[MERGED] Syrian rebellion, troop movement & negotiations

cyberhog

...the head of the UN Supervision Mission in Syria told the Security Council that the nearly 300 unarmed UN observers were “morally obliged” to stay.


...there needed to be a commitment by both the government and the opposition to the observers’ safety and security, as well as their freedom of movement.

“The government has expressed that very clearly in the last couple of days. I’ve not seen the same clear statements (from) the opposition yet,” he said.

The rebels are unwilling to voice their commitment to the observers' safety because they are trying everything they can to scuttle the Annan plan and that includes attacking the UN observer mission.

Mood told the meeting UN vehicles had been hit 10 times by “direct fire” and hundreds of times by “indirect fire.”

He said nine UN vehicles had been hit in the past eight days alone.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/kt-article-display-1.asp?xfile=data/middleeast/2012/June/middleeast_June237.xml&section=middleeast


Just like the Houla massacre, attacking UN observers is all part of the opposition's strategy to create enough hysteria to justify NATO-enforced regime change. So even though there is good reason to be wary of the rebels they still manage to garner support from the West. One of the most vocal rebel sympathisers being Sen. John McCain, who calls it "shameful" that the US is not helping to "make it a fair fight"

That call to "make it a fair fight" can also be seen as an attempt to scuttle the Annan plan since Maj Gen Mood has said that UNSMIS would "only resume full operations if there were a significant reduction in the level of violence".

You know the West's obsession with changing regimes has gone too far when a US Senator shows the same disregard for UNSMIS' safety as the criminal thugs that make up the rebel movement.

Nodin

Just like the Houla massacre...........

Do please explain.

nacho libre

Nodin wrote: »

Do please explain.

He's probably referring to this article:
http://wsws.org/articles/2012/jun2012/houl-j16.shtml

Which, if true, indicates the rebels aren't the clean cut heroes some people here like to make them out to be

Jonny7

nacho libre wrote: »

He's probably referring to this article:
http://wsws.org/articles/2012/jun2012/houl-j16.shtml

Which, if true, indicates the rebels aren't the clean cut heroes some people here like to make them out to be

People seem out to "prove" that the rebels are not clean-cut, case in point - this thread.

The "rebels" are made up of everyone from extremists, to blue collar workers, to defected military - how they act is generally being judged not on its own merit but by what is happening on a grand scale in Syria.

Taken on it's own and isolated, the allied bombing of Dresden was an absolute tragedy, yet within the context of the war it has generally not been seen as such.

Context.

I am pretty damn sure elements within the umbrella of "rebels" in Syria are capable of their own violent reprisals.

OP has a long history of creating similar topics along a similar vein.

troposphere

Article in NY Times today

WASHINGTON — A small number of C.I.A. officers are operating secretly in southern Turkey, helping allies decide which Syrian opposition fighters across the border will receive arms to fight the Syrian government, according to American officials and Arab intelligence officers.

The weapons, including automatic rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, ammunition and some antitank weapons, are being funneled mostly across the Turkish border by way of a shadowy network of intermediaries including Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood and paid for by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the officials said.

The C.I.A. officers have been in southern Turkey for several weeks, in part to help keep weapons out of the hands of fighters allied with Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups, one senior American official said. The Obama administration has said it is not providing arms to the rebels, but it has also acknowledged that Syria’s neighbors would do so.

Continued

AlekSmart

Jonny7 wrote: »

People seem out to "prove" that the rebels are not clean-cut, case in point - this thread.

The "rebels" are made up of everyone from extremists, to blue collar workers, to defected military - how they act is generally being judged not on its own merit but by what is happening on a grand scale in Syria.

I am pretty damn sure elements within the umbrella of "rebels" in Syria are capable of their own violent reprisals.

OP has a long history of creating similar topics along a similar vein.

Whether or not the OP's long history conforms to other posters mores is a moot point,I do hope this does not infer that a person possessing an opposing viewpoint is somehow to be denied the opportunity to express it ?

Far from attempting to "prove" anything about either side in this latest conflict,I continue to be wary of any deluge of pro or anti coverage from mainstream media sources of whatever hue.

It is,for me,a matter of attempting to get a "sense" of a different country,culture and people from as diverse a set of observations as possible.

In coverage of the Libyan conflict I tended to be far more taken by the appearance and lack of enthusiasm of many people sitting in the background of TV footage rather than the hordes of youthful AK wielding,All Ua Akhbar screaming rebels who dominated the TV footage each night....

Similarly in Syria,whilst there is readily obvious savagery and butchery being perpetrated on innocents,I'm not rolling in behind the simplistic notion that Al Assad the younger is 100% the problem and his removal/excution is,therefore,100% the answer.

Not a chance IMO.

With the United States taking a somewhat more overtly restrained role in the destabilization of Libya,I am therefore concerned that we now see reports of the "Agency's" involvement in solving stuff for the Syrian "Rebels"....

America,no more than Russia,does not have a great track-record of considered intervention in other countries internal problems,with the likes of the CIA,NSA and various US Military Intelligence agencies getting it wrong far more times than might be considered healthy for the greater good.

There appears to be an somewhat unhealthy focus on abandoning all sense of objectivity in these matters,with a recurring need to see all strong leaderships in a negative and regressive light.

cyberhog

Jonny7 wrote: »

OP has a long history of creating similar topics along a similar vein.

And you have a long history of whining about them. It clearly perturbs you that I challenge the Western media narrative, but it doesn't seem to bother you at all when rebels commit "serious human rights abuses," including using hostages as human shields.

Homs (Agenzia Fides) - The 800 civilians trapped in Homs are caught between the crossfire, unable to get out, exploited in the conflict, now used as human shields: is the alarm that reaches Fides Agency by representatives of the local Church committed to seeking a solution for the salvation of their lives. A faction of the rebel army holed up in the city does not want them to evacuate to avoid the Syrian army to take favorable positions with military means. As reported to Fides by the Orthodox Christian priest Fr. Boutros Al Zein, "among them there are about 400 Christian civilians, mostly elderly and women, victims of authentic kidnapping, blocked in the streets of Al Bustan Diwan and Hamidiyyeh. Civilians – he explains - were collected and directed towards the border of these two streets, becoming human shields to prevent the attack of regular Syrian forces. "

http://www.fides.org/aree/news/newsdet.php?idnews=31760&lan=eng

If you support regime change you are all for everything that goes with it. You can't pick and choose.

Nodin

cyberhog wrote: »

And you have a .........and choose.

Would you be as good as to get back to me on
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79321059&postcount=2

Jaafa

Nodin wrote: »

Would you be as good as to get back to me on
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79321059&postcount=2

Nacho Libre has posted what the most likely scenario is in relation to the massacre. The account given is the most detailed and makes the most sense.

Those killed in the massacre were almost all from the same family, a pro-assad family, opposition members either on orders, or taking their own initiative killed them.

Nodin

Jaafa wrote: »

Nacho Libre has posted what the most likely scenario is in relation to the massacre. The account given is the most detailed and makes the most sense.

Those killed in the massacre were almost all from the same family, a pro-assad family, opposition members either on orders, or taking their own initiative killed them.

I'd like to know what the OP thinks.

Jonny7

AlekSmart wrote: »

There appears to be an somewhat unhealthy focus on abandoning all sense of objectivity in these matters,with a recurring need to see all strong leaderships in a negative and regressive light.

Very strange view..

So you feel dictatorships are misrepresented?

Take for example Saudi and Bahrain, do you think there is some sort of need and lack of objectivity to see the governance of those countries in a negative light? what would define that need?

I strongly suspect I know what the scapegoat will be

cyberhog

Nodin wrote: »

I'd like to know what the OP thinks.

I don't think that anyone here is in any doubt about where I stand on the rebels. You, on the other hand, seem to be very fond of just rolling right past the topic without sharing your thoughts on it but then expect other members to respond to your questioning. Sorry that's not how it works my friend. Either come out of your bunker and address the topic and not the member personally or simply ignore the post.

cyberhog

ST. PETERSBURG, Russia, June 22 (Xinhua) -- Syria is ready to withdraw troops from Syrian cities simultaneously with the armed opposition, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Friday.

After talks with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem in St. Petersburg, Lavrov told Russia-24 TV channel that the withdrawal should be carried out under international observation.

"The governmental forces and the armed opposition should withdraw synchronically from cities... The Syrian government is ready for this step, the minister (Moallem) told me about it," Lavrov said.


...

Meanwhile, Lavrov also urged Damascus to implement a peace plan presented by U.N.-Arab League joint envoy Kofi Annan.

"We urged them to support statements on their readiness to implement Kofi Annan's plan with real actions. They have already done much, but must do more," Lavrov said, stressing that the opposite side must do the same.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/xinhua/2012-06-22/content_6256408.html

The rebels will of course refuse to agree to a simultaneous withdrawal because that does not fit with the objective of annihilating the Assad regime. They clearly don't care about civilian deaths, they will continue to drag the conflict out hiding among the local populace and using civilians as human shields to protect them from the Syrian Army, while continuing to falsely accuse the government of masscares that they themselves are committing. They have no regard for the innocent civilians caught in the crossfire. They are bunch of single-minded savages who have neither the honour or courage to leave the cities and take the fight outside of civilian areas.

hyperborean

Not going to happen, the western armed rebels will continue to murder and maim, the Syrian army will continue to reply in kind and the civilians will suffer.

Savages

Nodin

cyberhog wrote: »

I don't think that anyone here is in any doubt about where I stand on the rebels. .........

I didn't ask where you stood on the Rebels. I asked what you meant by a specific remark in your post

cyberhog wrote:

Just like the Houla massacre, attacking UN observers is all part of the opposition's strategy to create enough hysteria to justify NATO-enforced regime change

I've bolded the specific part. If you'd be good enough to expand...?

AlekSmart

Jonny7 wrote: »

Very strange view..

So you feel dictatorships are misrepresented?

Take for example Saudi and Bahrain,do you think there is some sort of need and lack of objectivity to see the governance of those countries in a negative light? what would define that need?

I strongly suspect I know what the scapegoat will be

Suspicions are good,all evidence of a healthy productive mind and I'd generally be supportive of the process.

Do I feel Dictatorships are misrepresented ?

Yes,some indeed are.

The very use of the term Dictator,with all it's Chaplinesque connotations,serves to mark out the field of play which will then guide any debate on the "Dictator" concerned.

The generally accepted belief appears to be that all things being equal,human beings can exist in peaceful harmony without the need for external rules or societal mores being imposed upon them.

It is indeed a worthwhile theory,as it points to a World inhabited totally by sensible,pensive,considerate peoples who will happily co-exist in perpetuity.

My own view,is that throughout the history of Mankind's development on this wee planet,there have been few examples of large-scale working societal groupings who actually managed this.

Human Nature,in all of it's thoroughly unpredictable,self-serving and counter productive glory tends to triumph in the end as it's members (US !) revert back to behaviour patterns forged in a crucible of basic survival well beyond the range of our conscious memory.

Just to be clear on the Saudi and Bahraini question,as it appears to be an emerging issue,I am quite confident that large chunks of the principles of governance under which their people live are totally at variance with our native ideals.

However,I am quite comfortable that within these countries,and indeed Libya or Syria,there are currently large numbers of people who are content to simply get on with the basics of living within the boundaries of what they consider their way-of-life.

Making absolute value-calls on the rights and wrongs of these other cultures,is of course par for the course these days,but all I'm saying is that I personally won't row in behind each and every such call,be it on an Individual,such as Gadaffi,or a country and it's people,Syria.

Chuck Stone

cyberhog wrote: »

The rebels will of course refuse to agree to a simultaneous withdrawal because that does not fit with the objective of annihilating the Assad regime.

The Assad regime is a dictatorship/police state is it not? Do you not support the right of people to topple dictatorships?

They clearly don't care about civilian deaths, they will continue to drag the conflict out hiding among the local populace and using civilians as human shields to protect them from the Syrian Army,

That sounds eerily familiar to what the Israelis say about the Palestinians. What do you expect the rebels to do? Wear brightly coloured bibs like they're playing 5-a-side?

They have no regard for the innocent civilians caught in the crossfire. They are bunch of single-minded savages who have neither the honour or courage to leave the cities and take the fight outside of civilian areas.

Oh come on. You want them to line themselves up like toy soldiers and be massacred by the police state forces?

How naive.

Jonny7

AlekSmart wrote: »

Do I feel Dictatorships are misrepresented ?

Yes,some indeed are.

Which ones and in what way?

However,I am quite comfortable that within these countries,and indeed Libya or Syria,there are currently large numbers of people who are content to simply get on with the basics of living within the boundaries of what they consider their way-of-life.

a) how do you know they are happy or content?

b) what can these people do if they are unhappy?

I am certainly not saying every single citizen in these nations is deeply unhappy. I am emphasizing the fact that it cannot be gauged properly or fairly under the fear and threat of pressure, imprisonment, torture and death, no opportunity to protest in any form and most importantly no free vote/choice in whom leads them.

southsiderosie

MOD NOTE:

Threads on movements of Syrian combatants merged.

I understand that the situation in Syria is fluid, but I don't think we need a new thread anytime there is a new pronouncement from one side or the other. Please consider existing threads before starting a new one - especially since there is a similar pool of posters participating in all of the Syria-related threads.

AlekSmart

Jonny7 wrote: »

Which ones and in what way?

a) how do you know they are happy or content?

b) what can these people do if they are unhappy?

I am certainly not saying every single citizen in these nations is deeply unhappy. I am emphasizing the fact that it cannot be gauged properly or fairly under the fear and threat of pressure, imprisonment, torture and death, no opportunity to protest in any form and most importantly no free vote/choice in whom leads them.

Im uncertain as to whether Jonny7 requires individualized dissection of every non-liberal minded regime currently existing ?

I sure am not going to do such a forensic trawl,as the global situation is constantly changing,and no matter which ones were chosen I rather suspect there would simply be a recurring call for more specifics.

It's apparent that Jonny7 and myself have differing notions on the level of rule required to merit the title Dictatorship so we'll just have to peacefully co-exist on that basis.

As for the a & b questions,they appear somewhat vapourous in a vaguely "When did you stop beating your wife" kinda way.

I have no absolute way of gauging the happiness or otherwise of an entire Nation or Culture and I suggest that many of the so-called freedon-fighters are in the exact same position.

I am equally happy to call my dissatisfaction with the premise being advanced,here and elsewhere,that mere membership of a disaffected group is sufficient to confer Freedom Fighter status on individuals.

It's interesting to speculate on where Libya would be today had King Idris not been deposed in 1969.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/september/1/newsid_3911000/3911587.stm

Thousands took to the streets to demonstrate their support for the revolution. At the time, the coup was widely welcomed as an Arab nationalist reaction to the humiliating defeat of the Arab armies in the Six Day War with Israel in 1967 and to what were seen as the pro-Western policies and corruption of the monarchy.

Those thousands of supportive Libyans have today somehow magically morphed into Gadaffi Loyalists,no doubt evil to a man.....unless there's another less obvious explaination..?

Gadaffi's following 40 year's of rule is now commonly portrayed as ghastly,oppressive and evil,at least it must be in order to keep us all onside with the UN/NATO mantra.

Gadaffi's major contribution to his own eventual execution was primarily his lack of military spending,which saw his standing Army,Air-Force and Navy being sadly lacking in modern weaponry and tactical leadership.

Similarly in Syria,the Al-Assad leadership did'nt simply come about by a single man saying "Hello,I'm your new Boss"...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2000/jun/15/guardianweekly.guardianweekly1

President Hafez al-Assad, master of Syria since 1979, was a towering figure of Arab politics, respected and feared in his own country and throughout the Middle East. His death, at 69, marks the end of an era.

His achievements were threefold: he gave Syria years of much-needed stability; he turned his relatively small country into a major regional player whose views could not be ignored; and, with patient consistency, he fought to prevent Israel from imposing its will on the Arab world.

Thats Al-Assad the elder for ye....

The young Al-Assad lad had a good start anyway...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/jul/11/israel2?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

With no candidates opposing him Bashar is guaranteed to win, but to some of the 9.5m voters it was not enough to mark "yes" on the ballot papers: they pricked their fingers to seal their votes with blood.

"I love Bashar, I pledged allegiance to him in my blood," a woman farmworker said, waving her bloodstained thumb outside one of the 25 polling stations set up in Lebanon for Syrian expatriates.

Syrian polling stations in Lebanon....there's one for you !

But hold-on a minute,there's more....

In Britain there were three polling stations - in London, Manchester and Sheffield - for the Syrian community, which includes a large number of students.

All suitably oppressive and demonic carry-on from the Al-Assad wing.....no doubt all those supportive UK based Syrian students had a similar Pauline conversion as the 1969 Libyan "rebels",which saw them become suitably evil,oppressive and demonic too...?

Sorry Jonny7,I'm still not willing to partake of the rather sudden burst of regime-change revolutions so actively proposed by M Sarkozy,Frau Merkel,Mr Cameron and S.Berlusconi (and their advisors)....Ill stick with my belief that left to their own devices,the Libyan and Syrian peoples might just not have been quite as full of revolutionary zeal as our media outlets now continually portray them.

Time,as ever,will tell.

cyberhog

Chuck Stone wrote: »

The Assad regime is a dictatorship/police state is it not? Do you not support the right of people to topple dictatorships?

I support popular uprisings that dispose of dictators through peaceful persistence as the protest movement did that toppled Mubarak. I do not support the Libyan and Syrian variety of revolution where popular support is lacking and those pushing the rebellion have a more violent streak.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Oh come on. You want them to line themselves up like toy soldiers and be massacred by the police state forces?

How naive.

There is a saying "if you can't kill the wolf, don't pull its tail"

The rebels know they are not capable of toppling Assad so they hide among civilians and just keep pulling the tail. They care not of the lives they destroy.

Eggy Baby!

Do you not support the right of people to topple dictatorships?

I suppose most people here do not support the right of the USA/its goons to topple dictatorships. Considering it also exercises its "right" to support them as it pleases! The logic of "To topple one dictatorship we must support many" kept from the Cold War is skewed. Basically American foreign policy is a veiled form of containment almost fixated on the Middle East.

Jonny7

AlekSmart wrote: »

Im uncertain as to whether Jonny7 requires individualized dissection of every non-liberal minded regime currently existing ?

Its very simple and straightforward, just give an example of one.

It's apparent that Jonny7 and myself have differing notions on the level of rule required to merit the title Dictatorship so we'll just have to peacefully co-exist on that basis.

Yeah we've been through this before.

You seem to have the bizarre theory that people not being allowed to vote, being ruled by one family for decades and being faced with violence if they protest in any way - is somehow offset by the fact that said country perhaps has good roads or a good health system.

Saddam had a great middle class, Hitler had wonderful roads, Gadaffi had a large water project. These men were dictators, running dictatorships.

As for the a & b questions,they appear somewhat vapourous in a vaguely "When did you stop beating your wife" kinda way.

Simple questions, simple answers - shouldn't require a page of waffle of each time Alex

Syrian polling stations in Lebanon....there's one for you !
But hold-on a minute,there's more....

The notion that people have a real vote in Syria is a false one. People "voted" in Saddam's Iraq. As I've said many times before you don't seem to grasp or understand what
a dictatorship in any way shape or form.

Sorry Jonny7,I'm still not willing to partake of the rather sudden burst of regime-change revolutions so actively proposed by M Sarkozy,Frau Merkel,Mr Cameron and S.Berlusconi (and their advisors)....Ill stick with my belief that left to their own devices,the Libyan and Syrian peoples might just not have been quite as full of revolutionary zeal as our media outlets now continually portray them.

Again, an absolutely bizarre view of the situation. Uprisings and protests took place in over a dozen countries across the ME and N Africa. Democratic countries across the world, and even undemocratic countries, e.g. Iran, China, etc - supported these uprisings, post-event.

Silvio Berlusconi is not in power.

Jonny7

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

I suppose most people here do not support the right of the USA/its goons to topple dictatorships. Considering it also exercises its "right" to support them as it pleases! The logic of "To topple one dictatorship we must support many" kept from the Cold War is skewed. Basically American foreign policy is a veiled form of containment almost fixated on the Middle East.

Your fixation is with the US (hypocrisy), not with what Assad is doing. We get the message.

AlekSmart

Jonny7 wrote: »

Its very simple and straightforward, just give an example of one.

Yeah we've been through this before.

You seem to have the bizarre theory that people not being allowed to vote, being ruled by one family for decades and being faced with violence if they protest in any way - is somehow offset by the fact that said country perhaps has good roads or a good health system.

Saddam had a great middle class, Hitler had wonderful roads, Gadaffi had a large water project. These men were dictators, running dictatorships.

Simple questions, simple answers - shouldn't require a page of waffle of each time Alex

Yup,simple & straightforward,which appears to be how Jonny7 considers much of the ongoing regime change processes dubbed the Arab Spring.

I don't subscribe to the simple,simple,simple theory at all,particularly when it relates to rebellions which far from being widespread and "popular" to begin with,required significant outside asistance before taking flight.

I'm afraid,the "page of waffle" is all yer going to get from me Jonny7,but it's entirely up to yourself as to whether you consider it worth reading or not.

What Jonny7 appears to suggest is the Albert Reynolds "One Sheet" approach ?

Whilst I do understand the popular need for things to be condensed into byte-sized morsels in order to facilitate easier quicker understanding,I believe that some stuff just does'nt condense,leaving you with the requirement to take a far broader and less certain approach.

It's all becoming Monty Pythonesque at this stage,but yes,perhaps,a "Great Middle Class,Great Roads and a Large Water Project" don't actually count for much,but there are sufficient beneficiaries of these things to suggest otherwise.

Jonny7

AlekSmart wrote: »

Yup,simple & straightforward,which appears to be how Jonny7 considers much of the ongoing regime change processes dubbed the Arab Spring.

I am asking you direct questions, you cannot seem to provide answers, there just appears to be a lot of musing and meandering on the subject.

I don't subscribe to the simple,simple,simple theory at all,particularly when it relates to rebellions which far from being widespread and "popular" to begin with,required significant outside asistance before taking flight.

Alex that's a big claim, you have to provide us with proof of what you deem to be "significant outside assistance" in early 2011 for the Syrian uprising.

I'm afraid,the "page of waffle" is all yer going to get from me Jonny7,but it's entirely up to yourself as to whether you consider it worth reading or not.

Regretfully I do read it sometimes.

Whilst I do understand the popular need for things to be condensed into byte-sized morsels in order to facilitate easier quicker understanding,I believe that some stuff just does'nt condense,leaving you with the requirement to take a far broader and less certain approach.

I don't know what this is, filler?

It's all becoming Monty Pythonesque at this stage,but yes,perhaps,a "Great Middle Class,Great Roads and a Large Water Project" don't actually count for much,but there are sufficient beneficiaries of these things to suggest otherwise.

Monty Pythonesque? to be fair that's lending far too much credibility to your theory on the matter.

If Merkel had protesters machine-gunned in downtown Berlin tomorrow I somehow very much doubt you'd be here arguing that maybe she is "misrepresented" and offering up a bizarre excuse list of "good" things she's done for Germany. She'd be out of power instantly.

wingsof daun

Jonny7 wrote: »

You seem to have the bizarre theory that people not being allowed to vote, being ruled by one family for decades and being faced with violence if they protest in any way - is somehow offset by the fact that said country perhaps has good roads or a good health system.


The notion that people have a real vote in Syria is a false one. People "voted" in Saddam's Iraq. As I've said many times before you don't seem to grasp or understand what
a dictatorship in any way shape or form.

If a country has 4 parties and the criminals control all parties A, B, C and D then what use is it voting?! You may form your own party E, but without the required financial backing and campaign funding it will never win.

When the media can destroy or make a presidential hopeful and when a person who is a citizen cannot have a chance to become president without the financial backing of the wealthy then that, imo, is dictatorship. For example, the USA.

In a dictatorship, the dictator is always protected by the most up-to-date technology and personel. He never mingles freely with the masses. He may speak from behind bulletproof glass as American presidents have done in the past.

Eggy Baby!

I wouldn't say the USA is a dictatorship now....

zom

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

I wouldn't say the USA is a dictatorship now....

It's not so far from dictatorship. Dictatorship doesn't have to be one person rule - there can be small group of peoples pulling the strings of marionette president or government. Just like USA.

AlekSmart

zom wrote: »

It's not so far from dictatorship. Dictatorship doesn't have to be one person rule - there can be small group of peoples pulling the strings of marionette president or government. Just like USA.

HMmmm....you mean kinda like the Bilderberg Group...?

http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/index.php

Eggy Baby!

zom wrote: »

It's not so far from dictatorship. Dictatorship doesn't have to be one person rule - there can be small group of peoples pulling the strings of marionette president or government. Just like USA.

Not to mention the surveillance situation, which is "endemic" according to Privacy International, and steadily getting worse. The fact that they are going to use drones to spy on their citizens is also dreadful.

I could go on about the two-party state but that's too well known.

It certainly is among the worst and most undemocratic "Western" democracies.

Jonny7

Thread goes in usual direction.

AlekSmart

Jonny7 wrote: »

Thread goes in usual direction.

Tongue in Cheek...?

Eggy Baby!

Jonny7 wrote: »

Thread goes in usual direction.

I was simply replying to a comment left by zom. If the thread has gone in the "usual direction" as you ruefully put it, then why do you continue to comment?

Jonny7

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

I was simply replying to a comment left by zom. If the thread has gone in the "usual direction" as you ruefully put it, then why do you continue to comment?

The usual direction is to use an international thread solely to bash certain countries, e.g. the US.

It fact some people's only aim is to use these threads just to 'have a go' so to speak, its not exactly subtle, perhaps we need a sticky or something.

On topic, tensions are rising between Turkey and the Syrian military, the rhetoric has been upped, I feel a little suspicious about exactly where the jets were, but after intially playing cautious, Turkey seems to be emboldened - still it would be a weak trigger point for any military escalation.

I definitely think the Syrians were play it more cautious along the Turk border, unless Assad thinks such a conflict could benefit him.

Eggy Baby!

Gulf of Tonkin Mark 2.

OS119

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

Gulf of Tonkin Mark 2.

unlikely - had the Turks been looking for an excuse they'd be at war already over this. that they're not proves that while they may be happy to see the back of Assad, they aren't going to go to war over it.

everyday that passes without retaliation makes not only the retalition less likely, but all out war less likely. that said, i wouldn't be surprised if, because of this incident, the Turks were a little more generous with the 'support' they give to the Syrian rebel groups under their sway...

Pedant

What are the chances of Iran defending Syria in the event of Turko-Syrian war?

Jonny7

Pedant wrote: »

What are the chances of Iran defending Syria in the event of Turko-Syrian war?

An actual war is unlikely, but in such a case, based on Iran's low level of rhetoric on the issue I highly doubt they would step to the forefront of any such conflict.

I think, like the Russians, if things got very serious, they would back down (probably after a bit of brinkmanship). Even the Russians are showing cracks and concern for the level of violence in Syria, they aren't fools, they know who the main culprit is.

Of course if Syria was hypothetically at peace internally, and the situation escalated with the Turks I would expect Russia and Iran to be much more vocal

cyberhog

Jonny7 wrote: »

Even the Russians are showing cracks and concern for the level of violence in Syria, they aren't fools, they know who the main culprit is.

Russia doesn't see a "main culprit" it has always maintained that both sides are equally at fault.

The UN also blames the two sides equally.

(Reuters) - Both rebels and forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad are intensifying violence in Syria and striving for military gains rather than peaceful transition, the chief U.N. monitor in Syria, Major-General Robert Mood, said on Friday.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/15/us-syria-crisis-idUSBRE85D0IS20120615

I don't know what news source you're relying on but it clearly isn't giving you the right information.

lagente

Looks like the Brigade from Libya (with a good few Irish in it) that went to Syria are getting militant. Why does there have to be so much religion in what they are saying, considering Syria, (as backward as it is) is relatively secular? What kind of solution could they possibly bring to the region that borders Iraq for 600 km? None that's what.

AlekSmart

lagente wrote: »

Looks like the Brigade from Libya (with a good few Irish in it) that went to Syria are getting militant. Why does there have to be so much religion in what they are saying, considering Syria, (as backward as it is) is relatively secular? What kind of solution could they possibly bring to the region that borders Iraq for 600 km? None that's what.

Good point Lagente,and one which often flies straight over the heads of many "experts" on the regions politics.

The Allah-Ua-Akhbar chanting folk were always possessed of a particular ire for those leaders or regimes who were not bowing deeply enough in the direction of their particular mecca.....To many of these "Martyrs Brigade" types the problem of strong secular leaders is a particularly hard nut to crack.

However,with the assistance of agencies such as UN/NATO in Libya,the "Freedom Fighters" now see a new avenue to be explored.

If we could only deliver on a No-Fly Zone over Syria,this "popular" rebellion might well deliver on its promise ?

Suff

lagente wrote: »

considering Syria, (as backward as it is)

Have you visited Syria?

Jonny7

lagente wrote: »

Looks like the Brigade from Libya (with a good few Irish in it) that went to Syria are getting militant. Why does there have to be so much religion in what they are saying, considering Syria, (as backward as it is) is relatively secular? What kind of solution could they possibly bring to the region that borders Iraq for 600 km? None that's what.

According to your original post there was an Irish brigade that fought in Libya consisting of a high number of Irish (100's I believe you claimed)

Is this what you are referring to?

or are you getting confused with this

cyberhog

Amnesty condemns massacre at Syrian TV station

Amnesty International has condemned the attack on the pro-government Ikhbariya TV station in Syria, saying media workers should not have been targeted.

...

Amnesty International Middle East and North Africa Deputy Director Ann Harrison said:

“Even a media organisation engaged in propaganda is still a civilian object, so it and those working for it must never be deliberately targeted.

“All parties should condemn this attack and make clear to those under their command that attacks of this nature and other such violations will not be tolerated.”

http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=20193


It appears the influx of weapons and support from the West and Gulf regimes has spurred the rebels to step up their terror campaign against Syrian civilians.

Pedant

cyberhog wrote: »

Amnesty condemns massacre at Syrian TV station




http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=20193


It appears the influx of weapons and support from the West and Gulf regimes has spurred the rebels to step up their terror campaign against Syrian civilians.

In fairness, while the attack on this TV station is condemnable, the terror inflicted by the Syrian government on Syrian civilians thus far far overshadow's anything the rebels have done.

cyberhog

Pedant wrote: »

In fairness, while the attack on this TV station is condemnable, the terror inflicted by the Syrian government on Syrian civilians thus far far overshadow's anything the rebels have done.

Everyone is well aware of the civilian casualties that have resulted from government offensives against rebels hiding in civilian populations since that is what the media spends 99% of its time reporting on. So you may feel the government forces are more brutal than the rebels but that is only because the media ignores a great deal of the human rights abuses committed by rebels such as using the elderly and women as human shields against Syrian forces.

IMO I don't see anything unfair about drawing attention to the Western backed terror campaign against civilians loyal to the regime. We should be under no illusions about the true nature of the opposition.

Pedant

cyberhog wrote: »

Everyone is well aware of the civilian casualties that have resulted from government offensives against rebels hiding in civilian populations since that is what the media spends 99% of its time reporting on. So you may feel the government forces are more brutal than the rebels but that is only because the media ignores a great deal of the human rights abuses committed by rebels such as using the elderly and women as human shields against Syrian forces.

IMO I don't see anything unfair about drawing attention to the Western backed terror campaign against civilians loyal to the regime. We should be under no illusions about the true nature of the opposition

Oh please. THOUSANDS of civilians have died so far. There are numerous reports including one to the UN about how the government forces have treated their civilians so far; tortures, rapes, massacres. Even if this supposed "human shield" lark you're spouting is true, it still shows utter ruthlessness on the government's part. They are willing to sacrifice civilian lives to achieve the ultimate goal of success again the rebel; the regime puts its own survival above the individual lives of its civilians. If these civilians used as "human shields" by rebels, then they are hostages and the situation ought to be treated like a hostage situation - not shelling civilian areas.

And by the way, there are even reports that the Syrian government itself is using children as human shields, not just rebels.

When you look at all the evidence, you see who the aggressor is - the fascist/authoritarian leadership of Syria and Bassar Al Assad; a man who adorns himself in a cult of personality, eerily similar to that employed by Adolf Hitler (he even get a Roman solute).

Eggy Baby!

When you look at all the evidence, you see who the aggressor is - the fascist/authoritarian leadership of Syria and Bassar Al Assad; a man who adorns himself in a cult of personality, eerily similar to that employed by Adolf Hitler (he even get a Roman solute).

If I'm honest, assembling a cult of personality is the most mild thing Assad has done.

If these civilians used as "human shields" by rebels, then they are hostages and the situation ought to be treated like a hostage situation - not shelling civilian areas.

So you deflect blame off the rebels for using human shields, and instead blame the government for essentially not realising the rebels are using human shields. You do realise the reality of conflict, don't you? The rebels will probably dress up civilians in battle attire, give them empty guns and have them run around combat zones as cannon fodder. It would be impossible for the government to defeat an irregular force such as the rebels if they had to stop and check every individual fighter.

"Human shields" is a rather vague term, but it usually is not utilised in the way you insinuate it was, that the rebels are somehow physically "holding" the people.

Oh please. THOUSANDS of civilians have died so far.

If you have read the entire thread here, many people will have given many points in favour of blaming Assad totally, but other believe the rebels were totally to blame. Thankfully conflicts like these are not resolved through one hundred percent-ism.

Jonny7

The situation will not be 'solved' just moved into another phase, hopefully a more peaceful one.

This will either be via international means, via Assad stepping down, or via Assad being ousted/killed by the opposition.

Assad stepping down and holding free and fair elections (internationally monitored) at the beginning of this conflict would have been relatively the most successful and peaceful means of securing the transition.

However, even if he does this at this point in time, the country will still be in chaos, albeit a lower level, but would expect a large amount of reprisals and revenge killings.

If the international community steps in via UN plan, unified pressure, peacekeepers, etc then the violence should drop but the main problem will remain. I doubt there will be international military action unless the situation escalates or there are unexpected events, that's a whole different kettle of fish.

Finally, if the rebels do oust him, there will still be a lot of violence, again the form of retribution, revenge. Also armed groups, different factions, militants all of varying motives will find their way easier into positions of power.

When the country does reach the stage of holding elections I expect a similar situation to Egypt, e.g; the old guard in a new guise trying to retain power, and then Islamic brotherhood style parties vying for power.

I would not expect moderates to intially do well after 1.5 years of serious civil strife and violence.

If democracy can survive the first decade or so, then there is a hope the country can be on its way towards peace and normality.

If any sort of dictatorship or military coup occurs, then back to square one, rinse repeat.

lagente

Jonny7 wrote: »

I would not expect moderates to intially do well after 1.5 years of serious civil strife and violence.

If any sort of dictatorship or military coup occurs, then back to square one, rinse repeat.

I would however, I would expect that kind of thing of the individual in democracy, but if they want to bring religion and divides based on religion into it, eg. ala Egypt, Libya, Iraq etc then there will be a awful price for that, and one that must be avoided.
Not enough are suggesting these days that kind of bottom up approach to solving the problems, always top-down solutions,
the easy answer, no reflection as to how religion and religious control is being used, and thus politics becomes a game of numbers of the religious categories, and democracy gets broken, and often not just broken, but sometimes completely useless.

As for the last question, I stand by that there were and are many Irish in the ongoing Libyan war, and also that it was and is, in the hundreds. And I am also saying that there are many Irish in Syria right now, and I'll go for a figure in the hundreds again. Religion is too big a
motivator for too many Irish going there. But I will point out, without trying to sound too exclusive, that I do use 'Irish' very loosely.

That Tripoli Brigade wikipedia article, is propaganda to me, in what is said and what is left out. And once again, wikipedia is being used as propaganda throughout all these conflicts.