The Bashar al-Assad Betting Game

[rory_20_uk]

Frankly, who knows?

What most people want is to live their life without worrying that they'll be dragged off and killed. Y'know, small things.

Most would probably like to have a life similar to those in Surrey. But that isn't an option.

To get on the wrong side of this fight is probably life and death. The last uprising c. 30k people were killed merely at the end to prove a point.
To make things really "fun", if you're a minority and militant islamists with a Saudi-backed intolerance to... practically everything there could also be religious cleansing.

What to do? Both options are so ghastly I imagine most just hope that if they keep their heads down and do nothing, neither size will decide to raze their home / village / town and kill all the occupants.

[Fragony]

Just looking for a bit of clarity.

The war is often portrayed as a popular uprising against Assad; while flicking through the web I came across one article that suggests otherwise.

The contention was essentially that 40% of Syria's pop. is made up of numerous minorities, none of whom were active or engaged in the uprising. So is the civil war a changing of the guard among the elite; or a popular uprising?

I really have absolutely no idea

[SoFarSoGood]

Who knows. I don't think you appreciate or understand the position of the ahl al-bayt within Shi‘a communities. Quite some important people are buried in Damascus, and pilgrimage to these spots has nothing to do with the hajj itself.

Iran has already admitted that some of the 'pilgrims' are "retired Quds". If it walks and quacks like a duck...

[Hax]

I'm not saying they're not related to the Iranian government. It's just that you've been giving the wrong reasons. Also, you sure gotta a lot of chutspa showing up on these forums, mister Netanyahu.

[rory_20_uk]

Iran has already admitted that some of the 'pilgrims' are "retired Quds". If it walks and quacks like a duck...

Turkey: set up secret HQ for rebels and provides training / logistical support etc.
UK / USA - providing "non lethal" assistance - which is farcical as others are providing the guns and both are equally required for a force to be effective. This they tell us. Is the SAS / other special forces in there? Who knows.
Other countries are providing small arms and the Rebels also have some Anti-Air / Anti-Armour. Limited amounts lest Terrorists get their hands on it (i.e. the same people if they decide to leave Syria).
Russia happened to have two ships dock in the port it uses which happen to be full of Marines. They're there for duty free, right?

The language might have changed, but Bismark could adapt to this inside of 5 minutes.

[SoFarSoGood]

Russia cannot get involved directly or Turkey will crush them and take Armenia to boot. A boat-full of Marines is only good for holding a dock area, not substantial intervention. Turks simply have the most organised numbers in the area and sit between Russian resupply lines for Russia to be insane enough to send serious troops in. Mind it would be great if they did...

[Fragony]

I'd rather have nobody does anything at all untill we know a little bit more about the rebels. Syria wasn't all that bad before this started (I am told I know nothing of Syria myself) and the christians and alavites don't seem to like the rebels all that much. There are supposedly jihadi's from all over the world fighting against the state army, including European and American ones, yes you too America.

[rory_20_uk]

That's my point - the Russians want a warm water port - that's it. Much easier to negotiate with whoever wins with a garrison nearby. They have done what is required to protect their interests and as far as possible not upset others in the local area - Marines could most likely hold out against attacks until reinforced, but are no serious threat to anyone else.

[Hax]

I'd rather have nobody does anything at all untill we know a little bit more about the rebels. Syria wasn't all that bad before this started (I am told I know nothing of Syria myself) and the christians and alavites don't seem to like the rebels all that much. There are supposedly jihadi's from all over the world fighting against the state army, including European and American ones, yes you too America.

So let's suppose for a moment that yes, a part of the rebels, or all of them, are Islamic radicals. Does that make their grievances any less justified? Read up on the Algerian civil war of the 1990's.

[rvg]

So let's suppose for a moment that yes, a part of the rebels, or all of them, are Islamic radicals. Does that make their grievances any less justified? Read up on the Algerian civil war of the 1990's.

Less justified? No. It does however make helping them akin to shooting self in the foot.

[Fragony]

So let's suppose for a moment that yes, a part of the rebels, or all of them, are Islamic radicals. Does that make their grievances any less justified? Read up on the Algerian civil war of the 1990's.

You are talking to a total noob here Hax I won't pretend to have anything meaninfull to say on what's going on in Syria, or Algeria for that matter

[Hax]

Less justified? No. It does however make helping them akin to shooting self in the foot.

I'd disagree. If you look at movements operating against foreign powers, you'll mostly find they're either of a supranational nature (such as al-Qa'ida or extreme left wing groups) or they're nationalist movements without a country (for example: the radical Zionist movement in the 1930's and 40's or the PLO).

The thing with Islamism is that as soon as its mentioned, people tend to have this kneejerk reaction. Anything associated with Islamist movements is immediately dismissed, which, in my opinion is not only unfair, but actually works in the opposite direction. Believe me, I'd rather talk to Mohammad Morsi than to Ayman al-Zawihiri or Osama bin Laden. I'd rather talk with Hezbollah than with the Taliban.

You are talking to a total noob here Hax I won't pretend to have anything meaninfull to say on what's going on in Syria, or Algeria for that matter

Okay, so here's a newsflash: don't say anything. We don't necessarily need your opinion to have a conversation.

[rvg]

The thing with Islamism is that as soon as its mentioned, people tend to have this kneejerk reaction. Anything associated with Islamist movements is immediately dismissed...

And rightfully so.

which, in my opinion is not only unfair, but actually works in the opposite direction.

Not at all. There are plenty of non-crazy people to deal with. Like nationalists, BAATHists, pan-arabists, etc.

I'd rather talk with Hezbollah than with the Taliban..

I'd much rather not talk with either one.

[Fragony]

That is fortunate for all of us Hax as I can't give my opinion because I don't know anything about the situation there. I also know little about saturated fat percentages of yak-milk from Tibet by the way, heard it tastes horrible.

[Hax]

And rightfully so.

Yeah, woo, ever since the Muslim Brotherhood came to power in Egypt, you'll get stoned for kissing your girlfriend in public! And in Tunisia, they're mass-executing money-launderers as we speak And now that Hezbollah is in a coalition with the Progressive Socialist Party and Amal in Lebanon, they're also murdering gays!

Man, have you ever even been in the vicinity of these areas. Here's a thing, I was in Lebanon last month. I talked to everyon there, and you know what? They don't even care about Aoun or Gemayel or Nasrallah, as long as they get paid and can take care of their families, they're happy.

Not at all. There are plenty of non-crazy people to deal with. Like nationalists, BAATHists, pan-arabists, etc.

Tell you a nice story about the Ba‘ath in Iraq. They were executing babies. Swear to God. How can you not call them crazy?

[rvg]

Yeah, woo, ever since the Muslim Brotherhood came to power in Egypt, you'll get stoned for kissing your girlfriend in public! And in Tunisia, they're mass-executing money-launderers as we speak And now that Hezbollah is in a coalition with the Progressive Socialist Party and Amal in Lebanon, they're also murdering gays!

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here...

Man, have you ever even been in the vicinity of these areas. Here's a thing, I was in Lebanon last month. I talked to everyon there, and you know what? They don't even care about Aoun or Gemayel or Nasrallah, as long as they get paid and can take care of their families, they're happy.

Whom did you talk to? Who is "everyone"? Furthermore, the reason they don't care about Nasrallah is because people like Aoun and Gemayel won't allow Nasrallah to turn Lebanon into mini-Iran. Otherwise they'd care very much.

Tell you a nice story about the Ba‘ath in Iraq. They were executing babies. Swear to God. How can you not call them crazy?

What babies? When? On whose orders?

[Hax]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here...

In the three countries I just mentioned, Islamist parties play a large role in the political process within the country. I was using sarcasm to express the fact that none of these countries at the current moment are currently ruled as Islamic states. None.

Whom did you talk to? Who is "everyone"? Furthermore, the reason they don't care about Nasrallah is because people like Aoun and Gemayel won't allow Nasrallah to turn Lebanon into mini-Iran. Otherwise they'd care very much.

Hmm, let me think. Students at AUB university, shopkeepers in Hamra, Shi‘a in the banlieus, Sunnis in the centre of the city, Christians in Gemmayze, Druze in the mountain areas. Do you want me to go on?

The thing with you is that you automatically assume that everyone not immediately adhering to your view of how Muslim parties function are either ignorant or are somehow complying with the supposed Muslim plot to take over the world. The very fact that you're saying: "otherwise they'd care very much" pretty much suggest that you're not even willing to let these people have an opinion of their own, even though they're first of all much more fit and entitled to an opinion on how their own country is run and secondly because they actually live there and are sick of this sectarian infighting which has cost hundreds of lives over the last thirty years.

Stop enforcing your opinion people whose country you know nothing about.

What babies? When? On whose orders?

Robert Fisk mentioned in his "The Great War for Civilization" that this woman, whose husband had deserted and was arrested, came to the jail with three of her children. They were all shot, except the mother. I'm looking up the exact quote.

[rvg]

In the three countries I just mentioned, Islamist parties play a large role in the political process within the country. I was using sarcasm to express the fact that none of these countries at the current moment are currently ruled as Islamic states. None.

Not yet. In Egypt, it is the military that prevents islamists from doing something stupid for now, as for Tunisia and Libya, it's too early to tell. In Tunisia there's already a nationwide campaign of attacking liquor stores. Not a good start.

Hmm, let me think. Students at AUB university, shopkeepers in Hamra, Shi‘a in the banlieus, Sunnis in the centre of the city, Christians in Gemmayze, Druze in the mountain areas. Do you want me to go on?

The thing with you is that you automatically assume that everyone not immediately adhering to your view of how Muslim parties function are either ignorant or are somehow complying with the supposed Muslim plot to take over the world. The very fact that you're saying: "otherwise they'd care very much" pretty much suggest that you're not even willing to let these people have an opinion of their own, even though they're first of all much more fit and entitled to an opinion on how their own country is run and secondly because they actually live there and are sick of this sectarian infighting which has cost hundreds of lives over the last thirty years.

Wait a minute, you're telling me that Nasrallah wouldn't want to turn Lebanon into Shiite theocracy? Really? Oh, I bet he would, but he can't. Precisely because of the Sunni/Shiite/Maronite gridlock.

Stop enforcing your opinion people whose country you know nothing about.

I know more about it than you think.

Robert Fisk mentioned in his "The Great War for Civilization" that this woman, whose husband had deserted and was arrested, came to the jail with three of her children. They were all shot, except the mother. I'm looking up the exact quote.

And? Am I supposed to believe that all baathists across the Arab world are crazy because of that incident?

[Hax]

Wait a minute, you're telling me that Nasrallah wouldn't want to turn Lebanon into Shiite theocracy? Really? Oh, I bet he would, but he can't. Precisely because of the Sunni/Shiite/Maronite gridlock.

No. And you know why? It's because people in Lebanon are totally done with the destructive sectarian warmongering that has cost lots of Lebanese their lives. You keep pressign this issue of religion, but people are completely done with it. In fact, one of these people I was talking actually rebuffed me for assuming he was a Shi‘a because his family was from Saida. He said that questions like those are not only rude, but they are obstructing people from living in a sustainable, peaceful environment. Sectarian thought is way more destructive than you seem to realise.

I know more about it than you think.

Haven't seen that much evidence, to be fair.

And? Am I supposed to believe that all baathists across the Arab world are crazy because of that incident

Replace baathists with Islamists and there you go.

[rvg]

No. And you know why? It's because people in Lebanon are totally done with the destructive sectarian warmongering that has cost lots of Lebanese their lives. You keep pressign this issue of religion, but people are completely done with it. In fact, one of these people I was talking actually rebuffed me for assuming he was a Shi‘a because his family was from Saida. He said that questions like those are not only rude, but they are obstructing people from living in a sustainable, peaceful environment. Sectarian thought is way more destructive than you seem to realise.

The question is whether or not Nasrallah is done with the sectarian warmongering. And the answer is no. This guy is as sectarian as they get.

Replace baathists with Islamists and there you go.

Except that islamists routinely try to establish theocracies whenever they get a chance to do so. Be it in the Gaza Strip, Tunisia, Mali or wherever else. The trend repeats itself over and over. It's something to be expected.

[Hax]

The question is whether or not Nasrallah is done with the sectarian warmongering. And the answer is no. This guy is as sectarian as they get.

That's just part of the question. But in my opinion, contributing to this sectarian divide (which is what you're doing) is not helping anyone. You're basically telling people they can't get along because of their religion. What, then, on the rhetorical field, seperates you from Hassan Nasrallah? The irony that seems to slip over most people is that they're applying the exact same logic as the people with whom they disagree.

Just as the repeatable trend that it doesn't really matter to what degree political parties try to form any kind of opposition, they'll always get crushed by their governments. It's not coincidental that the only form of meaningful resistance against a corrupt and nepotist government (be it Iran under the Shah, the post-Nasser era in Egypt or the Palestinian territories under Fatah) is through Islam. I'm not going to deny that Islam lends itself quite useful for this, but you have to realise that at the moment your political party's headquarters being shut down, your party leaders are being arrested, jailed, executed or assassinated, the only place they can't shut down is your mosque. The only person they can't assassinate is the imam.

It is not coincidental, it's not because all Muslims feel like they should express their dissatisfaction through religion, but it's because the very same governments that oppressed them for generations have driven them to the only place where you can still oppose the government without immediately being arrested.

[rvg]

That's just part of the question. But in my opinion, contributing to this sectarian divide (which is what you're doing) is not helping anyone. You're basically telling people they can't get along because of their religion.

That is false, I'm not saying anything like that. What I'm saying is that islamists (of any sect) if given a chance would crush all other groups in their respective country and establish their flavor of theocracy instead of freedom.

What, then, on the rhetorical field, seperates you from Hassan Nasrallah? The irony that seems to slip over most people is that they're applying the exact same logic as the people with whom they disagree.

I'm merely calling a spade a spade.

Just as the repeatable trend that it doesn't really matter to what degree political parties try to form any kind of opposition, they'll always get crushed by their governments. It's not coincidental that the only form of meaningful resistance against a corrupt and nepotist government (be it Iran under the Shah, the post-Nasser era in Egypt or the Palestinian territories under Fatah) is through Islam.

That's not true. The commie South Yemen was a testament to that.

I'm not going to deny that Islam lends itself quite useful for this, but you have to realise that at the moment your political party's headquarters being shut down, your party leaders are being arrested, jailed, executed or assassinated, the only place they can't shut down is your mosque. The only person they can't assassinate is the imam.

It doesn't subtract from the problem: once the islamists grab the power, that imam wants to be a caliph, or at the very least a president or an grand ayatollah.

It is not coincidental, it's not because all Muslims feel like they should express their dissatisfaction through religion, but it's because the very same governments that oppressed them for generations have driven them to the only place where you can still oppose the government without immediately being arrested.

Certainly a sad reality.

[Hax]

That is false, I'm not saying anything like that. What I'm saying is that islamists (of any sect) if given a chance would crush all other groups in their respective country and establish their flavor of theocracy instead of freedom.

But you're clinging to the idea that in the minds of the people we're talking about, sectarianism is more important than anything else. It's not true. Lebanon is a prime example of that. So is Egypt right now. Or Tunisia.

I'm merely calling a spade a spade.

That is aboslutely no excuse. You can't hide under the nomer of "don't shoot the messenger". You are responsible for what you're saying.

That's not true. The commie South Yemen was a testament to that.

And look what happened to them. Look what happened to the political parties in Egypt after 1952, or the Tudeh and their coalition partners in Iran after 1953, or the short-lived moments of political freedom in Algeria in the early 90's. These regimes are not at all interested in allowing any kind of opposition.

It doesn't subtract from the problem: once the islamists grab the power, that imam wants to be a caliph, or at the very least a president or an grand ayatollah.

Grand Ayatollah is a stricly modern Shi‘a concept. And seriously, returning to the Caliphate? I don't think there's any party, apart from Hizb al-Tahrir, that is supporting the idea of a new caliphate. Tunisia's Nahda party has gone as far as to say there's no way there's going to be another Caliphate.

I don't dismiss your knowledge, but I absolutely dismiss your assessment of this knowledge. The point is that we're dealing with people here who have very legitimate reasons to express their dissatisfaction, and so be it that it's under the nomer of Islam(ism). Believe it or not, but these are with whom you can talk.

Case in point:

[Fragony]

You don't have to know anything about the islam, rule #1: 'more islam equals worse world'. No matter if it's in Africa, Middle-East, Indonesia or Europe. It just happens to be a violent and intolerant desert-ideoligy. Islam is like a cancer, starts small, spreads out, starts affecting vital organs, host dies.

[Hax]

Another well-researched and nuanced opinion from our resident expert on Islam and the Middle-East, Fragony. Thank you.

[Fragony]

Owwwwwww ok. You don't have to be an expert just looking at what happens just about everywhere in the world where islam is it's pretty much the same. Islam is ALWAYS the agressor when it comes to religious intolerance. Fact.

[rory_20_uk]

Owwwwwww ok. You don't have to be an expert just looking at what happens just about everywhere in the world where islam is it's pretty much the same. Islam is ALWAYS the agressor when it comes to religious intolerance. Fact.

Cobblers. Sikhs and Hindus are just as capable of pushing back, and in Africa Christians are equally good at violence. Jews? The chosen ones have their own rule book. Lebanon was a civil war - that takes two to tango.

Europe might have become soft recently but it might be a blip and we'll start slaughtering those who are wrong and deserve to be killed due to their faith. To be fair, the Christian Serbs kept up the tradition of Ethnic / religious extermination so we've still got the skills.

[Fragony]

Ok on Libanon you have a point, but Serbia really isn't all that straightforward. Wasn't very nice but they had it comming imho

[Hax]

Owwwwwww ok. You don't have to be an expert just looking at what happens just about everywhere in the world where islam is it's pretty much the same. Islam is ALWAYS the agressor when it comes to religious intolerance. Fact.

Well, look at it like this: if the truth is already so obvious, you don't even have to mention it. Have you considered the possibility that you're actually wrong​?

Wasn't very nice but they had it comming imho

Eh..yeah, whatever. Defending genocide now?

[Fragony]

What genocide, it's called a warcrime women and children were spared. And it happened for a reason Serbian villages were consistantly attacked from the safe-zones we pulled up, and a lot of the people doing that weren't even ethinc Yugoslavian they were jihadi's from the Middle-East who wanted to open a front in the west. And Serbians were already a bit pissed because of what muslim-SS devisions led by the Grand Mufti from Jeruzalem did to them in WW2, that was actually genocide.

If you don't believe ask Brennus he was there