Not pissing on the parade at all, you're absolutely right. Intervention is the easy part (as with Iraq). The long game is rebuilding towns and communities. The US fecked us over with Iraq and left it horrendously unstable.
Livestream out of Syria
- Thread starter ooeat0meoo
- Start date
Not pissing on the parade at all, you're absolutely right. Intervention is the easy part (as with Iraq). The long game is rebuilding towns and communities. The US fecked us over with Iraq and left it horrendously unstable.
Vida's right, actually. And there's a wealth of evidence to prove that.
The West (as in Britain, the U.S. and France mostly) have proven themselves almost completely incapable of operating without self-interest (there are a few fringe examples, but the weight of evidence is in favour of Vida's point). And it's a self-interest that's driven almost entirely by corporate or financial imperatives.
As for the West attempting to spread peace and democracy in the Middle East: read some of the interviews (you can get them online, I'm sure) carried out by the Wall Street Journal in the aftermath of 9/11 that they did with wealthy businessmen, international lawyers and academics from the region. The articles gave an excellent insight into reasons behind the ill-feeling towards the West that's felt by many in the region.
The West (as in Britain, the U.S. and France mostly) have proven themselves almost completely incapable of operating without self-interest (there are a few fringe examples, but the weight of evidence is in favour of Vida's point). And it's a self-interest that's driven almost entirely by corporate or financial imperatives.
As for the West attempting to spread peace and democracy in the Middle East: read some of the interviews (you can get them online, I'm sure) carried out by the Wall Street Journal in the aftermath of 9/11 that they did with wealthy businessmen, international lawyers and academics from the region. The articles gave an excellent insight into reasons behind the ill-feeling towards the West that's felt by many in the region.
I think Western nations are above all else interested in market economics. The global economy is now interdependent and creating stable conditions for commerce is usually a big factor. Human rights are a factor as well. The reason the U.S. put its voice behind Libya, Egypt, Syria, and Tunisia, but not Bahrain or Yemen is simply down to strategic interests. Bahrain houses a big US naval base that is more or less in charge of protecting supply routes through the Persian Gulf and Yemen has cooperated on Al-Qaeda operations within their territory. That's not to say human rights are not important, but sometimes first order economic issues take precedence over humanitarian ones. That's the nature of the international system.
Since i dont know anything can you enlighten me why the west overthrew a democratically elected govt in iran in 1953 and installed a monarch. I reckon that goes against the self interest of "peace and democracy". While we are at it also explain why the west is ignoring civilians being killed in bahrain. Afterall the west does understand its responsibility to protect innocent civilians around the world.
I obviously have no working knowledge so please enlighten me.
Since i dont know anything can you enlighten me why the west overthrew a democratically elected govt in iran in 1953 and installed a monarch. I reckon that goes against the self interest of "peace and democracy". While we are at it also explain why the west is ignoring civilians being killed in bahrain. Afterall the west does understand its responsibility to protect innocent civilians around the world.
I obviously have no working knowledge so please enlighten me.
You can't compare the factors of what motivate actors today with historical events from past generations. The rules and norms of the system and the actors within it have changed.
Agreed.
Tell that to the people who believe strategies are formed on the basis of humanitarian reasons without considering other self intersts first. The west's best allies have been dictators rather than democracies in asia, africa and south america (non-white nations) in the past five decades. Economic and security reasons have always trumped humanitarian reasons for every nation.
The situation in iran today is because of that coup in 1953. The mullah regime wouldn't be ruling iran if the shah wasn't installed by the west. Due to that coup there is genuine mistrust among iranians about the west.
bahrain is a current event.
By that logic you can trace every situation today to antecedent events over thousands of years ago. In reality, politics has to be analyzed by events as historically close to the actual situation as possible. For example, the Iraq War and Bush, not Eisenhower.
Why do people persist with taking events out of their context, when the west was lining up allies amongst dictatorships primarily from the fifties to the eighties it was to fight the Cold War. That was one of the biggest struggles in human history, our way of life and the current world order depended on winning it.
We did and as a direct consequence the world is more prosperous, it is infinitely more stable and so many more people live free today as a result - we are a week away from Euro 2012 beginning in Poland which little over twenty years ago was a deprived dictatorship yet has been the most dynamic economy in Europe for five years now. If we had to ally with a few dictatorships here and there to do it then as history proves it was a price worth paying.
And the situation because of that was a fear of the Russians, that because of the Russian Revolution, that because of the First World War, that because of strife and tension in the Balkans and Germany getting ahead of itself on the world stage.
There is no beginning.
Propping up dictatorships responsible for the murders of innumerable innocent people is never "a price worth paying".
Iran: Military intervention in Syria will 'engulf' Israel
hmmm...and they should be allowed to possess nukes because it's only "fair" as long as others have them.
hmmm...and they should be allowed to possess nukes because it's only "fair" as long as others have them.
Well, the Pentagon seems to believe that "Iran's security strategy is based first on deterring an attack...Iran's nuclear program and its willingness to keep open the possibility of developing nuclear weapons is a central part of its deterrent strategy"
The report is here if you want to read it:
http://www.scribd.com/Silendo/d/30277432-DoD-Unclassified-Report-on-Military-Power-of-Iran
The report is here if you want to read it:
http://www.scribd.com/Silendo/d/30277432-DoD-Unclassified-Report-on-Military-Power-of-Iran
Iran does not threat with an attack on Israel if it is attacked here, but an attack on Israel if the West intervenes militarily in Syria. That's a little bit of a stretch regarding the definition of deterrence.
can anyone confirm that the translation is correct ?
Nations as a rule look out for or at least what their leaders feel are their own best interest, can see it all down through history and on into today. East, West, North, South, nations for the most part do what they think is best for them or more correctly what the leaders see as being best for them/themselves. Nothing new under the sun, unfortunately.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/05/201253115147529764.html
Why would Putin be bothered about Syrians dying? He's perfectly happy with his own people, especially journalists who don't like him, dying as long as they don't pile up all at once so people notice. At least now Western-Russian relations will be carried out more openly rather than working through Medvedev. It makes strategic sense for the Russians to back Syria, but they should at least have the balls to admit it.
Also, a Russian ship carrying weapons arrived Tartus last week. So their denials are a joke.
Why would Putin be bothered about Syrians dying? He's perfectly happy with his own people, especially journalists who don't like him, dying as long as they don't pile up all at once so people notice. At least now Western-Russian relations will be carried out more openly rather than working through Medvedev. It makes strategic sense for the Russians to back Syria, but they should at least have the balls to admit it.
Also, a Russian ship carrying weapons arrived Tartus last week. So their denials are a joke.
It completely depends on whether the country is democratic or non-democratic. Authoritarian leaders often think about staying in power more than what's best for their countries.
Can the translation be any more fake?
from the start Takfeer isn't what he said, he sad Takbir as in everyone please say Allahu Akbar! then he says something like may our martyrs R.I.P they write (I give my products......), this is as fake as it can get, mate! Plus this the father of one of the most loved and respected guys in Syria Khaled Abu-Salah who speaks out to the media from Baba Amr...For the first time in 70 years the biggest strike happened everywhere in Damascus(almost 80%) even the shops that were forced to open by security forces refused to sell anything to anyone, biggest protests in Damascus are happening this few days, and I feel we are going to solve our problems without any interventions.
General Moud or whatever his name is who was sent by the U.N to be an observer, went to Al-Houleh where the latest massacre happened, he confirmed that the massacre was done by Assad's militias and confirmed the bombing of the country with tanks and missiles, although he said that only 20 of the people killed was by the bombing, the other 86 was either shot or slaughtered, people from all around the Houleh city confirmed to the general that it was Assad's doing and the attackers where all from pro-Assad villages around Al-Houleh.
New Stream: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/alepponow#utm_campaign=t.co&utm_source=7532293&utm_medium=social
Location: Aleppo, Lebanon
The location where 11 farmer/pilgrims taken hostage in response to things said by the head of Hezbullah. Two days ago, two of the hostages had been released.
Reported 3 days ago, tanks had closed in on the region which has experience trouble in the past.
Location: Aleppo, Lebanon
The location where 11 farmer/pilgrims taken hostage in response to things said by the head of Hezbullah. Two days ago, two of the hostages had been released.
Reported 3 days ago, tanks had closed in on the region which has experience trouble in the past.
Aleppo is in Syria.
ok... I read it wrong, somewhere along the line. Thanks Raoul
78 Reported kill in Hama, Syria on Wednesday.
CNN story in link
CNN story in link
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/06/world/meast/syria-unrest/index.html?eref=rss_world&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fedition_world+%28RSS%3A+World%29
This is....really really wrong.
Firstly, he says Takbeer, which means say Allah Akbar. That instantly makes you suspicious about the intent of the translator. And Takfeer does not even mean death to infidels anyway...
In the loins bit, he's mumbling and the sound isn't great but he certainly doesn't say that, he's still in greetings. My arabic is a bit rusty but they use two different words for sacrifice, neither of which actually mean it I think.
I'm not actually 100% sure what is going on in the video. The sound is muffled, they have a silly accent and my arabic is a bit rusty but I'm pretty sure it is not what its being translated as.
I wrote what the video is about, his son is Khaled Abu Salah, he used to work with the rebels in Baba Amr when it existed, they are cheering Abu Salah and they are donating money for the rebels...
It's a very small Sunni village the has 130 people only living in it, the actual number of dead people there is 126 so only 4 survived, the UN observers was denied access to the place by the regime.
That's a very high percentage of terrorists collaborating with Israel, isn't it?
I don't think Israel has anything to do with what's happening in Syria.
I was referring to the ridiculous claims by Bashar's regime.
It's quite obvious that AQ, Israel, and the US have all teamed up to cause trouble in Syria. It's like team America.
The UN should be dismantled, and international intervention in any conflict is deemed irrelevant and hypocritical after this. The message here is that you can't trust anyone, and not even mass murder on a genocidal scale is gonna get one protection from the very organization that was established to prevent just that.
Is is a matter of time before we see death camps again, as long as tit-for-tat exchanges between the West and Russia/China in the UNSC dictate world affairs?
Is is a matter of time before we see death camps again, as long as tit-for-tat exchanges between the West and Russia/China in the UNSC dictate world affairs?
Aren't there any more condemnations to be made?
Assad is becoming more and more irrelevant if he, as he claims, he can't control the goons who are executing women and children. All the more reason for him to step aside.
Not that I don't believe you, but do you have a link to a story confirming these numbers? I will like to pass this along. Unable to quote someone on a discussion forum. ~ I'm going to the Institute of Policy Studies this weekend to discuss Syria, again.
Will this be a televised event on C-SPAN ? I'd love to hear your speech.