Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

SYRIA WAR MEGATHREAD - Mod Note First Post

1…1112141617…33

Comments

  • #392
    theGEM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 133 ✭✭theGEM


    seanie_c wrote: »
    Israel.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Wonderful post new poster. Please expand on your theory, as that is all that it is.

    Sunni vs Shia
    Saudi Arabia vs Iran & Iraq
    Israel vs Iran
    US vs Russia (middle east dominance)
    Securlarism (Assad) vs Fundamentalism (Rebels)


  • #393
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    theGEM wrote: »
    Sunni vs Shia
    Saudi Arabia vs Iran & Iraq
    Israel vs Iran
    US vs Russia (middle east dominance)
    Securlarism (Assad) vs Fundamentalism (Rebels)

    Wrong.

    A minority of the rebels are fundamentalist. The majority are still secular.


  • #394
    Amirani
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,554 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    Sorry if I missed it, what's your position here gurramok? What action should Western forces take?


  • #395
    Arnold Layne
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 976 ✭✭✭Arnold Layne


    gurramok wrote: »
    I never said Napalm was a chemical weapon. I indicated that he used it to kill children hence any weapon possible is doable for him to kill at will. He has levelled cities already.

    Q. What is the difference between using Drones or Napalm to kill children?

    A. The current US president uses the former while preceeding US Presidents used the latter


  • #396
    Lightbulb Sun
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,405 ✭✭✭Lightbulb Sun


    gurramok wrote: »
    No. Whats Iraq got to do with 2013 Syria?

    Do you condone Assad's bombing of kids?

    I'm just pointing out the double standard the US conveniently get away with.

    No I don't.

    As long as you can see the shitstorm that will follow American intervention...

    Looks like the UK MPS have taken a look towards the future this time and realised what the repurcussions for the region will be. Damascus is the holy grail for the Jihadis.


  • Advertisement
  • #397
    Karl Stein
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,689 ✭✭✭Karl Stein


    seanie_c wrote: »
    Israel.

    Israel was a part of the equation but not the sole reason by a long stretch.

    Israel is kinda the US's attack dog. If the US calls Israel to heel it does as its told (returning the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt).


  • #398
    Arnold Layne
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 976 ✭✭✭Arnold Layne


    gurramok wrote: »
    Wrong.

    A minority of the rebels are fundamentalist. The majority are still secular.

    Proof.

    Who does Israel support?


  • #399
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    NiallSparky wrote: »
    Sorry if I missed it, what's your position here gurramok? What action should Western forces take?

    Position on the chemical weapons attack alone or Assad?

    I've argued for 2 years now that state forces in Syria have no right to deny democracy of the protesters now forcibly turned to the FSA. I've argued the same in Tunisia and Libya despite some misguided here on boards denouncing it as some mad conspiracy.

    As a response to the chemical attack(and all mass attacks on civilians by Assad's planes), Assad's heavy weapons as well as military bases\institutions should be targeted for destruction. Hopeful of a no-fly zone but unfortunately Russia will deny this as they have a military base in Syria and already supply arms to Assad so will block any resolution out of selfish interest at the detriment of civilian genocide.


  • #400
    theGEM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 133 ✭✭theGEM


    gurramok wrote: »
    Wrong.

    A minority of the rebels are fundamentalist. The majority are still secular.

    I doubt that otherwise America et al would have been in there months/years ago.

    http://www.passionforliberty.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/fsa_composition.png


  • #401
    seanie_c
    Closed Accounts Posts: 295 ✭✭seanie_c


    gurramok wrote: »
    Wrong.

    A minority of the rebels are fundamentalist. The majority are still secular.

    Ah yes, I heard John McCain say this too when he met with "rebels" in May this year.

    He's an Israeli asset.
    He was accompanied by Mouza Moustafa, part of the Syrian Emergency Task Force, funded by various Israeli think tanks.

    Before his career with SETF, he was executive director Libyan Council For North America.

    ...how's that democracy working out in Libya by the way?

    They got off to a good start sticking a bayonet up Gaddafi's anus, don't you think?

    I'm sure Syria will be a paradise once Assad is removed from power and the "rebels" take over . . .:rolleyes:

    And you think you know what's going on in Syria? Right.


  • Advertisement
  • #402
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    Lightbulb Sun wrote: »
    I'm just pointing out the double standard the US conveniently get away with.

    No I don't.

    As long as you can see the shitstorm that will follow American intervention...

    Looks like the UK MPS have taken a look towards the future this time and realised what the repurcussions for the region will be. Damascus is the holy grail for the Jihadis.

    What sh1tstorm?

    You expect Hezbollah and Iran to get upset when they have been engaged in Syria agianst the FSA already? Seriously!!
    Arnold Layne wrote: »
    Q. What is the difference between using Drones or Napalm to kill children?

    A. The current US president uses the former while preceeding US Presidents used the latter

    Proof? Is this an anti-US tirade?

    Look, Syrian kids have been massacred deliberately by chemical and naplam weapons. If the world stands by, another dictator will think that he\she can do what they pleases to rule a country. It has to be stopped now.
    Arnold Layne wrote: »
    Proof.

    Who does Israel support?

    What? Wtf has Israel go to do with all of this? Other than sharing a border and having the Golan Heights under in my opinion illegal control, Israel is not involved in the Syrian civil war.


  • #403
    Lightbulb Sun
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,405 ✭✭✭Lightbulb Sun


    gurramok wrote: »
    What sh1tstorm?

    You expect Hezbollah and Iran to get upset when they have been engaged in Syria agianst the FSA already? Seriously!!


    See Seanehs post above. Where did I mention Hezbollah or Iran?


  • #404
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    theGEM wrote: »
    I doubt that otherwise America et al would have been in there months/years ago.

    http://www.passionforliberty.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/fsa_composition.png

    Do you easily read into propaganda?
    seanie_c wrote: »
    Ah yes, I heard John McCain say this too when he met with "rebels" in May this year.

    He's an Israeli asset.
    He was accompanied by Mouza Moustafa, part of the Syrian Emergency Task Force, funded by various Israeli think tanks.

    Before his career with SETF, he was executive director Libyan Council For North America.

    ...how's that democracy working out in Libya by the way?

    They got off to a good start sticking a bayonet up Gaddafi's anus, don't you think?

    I'm sure Syria will be a paradise once Assad is removed from power and the "rebels" take over . . .:rolleyes:

    And you think you know what's going on in Syria? Right.

    John McCain is an idiot. We here would have more knowledge on Mid-East Affairs :)

    Libya recently rejected their Islamist elements(remember Benghazi) and so has Tunisia.
    Oh, and Egypt too. Strangely the usual brigade have been too quiet about the popular uprising against Morsi in which the military used after to clamp down on the Brotherhood.

    What does this all say? It says that the claims of an extremist Islamist takeover in said countries by the said usual posters have been well...truely wild of the mark.


  • #405
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    Lightbulb Sun wrote: »
    See Seanehs post above. Where did I mention Hezbollah or Iran?

    Then please explain the said sh1tstorm that will follow after intervention by the West.


  • #406
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    gurramok wrote: »


    What? Wtf has Israel go to do with all of this? Other than sharing a border and having the Golan Heights under in my opinion illegal control, Israel is not involved in the Syrian civil war.



    Actually, Israel probably has a lot to do with why the US is interested in this. Assad has allowed Syria to be a conduit for Iran to supply Hezzbollah with weapons, if Assad is no longer in power, that conduit is no long in operation.
    The US also know that once Assad is removed that the Jihadis will move on to Lebanon and try and impose their band of crazy there as well, engaging Hezbollah and the Christian militias with the aim of making Lebanon a Sunni controlled state. The House of saud, the ones paying for all the Jihadi's weapons and food, aren't big fans of the current setup in Lebanon.

    All of this benefits Israel in several ways, Hezbollah are weakened and distracted, Hamas lose two of their major backers (Hezbollah and Syria) and Iran is isolated in a sea of Sunni controlled states.


    If you can't see the logic in all this, well, I guess you know even less about the politics in the region than I assumed.


  • #407
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    Seaneh wrote: »
    Actually, Israel probably has a lot to do with why the US is interested in this. Assad has allowed Syria to be a conduit for Iran to supply Hezzbollah with weapons, if Assad is no longer in power, that conduit is no long in operation.
    The US also know that once Assad is removed that the Jihadis will move on to Lebanon and try and impose their band of crazy there as well, engaging Hezbollah and the Christian militias with the aim of making Lebanon a Sunni controlled state. The House of saud, the ones paying for all the Jihadi's weapons and food, aren't big fans of the current setup in Lebanon.

    All of this benefits Israel in several ways, Hezbollah are weakened and distracted, Hamas lose two of their major backers (Hezbollah and Syria) and Iran is isolated in a sea of Sunni controlled states.


    If you can't see the logic in all this, well, I guess you know even less about the politics in the region than I assumed.

    I agreed with you as far as the 2nd paragraph.

    You are making the mistake believing that all Sunni's and especially the ones that have influence are all Jihadists. They are not. It's a wild assumption on your part with no basis at all.

    By the way, Hamas have fallen out with Hezbollah and Assad over Assad's treatment of Sunni's in the civil war.


  • #408
    crockholm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,448 ✭✭✭crockholm


    Seaneh wrote: »
    There is no evidence that he has used chemical weapons, NONE, ever.

    NONE.

    And no matter how many times you repeat yourself, there still won't be.

    Napalm is not a chemical weapon, incendiaries are not banned under international law. They are used ALL THE TIME, especially by the country trying to claim the moral high ground and play world police again.

    If you want to be pissed about someone using Napalm and other incendiaries, then I suggest you start petitioning for the UN to attack the US to punish them for their use of it.


    I am not confusing Syria with anywhere else. I'd wager I'm far more aware of the issues at play in Syria right now than you ever will be.
    I'm not an Assad supporter, I never have been, I am just not stupid enough to believe that installing an American Citizen from Texas with strong links the the house of Saud and the Muslim brotherhood who the FSA have rejected several times as the leader of Syria is a recipe for disaster.

    I also realise that the FSA have no hope in hell of controlling the Salafists and that within months any secular government that might be installed will be overthrown by Jihadis and as a result the Shiites, Christians and Kurds will be rounded up and slaughtered by the Sunni extremists, like they already are being in rebel held areas in Syria!


    If you don't understand the actual issues at play in Syria, don't try and preach about "right and wrong" because you haven't a ****ing notion what you are ****ing on about.


    Of the current potential winners of the civil war, Assad is THE LEAST WORST OPTION.

    If Qatar and Saudi stop supporting the Salafists they war ends IN WEEKS.

    That is what the international community should be pushing for, ending the war as quickly as possible and then engaging Assad.
    Assad has already said he will hold open elections with international observers if the fighting ceases. Hold him to his word, let the regime change politically, trying to fund the rebels, who are, frankly, having their arses handed to them on a daily bases for the last few months, is the single stupidst option available in this war and only means it drags on and on and more people die. Without foreign intervention from Qatar and Saudi this war would already be over.

    Was talking to a Syrian woman today,one with most of her family still stuck in that blighted country,according to her, her family has not eaten meat in over 5 months.
    Whereas it was common knowledge that Assad was a dangerous man,a degree of stability came with his rule.Now through the civil war,any sembelance of community seems to have disintergrated,neighbours are in dread of being accused of being any way sympathetic to any cause,as more unscruplous people are using the situation to grab their neighbours goods and properties.
    She is clearly in favour of Assad remaining in power,some of her further out clan relatives have not been so lucky in their dealings with the rebels and their Islamist auxillaries.

    My own feelings on this would be that while the US likes to imagine itself as some destroyer of tyrannies and johnny appleseed of democracy , they all to often miss the consequences of their actions. Well they might get to bomb the **** out of somewhere foreign and express their military might and prowess,berate Europe for it's wimpish stances,while half a million pissed off,shell shocked refugees show up at European borders,a Europe that is increasing unwelcoming of the newcommers.

    I wonder if the US had to accecpt the numbers of war fleeing refugees (the majority being muslims)would it be so gung-ho?


  • #409
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    gurramok wrote: »
    By the way, Hamas have fallen out with Hezbollah and Assad over Assad's treatment of Sunni's in the civil war.

    Iran are still supplying Hamas with rockets via Syria. Hamas and the MB aren't happy with Assad, they never have been, but Hamas will still take Iran and Syria's support.

    Hamas and Hezbollah have never been friendly, but Hezbollah do what Iran tell them to.


  • #410
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    gurramok wrote: »

    You are making the mistake believing that all Sunni's and especially the ones that have influence are all Jihadists. They are not. It's a wild assumption on your part with no basis at all.

    No, I'm not.

    I never said anything to even remotely imply that. I said Iran would be surrounded by a sea of sunni controlled states, this is true, and this would further isolate them in the region, this is also true. They would be left with no real ally and would be surrounded by states with massive numbers of salafist jihadis who are controlled by the Saudis, this is the truth. You're just not able to comprehend this because you've just got this "Assad bad, rebels good" mentality stuck in your head when in reality it's "Assad bad, some rebels not so bad, a lot of rebels far worse".


  • #411
    seanie_c
    Closed Accounts Posts: 295 ✭✭seanie_c


    Cathal Cloch wrote: »
    Israel was a part of the equation but not the sole reason by a long stretch.

    Israel is kinda the US's attack dog. If the US calls Israel to heel it does as its told (returning the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt).

    America has nothing to gain removing Assad.
    It's Israel and the House of Saud with Qatar that want Assad out of the picture.

    All the key people that want Syria attacked by the US are loyal to the state of Israel.

    Even Doctors without Borders is a Pro-Israeli organization that helped Al Qaeda topple Gaddafi in Libya. DWB supported invasion of Iraq, Libya and now Syria. Dr. Bernard Kouchner was very vocal in his support to attack Syria as he is himself loyal to the state of Israel.

    John McCain, another classic asset of Israel in the middle east.
    Israel have more to do with this than anyone else, they benefit the most from the destruction of Syria.

    Look at the recent deployment of 150 troops to Golan Heights by Alan Shatter, the disputed territory between Israel and Syria from the 1967 war.

    What does Alan Shatter do? He cuts the budget for Gardai and buys €15 million of weapons from Israel before offering up 150 paddies to protect Israel from the same Islamic nutjobs Israel are helping destroy Syria.

    Israel has already sold drilling rights to Genie Energy earlier this year despite the deal being viewed as illegal under international law.

    The largest shareholders are Jacob Rothschild (member of family responsible for creation of Israel) Rupert Murdoch (media mogul, sky/fox news) Dick Cheney (Halliburton oil services, led US to war in Iraq)

    Don't be surprised if Israel invade Lebanon again once Assad/Hizballah are neutralized. The Hasbani River is important to Israel and they will try to take control of it.


  • Advertisement
  • #412
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    Seaneh wrote: »
    No, I'm not.

    I never said anything to even remotely imply that. I said Iran would be surrounded by a sea of sunni controlled states, this is true, and this would further isolate them in the region, this is also true. They would be left with no real ally and would be surrounded by states with massive numbers of salafist jihadis who are controlled by the Saudis, this is the truth. You're just not able to comprehend this because you've just got this "Assad bad, rebels good" mentality stuck in your head when in reality it's "Assad bad, some rebels not so bad, a lot of rebels far worse".

    Look at the reality.

    Religion is big there.

    Iraq is now Shia controlled. Syria will be Sunni controlled. Neither will be in the hands of extremists to wipe out the minority opposites. There are no majority "salafist jihadis", god knows where that analysis came from??

    That's the mistake you are implying.


  • #413
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    gurramok wrote: »
    Look at the reality.

    Religion is big there.

    Iraq is now Shia controlled. Syria will be Sunni controlled. Neither will be in the hands of extremists to wipe out the minority opposites. There are no majority "salafist jihadis", god knows where that analysis came from??

    That's the mistake you are implying.

    The most powerful fighting forces in the rebel ranks are controlled by Islamist extremists. Those troops are not going to just stand down and allow a secular government, they WILL overthrow any government installed by the west. They WILL NOT accept a texas based american citizen as premier of Syria and they will have no problems ousting the FSA and taking control of the country.
    Saudi and Qatar have no interest in installing Democracy, they want Theocracy in Syria just like Saudi and Qatar, lead by Imams they fund and control and enforced by jihadis they "educated" and armed. They will not allow any secular government to control a country they "invested" the amount of time and money they have Syria. Look at what they are funding in Iraq and Afghanistan ffs.

    Taliban/Al Qeada/Al Nusra/etc, they are all funded by Saudi money, "educated" by Saudi imams and promoting Saudi driven Salafist ideals.

    Not seeing THAT is the mistake YOU are making.


  • #414
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    Seaneh wrote: »
    The most powerful fighting forces in the rebel ranks are controlled by Islamist extremists. Those troops are not going to just stand down and allow a secular government, they WILL overthrow any government installed by the west. They WILL NOT accept a texas based american citizen as premier of Syria and they will have no problems ousting the FSA and taking control of the country.
    Saudi and Qatar have no interest in installing Democracy, they want Theocracy in Syria just like Saudi and Qatar, lead by Imams they fund and control and enforced by jihadis they "educated" and armed. They will not allow any secular government to control a country they "invested" the amount of time and money they have Syria. Look at what they are funding in Iraq and Afghanistan ffs.

    Taliban/Al Qeada/Al Nusra/etc, they are all funded by Saudi money, "educated" by Saudi imams and promoting Saudi driven Salafist ideals.

    Not seeing THAT is the mistake YOU are making.

    One note from your post. You are stating that the Saudis are directly funding the Taliban\Al Qeada\Al Nusra.

    That's tinfoil hat stuff. the Saudi's along with the Yemeni's have been at the forefront of the fight against Islamic extremists.


  • #415
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    gurramok wrote: »
    the Saudi's along with the Yemeni's have been at the forefront of the fight against Islamic extremists.

    Ah jaysus, you're absolutely off the reservation now with your nonsense.


  • #416
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    Seaneh wrote: »
    Ah jaysus, you're absolutely off the reservation now with your nonsense.

    What, facts hurt you?

    There is nothing to disprove as to what I said about the Saudi's.


  • #417
    GottaGetGatt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,131 ✭✭✭GottaGetGatt


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCliSnGHKCU&feature=c4-overview&list=UU4unV5BVmWubfAF0Al_AVdw


  • #418
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    gurramok wrote: »
    What, facts hurt you?

    There is nothing to disprove as to what I said about the Saudi's.

    The Saudi Government allow upwards of $10billion per year to be channelled from "charities" to extremist groups, these charities are controlled by people that the house of Saud allow to be in positions of power.

    They promote Wahabi/Salafi radicalism as part of the national curriculum, which leads to an unending production line of jihadis.
    They export their Wahabi/Salafi ideals to every country in the arab world in the form of Imams and Saudi funded religious schools and mosques meaning that their production line of little soldiers for Allah is not just in Saudi or the Arab Peninsula but most of the developed world too.

    The fact that you are actually ignorant of this stuff would be forgivable if you weren't actually trying to say that Saudi are "combating Islamist terrorism".


    They are EXPORTING Islamist terrorism.

    Go and research just where people like Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri got their ideologies from. Research where their funding came from. Research where the London tube bombers were educated, research where their mosque is funded from, research where the imams they followed are based, research what Royal Family promotes the Ideals they spread.

    And then come back here with your tail between your legs and admit you haven't a breeze what you are talking about.


  • #419
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    Just because a handful of Saudi's are extreme does not mean the whole nation are extreme, thats your mistake.

    Where is your proof to label the entire Saudi nation as supporting the Taliban\Al Qeada\Al Nusra?


  • #420
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    gurramok wrote: »
    Just because a handful of Saudi's are extreme does not mean the whole nation are extreme, thats your mistake.

    Where is your proof to label the entire Saudi nation as supporting the Taliban\Al Qeada\Al Nusra?

    I didn't say the entire saudi nation does.

    Stop moving the ****ing goalposts everytime someone pulls apart your nonsense.


    You tried to say that the saudis are "on the forefront of batlling terrorism".

    That is absolute bollocks when the Saudi Royal Family actively promote Wahabi radicalism and give an international platform for Radical Wahabi Imams and fund their schools and mosques all over the world, which is the basis of the beliefs of groups like Al Qeada, The Taliban, Al Nursa, Hamas and so on.


    So, go ahead and admit you were talking nonsense and stop trying to dig your way out of a hole.


  • Advertisement
  • #421
    theGEM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 133 ✭✭theGEM


    gurramok wrote: »
    Just because a handful of Saudi's are extreme does not mean the whole nation are extreme, thats your mistake.

    Where is your proof to label the entire Saudi nation as supporting the Taliban\Al Qeada\Al Nusra?

    Read this article, the Saudi's can turn on and off the extremists in Syria

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/10266957/Saudis-offer-Russia-secret-oil-deal-if-it-drops-Syria.html


Advertisement