Thanks but I hope you'll continue being an argumentative prick.
ISIS in Iraq and Syria
- Thread starter Suli
- Start date
Jesus dude, that's some story, I'm sorry you've been through that shite. I'm not one for giving life advice, far from it, but I know from experience that if you're focusing on all the bad news coming through, it helps to keep it in perspective that, in fact, there is still a lot of good going on the world, in this day and age you just have a dig a bit deeper to find out about it.
Latest tweets saying thousands of rebels that were on their way out in buses were stopped by "sectarian militants", robbed of all their money, and sent back to East Aleppo. They are now stuck there and are freaking out...
@DenisIrwin , a lot of respect buddy. If you have time I recommend reading this thread (and the older thread Livestream out of Syria ) from the start of the conflict. There is a lot of good information about the conflict here. Try to read from all different sources, even the ones you disagree with. Wish you all the best in your life.
Anyway, how ironic is this...
Syrian arrested in Saudi Arabia over pro-Assad Facebook photo
Saudi police arrested a Syrian resident in Riyadh after he posted a photo of himself on Facebook praising the recapture of his home city of Aleppo by government forces, according to a report in al-Riyadh newspaper on Friday.
A photo published with the report showed a man with his hand raised and his fingers pointed in a victory sign. His facial features were blurred to conceal his identity.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-middle-east-crisis-saudi-aleppo-idUSKBN1451PI
That was a good discussion indeed, and I think the last two months have provided further evidence for the points I made.
Anyway, how ironic is this...
Syrian arrested in Saudi Arabia over pro-Assad Facebook photo
Saudi police arrested a Syrian resident in Riyadh after he posted a photo of himself on Facebook praising the recapture of his home city of Aleppo by government forces, according to a report in al-Riyadh newspaper on Friday.
A photo published with the report showed a man with his hand raised and his fingers pointed in a victory sign. His facial features were blurred to conceal his identity.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-middle-east-crisis-saudi-aleppo-idUSKBN1451PI
That's bs. The problem is that they agreed that wounded people (especially children and women) are evacuated from two villages which Al-Nusra and co besiege near Idlib (Foua and Kafriya) as part of the deal, but they didn't allow them to leave. The last batch of Al-Nusra and co was returned to Aleppo until they allow the people they agreed on to be evacuated from the other two villages.
Last edited:
What i find depressing in this situation is that the EU is silent. That's a big opportunity for them to have their say in The Syrian peace process.
What should they do since they don't have a collective security council vote ?
For example, why didn't the EU propose the same thing? I know he is hypocrite after bombing Aleppo, but everyone will say how a big leader he is.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/12/16/middleeast/aleppo-syria-putin-evacuations/
I want to see a strong, all-inclusive, secular, democratic Syria - rebuilt from the rubble with UN help.
I want to see a lot more open transparent dialogue between radical fundamentalist jihad leaders and peaceful Islamic leaders and scholars. I would hope that that would be the best way to eradicate terrorism being committed in the name of Islam.
I want to see a strong, all-inclusive, secular, democratic Kurdistan - with good relations with its neighbours.
That's just 3. How do we get there?
Edit: How does arming and funding sectarian fundamentalist jihadist head-choppers take us in any but the wrong direction?
I want to see a lot more open transparent dialogue between radical fundamentalist jihad leaders and peaceful Islamic leaders and scholars. I would hope that that would be the best way to eradicate terrorism being committed in the name of Islam.
I want to see a strong, all-inclusive, secular, democratic Kurdistan - with good relations with its neighbours.
That's just 3. How do we get there?
Edit: How does arming and funding sectarian fundamentalist jihadist head-choppers take us in any but the wrong direction?
Last edited:
That's obviously not going to happen with an authoritarian dictator in charge and another authoritarian pulling his strings.
How's it going to happen then? When you say "authoritarian" do you mean "strong"?
Edit. No, of course you don't. I do though. In this situation, right now, no other kind of leadership will get the job done.
Neither is it going to happen with Islamic extremists, backed by the countries that harbour the most religious extremism.
Let's be real for a second and stop entertaining pipe dreams. The most important thing now is a cessation to this violence. That's not going to happen while stubborn nations insist on backing extremists to win a war they simply cannot win. Not when they don't have the support of the majority of the people.
There's no democracy in promoting a scenario where an authoritarian dictator is in charge, and whose family has ruled with an iron fist for 4 decades. The beginning of this conflict was in response to a public call for greater freedoms following the Arab Spring revolutions in other parts of the region. It was met with a brutal crackdown by the same guy who is still in charge. You won't see any hope for a UN backed Democracy movement in Syria while Assad and Putin are running the show.
If you want to get real then you would have to concede that most if not all the belligerents in the Syrian civil war are undemocratic. So to DenisIrwin's earlier point, there is no hope for Democracy in Syria with a dictator with zero interest in relinquishing power in charge.
Well, hell! How is Assad supposed to conduct a democratic election in the middle of a war? Oh. Yeah. He did, didn't he?
Saddam held elections as well. Doesn't mean they were transparent, legitimate, or internationally credible.
We could argue about this and bring in comparisons with other regimes in the area... The fact is, though, that fundamental constitutional aspects of the regime will have to change in order to bring about full democratic rights for all Syrians. I hold hopes that it can happen, with Assad retaining power during a transitional phase post-hostilities in the run up to another, fully monitored, fair and free election. I can't see any other practicable way forward at this stage. Can you?
Of course none of them are democratic, but arming a rag tag bunch of Islamists isn't going to magically gift them democracy either.
Democracy shouldn't even be the target anymore, peace and a cessation of the violence should be the immediate priorities. We take care of that and we've done very well.
Why would the regime change ? It is authoritarian, has been in power for over 45 years, rules with an iron fist and is run by a dictator who can't relinquish power because he would be prosecuted by any follow on Democratic government for decades of crimes against the people. Its not exactly rocket science to deduce there won't be any Democracy in Syria for a very long time.
Tell that to DennisIrwin.
Actually scrap that, there's actually some model of democracy in Rojava.
Could learn a thing or two from the Kurds
Could learn a thing or two from the Kurds
some saying the solution is to partition Syria into two or more regions/countries.
It will be very interesting indeed if this turns out to be true:
http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/12/...al-forces-this-morning-in-east-aleppo-bunker/
I'll just quote a bit of it...
According to two reports coming out of Aleppo today, at Least 10 NATO Military Officers Captured This Morning in East Aleppo Bunker by Syrian Special Forces.
This story was quietly leaked by Voltaire.net, who announced, “The Security Council is sitting in private on Friday, December 16, 2016, at 17:00 GMT, while NATO officers were arrested this morning by the Syrian Special Forces in a bunker in East Aleppo.”
More detail was provided by Aleppo-based Syrian journalist Said Hilal Alcharifi. According to Alcharifi, Captured NATO officers were from a number of member states including the US, France, Germany and Turkey, as well as Israel. Here is his statement (translated from Arabic):
“The Syrian authorities have been able, thanks to meticulous details, get to HQ senior Western and regional officers in the basement of a neighborhood of Aleppo-east, and capture all alive. Some names have already been ex-filtered to Syrian journalists, including myself.
Given nationalities – US, French, British, German, Israeli, Turkish, Saudi, Moroccan, Qatari etc.. etc, of these bastards and their military ranks, I assure you that. Syria currently holds a great treasure to lead negotiations with the countries that have destroyed it.”
http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/12/...al-forces-this-morning-in-east-aleppo-bunker/
I'll just quote a bit of it...
According to two reports coming out of Aleppo today, at Least 10 NATO Military Officers Captured This Morning in East Aleppo Bunker by Syrian Special Forces.
This story was quietly leaked by Voltaire.net, who announced, “The Security Council is sitting in private on Friday, December 16, 2016, at 17:00 GMT, while NATO officers were arrested this morning by the Syrian Special Forces in a bunker in East Aleppo.”
More detail was provided by Aleppo-based Syrian journalist Said Hilal Alcharifi. According to Alcharifi, Captured NATO officers were from a number of member states including the US, France, Germany and Turkey, as well as Israel. Here is his statement (translated from Arabic):
“The Syrian authorities have been able, thanks to meticulous details, get to HQ senior Western and regional officers in the basement of a neighborhood of Aleppo-east, and capture all alive. Some names have already been ex-filtered to Syrian journalists, including myself.
Given nationalities – US, French, British, German, Israeli, Turkish, Saudi, Moroccan, Qatari etc.. etc, of these bastards and their military ranks, I assure you that. Syria currently holds a great treasure to lead negotiations with the countries that have destroyed it.”
These actors are all very good. They should get oscars and baftas for their performances in this propaganda video purporting to show people living happy, free and fulfilling lives under Assad's authoritarian, iron-fisted, repressive, murderous rule.
Wait...so we're now at the point of saying Assad's a good guy? Really?
Man of the Year potential I reckon. Maybe next year.
Maybe they can have a picture of the kids he gassed on the cover.
Who needs Irwin when you have DennisIrwin.
It should be Sunni Islam, Shia Islam and Kurds.
Issues are the lack of clear religous borders and of course that Assad is unlikely to split up his country. In addition to that, Erdogan won't accept a Kurdish state on his southern border. The only feasible way I'd see would be a (further?) federalization with more autonomy for Kurds and Sunnis. But even that option will probably upset a lot of people.
I miss the good old times where every geopolitical issue could be solved by 2 Westerners, a map and their pencil.
What about the Christians and Druze? Where do we put them? And what about the secular folk who don't want to be on either religious divide.
That's true, but the majority of people in Syria are Sunni Islam. Assad and The Alawites are just a minority. You have to think about a federalization.
The Christians and Druze should be part of the Alawites federation.
If it were so simple there would have been an election. But since Assad is part of a religous minority himself, he would probably have issues getting elected if everything were democratic. And there is in reality no way for the Western nations to enforce either a federalization or splitting the country up, without getting further involved in the conflict. If Assad says: 'No, i won. I deserve to be dictator for life.' we can either start a war of aggression, do nothing or be grumpy and use sanctions. Which is underwhelming but a reasonable tool of diplomacy.
I can only see Russia being able to do something. They have a big influence on Assad and if they decided to get rid of him nothing could stop them.
I've seen this idea that Assad held 'democratic' elections being thrown about lately - that Eva Bartlett one even based her claim that the majority of Syrians support Assad (not an unreasonable claim btw) on the 'fact' that he got 88% in the last election - despite the sense she spoke with regards to the mainstream media's stance, that marks her out as a regime stooge.
No Ba'th party anytime, anywhere, has or ever will hold free and fair elections. The Ba'th is incapable of reform. It can't be part of any democratic future, and the idea that it is 'secular' is also quite problematic if we're defining that term along Western norms.
Having said that, democracy and elections are the last thing most of the Middle East needs right now. Most Middle Easterners at the moment are tied to their tribe, sect, or ethnic group, ideas of nationalism tend to become tied to these and there is a lack of a strong attachment to any broader civil identity. That is not to say that things won't and can't change, it's just the reality at this moment in time. The situation in North Africa is a bit different since Egypt and Tunisia (and Morocco I'd argue) have a greater sense of national identity.
So when elections are held, they produce results along those fault lines in society, which only serve to entrench the differences between people, which in turns makes minorities nervous and majorities emboldened (this is one reason why minority rule has been so common in the history of the Middle East). Which is a recipe for further conflict and external meddling. There needs to be a fundamental change in society before any elections are held.
Syria will probably be partitioned, but it won't be a neat and tidy process (how can it be as the result of a bloody civil war?) and it won't necessarily reflect ethnic or sectarian lines beyond the Kurdish areas (and I don't think that's necessarily desirable), it'll reflect Turkish-Iranian-Russian-American power politics. In any case dividing along sectarian lines in Syria would be very tough, Alawites live all over the country - yes they have been traditionally concentrated in the coastal hinterland, but the coast itself is largely Sunni, so you'd have a small, mountainous Alawite island surrounded by a Sunni state. And you'd have to deal with all those Sunnis who'd prefer to live under Assad. Christian's are dispersed all over the country, and the Druze are concentrated South-East of Damascus and on the Golan, far away from any potential Alawite rump state.
And Assad now controls all the major Sunni population centers, why would he give them up willingly?
No Ba'th party anytime, anywhere, has or ever will hold free and fair elections. The Ba'th is incapable of reform. It can't be part of any democratic future, and the idea that it is 'secular' is also quite problematic if we're defining that term along Western norms.
Having said that, democracy and elections are the last thing most of the Middle East needs right now. Most Middle Easterners at the moment are tied to their tribe, sect, or ethnic group, ideas of nationalism tend to become tied to these and there is a lack of a strong attachment to any broader civil identity. That is not to say that things won't and can't change, it's just the reality at this moment in time. The situation in North Africa is a bit different since Egypt and Tunisia (and Morocco I'd argue) have a greater sense of national identity.
So when elections are held, they produce results along those fault lines in society, which only serve to entrench the differences between people, which in turns makes minorities nervous and majorities emboldened (this is one reason why minority rule has been so common in the history of the Middle East). Which is a recipe for further conflict and external meddling. There needs to be a fundamental change in society before any elections are held.
Syria will probably be partitioned, but it won't be a neat and tidy process (how can it be as the result of a bloody civil war?) and it won't necessarily reflect ethnic or sectarian lines beyond the Kurdish areas (and I don't think that's necessarily desirable), it'll reflect Turkish-Iranian-Russian-American power politics. In any case dividing along sectarian lines in Syria would be very tough, Alawites live all over the country - yes they have been traditionally concentrated in the coastal hinterland, but the coast itself is largely Sunni, so you'd have a small, mountainous Alawite island surrounded by a Sunni state. And you'd have to deal with all those Sunnis who'd prefer to live under Assad. Christian's are dispersed all over the country, and the Druze are concentrated South-East of Damascus and on the Golan, far away from any potential Alawite rump state.
And Assad now controls all the major Sunni population centers, why would he give them up willingly?
Last edited:
They may have the power to pressure Assad into accepting such reforms, but why? As it is, they will probably gain a loyal dictator and a larger military base in the Mediterranean. Splitting Syria might be the right thing to do, but Russia is not interested in whether the majority of the population will be misrepresented. For them this would only mean weaken an ally, therefore I doubt something will happen there. If this is dealt with using the UN Security council, China will probably not be too excited about a foreign push to split up a nation either.
Just because he could think supporting Assad has become too risky for his reputation. He doesn't want Russia to get more isolated than it is now.