|
Warcabbit posted:You know, that's one hell of a casus belli. What would happen if Turkey decided to declare war on Syria, conqered it, and absorbed it? It might actually be good, insofar as stability is concerned. You're assuming they could conquer it. But for argument's sake, even if they pulled it off it'd just make them the new target for all of AQ and other such groups in that area. The PKK would likely ramp up attacks as well.
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 05:31 |
|
|
Hopefully the Turks decide to finally do something about Syria, regardless of whether or not they're just pinning it on Assad or if the Syrian government really did do it. A Turkish-occupied Syria is probably about the best scenario we can realistically expect at this point.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
God, can this thread stop with all this incredibly stupid speculation the second literally anything happens? No, Turkey won't invade over this poo poo. Nobody is going to invade over this poo poo. That is the most stupid idea ever. This isn't going to cause WW3 either for those who were ready to jump on that. Nothing radical is going to happen - it's going to be the same poo poo that has been slowly going on over the past two years. It's going to be long, tedious and super depressing with a lot of grey areas and nuances.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 01:47
|
|
|
History is over and our leaders have a handle on the situation; parallels between the Middle East and early 20th century Central/East Europe are nil. Stop discussing unsettling possibilities that could never ever happen.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 02:04
|
|
|
When catastrophe strikes, D&D's armchair commandos are there to make the tough decisions and read what's really going on! Really though, if Syria can be toppled relatively soon, and with Iran's elections coming up in several months, who knows how this can turn out for the entire region.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 02:16
|
|
|
Yes, those parallels are nil because they're two entirely different things. Discuss all you want, but at least try to understand even the most basic of facts about the conflict and about the region before going off to fantasy island. Somebody literally just said that a Turkey-occupied Syria would be the best possible outcome. Somebody literally just said that a Turkey-occupied Syria would be the best possible outcome. Discussion is good, we can learn a lot from discussing this. But this isn't a discussion. This is people reaching Grover-levels of fantasy, pitching stupid ideas into the air, waiting until less idiotic posters knock them down and tell them that if they had thought about it for more than the time it took to type, they wouldn't have wasted anyone's time with it. You know, that you compare it to early 20th century Central/East Europe does tell me a lot. The reason why the two aren't comparable is because of the fact that they're two completely different situations, two different contexts, different world players, different involved parties, different everything - but it makes sense that you suggest it because it shows that you literally don't care about any of that and are stuck in the most basic of ideas about the conflict. If you want to learn: fine. But seeing as every time Syria is mentioned in the same sentence as another nation, someone inevitably ponders 'but what if they invade Syria?' before getting the same explanation, let's drop the pretence that anything is being learned here.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 02:16
|
|
|
Vernii posted:Hopefully the Turks decide to finally do something about Syria, regardless of whether or not they're just pinning it on Assad or if the Syrian government really did do it. A Turkish-occupied Syria is probably about the best scenario we can realistically expect at this point. I don't think the Turkish Public would like it, since it's highly likely to drag their armed forces into a situation like 1980's Lebanon was for Israel, except bloodier.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 02:28
|
|
|
Also, remember that Syria is in the middle of a civil war. Why invade when you can simply throw more support behind the existing rebels? Turkey will respond, and perhaps NATO, but at the absolute most it will be limited to providing rebels with some air support.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 03:50
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:So in the space of about a week, Syria's pissed off both Turkey and Israel? Who even knows if the Syrian government is really behind these bombings? The Turkish government has its own agenda to push. As for the Israelis, they bomb pretty much whoever they want for whatever reason they want. Syria hasn't done anything that it hasn't already been doing for decades (being the last leg of Iran's supply chain to Hezbollah in Lebanon), and it's not like the Sudanese did anything outstanding late last year when Israel bombed them then, either. illrepute fucked around with this message at 05:03 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 04:59
|
|
|
New Division posted:I don't think the Turkish Public would like it, since it's highly likely to drag their armed forces into a situation like 1980's Lebanon was for Israel, except bloodier. Yeah, if Turkey invades Syria they'd better be willing and able to kill literally everyone because otherwise they're going to find themselves in a situation that would make Iraq look like a walk in the park. It's not going to happen. McDowell posted:History is over and our leaders have a handle on the situation; parallels between the Middle East and early 20th century Central/East Europe are nil. Stop discussing unsettling possibilities that could never ever happen. Okay, seriously, you do at least understand what MAD is and that it's still a thing, right?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 05:03
|
|
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/12/opinion/sunday/friedman-the-yemeni-way.html?smid=tw-nytopinion&seid=auto&_r=0 This is a very optimistic column, though I guess I'll give Friedman credit for traveling to the Middle East for the first time in forever.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 05:19
|
|
|
Xandu posted:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/12/opinion/sunday/friedman-the-yemeni-way.html?smid=tw-nytopinion&seid=auto&_r=0 Rule number one of Friedman Club. Do not talk about Friedman club. Rule two about Friedman club-
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 05:26
|
|
|
Apparently when he met the Yemeni President, he compared him to Mandela.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 05:28
|
|
|
Xandu posted:Apparently when he met the Yemeni President, he compared him to Mandela. The new guy? Because if not, 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 05:29
|
|
|
McDowell posted:History is over and our leaders have a handle on the situation; parallels between the Middle East and early 20th century Central/East Europe are nil. Stop discussing unsettling possibilities that could never ever happen. I'd love to hear about these parallels 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 05:37
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:If it's actually connected to Syria... During Lebanon's civil war, they would plant bombs on the cars of political leaders they didn't like and blow them up when they were clear of the blast radius. Last year one of their buddies (Michel Samaha) in the Lebanese parliament was caught smuggling explosives in his own, personal car from Syria into Lebanon, knowing that they were going to be used to assassinate religious leaders and incite sectarian strife. The head of the Internal Security Forces who was heading the investigation was later assassinated. The Syrian regime may or may not be stupid, but it clearly believes in carrying the biggest stick and brazenly beating anybody it doesn't like with it. This isn't something secret, it is how the Mukhabarat have been acting for the last few decades, and it is ingrained into their mentality. Most people don't understand how diabolical and malicious the Syrian Mukhabarat are. They are unimaginably so.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 07:41
|
|
|
Xandu posted:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/12/opinion/sunday/friedman-the-yemeni-way.html?smid=tw-nytopinion&seid=auto&_r=0 Given the circumstances, the Yemeni revolution has turned out to be a roaring success, so far. Look at the situation. Yemeni's are considered gun happy even by middle eastern standards. They are considered very tribal, even by gulf standards. They are very conservative, have a widespread drug problem, next to no resources, a booming population and very influential secession movements. Also, lots of Alqaida. Yet the protests there had outstanding female participation. The country didn't descend into a civil war even after Saleh murdered dozens of people each day. Now, despite all the odds they're having a peaceful national dialogue with a third of all delegates being women. Despite all it's problems, it is one of the better outcomes of the Arab Spring, and it had the potential to become one of the very worst.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 07:54
|
|
|
BBC reporting that Turkey has arrested nine of its nationals in connection with the car bombings. Some are speculating that they may have ties to Alevi Turks suspected of carrying out massacres in northern Syria.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 11:02
|
|
|
McDowell posted:parallels between the Middle East and early 20th century Central/East Europe are nil But, uh...they are? Like in a ridiculous number of ways? I mean pretty much every way you can think of, from historical to ethnic to religious to economic to the personalities involved, the countries involved... I mean anyone who thinks this might lead to WWIII is literally a dumb person. Like not meant as an insult, just someone so low in intelligence or alternatively interest in the factors at play that they can be objectively said to be dumb.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 13:46
|
|
|
Muffiner posted:Given the circumstances, the Yemeni revolution has turned out to be a roaring success, so far. It seems to me like it still has that potential. The NDC is hosed up in a lot of ways. Al-Hirak is still boycotting it (?) and they're said to have the support of 85 % of all of South Yemen. To me it looks like there's as much reason to be pessimistic as optimistic right now.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 14:03
|
|
|
towelieban posted:When catastrophe strikes, D&D's armchair commandos are there to make the tough decisions and read what's really going on! Iran's president is little more than a talking head for Khomeini so don't expect anything to actually change with their elections.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 14:13
|
|
|
Squalid posted:I'd love to hear about these parallels Decades of border conflicts, ethnic strife, and economic uncertainty coming to a head in a region where the major international players have diplomatic entanglements (Russia's support of Assad; American diplomatic obligations to Israel, Turkey, and Arab states, China's general ascendance). With the UN powerless, it seems like things can only continue to escalate and bring the major powers into conflict (not they want this because of the aforementioned MAD, but they have to support their regional interests or look like a bad ally)
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 14:44
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Iran's president is little more than a talking head for Khomeini so don't expect anything to actually change with their elections. This might have just been left open to interpretation a bit much, but Ahmadinejad isn't anything resembling a puppet for the supreme leader. The position of President could easily be argued as meant to fall in line, as impeachment proceedings have been brought up against Mahmoud for going against the grain, but he certainly hasn't complied with it. He's been very unpopular with Khameini and his supporters for quite a while now, partly because he's befriended a political group that have been accused of corruption, and didn't do a very good job dispelling allegations of sorcery.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 15:12
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Iran's president is little more than a talking head for Khomeini so don't expect anything to actually change with their elections. 1) Khameini. Khomeini's dead. 2) ...Kinda. Ahmadinejad's gone off the reservation in an excessively authoritarian direction at times (cf the protests around the last election), so it's not inconceivable a more moderate candidate might have some impact on anything the Guardian Council doesn't care enough about to stick its nose into.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 15:13
|
|
|
In my perfect world Ahmadinejad is an actual sorcerer. A manly, dreamy sorcerer
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 15:16
|
|
|
The situation in Turkey is hosed up, the damage is massive and all the truth we have is a suspiciously fast conclusion that somehow Essad decided to bomb Turkey, as if he had no other problems. The video is NSFW obviously and its depressing as hell so watch with caution. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvYhKzieWd8
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 15:45
|
|
|
For what it's worth, the Syrian regime is strenuously denying any involvement in the bombing. Assad and his cronies have every reason to lie, of course, but at this point I wouldn't put lying past the Turkish government either. Erdogan wants military involvement in Syria very badly.
New Division fucked around with this message at 15:53 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 15:51
|
|
|
Pretty much everyone in the country does not buy the Syria is responsible accusation. The circumstances are all too convenient... my beloved prime minister has been looking for an excuse to get the country behind him in a possible invasion of Syria for a long time now, and it hasn't happened, nobody wants him to interfere, with the opposition, or with Essad, but he really wants to get involved. Today there is a very very big footballing event in Turkey, the Country's two biggest teams are going to play against each other and the Government has put a restriction on reporting the news on Reyhanli... so when you look at newspapers and news websites you will see all sorts of news of a football game rather than what's really going on. We also now have a couple of official statements from the first modern Ottoman Emperor Lord Erdogan, and that's about it. It's bullshit, it smells of bullshit and noone buys it. Many innocent people will die because of this man's fantasy for power in the region, and nobody wants it, there have been videos and news reports in social media all morning of masses protesting against the government and Erdogan but its not on any news channel or site... it disgusts me.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 15:56
|
|
|
The damage from those bombs is unreal 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 15:57
|
|
|
McDowell posted:Decades of border conflicts, ethnic strife, and economic uncertainty coming to a head in a region where the major international players have diplomatic entanglements (Russia's support of Assad; American diplomatic obligations to Israel, Turkey, and Arab states, China's general ascendance). With the UN powerless, it seems like things can only continue to escalate and bring the major powers into conflict (not they want this because of the aforementioned MAD, but they have to support their regional interests or look like a bad ally)
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 16:01
|
|
|
With NATO consisting of France, the UK, and Turkey and Russia backing Assad let's just call Crimean War 2: Cruise Control.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 16:04
|
|
|
LP97S posted:With NATO consisting of France, the UK, and Turkey and Russia backing Assad let's just call Crimean War 2: Cruise Control. Jason Patric could look a hell of a lot like Assad with a little work. Let's greenlight this sucker.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 16:13
|
|
|
Azmodaii posted:Pretty much everyone in the country does not buy the Syria is responsible accusation. The circumstances are all too convenient... my beloved prime minister has been looking for an excuse to get the country behind him in a possible invasion of Syria for a long time now, and it hasn't happened, nobody wants him to interfere, with the opposition, or with Essad, but he really wants to get involved. So wait... you think Erdogan both engineered this and at the same time wants to restrict reporting and discussion of it? Even if he did bomb his own citizens, why would he limit reporting rather than hyping the hell out of it? When Putin (possibly) bombed the apartment buildings in 1999, he used it to his full advantage, and definitely didn't say "nobody talk about this." It is surprising how quickly Turkey has apprehended the suspects but I don't think it's strange that they put the blame on Assad so quickly. A charitable person might think they wanted to protect the Syrian refugees from violence - even if it wasn't Assad, the refugees are innocent and would have been in great danger. Mozi fucked around with this message at 16:43 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 16:41
|
|
|
Mozi posted:So wait... you think Erdogan both engineered this and at the same time wants to restrict reporting and discussion of it? Even if he did bomb his own citizens, why would he limit reporting rather than hyping the hell out of it? When Putin (possibly) bombed the apartment buildings in 1999, he used it to his full advantage, and definitely didn't say "nobody talk about this." I understood his accusations against Erdogan to be more in line with what happened after the 2004 Madrid bombings when the President came out blaming the ETA when they knew it was the Al Qaeda because it was more convenient for them. What is that about Putin possibly bombing the apartment buildings in 1999? Twee as Fuck fucked around with this message at 17:36 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
R. Mute posted:When you think about it, it's also pretty comparable to the Crusades - same region, religious motives, heavy interest from the West. Yup, perfect comparison. Or maybe the Carthaginian wars... Wow, so many parallels! This is all relevant! One can make a number of historical connections, I just tried to keep it contemporary. You can also see a parallel with IT shrinking the world and putting the region under stress (mass literacy, telephones, etc in the 20th; the internet and smartphones today) these shifts in how quickly word spreads changes the relation between rulers and ruled, as well as how nations handle their interests. On another note it seems like we need a Turkish Alex Jones.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 17:17
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:I understood his accusations against Erdogan to be more in line with what happened after the 2004 Madrid bombings when the President came out blaming Al Qaeda when they knew it was the ETA because it was more convenient for them. A series of apartment bombings hit multiple Russian cities in 1999, killing hundreds. The bombings were blamed on Chechens and the second Chechen war resulted, but there's conspiracy theories that the bombings were orchestrated by the Russian FSB to build support for the second Chechen war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings I think the idea this Turkish bombing was an inside job is extremely unlikely (I don't buy into the conspiracy theories on the apartment bombings either) but I could see the bombing being pinned on whoever it is politically convenient, and that is definitely Assad's regime in this case. Never let a good bombing go to waste, I guess.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 17:19
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:I understood his accusations against Erdogan to be more in line with what happened after the 2004 Madrid bombings when the President came out blaming Al Qaeda when they knew it was the ETA because it was more convenient for them. Interesting parallel but you got it backwards. They blamed the ETA immediately instead of AQ.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 17:25
|
|
|
farraday posted:Interesting parallel but you got it backwards. They blamed the ETA immediately instead of AQ. I know that  . That's called 'lack of coffee after waking up, corrected original post.I wouldn't be surprised if those involved were part of the PKK or were Turks for X reasons who wanted Syrian refugees out, and Erdogan decided to exploit this further against Assad. Then again it's just as likely to be Assad saying 'Back off or next time we'll hit major cities'. New Division posted:A series of apartment bombings hit multiple Russian cities in 1999, killing hundreds. The bombings were blamed on Chechens and the second Chechen war resulted, but there's conspiracy theories that the bombings were orchestrated by the Russian FSB to build support for the second Chechen war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings That sounds awfully like the Alex Jones stuff, but only 
Twee as Fuck fucked around with this message at 17:38 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
Mozi posted:A charitable person might think they wanted to protect the Syrian refugees from violence - even if it wasn't Assad, the refugees are innocent and would have been in great danger. This is important to consider. There were reports of fighting between Syrians and Turks in the city after the bombings. That could have led to a strong movement against Syrians being allowed refuge in Turkey. It makes sense to shut that down as fast as possible to avoid tensions, and it doesn't make sense to try and reduce people's exposure to the bombings if they were using the attack as a way to spark popular opinion towards intervention. It's possible Erdogan was just trying to put out a fire rather than start one. We'll be able to tell if it becomes clear that the regime is not responsible for the attacks, but Turkey continues to insist they are.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 18:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 05:31 |
|
|
So. Let's say Erdogan starts a war. We've got, then, a couple players. Turkey. The Kurds. Assad. The Islamist rebels, and the anti-Assad rebels. Plus Hezbollah, Iran, and Israel as minor partners. The FSA-types may not be thrilled with Turkey, but would they work with Erdogan? Would the Kurds, in return for some quid-pro-quo, some kind of promise of a Kurdish state carved out of Syria? (Yes, I know, never happen, but if I were Erdogan, I'd certainly be promising it in return for aid, if I were aiming at Syria.) The Islamists would aim at Turkey, of course, but what else would happen? I'm sure someone will come along to tell me how stupid I'm being and how nothing will change, but that's how I learn. Edit: The only reason I can see this as happening is that Russia and the US have seen the Libya/Egypt results, and maybe they'd want to strongly suggest something different this time. Warcabbit fucked around with this message at 18:30 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 18:25
|
|
