SYRIA thread

[CrossLOPER]

So even if the list is fake (which I don't rule out) the names on it can't serve as a clue to determine whether it was so.

Fair enough.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

It would be hard to claim defence when you mount an offence in a different country. Unless you're the USA of course and then invading on the other side of the planet is defence.

It's been a yank mantra for years that the best defense is a good offense. We would much rather combat terrorists with Hellfire missiles in Yemen than in New Jersey.

[Gilrandir]

What the hell is a "Greek Imperial Putinist"? A Byzantine on kryptonite?

Much simpler than that: an Imperial Putinist from Greece.

[Kagemusha]

When the opposing sides are Assad and Putin versus Al Qaida, Al Nusra and Saudi´s. It starts to go little at the meh department. When the bombing was at the Isis controlled cities. Press did not print a word about the human catastrophe looming. Now we are supposed to be bleeding our hearts out when it is Saudi backed Wahhabist areas. Sorry but the hypocrisy is just too much..

[Crandar]

I agree with your sentiment, but I think it would be more accurate to say Syria and Russia, instead of Assad and Putin.
I am sure you didn't do it intentionally, but the tendency of many journalists to describe the governments in Damascus and Moscow, by mentioning only the heads of state is a clever propaganda tactic.

You can dehumanize your opponent much more easily, if you identify him with a single authoritarian figure, instead of saying the government, the state, the people or the society.

Much simpler than that: an Imperial Putinist from Greece.

I am not going to insist, if you feel generous enough, please do explain your cryptic message, especially the imperial part, appropriately.

If not, so be it, I am going to survive, even if my curiosity remains unsatisfied.

[Montmorency]

I am sure you didn't do it intentionally, but the tendency of many journalists to describe the governments in Damascus and Moscow, by mentioning only the heads of state is a clever propaganda tactic.

I'm pretty sure this is a general journalistic practice, to refer to countries by the head of government or by the capital of the country.

[Gilrandir]

I am not going to insist, if you feel generous enough, please do explain your cryptic message, especially the imperial part, appropriately.

If not, so be it, I am going to survive, even if my curiosity remains unsatisfied.

This is thread derailment, but since I didn't initiate it i will respond.

I didn't ask you to explain why you consider me a nationalist, though in no post of mine I wrote about supremacy or flawlessness of Ukrainians. To tell the truth, my general opinion of Ukrainians is far from overly positive. I was and am concerned with the country, not with the nation which qualifies me as a patriot. Yet you persist in your misconception.

Now about imperialism: in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia you took the side of Russia because Ukraine is infested with evil nazis (never paying attention that at the war in Donbas Russian nazis were aplenty). Current Russian leader (Putin) took/resumed a course to rebuilding the empire and gathering back all lands where Russian is spoken. Since you took the side of Russia you support this course which makes you an Imperial Putinist.

[CrossLOPER]

If not, so be it, I am going to survive, even if my curiosity remains unsatisfied.

He calls people things like that when he runs out of youtube footage filled with "proof", sort of like when Fragony starts using terms like "cultural marxism" or mentions anything related to Angela Merkel or arranged Muslim marriages.

[Gilrandir]

He calls people things like that when he runs out of youtube footage filled with "proof", sort of like when Fragony starts using terms like "cultural marxism" or mentions anything related to Angela Merkel or arranged Muslim marriages.

I call people things ONLY after they do the same to me.

As for youtube footage proofs, talk with Crandar. He was the one to show such footage entitled "Ukrainian nazi beating a Mongol on a Barcelona subway train".

[CrossLOPER]

I call people things ONLY after they do the same to me.

As for youtube footage proofs, talk with Crandar. He was the one to show such footage entitled "Ukrainian nazi beating a Mongol on a Barcelona subway train".

You two should marry. You would be SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO cute. <3

[Crandar]

Hey, you know what they say about teenagers that argue a lot, right?

...

So you just misspelled Imperialist (and misused, but OK). I am fine with that, it's just your personal opinion, with which I do not agree, but why didn't you explain it in the first place, instead of leaving it unchanged, except for changing the second adjective to genitive? Also, lighten up a little and let the Mongol affair, which I don't even remember, go. It's been already like 4 years since France became again the 2nd largest European state since the '90s.

I'm pretty sure this is a general journalistic practice, to refer to countries by the head of government or by the capital of the country.

Is it though? My personal impression is that the baddies (North Korea, Iran under Ahmadinejad, Russia, Syria and etc.) tend to be referred by the head of government in a disproportionate manner. Even cases where the surname is used as an adjective to nouns like government or administration seem much rarer. It's just my opinion, though, so take it with a pinch of salt, but I think it would be an interesting subject ot search.

[Gilrandir]

So you just misspelled Imperialist (and misused, but OK). I am fine with that, it's just your personal opinion, with which I do not agree, but why didn't you explain it in the first place, instead of leaving it unchanged, except for changing the second adjective to genitive?

I wrote "Greek Imperial Putinist" then made the meaning clearer by changing it into "Imperial Putinist from Greece".

Please, tell me:
1. Where did I use "imperialist"?
2. How could I have misspelled it if I never used it. If you mean that I misspelled "Imperial", please give the correct spelling of this word.
3. What second adjective did I change to genitive? I changed the first adjective to a personal noun in the common case.

As for the absence of initial explanation, I had thought the meaning clear, but after your inquiry I realized that there could be two readings of the phrase I used. Just like "Second language acquisition conference" can be understood as "A conference on acquisition of a second language" and "The second conference on language acquisition". Or famous examples like "Visiting relatives can be annoying", "Flying planes can be dangerous", "Anyone who cooks ducks out of the washing" which can be ambiguous or misleading (so called garden path strategy). That's the problem of analytical languages.

Also, lighten up a little and let the Mongol affair, which I don't even remember, go.

I just wanted you to realize that before accusing others of referring to unreliable sources one must be absolutely sure that he is exempt from such blunders.

It's been already like 4 years since France became again the 2nd largest European state since the '90s.

Officially - not. Even Greece doesn't acknowledge it.

But I don't understand why you don't "let go" the Crimea annexation. Do you think you can prove something when you bring it into dicussing Syria? Or do you think that you can hurt me with a reminder and score some point? Or do you wish me to reciprocate every time with Constantinople?

But if we for a moment forget about our squabble and remember the thread topic: on how "private" are the mercenaries from Wagner:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.b914c8d477af

[CrossLOPER]

Here's what happens when you don't properly brainwash the random children you kidnap off the street for your propoganda:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43196397

[rory_20_uk]

The numbers of people who joined the armies of Europe in WW1 show that this is a well-trodden road: "Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"

Every state would like the populace to lie down their lives for the good of the state.

[Sarmatian]

I can stomach a lot, comes with the territory (in this case literally) but (ab)using children is definitely not one of them. Go and make a martyr out of yourself, you sick, crazy ****.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I can stomach a lot, comes with the territory (in this case literally) but (ab)using children is definitely not one of them. Go and make a martyr out of yourself, you sick, crazy ****.

Sadly, teaching kids to revere martyrs has been a part of the Islamo-terrorist playbook for a while now. Sad to see a NATO leader playing the same card.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

The numbers of people who joined the armies of Europe in WW1 show that this is a well-trodden road: "Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"

Every state would like the populace to lie down their lives for the good of the state.

States MUST have a cadre of persons willing to risk such a sacrifice to be successful in an armed conflict. Patton's comments about dying for your country apply though.

Prior to WW1, most of the great powers had mandatory conscription followed by reserve status for all male citizens. Only the UK began the war with a volunteer army and no draft.

[Husar]

States MUST have a cadre of persons willing to risk such a sacrifice to be successful in an armed conflict. Patton's comments about dying for your country apply though.

Prior to WW1, most of the great powers had mandatory conscription followed by reserve status for all male citizens. Only the UK began the war with a volunteer army and no draft.

Yes, but volunteers were everywhere:

https://www.bl.uk/world-war-one/arti...and-volunteers

However, even countries with long traditions of conscription also had large volunteering movements. In Germany, around half a million men came forward. The great rush was at the start of the war: in the first 10 days 143,922 men enlisted in Prussian units alone. France’s voluntary enlistments were smaller but steadier, reaching 187,905 men by the end of hostilities. In multinational Austria-Hungary, men appear to have been less willing to volunteer for the Emperor’s army, although they promptly obeyed call up orders. Some nationalist movements did recruit successfully, however. The Polish Legionaries, the largest of these forces, had 21,000 volunteers by 1917.

[spmetla]

Sadly, teaching kids to revere martyrs has been a part of the Islamo-terrorist playbook for a while now. Sad to see a NATO leader playing the same card.

Under Erdogan Turkey has become the NATO ally we need but don't really want. He can push pretty far because he has a lot of leverage with NATO and with the EU (flow of migrants and cooperation with FRONTEX, Black Sea access, Incirlik airbase).
Would we fare better with Turkey in the camp of present day Russia or remain with NATO/EU being a sort of check on its behavior?

Here's another sad story on the enduring Syria problem:
Syria conflict: Women 'sexually exploited in return for aid'
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-43206297

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Women in Syria have been sexually exploited by men delivering aid on behalf of the UN and international charities, the BBC has learned.

Aid workers said the men would trade food and lifts for sexual favours.

Despite warnings about the abuse three years ago, a new report shows it is continuing in the south of the country.

UN agencies and charities said they had zero tolerance of exploitation and were not aware of any cases of abuse by partner organisations in the region.

Aid workers told the BBC that the exploitation is so widespread that some Syrian women are refusing to go to distribution centres because people would assume they had offered their bodies for the aid they brought home.

One worker claimed that some humanitarian agencies were turning a blind eye to the exploitation because using third parties and local officials was the only way of getting aid into dangerous parts of Syria that international staff could not access.

The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) conducted an assessment of gender based violence in the region last year and concluded that humanitarian assistance was being exchanged for sex in various governorates in Syria.

The report, entitled "Voices from Syria 2018", said: "Examples were given of women or girls marrying officials for a short period of time for 'sexual services' in order to receive meals; distributors asking for telephone numbers of women and girls; giving them lifts to their houses 'to take something in return' or obtaining distributions 'in exchange for a visit to her home' or 'in exchange for services, such as spending a night with them'."

Syria conflict: Will powers end up in direct war?
Why is there a war in Syria?
It added: "Women and girls 'without male protectors', such as widows and divorcees as well as female IDPs (Internally Displaced Persons), were regarded as particularly vulnerable to sexual exploitation."
............

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Under Erdogan Turkey has become the NATO ally we need but don't really want. He can push pretty far because he has a lot of leverage with NATO and with the EU (flow of migrants and cooperation with FRONTEX, Black Sea access, Incirlik airbase).
Would we fare better with Turkey in the camp of present day Russia or remain with NATO/EU being a sort of check on its behavior?

Here's another sad story on the enduring Syria problem:
Syria conflict: Women 'sexually exploited in return for aid'
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-43206297

Turkey is still trending Islamist. I do not see that changing. That airbase is not gonna be worth it if things continue.

Women in war zones are exploited sexually. That will not change.

[Montmorency]

France24 published quotes from a "paramilitary chief" or recruiter for Wagner. This fellow claims 218 dead Russians (not overall fatalities), with about 150 bodies recovered.

“If you sign up with a private military company, you have sold yourself to them for money,” he said. “The company can use you however it wants. What will happen to you after your death? If you’ve been turned into mincemeat, so what? They put you in a bag, close the coffin and – in the best-case scenario – send you home. In the worst, they bury you there. If you are ready to earn money by killing people and defending the commercial interests of others, then that’s fine.”

“The goal is financial revenue and the possibility of taking control of a large market for oil resources so our country can control it,” he said. “I think that’s a good thing."

"We didn’t start this war. But it’s up to us to finish it."

Seems not quite legit, so what's going on? Disinformation from Moscow? Any more new scoops?


Meanwhile, Putin is putting out campaign ads to make Roy Moore proud.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Sarmatian]

I don't understand,why is this a Putin ad? This is "go out and vote" ad.

Do you mean because of the gay guy?

[Montmorency]

It's not a non-partisan PSA, and it's not from a Western-oriented leftist.

But you're right. To be more precise, I should say "pro-Putin". I don't suppose he involves himself with such minutiae.

Reminds me of this.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

It's not a non-partisan PSA, and it's not from a Western-oriented leftist.

But you're right. To be more precise, I should say "pro-Putin". I don't suppose he involves himself with such minutiae.

Reminds me of this.

But we didn't get an "I'm Vlad Putin and I approved this message..."

[Montmorency]

But we didn't get an "I'm Vlad Putin and I approved this message..."

Why so coy?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-of-not-voting

Russians who don’t vote in next month’s presidential elections risk seeing their country transformed into a gay-friendly state where people in their 50s are eligible for military conscription, a homophobic and xenophobic viral video has warned.

The three-minute video, which features professional actors, was uploaded to social media on Friday and Saturday and has been watched by millions of people. The actors say they do not know who ordered the video.

The video is set on 17 March, the eve of the presidential election, and starts with a middle-aged man mocking his wife, who wants to set an alarm clock to get up and vote. “As if they won’t elect someone without you,” he says.

He then falls asleep and dreams that a military official, flanked by two soldiers, including a black man, attempts to conscript him into the army. “I’m 52,” he protests. “Excellent. The conscription age has been increased to 60.”

He then goes into the kitchen, where a tattooed gay man sits filing his nails. “Who’s this?” he asks his wife. “I’m a gay on a homestay,” the man tells him, after which his wife reminds him that under a new law, Russian families are obliged to take in gay people who have been abandoned by their partners.

Shocked, the man rushes into the toilet, where an intercom says “toilet time is restricted”. In the tradition of classic horror films, he apparently wakes up, only to find himself in bed with the gay man. He then wakes up for real, and urges his wife to come with him to the polling station “before it’s too late!”

Opposition journalists believe the video was produced by either President Vladimir Putin’s campaign team or the government-controlled election committee. The Kremlin is eager to see a big turnout to underscore Putin’s legitimacy. Alexei Navalny, the opposition figurehead, has been urging Russians to boycott the election, which he says is rigged. Putin’s campaign slogan is A strong president. A strong Russia.

The implication in not voting is pretty clear. Presumably the ones who funded this ad aren't aligned with people boycotting the elections, critical of their legitimacy, or supportive of gay marriage and other LGBT rights. So your options are Putin's campaign/regime (he's running as an independent) or supporters, the United Russia party (which dominates the government and presumably retains substantive ties to Putin) or supporters, and the regional governments (kleptocrats complicit with Putin's governance) or supporters. In American analogy, if an ad like this played here without any disclosures or name-dropping, would you assume it was for: (A) a Democratic candidate; (B) a neutral PSA to increase turnout; (C) an alt-right/Trumpist candidate?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

["You see, rabbit, what a generous selection you have"]

[Sarmatian]

Well, if you focus on gay part, you may get an impression that this purely for Putin's benefit. Or anti opposition as they tend to be more lax on gay issues.

At the same time, if you focus on conscription part, you may get that this is anti Putin, as he's seen as personally responsible for Russian military interventionism as of late. And the video actually says "THE president" ordered conscription up to 60 years, not "new president". Putin pretty much personifies the office of the president. Or that it is pro opposition as they tend to be against military interventionism.

[Gilrandir]

Well, if you focus on gay part, you may get an impression that this purely for Putin's benefit. Or anti opposition as they tend to be more lax on gay issues.

At the same time, if you focus on conscription part, you may get that this is anti Putin, as he's seen as personally responsible for Russian military interventionism as of late. And the video actually says "THE president" ordered conscription up to 60 years, not "new president". Putin pretty much personifies the office of the president. Or that it is pro opposition as they tend to be against military interventionism.

It is only a superficial conclusion that the video is politically neutral, it just urges to participate in the elections.

From what I hear and see I can gather that the main challenge the Kremlin faces is the low turn out. Most likely Putin wants to put his claim to legitimacy beyond any doubt. The turnout of 50% or about that is likely to give grounds for such doubts. So most local governors received the 70/70 assignment: they are to ensure the turnout of 70% and 70% out of those must vote for Putin. In some regions, though (like Chechnya), both figures are above 90% so the local authorities don't have to worry much. Moreover, the opposition leader (Navalny) whose participation in elections was banned exhorted everybody to abstain.

So the call to go and vote is in fact what Putin needs.

[Strike For The South]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/i...attack-n863821

Syria launches Chemical attack
Israel launches air strikes
Israel Kils Iranians
Russia says they can't find any evidence of chemical attack.

What a shitshow, and of course the people who died so heinously had no voice with which to stop it. The pictures are disgusting and heartbreaking. My blood pressure rises just thinking about it.

The more and more this plodding excuse for an administration continues, the more and more it looks like that its lasting legacy will be a resurgent and angry Russia.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

As always in history, the "regular folk" caught up in events generally bear the harshest suffering. This is another sad example.


Strike: While this administration's reactive and somewhat disjointed foreign policy (outside trade at least) has certainly contributed, a resurgent Russia was largely inevitable and has been Putin's consistent aim since reaching a position of national prominence in the late 1990s. The anger -- Russia's "chip on the shoulder" that they are not viewed as equals or accorded the respect they deserve -- goes back at least to Peter I and probably earlier. Trump can claim no more than to be the latest focus for it.

[rory_20_uk]

We hear about it here, and not about it elsewhere in the world - which doesn't make it right but does show really really don't care very much and would rather it could happen without us being told about it.
One large problem is most Syrians have no particular love for the place and certainly not enough to endanger their own lives. And I completely understand that. I'd not be prepared to lay down my life for my country - and my country is almost infinitely better than Syria.
But without hundreds of thousands of armed and motivated troops who can if not outfight all comers then at least make the fight not worth the effort it will remain a game of Chess with human pieces: no one really wants to win and no one wants anyone else to win either.