparing to take legal action against Mr. Osama whilst we remain committed to our cause of flagging human rights abuses committed in Syria to the international community and media.
Should you need any further information or clarifications please do not hesitate to contact us.
Yours faithfully;

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (London)"

The Coventry was literally just uploading the content without any input or opinion or whatnot. They let him go after...well some incident. But tbh, it's irrelevant - the SOHR are literally a news highlighter without any insight or opinion. They highlight incidents/clashes from IS, Assad, + the rebels. I think it's silly arguing over their legitimacy as even from parallel sources similar numbers, and statistics, and things can be found. It's why I don't get your issue with them, because they're not providing anything new or influencing anything different.

It took me a while to find the above btw so it's not exactly all over the net.

If they were dubious I would very much have a problem with it, though having unfortunately seen the footage of what they're capable of, I have little reason to doubt their evil. Furthermore, I hated Saddam with a passion yet I still doubt most the propaganda that had undermined him, even from the Kurds. And we saw how his image and threat was excessively manipulated to justify the destruction of Iraq.

Who are you referring to on the bolded?

Agreed - I'm not saying there isn't propaganda out there in this Syrian civil war. Of course it exists, but I don't think the SOHR are part of it.

And yea I mean - I agree with you 100% re Iraq and Libya. That is a mess perpetrated by the US/Nato, but like I said earlier, that situation is not analogous to what's going on in Syria. For example, we have non state actors intervening, a legitimate viable opposition force that has been borne from the situation itself etc. I said it before and I'll say it again - if Assad wasn't a beardless, Western educated, secular, individual, he wouldn't be in power at this point. The fact that he fits the West's ideal ME dictator has helped keep him in power for so long. I am no fan of Western intervention, nor of the US (as you know I've been very vocal about that), but if Russia + Hezbollah, a terrorist organisation, are going to go in and start attacking FSA, rebels, etc, then they're going to need some help. Where that comes from whether it's the US or not, is a separate conversation.

 

[LeChuck]

When you say Chechnyans you mean Chechens, right? And when you say Chechens, you mean the whole nation, close to 1,5 million in Russia alone? Or a few hundred? A thousand? It's a bit of a generalization, no? Now I don't question your knowledge on Syria because you seem to have a lot of inside info, albeit with pro-FSA bias, but I was born and raised in Grozny, which happens to be the capital of Chechen Republic and lived there until I was 25. I still have many friends and even relatives among the Chechens, so when I say something on the subject, I'm not just making things up. Is there a possibility there are some Chechens fighting in the FSA? Maybe, but I doubt there are many. Most Chechen fighters in the Middle East are with ISIS and other radical groups and they're not welcomed back home for obvious reasons. Most Chechens living in Chechen Republic and anywhere else in Russia don't care one way or the other, they have other concerns. There are some radicals, especially among young generation, but like I said, they tend to sympathize with ISIS and the like and couldn't voice their views publicly, anyway. Putin can wipe his ass with FSA tomorrow and most Chechens wouldn't care. I mean, there are thousands of Muslims killing each other non stop for decades now, including Chechen radicals killing other Chechens, worrying about some rebel group in another country isn't high on their list of priorities.

Yes, when I say Chechnya I mean Chechen Muslims.

Now of course, I'm not speaking on behalf of 1.5m Muslims, but the fact that the JMA have allied with Al Nusra, as well as the majority of Caucasian groups (of which the overwhelming majority are made up of Chechen and Georgian Muslims, right?) would suggest that in this particular conflict they oppose both Assad and IS. I think IK, the Caucasus Emirate was one of the first to join the conflict in Syria and help in the fight against Assad. Hence, my earlier comment that they are sympathetic to the FSA i.e. there isn't much hostility. In fact, the revolutionary groups and the likes of Al Nusra etc have a lot of common ground in this particular fight. Ideologically, you can say they differ, but in terms of the greater goal they are working towards the same result. I'm not doubting your knowledge of Chechnyan Muslims and interactions with them, but to my (limited) knowledge, they have been fighting for autonomy and recognition for most of their lives, suggesting they are a passionate bunch of people. Maybe the majority of Chechnyans are apathetic, however.

 

[2cents]

Yes, when I say Chechnya I mean Chechen Muslims.

Now of course, I'm not speaking on behalf of 1.5m Muslims, but the fact that the JMA have allied with Al Nusra, as well as the majority of Caucasian groups (of which the overwhelming majority are made up of Chechen and Georgian Muslims, right?) would suggest that in this particular conflict they oppose both Assad and IS. I think IK, the Caucasus Emirate was one of the first to join the conflict in Syria and help in the fight against Assad. Hence, my earlier comment that they are sympathetic to the FSA i.e. there isn't much hostility. In fact, the revolutionary groups and the likes of Al Nusra etc have a lot of common ground in this particular fight. Ideologically, you can say they differ, but in terms of the greater goal they are working towards the same result. I'm not doubting your knowledge of Chechnyan Muslims and interactions with them, but to my (limited) knowledge, they have been fighting for autonomy and recognition for most of their lives, suggesting they are a passionate bunch of people. Maybe the majority of Chechnyans are apathetic, however.

This is a good website for keeping track of these things - http://www.chechensinsyria.com/

My vague understanding is that before the Nusra/ISIS split, there was a large independent predominantly Chechen outfit allied to Nusra and led by Abu Omar al-Shishani, an ethnic Chechen from the Pankisi Gorge in Georgia. He's one of the red-bearded ones with the very public profile. This group eventually evolved into Jaysh al-Muhajirun wa al-Ansar. When the split happened, Abu Omar went over to ISIS with a lot of followers, but a significant faction refused to. Since then, more splits have occurred amongst the JMA, with some formally pledging allegiance to Nusra and some maintaining independence. Apparently the group is now predominantly made up of Arab foreigners, and led by a Saudi.

In any case, even before the ascendance of Nusra and ISIS in Syria, the Chechens were regarded as probably the most notoriously violent group of foreigners fighting in Syria, responsible for example for the high-profile beheading of a priest and someone else in the Idlib countryside (the video, which is one of the sickest I've seen from Syria, is still up on Liveleak). I doubt the fighters in Syria are in any way representative of the broader Chechen population, they strike me as more likely to belong to the remnants of the most battle-hardened and brutalized elements of those groups which fought the Russians in the 90s and early 2000s.

 

[LeChuck]

This is a good website for keeping track of these things - http://www.chechensinsyria.com/

My vague understanding is that before the Nusra/ISIS split, there was a large independent predominantly Chechen outfit allied to Nusra and led by Abu Omar al-Shishani, an ethnic Chechen from the Pankisi Gorge in Georgia. He's one of the red-bearded ones with the very public profile. This group eventually evolved into Jaysh al-Muhajirun wa al-Ansar. When the split happened, Abu Omar went over to ISIS with a lot of followers, but a significant faction refused to. Since then, more splits have occurred amongst the JMA, with some formally pledging allegiance to Nusra and some maintaining independence. Apparently the group is now predominantly made up of Arab foreigners, and led by a Saudi.

In any case, even before the ascendance of Nusra and ISIS in Syria, the Chechens were regarded as probably the most notoriously violent group of foreigners fighting in Syria, responsible for example for the high-profile beheading of a priest and someone else in the Idlib countryside (the video, which is one of the sickest I've seen from Syria, is still up on Liveleak). I doubt the fighters in Syria are in any way representative of the broader Chechen population, they strike me as more likely to belong to the remnants of the most battle-hardened and brutalized elements of those groups which fought the Russians in the 90s and early 2000s.

That's the website I actually get most of my info from about the Chechnyan groups etc. Really useful.

On the last part of your post (bolded) - I agree. I almost wanted to type it out in my response to antihenry ie how the majority of these guys are political to the extreme, and have spent most of their lives fighting for Chechnyan autonomy and independence. I know when the issue in Syria came about a large group (of those that remained behind) were unhappy as they felt their cause was the one that should take greater precedence. However, I think they do have an influence on the younger groups as this fighting for freedom etc is instilled to them from a young age. Shishani himself isn't exactly an old over the hill guy (although there are rumours he's now dead).

 

[LeChuck]

Typical.

Nobody really cared about civilians when western countries bombed the shit out of Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Yemen etc. That was just collateral damage.

But when the Russians are actually doing something useful everyone is so worried about them.
This amount of hypocrisy in western media is simply amazing.

Urmmmmmmmmm

I think you'll find many, many, many people do care about civilian deaths and want the US/UK held accountable to such instances.

And secondly, what Russia is doing is undermining and killing the legitimate opposition force rather than focusing on IS. It's pigheaded and frankly a fecking nonsensical stupid decision by Putin who really is as moronic as Assad. So no, they're doing anything remotely useful. In fact, what they'll end up doing is perpetuating the situation.

 

[sun_tzu]

Urmmmmmmmmm

I think you'll find many, many, many people do care about civilian deaths and want the US/UK held accountable to such instances.

And secondly, what Russia is doing is undermining and killing the legitimate opposition force rather than focusing on IS. It's pigheaded and frankly a fecking nonsensical stupid decision by Putin who really is as moronic as Assad. So no, they're doing anything remotely useful. In fact, what they'll end up doing is perpetuating the situation.

Im no advocate or the russian policy but to try and be objective on your first point yes individuals cared about civilian deaths and I have no doubt there are individuals in Russia who feel the same - but our government did very much take the collateral damage route so it is somewhat hypocritical of the government to criticise Russia for basically doing the same (though this has always been the way of international politics and it wont change)

On the second point Russia does not accept they are a legitimate opposition force hence sees them as a legitimate target... obviousley the turks were accused of directing most of their munitions to kurds - simply put people have their own agends and they pursue them rather than somebody elses - (again international politics has always been this way and wont change)

 

[LeChuck]

On the second point Russia does not accept they are a legitimate opposition force hence sees them as a legitimate target... obviousley the turks were accused of directing most of their munitions to kurds - simply put people have their own agends and they pursue them rather than somebody elses - (again international politics has always been this way and wont change)

Putin postured and posed in front of the UN about the threat of IS and then bombs the opposition. It's fecking stupid and he's a fecking moron. I can't be the only one that sees this...?

 

[sun_tzu]

Putin postured and posed in front of the UN about the threat of IS and then bombs the opposition. It's fecking stupid and he's a fecking moron. I can't be the only one that sees this...?

yeah well we postured about the immediate threat of chemical weapons in Iraq as well didn't we - we even showed "proof"
Yes its stupid and its all a cover for pushing a pre conceived agenda - I just think that Russia is not unique in this position (it does not make the position any more palatable.
I dont think Putin is a moron though - he has basically got away with invading the chrimea, taking defacto control of part of ukraine, blowing up a passenger jet and yet people are talking about which people he bombs in Syria.

 

[MUFAN79]

Putin postured and posed in front of the UN about the threat of IS and then bombs the opposition. It's fecking stupid and he's a fecking moron. I can't be the only one that sees this...?

Turkey uses ISIS as excuse to attack Kurds. Was that stupid?

Everyone has their own self interests. Deal with it.

 

[MUFAN79]

Urmmmmmmmmm

I think you'll find many, many, many people do care about civilian deaths and want the US/UK held accountable to such instances.

And secondly, what Russia is doing is undermining and killing the legitimate opposition force rather than focusing on IS. It's pigheaded and frankly a fecking nonsensical stupid decision by Putin who really is as moronic as Assad. So no, they're doing anything remotely useful. In fact, what they'll end up doing is perpetuating the situation.

I was talking about western media.

 

[Ballache]

Putin postured and posed in front of the UN about the threat of IS and then bombs the opposition. It's fecking stupid and he's a fecking moron. I can't be the only one that sees this...?

You have your perspective, you can't see this through your own lens and say that he's a moron. For me he's a hero, and long may it continue, I sincerely hope he demolishes every last person fighting against the regime

 

[LeChuck]

Turkey uses ISIS as excuse to attack Kurds. Was that stupid?

Everyone has their own self interests. Deal with it.

Turkey and the Kurds have a long running history that predates this conflict. I'm not condoning it, and I'm not saying that Turkey are innocent, but they did carry out air strikes against IS. The evidence that they were targeting the Kurds isn't clear cut either.

You have your perspective, you can't see this through your own lens and say that he's a moron. For me he's a hero, and long may it continue, I sincerely hope he demolishes every last person fighting against the regime

He's a hero? For what exactly? And why do you support the regime?

 

[Ballache]

Turkey and the Kurds have a long running history that predates this conflict. I'm not condoning it, and I'm not saying that Turkey are innocent, but they did carry out air strikes against IS. The evidence that they were targeting the Kurds isn't clear cut either.



He's a hero? For what exactly? And why do you support the regime?

For doing what he's doing and supporting the regime just like Hezbollah are.
I'm with the regime for the same reason you're against it, a Sunni dominated government is not in my best interest as a minority. Let's just keep it at that, I try to avoid this thread because I can't be bothered with the discussion really.

 

[PedroMendez]

Putin postured and posed in front of the UN about the threat of IS and then bombs the opposition. It's fecking stupid and he's a fecking moron. I can't be the only one that sees this...?

Personally I agree, that he is a "moron", but that is not the point. The West always brings up human right issues, if it suits their agenda, but is in complete disregard, if it doesn´t. It is crazy, when US media is reporting about collateral damage of few Russian air-strikes, while the USA is running a prolonged bombing campaign in various countries for over a decade. Of course you´ll find some media outlets who report about that, but if you follow the mainstream media, the reporting is incredibly unbalanced. It is dishonest to focus on Russia bombing targets in Syria, if your own country (+allies) commit the same acts much more frequent.

 

[2cents]

The hypocrisy thing cuts all ways - I'm now seeing many people who have spent the last 15 years protesting against "foreign intervention" in the Middle East staying silent about or even cheering on the Russian bombing campaign.

 

[Ballache]

The hypocrisy thing cuts all ways - I'm now seeing many people who have spent the last 15 years protesting against "foreign intervention" in the Middle East staying silent about or even cheering on the Russian bombing campaign.

Ideally, everyone would leave us alone but that's never been the case and will never be the case. At the end you are forced to take sides. The whole region is the result of "Foreign intervention" with imperialists drawing up our borders among themselves.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

I can only speak from the experience of my people, and that experience is the West and Russia need to stay the feck away. The French, Brits and US prolonged the Vietnam war for another 20 year, going against the Geneva convention. The people of Syria has decided they want to depose Assad. Stay away, stop all the bullshit funding and all the faction will slug it out eventually. If by some abominable luck it happens to be ISIS, then maybe a mutual decision by the UN can be reached to put boots on the ground, but til then, no military intervention of any kinds from the superpower s.

 

[sun_tzu]

I can only speak from the experience of my people, and that experience is the West and Russia need to stay the feck away. The French, Brits and US prolonged the Vietnam war for another 20 year, going against the Geneva convention. The people of Syria has decided they want to depose Assad. Stay away, stop all the bullshit funding and all the faction will slug it out eventually. If by some abominable luck it happens to be ISIS, then maybe a mutual decision by the UN can be reached to put boots on the ground, but til then, no military intervention of any kinds from the superpower s.

I generally agree but then you wonder how many people would be executed, raped, tortured during their unfettered rise to power and how many more in (trying to) depose them...
there is no real answer to the situation - just ways of creating different problems

 

[2cents]

Ideally, everyone would leave us alone but that's never been the case and will never be the case. At the end you are forced to take sides.

Totally agree, which is why I'm sceptical of anyone (on any side) trying to frame their position on this conflict in terms of some moral principle like human rights, non-intervention or a 'peaceful solution'. Your own position strikes me as much more honest and understandable.

 

[Shamwow]

I wonder if there is any parallel between the thermodynamics of closed vs open systems and civil war.

Edit: The more I think about it the more I think it kind of makes sense. Only had 3 hours sleep in the last 2 days though.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

I generally agree but then you wonder how many people would be executed, raped, tortured during their unfettered rise to power and how many more in (trying to) depose them...
there is no real answer to the situation - just ways of creating different problems

It already happened. Unjustified Western presence will only exacerbate the situation, deepening the sectarian divide and prolong the conflict even further.

I believe that by and large the Islamic world does not accept ISIS's legitimacy. Let them handle the situation. Stop all outside parties - that includes the Gulf States, from interfering and we will see real improvement very quickly.

 

[LeChuck]

For doing what he's doing and supporting the regime just like Hezbollah are.
I'm with the regime for the same reason you're against it, a Sunni dominated government is not in my best interest as a minority. Let's just keep it at that, I try to avoid this thread because I can't be bothered with the discussion really.

So you think the opposition are intolerant of minorities? Even though they fight with minorities? The FSA fight with the Syriac Military Council, the premier Syrian Christian organisation, against IS and Assad. So, I'm not sure why you feel that a Christian minority wouldn't be accepted (you're Christian, right?)

 

[sun_tzu]

It already happened. Unjustified Western presence will only exacerbate the situation, deepening the sectarian divide and prolong the conflict even further.

I believe that by and large the Islamic world does not accept ISIS's legitimacy. Let them handle the situation. Stop all outside parties - that includes the Gulf States, from interfering and we will see real improvement very quickly.

but does that involve allowing assad to use chemical weapons and barrel bombs on civilians - because if it does thats a tough choice to stomach

 

[LeChuck]

Personally I agree, that he is a "moron", but that is not the point. The West always brings up human right issues, if it suits their agenda, but is in complete disregard, if it doesn´t. It is crazy, when US media is reporting about collateral damage of few Russian air-strikes, while the USA is running a prolonged bombing campaign in various countries for over a decade. Of course you´ll find some media outlets who report about that, but if you follow the mainstream media, the reporting is incredibly unbalanced. It is dishonest to focus on Russia bombing targets in Syria, if your own country (+allies) commit the same acts much more frequent.

No one here is championing the US cause though? (Raoul aside but that's more in the Afghan/Ukraine thread).

I mean, I've been very vocal of my dislike on the US and their interventions on these forums, as have others, so I don't see why we should turn a blind eye to when Russia do it. Yes, the US is a hypocrite for doing the same, but I'm glad they do it, and I'd wish other countries to it to them when they commit the same action...but until mainstream media does, I'll do it on these forums.