Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

«‹›3125 »

Herstory Begins Now: Aug 5, 2003; SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

Where are the hordes of nato mercenaries when you need them.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 13:23

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 25, 2024 19:53

Hefty Leftist: Jun 26, 2011; "You know how vodka or whiskey are distilled multiple times to taste good? It's the same with shit. After being digested for the third time shit starts to taste reeeeeeaaaally yummy."

Brown Moses posted:

This is apparently tanks and troops being moved on the Homs highway this morning
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMYqHSiP7ZQ

I can only hope most people fled Homs, but that's probably not likely. I guess we know what's going to happen next, if soldiers are going in.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 14:24

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Here's the damage done to Homs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpXmqYu4rTc

# ? Feb 8, 2012 14:29

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Here's a poll from YouGov

quote:

� 66% oppose sending British allied troops into Syria to help overthrow President Bashar al-Assad; 9% support it, 24% don't know

� 60% support a no-fly zone over Syria to stop the Syrian air force from attacking rebels or civilians; 18% oppose, 22% don't know

� 55% oppose the idea of providing arms to civilian rebels; 16% support it, 28% don't know

� 60% oppose the idea of sending British allied troops into Syria to protect civilians from attack; 18% support it, 22% don't know

Considering those findings lets have a poll of our own.
1 - Do you support or oppose sending British allied troops into Syria to help overthrow President Bashar al-Assad?
2 - Do you support or oppose a no-fly zone over Syria to stop the Syrian air force from attacking rebels or civilians?
3 - Do you support or oppose the idea of providing arms to civilian rebels?
4 - Do you support or oppose the idea of sending British allied troops into Syria to protect civilians from attack?

Personally I'm opposed to all of them:
1 - A ground invasion would just be a huge loving disaster for the entire region.
2 - A no-fly zone would be totally ineffective as the atrocities are being committed by ground troops.
3 - Providing weapons would be problematic as the opposition is pretty divided at the moment, and can't be said to represent a wide number of different groups in Syria, such as the Kurds, and those weapons could end up being used in oppressing other groupsin the long term.
4 - Same as number one.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 15:14

Jut: May 16, 2005; by Ralp

Brown Moses posted:

Here's a poll from YouGov

Considering those findings lets have a poll of our own.
1 - Do you support or oppose sending British allied troops into Syria to help overthrow President Bashar al-Assad?
2 - Do you support or oppose a no-fly zone over Syria to stop the Syrian air force from attacking rebels or civilians?
3 - Do you support or oppose the idea of providing arms to civilian rebels?
4 - Do you support or oppose the idea of sending British allied troops into Syria to protect civilians from attack?

Personally I'm opposed to all of them:
1 - A ground invasion would just be a huge loving disaster for the entire region.
2 - A no-fly zone would be totally ineffective as the atrocities are being committed by ground troops.
3 - Providing weapons would be problematic as the opposition is pretty divided at the moment, and can't be said to represent a wide number of different groups in Syria, such as the Kurds, and those weapons could end up being used in oppressing other groups in the long term.
4 - Same as number one.

Pretty much the same opinion here. Even more so since it's yet to be seen how Libya is going to play out.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 15:50

Cable Guy: Jul 18, 2005; I don't expect any trouble, but we'll be handing these out later...; Slippery Tilde

Ditto... Not so much that I oppose such action... just that I realize how futile and ultimately counter-productive it would be, so unfortunately, oppose across the board.

:smith:

# ? Feb 8, 2012 16:00

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Here's a destroyed home in Homs, with a grieving man crying over a dead woman
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsRDDINL9NU

# ? Feb 8, 2012 16:20

Acebuckeye13: Nov 2, 2010; If you or someone you know has a gambling problem, crisis counseling and referral services can be accessed by calling
1-800-GAMBLER; Ultra Carp

Brown Moses posted:

Here's a poll from YouGov

Considering those findings lets have a poll of our own.
1 - Do you support or oppose sending British allied troops into Syria to help overthrow President Bashar al-Assad?
2 - Do you support or oppose a no-fly zone over Syria to stop the Syrian air force from attacking rebels or civilians?
3 - Do you support or oppose the idea of providing arms to civilian rebels?
4 - Do you support or oppose the idea of sending British allied troops into Syria to protect civilians from attack?

Personally I'm opposed to all of them:
1 - A ground invasion would just be a huge loving disaster for the entire region.
2 - A no-fly zone would be totally ineffective as the atrocities are being committed by ground troops.
3 - Providing weapons would be problematic as the opposition is pretty divided at the moment, and can't be said to represent a wide number of different groups in Syria, such as the Kurds, and those weapons could end up being used in oppressing other groupsin the long term.
4 - Same as number one.

It's a hell of a thing. You WANT to do something, but those actions would just make the whole thing even worse.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 16:27

Golbez: Oct 9, 2002; 1 2 3!
If you want to take a shot at me get in line, line
1 2 3!
Baby, I've had all my shots and I'm fine

What's the point of a no-fly zone? He hasn't touched his planes yet, either because he hasn't had to, or because the air force is unwilling to attack. Now, if he did start using them? ... What can you do? Any military action in Syria would instantly leak into Turkey and probably Israel and you've got a regional war on your hands.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 16:28

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

What people mean by no-fly zone is close air support.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 16:30

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Xandu posted:

What people mean by no-fly zone is close air support.

Well this is the thing, there's a no-fly zone and a Libyan style "no-fly zone". The UN resolution on Libya never said it was limited to a no-fly zone, but anti-NATO anti-imperialist types got it in their head it did, and got very upset about it.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 16:32

Namarrgon: Dec 23, 2008; Congratulations on not getting fit in 2011!

So would a Libya-style NFZ help?

# ? Feb 8, 2012 16:37

Golbez: Oct 9, 2002; 1 2 3!
If you want to take a shot at me get in line, line
1 2 3!
Baby, I've had all my shots and I'm fine

If NATO shoots down a Syrian plane, would Syria attack Turkey?

# ? Feb 8, 2012 16:43

Al-Saqr: Nov 11, 2007; One Day I Will Return To Your Side.

Meanwhile in Saudi, a journalist on twitter said some things that has been interpreted as a disrespect on the prophet Mohammad, the entire wahhabi establishment went bonkers, the minister of culture banned him from writing in the country ever again, and the king issued an arrest warrant on him.

As we speak he has fled the country.

Meanwhile, the sex orgy parties, alchohol consumption, billion-dollars of corruption and all manners of debauchery continues and people are still dying from floods that could've been solved years ago and the national infrastructure (as well as the middle class) is collapsing.

KEEP MAKIN' THE PROPHET PROUD, SAUDI.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 16:43

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Namarrgon posted:

So would a Libya-style NFZ help?

Well Syria has a much bigger military, so it would require a much larger commitment by NATO and her allies to have the same effect, and reports throughout the Libyan conflict suggest NATO was pretty stretched just in Libya, so I'd doubt that would be possible in Syria.

There's also the issue there's not the same safe areas like the rebels had in Libya, so even if there was a NFZ it would require a lot more work for the FSA to get to the same position as the Libyan rebels were in even before they started taking more and more cities.

And then you have to consider that Syria borders Turkey, with all of Turkey's cities being in SCUD missile range, so if things went really badly wrong you could see Assad using those.

And then there's Iran and Lebanon, plus the more complex demographics of the country which would probably make the problems with Tawerghans in Libya look like a storm in a tea cup.

Pretty much any option apart from an immediate peace process will have terrrible consequences. The next best realisitc option is Assad wiping out his opponents quickly, avoiding a long civil war, and even that is loving awful.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 16:45

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

Al-Saqr posted:

Meanwhile in Saudi, a journalist on twitter said some things that has been interpreted as a disrespect on the prophet Mohammad, the entire wahhabi establishment went bonkers, the minister of culture banned him from writing in the country ever again, and the king issued an arrest warrant on him.

As we speak he has fled the country.

This case is so hosed up. Here's an english article on it.

http://saudijeans.org/2012/02/08/hamza-kashgari/

# ? Feb 8, 2012 16:58

Jut: May 16, 2005; by Ralp

Brown Moses posted:

Well Syria has a much bigger military, so it would require a much larger commitment by NATO and her allies to have the same effect, and reports throughout the Libyan conflict suggest NATO was pretty stretched just in Libya, so I'd doubt that would be possible in Syria.

There's also the issue there's not the same safe areas like the rebels had in Libya, so even if there was a NFZ it would require a lot more work for the FSA to get to the same position as the Libyan rebels were in even before they started taking more and more cities.

And then you have to consider that Syria borders Turkey, with all of Turkey's cities being in SCUD missile range, so if things went really badly wrong you could see Assad using those.

And then there's Iran and Lebanon, plus the more complex demographics of the country which would probably make the problems with Tawerghans in Libya look like a storm in a tea cup.

Pretty much any option apart from an immediate peace process will have terrrible consequences. The next best realisitc option is Assad wiping out his opponents quickly, avoiding a long civil war, and even that is loving awful.

Yet again, in full agreement. So why is the international community butthurt over Russia and China vetoing a UNSCR that they claimed could pave the way for future UNSCR's that could authorise forcible removal of power from Assad? And at the same time rubbishing Russia's calls for peace talks?
Coldwar Realpolitik?

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:01

Herstory Begins Now: Aug 5, 2003; SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

Jut posted:

Yet again, in full agreement. So why is the international community butthurt over Russia and China vetoing a UNSCR that they claimed could pave the way for future UNSCR's that could authorise forcible removal of power from Assad? And at the same time rubbishing Russia's calls for peace talks?
Coldwar Realpolitik?

Because every day that Assad keeps shelling a city full of civilians, the less likely any peace process is. You can only kill so many of peoples' family before they lose sight of peace and only want revenge.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:04

Jut: May 16, 2005; by Ralp

The-Mole posted:

Because every day that Assad keeps shelling a city full of civilians, the less likely any peace process is. You can only kill so many of peoples' family before they lose sight of peace and only want revenge.

It looks like the opposition have two choices at the moment though
1) Negotiate
2) Die

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:06

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Jut posted:

Yet again, in full agreement. So why is the international community butthurt over Russia and China vetoing a UNSCR that they claimed could pave the way for future UNSCR's that could authorise forcible removal of power from Assad? And at the same time rubbishing Russia's calls for peace talks?
Coldwar Realpolitik?

I get the feeling the UN forced the vote knowing full well Russia could veto it, so they could claim Russia had no interest in coming up with a real solution to the crisis, thus letting them pursue their own plans outside the UN, which you can see in the events of the last few days. Just look at this from moments ago

quote:

Russia has to "look at its conscience" following its veto of the UN resolution calling on Syria's president to quit, David Cameron said today according to PA.

Speaking in the Commons, Cameron said:

quote:
Frankly, Russia and China set themselves against Arab opinion and world opinion in passing what would have been a strong and good UN resolution.

What we now need to see, and Britain will be playing a big part in this, is real engagement with the opposition groups both inside and outside Syria - bringing together the strongest possible international alliance through a contact group so that we can co-ordinate our efforts with respect to getting rid of this dreadful regime and then making sure with the EU and other bodies we continue with the sanctions and pressure.

I think the bloodshed in Syria is absolutely appalling. I think the Russians have to look at their consciences and realise what they have done.

But the rest of the world will keep on fighting as hard as it can to give the Syrian people a chance to choose their own future.

I think it's mainly about the West and it's Arab allies versus Russia and China and their Arab allies, battling over influence in the new Middle East. They've picked their sides, now there battling over Syria.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:07

Mattksa: Apr 11, 2006

I'm currently living in the Eastern part of Saudi Arabia and after speaking with numerous coworkers and talking with some embassy people I'd highly recommend that anyone else in the region avoid Bahrain (especially Manama) over the next few weeks. Apparently things are going to start heating up again this week due to the 1 year Anniversary of the February 14th protests. I'd expect to see reports of additional unfortunate incidents occur over the next month or so.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:11

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Tim Marshall of Sky News has an interesting update on the diplomatic situation

quote:

UK For Sec has spoken on phone to Russia's Lavrov. Sky News understands it was a 'frank discussion'.....
Sources say Lavrov told Hague today on Syria 'no proof Assad is bombing Homs' described to me as 'an extraordinary position to take'.
Sky sources suggest Lavrov was told by Assad yesterday that he wasn't using his heavy weapons in Homs.
On a positive note..I'm told UK and Russia agree they need to keep supporting Arab League plans and monitors.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:12

Al-Saqr: Nov 11, 2007; One Day I Will Return To Your Side.

you know I never quite realized just how well-armed the Syrian army is, I had always assumed they were a shambles army with t-72's, but they've got stuff like freaking T-90's and BTRs by the thousands that they can throw left and right and every image of their regular soldiers (not shabiha) has them fully decked in equipment and armour.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:12

etalian: Mar 20, 2006

Al-Saqr posted:

you know I never quite realized just how well-armed the Syrian army is, I had always assumed they were a shambles army with t-72's, but they've got stuff like freaking T-90's and BTRs by the thousands that they can throw left and right.

Lots of cozy arms deals with the Russian has really helped Syria over the years to upgrade their military, so it will be hard fight.

Unlike in Libya where the military was pretty much gutted by the divide and conquer mentality. Plus it didn't help that massive amounts of equipment was not correctly maintained and the regime troops havd a wide range in in both loyalty and training quality.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:15

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

And that's why any military intervention would just be a disaster, you'd pretty much need a full on NATO invasion from Turkey and Jordan for it to have a rapid conclusion, and even then 10,000's would die. The way I see it the only solution for Syria that doesn't result in at a minimum 1000's dying is a peace process.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:19

Herstory Begins Now: Aug 5, 2003; SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

Jut posted:

It looks like the opposition have two choices at the moment though
1) Negotiate
2) Die

3) Take as many Assad supporters with them as they can. Eventually none will be left.

Brown Moses posted:

And that's why any military intervention would just be a disaster, you'd pretty much need a full on NATO invasion from Turkey and Jordan for it to have a rapid conclusion, and even then 10,000's would die. The way I see it the only solution for Syria that doesn't result in at a minimum 1000's dying is a peace process.

I think Syria is the best armed country anyone has ever considered intervening in.

Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Feb 8, 2012

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:21

Golbez: Oct 9, 2002; 1 2 3!
If you want to take a shot at me get in line, line
1 2 3!
Baby, I've had all my shots and I'm fine

Brown Moses posted:

And that's why any military intervention would just be a disaster, you'd pretty much need a full on NATO invasion from Turkey and Jordan for it to have a rapid conclusion, and even then 10,000's would die. The way I see it the only solution for Syria that doesn't result in at a minimum 1000's dying is a peace process.

What about Assad having a "heart attack"? What if he were removed from the equation?

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:23

Al-Saqr: Nov 11, 2007; One Day I Will Return To Your Side.

Golbez posted:

What about Assad having a "heart attack"? What if he were removed from the equation?

You REALLY dont want to know what his brothers and uncles are like.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:26

Jut: May 16, 2005; by Ralp

Golbez posted:

What about Assad having a "heart attack"? What if he were removed from the equation?

Even more of a mess. Internal Bathist struggle, military become the king makers...messy

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:26

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Yeah, you'd basically have to gather his friends and family into one place and blow it up at once. I think if his brother was in power things would be much worse then they already are, he's the one whose in charge of all the killing at the moment.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:30

Golbez: Oct 9, 2002; 1 2 3!
If you want to take a shot at me get in line, line
1 2 3!
Baby, I've had all my shots and I'm fine

What about a military coup? Sure, they all seem to be on board with Bashar, but if he were removed and his uncle is so much worse they might start having misgivings. Or a high up general has a "heart attack" and suddenly the head of the military is a little more reform-minded.

I'm not only saying there's other options, but I'm also trying to find out what they are.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:50

etalian: Mar 20, 2006

Golbez posted:

What about a military coup? Sure, they all seem to be on board with Bashar, but if he were removed and his uncle is so much worse they might start having misgivings. Or a high up general has a "heart attack" and suddenly the head of the military is a little more reform-minded.

I'm not only saying there's other options, but I'm also trying to find out what they are.

It would take a position of weakness for this to happen, plus some Libya-esque jumping ship on the military's part.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 17:52

Golbez: Oct 9, 2002; 1 2 3!
If you want to take a shot at me get in line, line
1 2 3!
Baby, I've had all my shots and I'm fine

Gosh, there really is no good way around this. At this point it's better to hope for electoral change in Russia than a leadership change in Syria. Without Russia supporting them both militarily and in the UN, their position would be severely weakened. Though, obviously, Iran would be right there to help prop them up. I still believe if Damascus falls, Tehran falls, and I think Iran knows that.

But this is Russia we're talking about.

Syria's hosed, aren't they.

Remember back when we had the feel-good stories of Libyan pilots defecting, of sudden movements into Tripoli, of our friend Lizzie and the Rixos Hotel? Good times. :allears:

Nothing like that now.

Golbez fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Feb 8, 2012

# ? Feb 8, 2012 18:06

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

The only peaceful solution would probably have to start with Assad ceding power to a caretaker government, and his brother stepping down from his position in the military. I think any point where the opposition is willing to accept less is the point where Assad will probably just keep killing them anyway.

That ain't ever happening, so a lot of civilians are going to get hosed.

The best way to describe Syria is "poo poo is hosed and it's bullshit".

# ? Feb 8, 2012 18:12

Convergence: Apr 9, 2005

Al-Saqr posted:

you know I never quite realized just how well-armed the Syrian army is, I had always assumed they were a shambles army with t-72's, but they've got stuff like freaking T-90's and BTRs by the thousands that they can throw left and right and every image of their regular soldiers (not shabiha) has them fully decked in equipment and armour.

They have a few hundred T-80s, not T-90s, which is a big difference

# ? Feb 8, 2012 18:12

big fat retard: Nov 11, 2003; I AM AN IDIOT WITH A COMPULSIVE NEED TO TROLL EVERY THREAD I SEE!!!! PAY NO ATTENTION TO WHAT I HAVE TO SAY!!!

If an American ally ever approached Syrian levels of repression, would we veto any resolutions against them like Russia and China are doing now? I suspect that after this, the answer is "no".

# ? Feb 8, 2012 18:13

Herstory Begins Now: Aug 5, 2003; SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

THE HORSES rear end posted:

If an American ally ever approached Syrian levels of repression, would we veto any resolutions against them like Russia and China are doing now? I suspect that after this, the answer is "no".

Argentina 1975-1983. Answer is yes. You'll also be happy to know that the Catholic Church even endorsed dropping sedated (unconvicted, post-torture) desaparecidos out of airplanes into the ocean.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 18:16

cancelope: Sep 23, 2010; The cops want to search the train

Thanks for posting the videos Moses. Ghastly as they are, they are sobering to see. Meanwhile I'm quite dismayed that bambuser is blocked in Turkey, and not just at the DNS level as is usually done...

# ? Feb 8, 2012 18:18

Golbez: Oct 9, 2002; 1 2 3!
If you want to take a shot at me get in line, line
1 2 3!
Baby, I've had all my shots and I'm fine

THE HORSES rear end posted:

If an American ally ever approached Syrian levels of repression, would we veto any resolutions against them like Russia and China are doing now? I suspect that after this, the answer is "no".

I have to think and hope we wouldn't. Especially in the post-Cold War era, we have less desire to maintain "buffers" and play the great game.

Of course, some would say Israel applies to that. Not Syria levels, but definitely more than most other U.S. allies. And we do tend to veto stuff related to Israel. But if Israel had started outright shelling Nablus, killing thousands? I think we would be involved with fixing Israel straight long before it got to the UN.

Edit: Military Argentina is an example of why I specified post-Cold War. We had our delusional reasons for supporting them back then, but I cannot imagine those reasons would pan out nowadays.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 18:19

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 25, 2024 19:53

Vladimir Putin: Mar 17, 2007; by R. Guyovich

THE HORSES rear end posted:

If an American ally ever approached Syrian levels of repression, would we veto any resolutions against them like Russia and China are doing now? I suspect that after this, the answer is "no".

I think the answer is 'yes'.

Edit: Although we did stab Mubarak in the back after 'backing' him for decades, so maybe I am wrong.

# ? Feb 8, 2012 18:23

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

«‹›3125 »