Syria

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think that Bashar stands to lose less from this attrition than the rebels do. As rebel tactics get uglier and uglier, they will lose support from the west, i.e. they lose.


Libya had one advantage that Syria does not have: it's universally Sunni. No religious minorities to worry about. Its sectarianism is purely tribal and thus much easier to deal with, since it's all about money.


It will be rebuilt. As long as the islamists are kept at bay, this is the better scenario.


People have been saying this for a year and a half now.


I don't think so. We won't lift a finger without a proper UN resolution, and thankfully the Russians have had the good sense of opposing all this nonsense.

You think Lbya doesn't have sectarian problems?

Are we forgetting the Christian the Jews?

Not to mention the African/Arabic issue?

Assad has been confirmed to being using Sarin - that's WMD territory we're in now.

You're taking a local, short-termist, perspective.

In the short term Assad may win, may hold on for another 5-10 years but in 20 years he will fall - what sort of country Syria will be when that happens is being decided now.

There's a good chance that in 10 years Libya will be similar to Turkey now, there's a good chance Syria will be like Somalia five years ago. You remember Solalia, the last Islamic country we tried to ignore.

[Pannonian]

Well - you know - letting the Rebels become embittered and vengeful has made this a lose-lose all around.

Libya worked because the West went in quick and stopped the Civil War from engulfing the entire country - and reduced the wholesale destruction of the country by limiting the duration of the fighting. Ergo, there was still some normalcy to return to - once they'd persuaded the national footie team's goalkeeper to put down his AA gun and put his gloves back on.

Syria has become a worse wasteland than Israel made of Lebanon, and we will be remembered as the people who didn't help them.

Assad's finished, long term, but once Syria comes through this it won't even be as Civilised as Iraq.

As far as Air Defences go - it's about time NATO had an actual workout, there's been no proper testing of kit since the Falklands - when a lot of said kit was shown to be sub-par.

Why should it be our responsibility to help them, when it seems every successful revolution in the Muslim countries tends to go religious fundie afterwards? And if we want to test our kit, why not look for another opportunity where we might actually profit from intervention?

[rvg]

You think Lbya doesn't have sectarian problems?

She does. Tribal sectarian problems. Everyone wants their piece of the oil revenue pie. Not that difficult to solve.

Are we forgetting the Christian the Jews?

Of course I am. The 1000 Jews who live on that dinky little island and a handful of Christians do not matter in the grand scheme of things for Libya. In Syria minorities are big enough to matter.

Not to mention the African/Arabic issue?

Most Africans have already been expelled or massacred, so it's no longer an issue.

Assad has been confirmed to being using Sarin - that's WMD territory we're in now.

Only if we want to be there. I do not. I doubt Obama does either.

You're taking a local, short-termist, perspective.

How so?

In the short term Assad may win, may hold on for another 5-10 years...

5-10 years is not a trivial amount of time. In that timeframe he may crush the rebellion completely.

There's a good chance that in 10 years Libya will be similar to Turkey now,

I'd love to see that happen. Really, I would. I don't think it will though.

there's a good chance Syria will be like Somalia five years ago. You remember Solalia, the last Islamic country we tried to ignore.

Negative. Syria has oil.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Why should it be our responsibility to help them, when it seems every successful revolution in the Muslim countries tends to go religious fundie afterwards? And if we want to test our kit, why not look for another opportunity where we might actually profit from intervention?

Why does it go religious fundie?

Usually because the alternative presented is the "Great Satan".

If we made a point of smacking Dictators around when they get like this we would be more popular.

Both the Syrians and the Iranians before them voiced feelings of being "abandoned" when they protested in favour of Western-ish ideals of at least a less-oppressive government and more freedom of expression. We ignore them, we won't give them arms or funds, and as a result they turn to the Islamic militias.

We should have blockaded Assad, prevented new munitions getting to him from Russia or elsewhere and out politicians should, at the least, be constantly screaming in the UN about his Air Force, which could at least be interdicted. You wouldn't even need to send aircraft - a couple of Dauntless class destroyers sat off the coast could destroy aircraft as they launched.

The Last 50-75 years policy of supporting "strongmen" so long as they enforced a veneer of Western society and wore suits has been an abject failure. It gave us the Shah in Iran, Saddam Hussain, two Assads...

It's time for a new strategy - one that involves the use of surgical force against a regime that turns guns on the populace.

[rvg]

To build a rapport between westerns and middle-easterners, we have to find a common cause...

Why do we need to build rapport?

[Pannonian]

To build a rapport between westerns and middle-easterners, we have to find a common cause. If resisting dictatorship and demanding more democracy isn't a common cause... I don't know what is. But, because we can't look past realpolitik for ten minutes, the Syrian people are going to suffer and the rift between the middle-east and the west will only get worse. Way too late to change that now.

We've already given them plenty of opportunity for that in Iraq. How's the rapport between the west and the middle east over that issue? Everywhere we've intervened in the name of democracy, the subsequent turn has been towards fundieism. Why not try the Chinese approach of being open and frank about establishing relations for the purpose of trade rather than ideology?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Why do we need to build rapport?

Why not?

They have oil - you can also grow excellent coffee in the Levant, but the constant wars have burned the plantations down to almost nothing. Then there's the old chestnut of being able to visit the Holy Land without getting killed - not to mention the wasted opportunities in Science and Literature for collaboration.

Do you realise that Iranian poets and Scientists are some of the best in the world?

Those guys are building nukes under a blockade, it's harder for them than it was for the US/American team during WWII!

[rvg]

Because World Peace is a good thing?

World Peace is a great thing about on par with me winning the next jackpot. Sadly the odds are also similar.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

We've already given them plenty of opportunity for that in Iraq. How's the rapport between the west and the middle east over that issue? Everywhere we've intervened in the name of democracy, the subsequent turn has been towards fundieism. Why not try the Chinese approach of being open and frank about establishing relations for the purpose of trade rather than ideology?

Faulty example - we failed to intervene in 1991/2 when we said we would. As a result Saddam destroyed the marshes - 2003 barely balanced the debt, and then the occupation was badly handled because the Bush administration had to go all "Facist purge" whilst forgetting that we had to occupy Germany for a decade with thousands of troops, many conscripts.

[rvg]

Why not?

What's the practical purpose of that? Love or hate has little to do with business.

They have oil - you can also grow excellent coffee in the Levant, but the constant wars have burned the plantations down to almost nothing.

I can live with the Venezuelan coffee.

Then there's the old chestnut of being able to visit the Holy Land without getting killed - not to mention the wasted opportunities in Science and Literature for collaboration.

It's okay, we've gotten by so far just fine.

Do you realise that Iranian poets and Scientists are some of the best in the world?

Will Iranian poetry make me a richer man? If not, then meh.

Those guys are building nukes under a blockade, it's harder for them than it was for the US/American team during WWII!

Shows us where their priorities lie.

[rvg]

So Greed is your only geopolitical motivator...

Greed? Certainly not personal greed. It's more of a general disenchantment in humanity in general, and in the humanity inhabiting the Middle East and South Asia in particular. It's not that I wish them ill, it's that I just don't care. They wish to kill each other? Let them. In the Syrian conflict specifically, I support Bashar because Syrian Christians support Bashar. They're the only people in that conflict that I care about. Their interests are my interests.

[Pannonian]

Faulty example - we failed to intervene in 1991/2 when we said we would. As a result Saddam destroyed the marshes - 2003 barely balanced the debt, and then the occupation was badly handled because the Bush administration had to go all "Facist purge" whilst forgetting that we had to occupy Germany for a decade with thousands of troops, many conscripts.

They shouldn't moan about not getting what they wanted from outsiders when they wanted it. If they give it to them at a later date, rather than whine about not getting it first up, they should make the most of what they got this time round. If they want to moan about the late delivery, then maybe we shouldn't bother with the delivery at all, and leave them to deal with things on their own. We wouldn't have lost anything if we'd never intervened to get rid of Iraq's dictator, so the next time they want us to help, maybe they should think about how they reacted this time round.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Greed? Certainly not personal greed. It's more of a general disenchantment in humanity in general, and in the humanity inhabiting the Middle East and South Asia in particular. It's not that I wish them ill, it's that I just don't care. They wish to kill each other? Let them. In the Syrian conflict specifically, I support Bashar because Syrian Christians support Bashar. They're the only people in that conflict that I care about. Their interests are my interests.

Me, I want a quiet life - that's why I don't often voice just how loathsome and alien I find much of US political and social life.

Your perverse election of law enforcement a judicial officials, your failure to care for the poor...

Given that the US essentially engineered the collapse of the British Empire and left Britain a basket case for decades I have more reason to hate Americans than Syrians.

I don't, though, I'd much rather make friends because having friends is the way to have a quiet life.

No hatred of America - no 9/11. It's that simple.

[rvg]

They don't want to kill eachother. Surely you don't believe that?

I judge them by what they do. They do it a lot and they do it well.

I'm not qualified to tell you what to believe, but in my opinion the Christian thing would be to wish an end to the fighitng above all else, and not the victory of a certain group over the other.

Not at the expense of Christians being subjugated by the islamists.

How much do you even know about Syrian christians? Do you feel for them because they suffer, or do you feel for them because they provide you an excuse to root for the fascist?

Middle Eastern Christians are my people, as in I'm descended from that group. This is personal.

[rvg]

By that logic, we love killing eachother too. Or have you forgotten the staggering statistics from our Civil War? You're not stupid, man. I know that you know that people at war usually don't want to be at war.

Let's not mix wars between the governments into this.

Islamists who are entirely our fault. We created them, armed them, funded them, and over the decades since have given them plenty of target practice.

Precisely. No reason to help them any further.

Its good to respect your heritage, but you should take advantage of the broader scope you have available to you as compared to your relatives in the middle-east. They know only that they are in a war. You, on the other hand, are capable of seeing the big picture if you want to.

Which is why I say: screw the Sunnis.

[rvg]

Nothing for it I guess.

Do not despair. You're still very young and I understand your drive to be Don Quixote. Give it a decade, or maybe a decade and a half, then we'll see if your perspective changes.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Middle Eastern Christians are my people, as in I'm descended from that group. This is personal.

Unless you're an Assyrian yourself, they aren't the Eastern Orthodox Christians are a splinter group who had little to do with the Latin West or Even the Greek Orthodox until relatively recently.

Your religion would be only slightly closer to them than to Islam itself.

[rvg]

Unless you're an Assyrian yourself, they aren't Te Eastern Orthodox Christians are a splinter group who had little to do with the Latin West or Even the Greek Orthodox until relatively recently.

Your religion would be only slightly closer to them than to Islam itself.

Brilliant deduction. I am in fact Assyrian.

[Hax]

This explains so much.​

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Brilliant deduction. I am in fact Assyrian.

Well, I did think you might be.

Well, OK - I can appreciate your viewpoint but I still think you're wrong.

In the long term a pluralist society will benefit Christians accross the Middle East - currently the dictators uses them as a scapegoat for the majority to vent on whilst protecting them from major harm, and keeping both groups loyal as a result.

[rvg]

In the long term a pluralist society will benefit Christians accross the Middle East

True, but that pluralism can only be achieved under a very narrow set of conditions. Lebanon can achieve that balance of power because it has no clear religious majority.

currently the dictators uses them as a scapegoat for the majority to vent on whilst protecting them from major harm, and keeping both groups loyal as a result.

Syria is different because a small minority is in power. That minority has to band together with other minorities in order to oppose the clear majority.

Also, take a look at Iraq: the oppressed Shia majority was liberated and almost immediately started working towards becoming the oppressive Shia majority.

Even if you take some remote, exotic pseudo-democracy like the Maldives: it does have a representative government and all, but it's still extremely repressive when it comes to freedom of religion: every citizen is required by law to be a Sunni Muslim. That's not very pluralistic.

[Fragony]

New video of beheading, I hear Dutch with a Flemish accent and a bit of what's probably Wallonian French. Never been happy with Hezbollah but if they shoot homegrown scum Salaam mia muca's. Should they come back they will probably get agression surpressing therapy. Lefties getting so wet with multicultural desire that they slip of their chair, no, it is not an enrichment to our culture, capice? When will islamphiles understand that they simply don't get it? No you idiots islam is NOT a religion of peace. Muslim and Islam are not the same thing silly gutmensch

[a completely inoffensive name]

Me, I want a quiet life - that's why I don't often voice just how loathsome and alien I find much of US political and social life.

You don't really know what the typical social life for Americans is....

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

You don't really know what the typical social life for Americans is....

I said "much" not "most", but here are a few things that baffle and/or terrify me.

1. Lack of professional Constabulary, mostly elected Law Enforcement.

2. Limited services outside municipal districts (remember the fire engine that turned up and watched a guy's house burn down because he wasn't covered?).

3. Lack of State-run healthcare.

4. Lack of understanding of the necessity of state-run healthcare.

5. Attitude to guns.

6. Attitude to handling of guns (as in, keeping loaded weapons out of gun safes with children around.)

That's my top six - the fact that things are the way they are tells me most Americans don't have a problem with most of this - which shows that Britain is much closer to Europe or Commonwealth countries than the US.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Alright, well much of the confusion is simply due to lack of knowledge regarding American history and culture. Let's just take a brief look at each thing.

1. Lack of professional Constabulary, mostly elected Law Enforcement.

Much of the issues regarding police in the US as pointed out by watchdogs like Crazed Rabbit is due to the effect of the War on Drugs which has been a major policy across all level of government for over thirty years. You have to understand that a lot of people were scared by the drug hay-day of the 1960s and 1970s which led to the creation of the War on Drugs. Then again in the late 1980s into the 1990s the crack cocaine epidemic once again scared a lot of people who worried that new, more powerful drugs were going to systematically destroy the fabric of society, at least in urban areas. What has happened has been a slow conditioning for the law enforcement officials and the prison system to make requests (increasingly absurd) under the banner of fighting the good fight. This coupled with the backlash against the anti-authority movements of the 1960s and 1970s (which were associated with rampant drug use) has made criticism of public servants (soldiers, firefighters, police etc...) very socially unacceptable. This is now why we are in the situation we have today. Socially the cops are Gods, and financially/politically they are.

2. Limited services outside municipal districts (remember the fire engine that turned up and watched a guy's house burn down because he wasn't covered?).

Such things are difficult to explain from an American to a European. it is no fault of your own, but you simply don't "get" the American mentality. Throughout American history, groups of people have strove to become self-reliant or independent from as many external influences as possible. In the modern society, this attitude has adapted into what is now popular libertarianism. This is where you get communities that have disestablished the traditional roles of government in favor of privatizing things like fire control. This kind of community wants to get as close to anarchy as possible that a strong wind could push over the council chambers and make it happen.

3. Lack of State-run healthcare.

Again, very long history that involves many battles between progressives asking for collective improvement with isolationists that wish for increased Federalism and self sufficiency.

4. Lack of understanding of the necessity of state-run healthcare.

This is a matter of opinion whether you want to admit it or not. Ultimately, you call it a necessity because your priority is on the public health as a whole. Many Americans disagree, which is why they do not argue for it. They understand as well as you do (well most people prob don't, but you get my point) and they simply reject it on more philosophical grounds.

5. Attitude to guns.

Threads upon threads of tired arguments about this and you have no clue about this at all? Do you just not bother to understand those you talk to?

6. Attitude to handling of guns (as in, keeping loaded weapons out of gun safes with children around.)

The gun community actually strictly lambastes people who don't practice proper gun safety. I don't expect you to know this though, because like me you don't know anything about the average gun owner unless you make the effort to go to the range with someone like I did.

[Tuuvi]

I said "much" not "most", but here are a few things that baffle and/or terrify me.

1. Lack of professional Constabulary, mostly elected Law Enforcement.

In my state you have to be certified as a peace officer before you can run as a sheriff. My own local sheriff has a pretty extensive background in law enforcement, just because we elect our Constables doesn't mean they're not professionals.

ACIN did pretty good job covering the rest, but I'd like to point out that there are regional differences in political beliefs and government across the US. In more liberal areas of the country you'll find plenty of people who support state-run healthcare, and are opposed to gun ownership. A lot of the horror stories you hear about police abuse, government incompetence, etc. are a result of local politics and management practices and don't represent the US as a whole.

[HoreTore]

So....

RVG is a Ba'athist now? Saddam appreciates your support.

[rvg]

RVG is a Ba'athist now? Saddam appreciates your support.

Saddam's dead, baby. Saddam's dead.

[Kralizec]

The Baath parties of Syria and Iraq didn't get along very well, you know...

Besides, it's perfectly possible to see Assad as the preferable option without being a fan of the guy or his family. In fact I'm leaning towards that direction myself. The best possible solution would be one where Assad leaves (in any way) and a stabile government takes it place which is somewhat democratic and usually respects the human rights of its residents. But I'm not that optimistic.

[rvg]

The best outcome would be for the rebels to win and install some kind of representative system, even if that system winds up being Islamist. At least that way, a few decades later when they're all regretting it, they'll have themselves to blame and not an outside oppressor...

Right, let's throw the minorities under the bus, after all it's not you who will be suffering under the islamist yoke. Great idea.