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 »

Volkerball: Oct 15, 2009; by FactsAreUseless

Deteriorata posted:

Again, I'm aware of all that. We're talking now, in 2014. ISIS got its start in Iraq, and spread East to Syria. A weak and fragmented post-Assad Syria would not have stood a chance against them.

ISIS was nothing in Iraq in 2011 either. The anbar awakening destroyed them militarily, and then the Arab spring destroyed them ideologically. All they did was blow things up here and there to hassle the army. They weren't outright fighting anywhere in Iraq until Fallujah this January. And no, we're not talking about now, since your point is that even early intervention would've swept ISIS into power, which is silly. Had the Arab spring "worked" in Syria as well, it would've backed salafism even further into a corner. Not the opposite. Syrians only started resorting to the help of jihadists once it became clear no one else was coming to help, and that was the point when ISIS became relevant enough to grow and become what it is today.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 14:55

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jan 17, 2026 13:33

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Volkerball posted:

ISIS was nothing in Iraq in 2011 either. The anbar awakening destroyed them militarily, and then the Arab spring destroyed them ideologically. All they did was blow things up here and there to hassle the army. They weren't outright fighting anywhere in Iraq until Fallujah this January. And no, we're not talking about now, since your point is that even early intervention would've swept ISIS into power, which is silly. Had the Arab spring "worked" in Syria as well, it would've backed salafism even further into a corner. Not the opposite. Syrians only started resorting to the help of jihadists once it became clear no one else was coming to help, and that was the point when ISIS became relevant enough to grow and become what it is today.

Huh? You seem to be determined to school me on a bunch of points I never made or even implied. I have never claimed that ISIS would have taken power immediately post-Assad, or even suggested as much.

Post-Assad Syria would have been weak and fragmented for many years, regardless of who immediately took power in his aftermath. As of this year, they would still be weak and fragmented (which is why I referenced Libya), and when ISIS started doing their thing they would have found little resistance to the East.

Hence, back to my original point, the current mess in the Middle East would not have been significantly different had Assad been deposed quickly by outside intervention.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 15:13

Volkerball: Oct 15, 2009; by FactsAreUseless

Deteriorata posted:

Huh? You seem to be determined to school me on a bunch of points I never made or even implied. I have never claimed that ISIS would have taken power immediately post-Assad, or even suggested as much.

Deteriorata posted:

The argument was that if the US had brought Assad down quickly, ISIS would not have become a problem. My point was that a post-Assad Syria would have fallen to ISIS in short order. Hence, an early US intervention to remove Assad would not likely have produced a better current situation there.

yeah ok

# ? Aug 25, 2014 15:19

Lustful Man Hugs: Jul 18, 2010

McDowell posted:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-YapDAWLkQ

The US allying with jihadist Iran? Not if Israeli and Saudi money have anything to say about it!

Is this ad invoking Daisy to support war with a state that may or may not have nuclear technology?

:ironicat:

# ? Aug 25, 2014 15:36

PleasingFungus: Oct 10, 2012; idiot asshole bitch who should fuck off

Deteriorata posted:

Huh? You seem to be determined to school me on a bunch of points I never made or even implied. I have never claimed that ISIS would have taken power immediately post-Assad, or even suggested as much.

Post-Assad Syria would have been weak and fragmented for many years, regardless of who immediately took power in his aftermath. As of this year, they would still be weak and fragmented (which is why I referenced Libya), and when ISIS started doing their thing they would have found little resistance to the East.

Hence, back to my original point, the current mess in the Middle East would not have been significantly different had Assad been deposed quickly by outside intervention.

ISIS is only as strong as they are because of the arms, experience, & recruits they gained fighting in Syria. If the Syrian war had gone differently (e.g.: secular rebels armed, Assad assassinated, NATO invaded, alien spaceships), ISIS would not have become as strong as they are today, and would not have been able to turn & sweep over Iraq as they did. They are not a natural force or an inevitable phenomenon; they were created by circumstances, which would have been different had Assad been deposed quickly.

e: notable that there've been a few articles suggesting that Assad supported ISIS early on, as a long-range strategic play. The WSJ printed one, and a former Syrian diplomat wrote another.

quote:

To achieve these aims, Assad first changed the narrative of the newborn Syrian revolution to one of sectarianism, not reform. He then fostered an extremist presence in Syria alongside the activists. Further, he facilitated the influx of foreign extremist fighters to threaten stability in the region. Finally, any efforts to kill time on the clock, such as the chemical weapons deal, its slow implementation, and the Geneva process, were enthusiastically exploited. The resulting international paralysis allowed Assad to present himself as an ally in the global war on terror, granting him license to crush civilians with impunity. The Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) emerged as one of those facts created to ensure Assad�s survival as he and his Iranian backers seek to frame this conflict as a regional sectarian issue, with a classical choice between military powers and Sunni extremists.

It reads like some 11-dimensional chess poo poo, especially the latter article, so I'm a little skeptical; but even if the extent to which Assad planned it all from the start is exaggerated, there does seem to be a significant amount of evidence that he funded & supported ISIS. If the Assad regime had been toppled years ago, the region would probably still be in chaos today, but it's unlikely that ISIS would be a major player.

PleasingFungus fucked around with this message at 16:14 on Aug 25, 2014

# ? Aug 25, 2014 15:46

illrepute: Dec 30, 2009; by XyloJW

Volkerball posted:

Well yeah, ISIS wouldn't last very long in a conventional war with the west.

Walid Muallem, who is basically the mouthpiece of the regime, is giving a press conference right now. He condemned the killing of Foley, says Syria are prepared to work with the international community to fight terrorism, and demands that any attack on ISIS in Syria be coordinated with the regime otherwise it would be considered aggression. Basically "Be friends with meee, you know you want to."

Well, we knew it was going to happen eventually. Since Assad's government has done nothing but claim that every single rebel group aligned against him are terrorists, of course he'd be willing for the west to help him fight "terrorism". I wonder if we'd be able to attack ISIS in a way that only benefits the FSA? Like hitting them up near Aleppo. That'd be pretty funny. As it stands, he's pretty much trying to get the West to legitimize him and win the civil war for him.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 15:51

Fados: Jan 7, 2013; I like Malcolm X, I can't be racist!

Put this racist dipshit on ignore immediately!

Sorry for the naive/dumb question but are the United Nations worth for if not to stop this kind of most terrible of monsters such as the likes of IS?

# ? Aug 25, 2014 16:01

illrepute: Dec 30, 2009; by XyloJW

Fados posted:

Sorry for the naive/dumb question but are the United Nations worth for if not to stop this kind of most terrible of monsters such as the likes of IS?

Providing a place for the major powers to talk about carving up the rest of the world without pissing on each other's shoes, generally.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 16:04

computer parts: Nov 18, 2010; PLEASE CLAP

illrepute posted:

Providing a place for the major powers to talk about carving up the rest of the world without pissing on each other's shoes, generally.

Or to be a little less cynical, the UN is designed for dealing with state actors which ISIS clearly is not.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 16:06

Volkerball: Oct 15, 2009; by FactsAreUseless

Fados posted:

Sorry for the naive/dumb question but are the United Nations worth for if not to stop this kind of most terrible of monsters such as the likes of IS?

Primarily to prevent world war 3. It's complicated because Russia and China won't tolerate any sort of action that could bring down Assad, but no one in the UNSC is going to veto action against ISIS, which is why the US has no issues with bombing them in Iraq. It's a very politicized subject, and the UN's policy on issues that are contested by members of the UNSC is to be bipartisan shills rather than to take sides.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 16:10

whatever7: Jul 26, 2001; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

computer parts posted:

Relations are warming with Iran as well.

But American didn't have to do anything to have a good relationship with Iran anyway. Iran was offering alot of help before the country was branded as "evil". If Iran had a semi decent relationship with tge US, that monkey looking Revolutionary Guard probably wouldn't be elected as president to begin with!

*head hits wall*

On the ground that we haven't had as many great movie out of the Iraq Wars as Vietnam, I declare it a worse war than Nam.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 16:22

Torpor: Oct 20, 2008; .. and now for my next trick, I'll pretend to be a political commentator...

HONK HONK

whatever7 posted:

But American didn't have to do anything to have a good relationship with Iran anyway. Iran was offering alot of help before the country was branded as "evil". If Iran had a semi decent relationship with tge US, that monkey looking Revolutionary Guard probably wouldn't be elected as president to begin with!

*head hits wall*

On the ground that we haven't had as many great movie out of the Iraq Wars as Vietnam, I declare it a worse war than Nam.

I am still waiting for Three Kings 2

# ? Aug 25, 2014 16:34

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

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/08/2...&_r=0&referrer=

Has UAE ever taken foreign military action before? Also really interesting that they denied it to Washington since it probably involved US weapons.

Edit: they have a few times I guess

Xandu fucked around with this message at 16:40 on Aug 25, 2014

# ? Aug 25, 2014 16:36

Cat Mattress: Jul 14, 2012; by Cyrano4747

PleasingFungus posted:

e: notable that there've been a few articles suggesting that Assad supported ISIS early on, as a long-range strategic play. The WSJ printed one, and a former Syrian diplomat wrote another.

It reads like some 11-dimensional chess poo poo, especially the latter article, so I'm a little skeptical; but even if the extent to which Assad planned it all from the start is exaggerated, there does seem to be a significant amount of evidence that he funded & supported ISIS. If the Assad regime had been toppled years ago, the region would probably still be in chaos today, but it's unlikely that ISIS would be a major player.

It could backfire on him if ISIS gets in position to destroy Assad, which seems to be happening after taking that air base.

And if Assad's regime is destroyed by ISIS, then what is going to stop an intervention in Syria to destroy ISIS? Russia blocked UN interventions against Assad because he was their pet and a key part of projecting Russian power in the Mediterranean, but if Assad is no more, Russia loses control of Syria anyway. Heck, they might even want to join a post-Assad anti-ISIS coalition themselves to try to keep some influence in Syria... Now that would be even stranger than US working with Iran.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 16:44

whatever7: Jul 26, 2001; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Torpor posted:

I am still waiting for Three Kings 2

Three Kings 2 starring Jennifer Lawrence, Bradley Cooper and Robert Deniro. *scene of water boarding* "What's wrong with Kim Kardashian?!"

# ? Aug 25, 2014 16:53

dr_rat: Jun 4, 2001; the COBGOBLIN got me! I bear the curse of bad sandwiches

Lustful Man Hugs posted:

Is this ad invoking Daisy to support war with a state that may or may not have nuclear technology?

I like how they end it on pumping techno music. The original daisy ad tried to convey the existential dread of nuclear weapons through the juxtapose of innocence and destruction, this one seemed like it was implying a nuclear attack on a populated area would be a lot like a bad cut scene in some crappy first person shooter.

dr_rat fucked around with this message at 17:18 on Aug 25, 2014

# ? Aug 25, 2014 16:56

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Xandu posted:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/08/2...&_r=0&referrer=

Has UAE ever taken foreign military action before? Also really interesting that they denied it to Washington since it probably involved US weapons.

Edit: they have a few times I guess

I've just been sent a bunch of photos from Tripoli showing the remains on an unexploded Mark 84 bomb, likely dropped by Egypt or the UAE.

Bellingcat is also under DDoS attack at the moment, guess I pissed someone off this weekend.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 17:16

ReV VAdAUL: Oct 3, 2004; I'm WILD about
WILDMAN

Brown Moses posted:

I've just been sent a bunch of photos from Tripoli showing the remains on an unexploded Mark 84 bomb, likely dropped by Egypt or the UAE.

Bellingcat is also under DDoS attack at the moment, guess I pissed someone off this weekend.

I've heard rumblings the people who were DDOSing Sony and Blizzard claimed they'd keep doing it till America stopped bombing IS. Now it almost certainly was just rear end in a top hat trolls saying stuff to be offensive but eh, maybe IS are targeting prominent game streamers and independent journalists reporting on the Middle East all as part of some masterplan.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 17:25

illrepute: Dec 30, 2009; by XyloJW

Cat Mattress posted:

It could backfire on him if ISIS gets in position to destroy Assad, which seems to be happening after taking that air base.

And if Assad's regime is destroyed by ISIS, then what is going to stop an intervention in Syria to destroy ISIS? Russia blocked UN interventions against Assad because he was their pet and a key part of projecting Russian power in the Mediterranean, but if Assad is no more, Russia loses control of Syria anyway. Heck, they might even want to join a post-Assad anti-ISIS coalition themselves to try to keep some influence in Syria... Now that would be even stranger than US working with Iran.

ISIS is not going to dismantle the Assad regime. If anything, an ISIS victory in Syria would like like broad swathes of rural areas and a few major cities under ISIS control while various FSA and SNA enclaves continue to hold out.

Of course, the irony is not lost on me that ISIS would do exactly to the alawites what they'd been dreading the rebels might do over the duration of the whole war, which is why they've continued to back Assad.

illrepute fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Aug 25, 2014

# ? Aug 25, 2014 17:26

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

This might show I'm slightly OCD, but some people have been claiming the image of Foley's corpse in the video is a still image. However, that's not true, you can actually see this bug walk across his leg

# ? Aug 25, 2014 18:47

Nenonen: Oct 22, 2009

Have you recognized the insect yet? It could give important clues about location.

(Good work.)

# ? Aug 25, 2014 18:51

Ham: Apr 30, 2009; You're BALD!

Xandu posted:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/08/2...&_r=0&referrer=

Has UAE ever taken foreign military action before? Also really interesting that they denied it to Washington since it probably involved US weapons.

Edit: they have a few times I guess

I was hesitant to believe Egypt did it, since we're not supposed to have in-air refueling capabilities and Tripoli is quite a way off from the nearest Egyptian airport, but there's sources claiming Egypt converted former airline Boeing 707s for aerial refueling. Either that or the UAE are basing an aerial refueling tanker in Egypt, which is quite believable at this point.

Eitherway, that "Neighbors of Libya" conference is over (attended by Egypt, Libya, Chad, Tunis, Niger, Algiers) and they issued this statement:

quote:

Believing in the importance of achieving peace, restoring security and gathering support for the legitimate Libyan institutions, headed by the elected house of representatives, for it represents the Libyan people's will, and the primary institution for the creation for a constitution, with the goal of helping our Libyan brothers in continuing on their path to democracy in a cradle of security and stability by forming a national government as soon as possible that works to achieve this, and seeking to halt the current armed operations that are destabilizing the country.

In the light of the recent developments, the neighboring countries have recognized the importance of swift action on their part in coordination with the Libyan government to deal with the developments in Libya and to form a cornerstone of regional and international efforts in the country, the neighboring countries have declared a common initiative that rests on three primary principles:

- Respect for the unity and sovereignty of Libya and the safety of it's land.
- Non-interference in Libyan internal affairs and maintaining it's political independence.
- Committing to inclusive debate, shunning violence and backing the political process.

The aim is to stop all violence and terrorism in Libya, and to enable the Libyan state to reclaim and extend it's authority and sovereignty to all Libyan soil, including the right to bear arms, through stopping the actions of armed groups and repelling terrorism and violence by any means necessary, in addition to backing the legitimate institutions and central authority of the state, and therefore, the convening nations call for the following:

1 - Immediate cessation of all armed operations, to back the political process; and improving conversation with political entities that reject violence, with the goal of reaching a national reconciliation and the creation of a new constitution for the country. As well, the recognition of the primary role played by the neighbors of Libya with regards to the developments in Libya and the necessity of their inclusion in all regional or international initiatives aiming to reach a settlement of the Libyan crisis.

2 - All militias and armed groups should give up their weapons and the insurrectionist options in a specific timeframe within the framework for a political agreement between all parties that reject violence through an independent mechanism sponsored by the neighbors of Libya and through international backing.

3 - The commitment of outside parties to abstain from exporting or arming illegitimate groups with weaponry of all kinds and to increase enforcement on all naval, air or land crossings with Libya to achieve this goal. No weaponry is to be imported except at the request of the Libyan state and after the approval of the security council.

4 - Resisting terrorism in all it's forms, drying up it's sources of funding and fighting cross-border organized crime and other illegal activities.

5 - Backing the role of the state's legitimate institutions, headed by the house of representatives, and rebuilding and rehabilitating the country's institutions, including the military and police, through limited peace-keeping programs, that contribute to the enforcement of stability, security and the achievement of development goals.

6 - Offering support to the Libyan government in it's efforts to secure it's borders with the neighboring countries, and halting all illegal smuggling activities.

7 - Providing a mechanism that includes tiered punishments resorted to in cases of non-compliance, including directed punishments or sanctions to individuals or groups that are proven responsible for harming or delaying the political process and the achievement of stability.

8 - Creating a mechanism under the purview of the foreign ministers of the neighboring countries to follow up on compliance with the above, through arranging visits to the Libyan house of representatives.

9 - The Egyptian presidency is directed to officially inform the UNSC and Secretary General of this brief, to the general assemblies of the Arab League and African Union, as well as the government of Spain in order to be issued?(proposed?) in the Madrid conference on the 17th of September, 2014.

10 - Welcoming the convening of a 5th meeting of the neighbors of Libya in Khartoum on an as yet not agreed date, to be decided later.

11 - The neighboring countries, in light of the above, also welcome international aid with regards to helping to build and rehabilitate the institutions of the Libyan government in cooperation with the neighboring countries, including border security training and providing modern monitoring and detection equipment, in addition to backing whatever punishment/sanction measures undertaken against individuals or entities that refuse to the cooperate with the political process and seek to collapse it through violence, including the possibility of approaching the UNSC to issue directed punishments/sanctions.

The three principles are well and all, but the following statements leave no room for doubt. If there hasn't been a direct military intervention in Libya yet, Sisi's making sure he has the legitimacy when he actually does it.

:catstare:

Ham fucked around with this message at 19:46 on Aug 25, 2014

# ? Aug 25, 2014 19:14

Kurtofan: Feb 16, 2011

Nenonen posted:

Have you recognized the insect yet? It could give important clues about location.

(Good work.)

Please tell me this is a Jojo's Bizarre Adventure reference.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 19:17

Rent-A-Cop: Oct 15, 2004; I posted my food for USPOL Thanksgiving!

Kurtofan posted:

Please tell me this is a Jojo's Bizarre Adventure reference.

Not everything is about anime.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 19:23

Blue Footed Booby: Oct 4, 2006; got those happy feet

Rent-A-Cop posted:

Not everything is about anime.

Just everything in this thread.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 19:41

Al-Saqr: Nov 11, 2007

Ham posted:

The three principles are well and all, but the following statements leave no room for doubt. If there hasn't been a direct military intervention in Libya yet, Sisi's making sure he has the legitimacy when he actually does it.

I kinda hope he does take military action, because seeing one of the worlds shittiest and most incompetent armies who never won a war be humiliated and exposed as the civilian-killing-fascist-good-for-nothings they are would be a service to humanity.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 20:05

Volkerball: Oct 15, 2009; by FactsAreUseless

illrepute posted:

ISIS is not going to dismantle the Assad regime. If anything, an ISIS victory in Syria would like like broad swathes of rural areas and a few major cities under ISIS control while various FSA and SNA enclaves continue to hold out.

Of course, the irony is not lost on me that ISIS would do exactly to the alawites what they'd been dreading the rebels might do over the duration of the whole war, which is why they've continued to back Assad.

This. Damascus would be just as bloody a fight as Baghdad would be, and ISIS isn't too eager to attack there. Assad will certainly give Damascus the Aleppo/Samson option treatment to ensure the city is completely hosed and a burden on whoever is in control rather than a benefit. That's assuming the regime feels Damascus is in an existential crisis, which it clearly is not in right now, and then they move to Latakia and it happens all over again. The regime is a long, long way from being defeated. Years and years.

And yeah, that's a bit of a grim self-fulfilling prophecy.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 20:07

Bip Roberts: Mar 29, 2005; by Fluffdaddy

Al-Saqr posted:

I kinda hope he does take military action, because seeing one of the worlds shittiest and most incompetent armies who never won a war be humiliated and exposed as the civilian-killing-fascist-good-for-nothings they are would be a service to humanity.

Well except for the civilians who get killed to prove a well made point.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 20:09

Cat Mattress: Jul 14, 2012; by Cyrano4747

Ham posted:

I was hesitant to believe Egypt did it, since we're not supposed to have in-air refueling capabilities and Tripoli is quite a way off from the nearest Egyptian airport, but there's sources claiming Egypt converted former airline Boeing 707s for aerial refueling. Either that or the UAE are basing an aerial refueling tanker in Egypt, which is quite believable at this point.

Eitherway, that "Neighbors of Libya" conference is over (attended by Egypt, Libya, Chad, Tunis, Niger, Algiers) and they issued this statement:

The three principles are well and all, but the following statements leave no room for doubt. If there hasn't been a direct military intervention in Libya yet, Sisi's making sure he has the legitimacy when he actually does it.

Seeing grammar crimes like the its/it's confusion in a joint official statement by six different countries is something that irks me. I know African countries are poor, but I'm sure they could have hired a proofreader by pooling their resources together!

# ? Aug 25, 2014 20:19

ReV VAdAUL: Oct 3, 2004; I'm WILD about
WILDMAN

Volkerball posted:

And yeah, that's a bit of a grim self-fulfilling prophecy.

I really wouldn't be surprised if he was intending to emulate the Algerian civil war from the moment he painted the protesters as sectarians hellbent on slaughtering Alawites.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 20:29

Ham: Apr 30, 2009; You're BALD!

Cat Mattress posted:

Seeing grammar crimes like the its/it's confusion in a joint official statement by six different countries is something that irks me. I know African countries are poor, but I'm sure they could have hired a proofreader by pooling their resources together!

I translated it myself. I'd never actually heard of its/it's before. Its so shameful. :suicide:

# ? Aug 25, 2014 20:30

Radio Prune: Feb 19, 2010

ReV VAdAUL posted:

I really wouldn't be surprised if he was intending to emulate the Algerian civil war from the moment he painted the protesters as sectarians hellbent on slaughtering Alawites.

And releasing Islamist militants from his jails.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 20:57

Cippalippus: Mar 31, 2007; Out for a ride, chillin out w/ a couple of friends. Going to be back for dinner

Al-Saqr posted:

I kinda hope he does take military action, because seeing one of the worlds shittiest and most incompetent armies who never won a war be humiliated and exposed as the civilian-killing-fascist-good-for-nothings they are would be a service to humanity.

Why are you talking about the US army out of context?
By the way, several European countries are talking about sending weapons to the Kurds.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 21:02

New Division: Jun 23, 2004; I beg to present to you as a Christmas gift, Mr. Lombardi, the city of Detroit.

The war in Libya is now in some ways a proxy war between Qatar/Turkey backed groups and Egypt/other Gulf States backed groups. It see it lasting quite a while.

These same divisions have played out in Syria. Both of those blocs have their preferred rebels within Syria.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 21:54

My Imaginary GF: Jul 16, 2005; by R. Guyovich

ReV VAdAUL posted:

I really wouldn't be surprised if he was intending to emulate the Algerian civil war from the moment he painted the protesters as sectarians hellbent on slaughtering Alawites.

Assad's a savy operator who knows his options for dealing with immediate crisis. The secular protestors were an existential threat to his Syrian state, so any action which harmed their ability to advance their positions more than harmed his position was taken.

Was this all planned ahead of time? No. Did this include freeing up resources to deal with the existential threat? Yes. For example, early on in the crisis, prison space was becoming too unorganized. Assad couldn't kill the secular opposition as fast as he needed with his current capacities. So, you have the islamists previously imprisoned and petty criminals being released. This had an affect of creating additional manpower for both the regime and islamist groups, to be used against secularists.

The West understood this and demanded Assad relinquish his chemical weapons. It was rationalized that Assad would refuse to do so, as then he would not have the power to destroy the islamists en masse, and then international authorization could be achieved for limited strikes to advance the secular opposition by achieving regime change. It was surprising that Assad accepted the transfer of his stockpiles and complied in a mostly-honest way; however, this is merely a similar repeat of Sadam's chemical weapon turnover, in that it was a strategy pursued honestly to prevent regime change. It is no surprise that American diplomats did not expect Assad to comply: they hadn't wanted him to, and individuals are bias towards accepting that when they make a demand against everyone's better interests it will not be fulfilled.

So what can America do after it eliminates Assad's chemical stockpile? He's complying with our demands, and we are wont to overthrow dictators willing to work with us. Its bad PR that threatens our relations with many other dictatorships: it sends the message that even when you comply with American demands to disarm, or worse, to non-proliferate, America will still attack. It sends the message that Iran is correct in its suspicions to acquire a nuclear weapon. No, far better to disarm Assad, prove State as willing to work with others and turn a blind eye to their long-term attrocities, and come to detente with Iran than it is replace Assad and deal with a Russian-supplied nuclear Iran.

Now, this had the effect of strengthening ISIS and weakening Iraq; it is what State asked for, so it is what military contingencies were drawn up for and why Clinton's circle were less aware of Egypt and UAE's recent Libyan incursian than DIA's umbrella. Washington: It's only a surprise when you ask the wrong person. I expect this will strengthen Biden's position and influence within this administration and weaken Clinton's. Hence the public release of the joint Clancygasm.

E:

New Division posted:

The war in Libya is now in some ways a proxy war between Qatar/Turkey backed groups and Egypt/other Gulf States backed groups. It see it lasting quite a while.

These same divisions have played out in Syria. Both of those blocs have their preferred rebels within Syria.

Bingo. And the Qatar/Turkey proxy war with Egypt/UAE is, in some ways, a proxy fight between Clinton's and Biden's circles.

My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Aug 25, 2014

# ? Aug 25, 2014 22:04

New Division: Jun 23, 2004; I beg to present to you as a Christmas gift, Mr. Lombardi, the city of Detroit.

My Imaginary GF posted:

Bingo. And the Qatar/Turkey proxy war with Egypt/UAE is, in some ways, a proxy fight between Clinton's and Biden's circles.

Hmmm... not sure I agree, but for the sake of being on the same page, in this instance Biden is aligned with Qatar/Turkey while Clinton is more aligned with Egypt and the UAE?

# ? Aug 25, 2014 22:13

My Imaginary GF: Jul 16, 2005; by R. Guyovich

New Division posted:

Hmmm... not sure I agree, but for the sake of being on the same page, in this instance Biden is aligned with Qatar/Turkey while Clinton is more aligned with Egypt and the UAE?

Mostly the reverse, in regards to Egypt/UAE's Libyan intervention. Egypt/UAE are aligned with Biden's interests, while Qatar/Turkey support Clinton's camp. Or so I've heard from the Turkish expatriate community in Chicago. A decent proxy to determine this is to examine Clinton's and Biden's public declaration on known historical facts which are denied by Erdogan.

My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Aug 25, 2014

# ? Aug 25, 2014 22:25

New Division: Jun 23, 2004; I beg to present to you as a Christmas gift, Mr. Lombardi, the city of Detroit.

My Imaginary GF posted:

Mostly the reverse, in regards to Egypt/UAE's Libyan intervention. Egypt/UAE are aligned with Biden's interests, while Qatar/Turkey support Clinton's camp. Or so I've heard from the Turkish expatriate community in Chicago. A decent proxy to determine this is to examine Clinton's and Biden's public declaration on known historical facts which are denied by Erdogan.

I dunno, I think it's a bit fuzzier than than. For one thing I think Clinton's camp was OK with the Egyptian coup, which Turkey and Qatar adamantly opposed.

Interesting theory though. And I will say that the Pro/anti Muslim Brotherhood (essentially what the split comes down to) proxy fight in the Middle East is one of the great unacknowledged factors behind the current violence in the Middel East.

# ? Aug 25, 2014 22:33

New Division: Jun 23, 2004; I beg to present to you as a Christmas gift, Mr. Lombardi, the city of Detroit.

aggh, disregard this. edit/=quoate

# ? Aug 25, 2014 22:35

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jan 17, 2026 13:33

My Imaginary GF: Jul 16, 2005; by R. Guyovich

New Division posted:

I dunno, I think it's a bit fuzzier than than. For one thing I think Clinton's camp was OK with the Egyptian coup, which Turkey and Qatar adamantly opposed.

Interesting theory though. And I will say that the Pro/anti Muslim Brotherhood (essentially what the split comes down to) proxy fight in the Middle East is one of the great unacknowledged factors behind the current violence in the Middel East.

Everyone was ok with the coup. Some advocated for it more than others; sometimes this advocacy took the form of silence. Nobody in Washington enjoys unrepentent Islamist dictators. You can be an Islamist dictator and still work with Washington, as long as you acknowledge in private you're only doing it to control your population and smooth your real business relations. Clinton is willing to change her positions for a better working relation with Erdogan, while Erdogan ignores Israeli policy towards Gaza because it strengthens Erdogan's position while appearing to grant Clinton a policy concession.

E:

You're absolutely spot on with the Muslim Brotherhood. And the umbrella of Muslim Brotherhood groups are, themselves, a means of proxy war between Sunni states and Iran.

My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Aug 25, 2014

# ? Aug 25, 2014 22:40

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

«‹›3125 »