|
Xandu posted:So this British guy does security work for NGOs and also works for a Croatian kitchen supply company. So weird. He does have a ridiculously specific name, I was googling early to see if he was listed in any bylines and all I got was that linkedin and a company registration page for that business. Apparently they specialize in grills and ice cream machines...
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 12:00 |
|
|
Edgar posted:is it related to the clashes out by Tell Abyad? Sounds like it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
Also, BBC World News started a segment this morning with the headline "Human Rights Watch claims it may have evidence that ISIS has committed war crimes." I'm not even sure I need to comment on that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
Zedsdeadbaby posted:The UN is a platform for the world's nations to sit down and talk. I think without the UN we wouldn't get much done. I don't think it's entirely useless. Just sorely lacking when it comes to stopping atrocities. Yeah, I would agree with this. The UN isn't useless, it just has a limited set of skills to apply to world problems. Some things it handles very well, but it's powerless in any military situation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
Xandu posted:So this British guy does security work for NGOs and also works for a Croatian kitchen supply company. So weird. Pff kitchens are just a code word for some really shady backdoor weapons stuff obviously
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
Zedsdeadbaby posted:Just sorely lacking when it comes to stopping atrocities. That is almost entirely the point of the UN, though. It is bad at doing the one thing it's supposed to do.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
Friendly Factory posted:That is almost entirely the point of the UN, though. It is bad at doing the one thing it's supposed to do. The entire point of the UN is to prevent WWIII.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:The entire point of the UN is to prevent WWIII. Then really the focus should be Ukraine and not ISIS. ISIS is not going to start WWIII before Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:14
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:The entire point of the UN is to prevent WWIII. I was under the impression that would be an atrocity. And the UN wouldn't be able to stop WWIII because that assumes anyone that could start WWIII would be thinking rationally, which they obviously wouldn't be.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
Friendly Factory posted:I was under the impression that would be an atrocity. And the UN wouldn't be able to stop WWIII because that assumes anyone that could start WWIII would be thinking rationally, which they obviously wouldn't be. If somebody is absolutely determined to act, no one could stop them. The point of the UN is to have a common platform where everyone can talk and interact, thus defusing minor issues before they build into something tragic - a la WWI.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Then really the focus should be Ukraine and not ISIS. ISIS is not going to start WWIII before Ukraine. I was wrong. It's not the "entire" point, but it is the biggest. The UN also hasn't been uninvolved in Ukraine. And keep in mind that Russia and the US are on opposite ends of the spectrum in Syria as well, and it's been just as much of a wedge between the two countries as Ukraine, if not more so, so the Syria situation being resolved is a big deal from the UN's standpoint.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:22
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Yeah, I would agree with this. The UN isn't useless, it just has a limited set of skills to apply to world problems. Some things it handles very well, but it's powerless in any military situation. I agree with this conception of the UN's purpose. The problem is that it then does things like send peacekeeping troops into war zones who are at best ineffectual and at worst get kidnapped or killed. Note that I don't intend to lump UNRWA in with this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:22
|
|
|
I'm not going to watch either video, but I know BM and others have seen it. So does the 'Sotloff' video fade-out as the last one supposedly did, or do they show the whole gruesome ordeal? I am worried that since some people questioned the fading-out of the last video that IS would let the whole thing play out in this one. Is it believed that the executioner in this one is the same as Foley's?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
It does fade out in the same way, no blood is visible while he's cutting. It appears to be the same guy too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
I read a description that said the voice seems slightly computerized this time around, perhaps in response to attempts to use voice analysis to identify the guy after the Foley video. BM, does that seem accurate?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
Friendly Factory posted:I was under the impression that would be an atrocity. And the UN wouldn't be able to stop WWIII because that assumes anyone that could start WWIII would be thinking rationally, which they obviously wouldn't be.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:I was wrong. It's not the "entire" point, but it is the biggest. The UN also hasn't been uninvolved in Ukraine. And keep in mind that Russia and the US are on opposite ends of the spectrum in Syria as well, and it's been just as much of a wedge between the two countries as Ukraine, if not more so, so the Syria situation being resolved is a big deal from the UN's standpoint. Except Ukraine is on the doorstep of Europe and has a competent military (vs Russia). Syria being in the ME and the rebels being a guerrilla force makes it a bit less to boil over into WWIII.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Then really the focus should be Ukraine and not ISIS. ISIS is not going to start WWIII before Ukraine. The UN's focus has clearly been on Ukraine, and not ISIS. The Security Council has consistently kept NATO out of direct conflict with Russia, in spite of ongoing tensions due to the conflict. Comparatively, the UN has had virtually no reaction to ISIS.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
Friendly Factory posted:That is almost entirely the point of the UN, though. It is bad at doing the one thing it's supposed to do. No, that's not the point of the UN at all, and saying it is makes me think you don't know what you're talking about. The purpose of the UN is (was?) to stop WW3. It was to provide a negotiating table between the USA and the USSR. Not to gently caress around in third world shitholes and prevent tinpot dictators for massacring people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:No, that's not the point of the UN at all, and saying it is makes me think you don't know what you're talking about. They should at least come out and say it rather then pretending to care about those places. Maybe someone else can fill that void.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
Just The Facts posted:They should at least come out and say it rather then pretending to care about those places. Maybe someone else can fill that void. Perhaps something with League in the title. League is a good word. A League of Places.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
Friendly Factory posted:Perhaps something with League in the title. League is a good word. A League of Places. Or we just let people bitch about their ineffectiveness.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
Generally the UN doesn't go around suppressing every violent insurgent group that pops up, peacekeepers generally are meant to oversee and police treaties between conflicting parties with some additional wiggle room in regards to protecting the civilian population/creating the conditions for a ceasefire (see UNPROFOR). Their role in mopping up anti-government insurgent groups in Africa (specifically the DRC) is still pretty contentious, they're not going to send a UN force in to deal with ISIS.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
Senator Bill Nelson said he will file legislation approving airstrikes against isis in Syria.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
Friendly Factory posted:That is almost entirely the point of the UN, though. It is bad at doing the one thing it's supposed to do. Such conflicts have to be nipped in the bud, back when they're still mostly insignificant. Once things start to escalate, then the UN is powerless since at its core it's a diplomatic tool. There's no way to know how many tragedies have been averted thanks to the UN. That one of the Great Powers (also known as permanent members of the UNSC, though admittedly the lineup is getting a bit dated) decides to be a bully, there's no stopping them. They're a great power. What do you want to do, start WW3? When a small local power decides to be a bully, the UN allows the Great Powers a way to decide to intervene or not, without inadvertently triggering WW3 because Great Power A wants to intervene but Great Power B is allied to local bully and wants them to proceed unhindered. E.g.: Iraq's invasion of Kuwait was responded to by a NATO coalition acting with the approval of the UNSC. Russia didn't decide that Saddam Hussein was important enough to their interests to defend him. On the other hand, Syria's gassing of rebellious populations got no response because Russia wanted to protect Bachar el-Assad, so the USA and allies dropped the matter. Something like ISIS is a special case. ISIS isn't a nation. The UN can certainly be used to gain international consensus on sending troops to defeat them, but that's all. And of course, it depends on willingness of nations to do that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
The UN just doesn't do anything without a massive amount of resolutions and I think Russia will veto any resolution because they don't want the US meddling in Syria any more than it already is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
Korak posted:The UN just doesn't do anything without a massive amount of resolutions and I think Russia will veto any resolution because they don't want the US meddling in Syria any more than it already is. Russia is pretty happy with the status quo, yes, but the calculus may change if ISIS keeps making gains against Assad at the rate they are.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:Russia is pretty happy with the status quo, yes, but the calculus may change if ISIS keeps making gains against Assad at the rate they are.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
I'm actually surprised Russia didn't begin airstrikes in Syria in the same fashion the US is conducting in Iraq. Sure they would have caught hell in the beginning of the conflict, but if they hit ISIS positions now I can't imagine anyone would complain.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
Korak posted:The other interesting thing is that there are roughly 1,000 or more Chechen rebels in ISIS controlled territory currently. Russia could be persuaded to get involved because of that factor. Various reports are saying that the Chechens are an enormous military asset for ISIS.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Just The Facts posted:I'm actually surprised Russia didn't begin airstrikes in Syria in the same fashion the US is conducting in Iraq. Sure they would have caught hell in the beginning of the conflict, but if they hit ISIS positions now I can't imagine anyone would complain. Pretty sure they would've if the US didn't.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Gregor Samsa posted:Various reports are saying that the Chechens are an enormous military asset for ISIS. Some of this is overblown. People talk a lot about the experience the Chechens and Bosnians bring with them, while kind of shrugging off that ISIS themselves have been at war for over a decade. I'm sure they are helpful, and guys like al-Shishani have even become important leaders, but I don't think it's crucial support that ISIS couldn't do without by any means.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
A brief but interesting oped in the NYT from several professors working in Near Eastern archaeology (including the director of the Penn Cultural Heritage Center, an organization almost exclusively occupied at the moment with helping to improve the treatment of archaeological heritage in Syria and Iraq) about another source of income for ISIS: the looting and export of archaeological heritage. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/03/opinion/isis-antiquities-sideline.html?_r=3 The most interesting part: quote:ISIS does not seem to have devoted the manpower of its army to the active work of looting archaeological sites. Rather, its involvement is financial. In general, ISIS permits local inhabitants to dig at these sites in exchange for a percentage of the monetary value of any finds. Can't help but laugh at the idea of an ISIS representative making sure that no one hurts themselves while operating a backhoe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
Just The Facts posted:I'm actually surprised Russia didn't begin airstrikes in Syria
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
MeinPanzer posted:A brief but interesting oped in the NYT from several professors working in Near Eastern archaeology (including the director of the Penn Cultural Heritage Center, an organization almost exclusively occupied at the moment with helping to improve the treatment of archaeological heritage in Syria and Iraq) about another source of income for ISIS: the looting and export of archaeological heritage. They probably aren't the only ones exporting that stuff. It happened in Iraq and Libya too. Also Egypt, though a very different situation there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
MeinPanzer posted:Can't help but laugh at the idea of an ISIS representative making sure that no one hurts themselves while operating a backhoe. I thought they were referring to not destroying artefacts by going crazy with the heavy machinery (since they are getting a cut of the profits).
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Just The Facts posted:I'm actually surprised Russia didn't begin airstrikes in Syria in the same fashion the US is conducting in Iraq. Sure they would have caught hell in the beginning of the conflict, but if they hit ISIS positions now I can't imagine anyone would complain. Air strikes with what and from where?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Xandu posted:They probably aren't the only ones exporting that stuff. It happened in Iraq and Libya too. Also Egypt, though a very different situation there. Yes, it's sadly widespread, and is common in countries like Pakistan as well. I think that the key here is that ISIS is in a unique position to loot and transport across international borders artifacts from one of the richest archaeological regions in the world, and will probably continue to do so for a long time. They have free reign to loot much of the Fertile Crescent and a perfect opening across the border with Turkey to reach international buyers. quote:I thought they were referring to not destroying artefacts by going crazy with the heavy machinery (since they are getting a cut of the profits). Yeah, that's what I thought too, but the statement makes it sound like ISIS has foremen ensuring everyone has had proper training or something. I'm a grad student as the University of Pennsylvania (at which two of the professors who wrote that article teach) and have many friends doing archaeological work in the Near East, and the situation is particularly depressing at the moment. Most scholars working in Iraq were forced to work in Syria after 2003, and many also worked tirelessly to try to recover the scraps of those objects looted from Iraq after 2003. Now Syria has become worse than Iraq was in the most brutal days of the insurgency, and much of Iraq is reverting to its state in the mid-2000s, with artifacts flowing out of both countries. I know of four grad students who were working over the summer in Kurdistan, still before recent events pretty much the only safe place to work in Iraq as an archaeologist, and who had to either leave altogether or move their projects to Turkey; the status of their work is now completely up in the air for the 2015 season. Sadly, Turkey has also become increasingly harsh on foreign archaeologists, often arbitrarily taking away projects from well-respected foreign scholars and generally making it difficult to come into the country to do archaeological work. MeinPanzer fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Sep 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
MeinPanzer posted:Can't help but laugh at the idea of an ISIS representative making sure that no one hurts themselves while operating a backhoe. Would the ISIS version of Staplerfahrer Klaus have more or less decapitations than the original video?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 12:00 |
|
|
Cippalippus posted:Air strikes with what and from where? The United States' ridiculous force projection capabilities make folk thinks that any powerful country can bomb wherever they want, whenever they want.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 00:50
|
|
