Syria

[ICantSpellDawg]

What I am missing in this discussion is the subtle game of high diplomatic stakes being played here, IMO. That is, the U.S. (and France, and the UK, and Turkey, and the Arab League, all independently, as most of you seem to forget in this U.S.-centered discussion) are raising the stakes with regards to Russia (and China by extension) by threatening to attack Syria more and more. What I think Washington is doing is creating an international climate of Western intervention, from which it is becoming harder to back down from with each passing day. In other words, Obama, Hollande, Cameron, Erdogan and the Saudis are implying with increasing vehemence (backed up even by Germany now) that they'll even go around the UN if they have to. This puts immense pressure on Moscow to bend and allow the UNSC to pass a resolution authorizing a punitive attack. In so doing they're banking on the assumption that Moscow doesn't want a break with the West over this. With the U.S. alone, maybe, but not with the whole West, including Germany. So I think they're trying to create a climate where a "Libya lite" resolution can be passed, but with a much more hardball diplomatic game.

The problem, of course, is: what if Russia doesn't blink? Then France, England, USA etc. have maneuvered themselves into a position from which they can't realistically back down anymore, without losing a lot of face. They've created an international situation in which backing down will create exactly what they're warning for right now: a green light for the use of chemical weapons. A self-fulfilling prophecy, which nobody wants, and which would force the West's hand if Russia doesn't allow the UNSC sanction to go through.

Those are the high stakes. They flow from the international norm, shared among virtually all countries, proscribing the use of WMDs. Playing up this norm without defending it would damage it, which of course is highly undesirable, and which makes the "no intervention" option quite unlikely by now, I think. It is now a question of UN-sanctioned intervention or no, not intervention or no.

P.S. I wouldn't worry about any military role for Russia (or Iran) in opposing intervention. Nobody in Moscow is prepared to defend anything except their own borders. Russia won't stick its neck out to try and save Assad's hide, not with the full force of NATO coming down on him.

Astute read on the situation. I agree.

[Papewaio]

I do not think we should act without UN support. It will set a bad precedent with the ascending superpower.

Not only that right now China and Russia being forced to agree on something isn't a good idea.

[HopAlongBunny]

Except, acting through NATO we affirm the power of the Western Alliance => further rubbing Russia's nose in the dirt.
After all, where is the Warsaw Pact now?

[Fisherking]

This is a situation that could turn out the same as Austrian intervention in Serbia. Anyone recall that one?

[The Wizard]

I honestly and sincerely can see no possible way whatsoever for this to develop past anything other than a military conflict involving Syria pitted against the West and its hangers-on. As a political event it may have much more fallout -- an even more intransigent China and Russia, to name just one possible outcome in high politics -- but there is next to no chance of a Western punitive expedition leading to a larger conflict.

I agree with Monty and The Wizard.
Syria is not interesting; not a hill to die on from a foreign policy perspective. But they have made it into one.
Will they double down on stupidity or lose face; history seems to point to doubling down.
The real foreign policy failure was painting themselves into the corner on an issue so trivial to interests.

Of course that might just be it.
The object may be to embarrass Russia.
Which is a powerful statement from the PoV of international dick-swinging; but is it worth the trouble.

I beg to differ, actually. This goes much further than a narrow idea of "national interests." Syria has become a "hill to die on" because it has violated one of the central norms governing international relations: the proscription of the use of WMDs. Of course this intersects with various other interests and events (not least of which is taking it to Assad, an old ally of Iran and enemy of the West), but it has essentially taken Damascus beyond the pale. There is an interest here to intervene, and that is to prevent the norm against the use of WMDs from weakening. The process is dynamic as the norm is both a structure of the international system as an object of politics (as witnessed by how it's being played up by France, USA, etc), but it has still created an actual interest among various countries to intervene.

I do not think we should act without UN support. It will set a bad precedent with the ascending superpower.

Not only that right now China and Russia being forced to agree on something isn't a good idea.

I agree. I am worried about the Western powers moving before having exhausted the legal frameworks and institutions they have at their disposal to generate international (and domestic!) goodwill. Attacking Syria should be a new Kosovo rather than a new Iraq, if it has to be done without UNSC approval at all.

[Sarmatian]

Why do people refer to Kosovo as a successful example of western interventionism, especially when compared to Iraq?

It left the province in hands of drug lords/mobsters/butchers/thieves/religious fundamentalists and the pretext for war was no more true than WMD's in Iraq.

[Fisherking]

Why do people refer to Kosovo as a successful example of western interventionism, especially when compared to Iraq?

It left the province in hands of drug lords/mobsters/butchers/thieves/religious fundamentalists and the pretext for war was no more true than WMD's in Iraq.

No, I seriously though Kosovo was a mistake from the outset. The Serbian leader was demonized in the press, sensational charges were made of systematic rape and wanton killings, maybe in part because the American President needed to improve his image.

But surely, no one could draw comparisons between that wrong headed mess and this one, right?

[Fisherking]

sorry for two in a row but:

http://www.france24.com/en/

AFP

Intercepted call ‘proves Syria used chemical weapons’
An intercepted phone call between Syrian officials in the wake of the alleged chemical weapons attack on August 21 convinced Washington that the country’s government was behind the massacre, according to Foreign Policy magazine.

How very convenient. We will never hear a tape, never have real verification, other than the word of a government that has lost all credibility due to their repeated lies by and for the agency making the report.

It makes the NSA look good, the administration look good and is supposed to boost our confidence in them.

I am not about to buy this line any more than the claim by NSA that they stopped 50 terrorists by monitoring phones in the US. They never released any of those names or the things they prevented did they?

Just why should we believe proven liars this time?

[Sarmatian]

I'm as happy to believe the Assad regime did it as the next guy, but nobody with a respectable cynical streak would ever take the government's blind word on something like this.

I really don't see how the rebels could have done it though. Are we to assume they got their hands on nerve gas? If so, why are they using it in Syria? Al Nusra and the other terrorist-linked groups in Syria would high-tail that stuff out of the country faster than you could call down a drone strike if they ever got their hands on some.

Realy the only two options that make sense are that the Assad regime decided to gas its own people, or that the shelling hit some kind of chemical facility. I think the former is more likely.

Rebels, and quite possibly even government forces aren't a homogenous group and at this point many of the factions involved probably don't have a clear chain of command. It could possibly be an order from a single idiot, inept handling, or an accidental hit.

Because Iraq is still a warzone.

Indeed, Kosovo's in a better shape simply by virtue of not being involved in a ground war, but in the slightly longer run, Iraq is much better position to actually create something successful. I don't see Kosovo improving in the next 50 years.

[HopAlongBunny]

How could this possibly happen!???


Cover Artist: Mark Frederickson

[Fisherking]

I'm as happy to believe the Assad regime did it as the next guy, but nobody with a respectable cynical streak would ever take the government's blind word on something like this.

I really don't see how the rebels could have done it though. Are we to assume they got their hands on nerve gas? If so, why are they using it in Syria? Al Nusra and the other terrorist-linked groups in Syria would high-tail that stuff out of the country faster than you could call down a drone strike if they ever got their hands on some.

Realy the only two options that make sense are that the Assad regime decided to gas its own people, or that the shelling hit some kind of chemical facility. I think the former is more likely.

I found that piece while looking on the site for a report filed in Dec 2012 of possible use of chemicals by the rebel forces after they captured a chlorine factory and a couple of similar warnings, more recently, but those are gone.

There are pictures of reported rebel chemical munitions captured and what they used to make them in the Russian press and others but there are problems with both sides IMO.

You can have a look at these and make up your mind if you believe them any more than the rest.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/video-sho...tack-in-syria/

http://www.infowars.com/syrian-rebel...un-inspectors/

http://www.latimes.com/world/worldno...,1287208.story

[ICantSpellDawg]

Obama is probably going to spike the ball on this one and ignore it. Go ahead, it isn't hard to do nothing and just move along.

[Montmorency]

Obama is probably going to spike the ball on this one and ignore it. Go ahead, it isn't hard to do nothing and just move along.

We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.

While it's very equivocal, if Obama just goes, 'Pshaw! I was just bluffing, is all', he and the United States will take a credibility hit.

We can't just be seen to be making idle statements about NBC.

[Papewaio]

Chlorine probably has such a small size that it can penetrate any normal air filter. It would require a sealed air supply. Even then chlorine oxidizes (rusts) a lot of materials.

Otherwise chlorine is a great cleaning agent, plenty of ways to neutralize it, biggest issue is not creating an acid as you clean it.

It is probably easier to make a fertilizer type bomb out of chlorine than a gas bomb.

[ICantSpellDawg]

While it's very equivocal, if Obama just goes, 'Pshaw! I was just bluffing, is all', he and the United States will take a credibility hit.

We can't just be seen to be making idle statements about NBC.

I dont know what they are planning, but the American consensus is to do nothing, because the American people are largely spineless cowards. You can see our critiques of the doves during the wind up to the last war. There is no action that could be taken which would cause them to vote for a police action. I was happy with the Obama decision regarding Libya And it went pretty well. What happened to that foreign policy advisor?

[Papewaio]

I don't think we are spineless. I just think first worlders have the attention span of a TV commerical.

Intervention done properly would not be a couple of air strikes for distracting news bites from the latest government polls.

It would be UN consensus for a full military intervention with the idea of implementing a Marshall plan level of long term thinking. It is going from a 25 minute mentality to a 25 year plus occupation with full martial law in effect.

You would need to rewrite the Syrian Consitution, remove all weapons from the populace. Provide education and training to make sure it gets a nice fat middle class over a twenty to thirty year period.

If you want democracy you need to take it slowly. Start with local council and mayors, work up to regions. Only to for state wide elections in year twenty+.

Military. Disband. Total disband. Start again from adults who are born post occupation start. Who have been well educated etc.

Essentially strip out every insitution. Flush it away and rebuild with the intent it can walk on its own two feet in at least a generation or two.

Until we in the west are prepared to station a miltary presence in the order of 10% of the local population, kiss the idea of any intervention being anything more then a distraction from local issues at home.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I don't think we are spineless. I just think first worlders have the attention span of a TV commerical.

Intervention done properly would not be a couple of air strikes for distracting news bites from the latest government polls.

It would be UN consensus for a full military intervention with the idea of implementing a Marshall plan level of long term thinking. It is going from a 25 minute mentality to a 25 year plus occupation with full martial law in effect.

You would need to rewrite the Syrian Consitution, remove all weapons from the populace. Provide education and training to make sure it gets a nice fat middle class over a twenty to thirty year period.

If you want democracy you need to take it slowly. Start with local council and mayors, work up to regions. Only to for state wide elections in year twenty+.

Military. Disband. Total disband. Start again from adults who are born post occupation start. Who have been well educated etc.

Essentially strip out every insitution. Flush it away and rebuild with the intent it can walk on its own two feet in at least a generation or two.

Until we in the west are prepared to station a miltary presence in the order of 10% of the local population, kiss the idea of any intervention being anything more then a distraction from local issues at home.

The same guy used strategic bombings in Libya to a favorable result. Why can't we do the same here; a situation with around 70k civilian deaths with 2 instances of chemical weapons use? The one thing that the Syrian people need is something that we have in abundance: force - and we wont give it to them. Unconscionable. A western hand is needed in conflicts like these - the smaller the better, but a handicap is better for our partners within Syria than negligence.

[Fragony]

The other chemical attacks http://rt.com/news/syria-investigate-un-chemical-116/

9% of the Americans support Dronebama in this, talk about a democratic deficit. I don't know how it is for France (hellowww you are broke, no money, nada) and England

Ah. Dronebama, the messias of european leftist intellectuals, change they can believe in, knows, for a fact, that it was Assad who did it. Why, I dunno.

[Fragony]

I know that, and they know it as well trust me on that one. Emperialism and zionism, the favorite words of gutmenschen, best spoken when rubbing the beard and lighting a pipe, goes great with moral and intellectual superiority

Gutmensch is kinda confused at the moment, even a weak nose needs half a fart to smell bullshit. But it's Obama. But Obama.. isn't... him

[Fragony]

I have no idea what Gutmensch means. It sounds edible.

It's a word we have here for leftist intellectuloco's. You know the type, beard, pipe, social study. Morally and intellectually superior, he's right, you are wrong. By default. Always wrong in the end though. Has respect.

[Papewaio]

The same guy used strategic bombings in Libya to a favorable result. Why can't we do the same here; a situation with around 70k civilian deaths with 2 instances of chemical weapons use? The one thing that the Syrian people need is something that we have in abundance: force - and we wont give it to them. Unconscionable. A western hand is needed in conflicts like these - the smaller the better, but a handicap is better for our partners within Syria than negligence.

Benghazi was not a favourable result.

[Ironside]

Chlorine probably has such a small size that it can penetrate any normal air filter. It would require a sealed air supply. Even then chlorine oxidizes (rusts) a lot of materials.

You can do it with an extra filter. But I suspect the gas mask starts to be too clumpsy at that point.

Anyway back to my question. The theory was that it's the rebels who used gas and why the US is then jumping on Assad instead of the rebels. I do get feeling that this is a big mess and the US is trying to get something half decent out of it long term.

Using chemical weapons is a big no no (the NBC list is there for a reason), so that it's forcing a severe response is not surprising.

[Fragony]

You can do it with an extra filter. But I suspect the gas mask starts to be too clumpsy at that point.

Anyway back to my question. The theory was that it's the rebels who used gas and why the US is then jumping on Assad instead of the rebels. I do get feeling that this is a big mess and the US is trying to get something half decent out of it long term.

Using chemical weapons is a big no no (the NBC list is there for a reason), so that it's forcing a severe response is not surprising.

A lot of the rebels are ex-army, they could have exactly the same stuff. Obama really spoke before his turn. Who are the rebels anyway, group of rebels just stole weapons from other rebels, American guy was captured and tortured by rebels, escaped, and other rebels patched him up and handed him over to the American embassy. Who is who I doubt anyone really knows

[Fragony]

Dead children miraculously comming back to live only to be killed again , it doesn't just happen in Palistinia

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4a9_1377562800

Or they breed very fast of course. Which they do, would shame rabbits enough to CO2 teh planet that badly

[Fisherking]

Obama’s support seems to be dropping but that could just speed up the process.



http://www.jpost.com/International/U...osition-324604

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23845800

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...not-slam-dunk/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...yria-response/

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...-consultation/

[Fragony]

Awesome, Kurdish whole female Syrian militia says: screw both the regime and the rebels. I'm in love with every one of them.

[rvg]

I would like to thank the British parliamentarians for voting "nay" on the military action. Your vote might be just enough to tip the scales here in the states firmly against any intervention. Cheers to torpedoing a pointless war before it had a chance to start. Well done.

[rvg]

Wait a minute... You're willing to drag America into a needless war just to settle scores with the GOP?

[Rhyfelwyr]

I really hope these war plans get shut down, I can only wonder what is motivating Cameron right now.

[Papewaio]

I hope GC that Obama doesn't go through with this.

Otherwise you might get a chance to update that profile pic in another forum wearing a gas mask in a tank... You need to finish that polish campaign in space.