Saudi-coalition vows to remove Assad by force 'if necessary' while the US demands the immediate cess
43 replies, posted
I didn't want to spam SH, so I made it into one thread.
[img]http://i1.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article7311648.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/Vladimir-Putin.jpg[/img]
[quote]Saudi Arabia has vowed to remove Syrian president Bashar al-Assad "by force" as it considers a ground invasion of the war-torn country alongside Turkey.
This comes after Russian president Vladimir Putin's government warned that any such action would inevitably lead to a "new cold war".
Further stoking tensions, Saudi Arabia's foreign minister Adel al-Jubeir told CNN: "I believe Bashar al-Assad is weak and I believe Bashar al-Assad is finished.
"Bashar al-Assad will leave - have no doubt about it.
"He will either leave by a political process or he will be removed by force.
"We will push as much as we can to ensure that the political process works. But if it doesn't work, it will be because of the obstinance of the Syrian regime and that of its allies.
[/quote]
[img]http://i1.tribune.com.pk/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/1046861-Saudimilitary-1455466448-925-640x480.jpg[/img]
Recent Saudi military exercise
[url=http://tribune.com.pk/story/1046861/20-nations-including-pakistan-join-major-military-manoeuvre-in-saudi/]20 nations, including Pakistan join major military manoeuvre in Saudi[/url]
Source: [url]http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/new-cold-war-edges-closer-7370224[/url]
^Scaremongering title but ignore that
[B]Obama tells Putin to stop hitting opposition forces in Syria[/B]
[quote]Rancho Mirage, California (CNN)President Barack Obama urged Russian President Vladimir Putin to end his air campaign against Syrian opposition forces during a phone call Saturday, the White House said, a day after Putin's deputy described relations between Moscow and Washington sinking to Cold War depths.
In a description of the phone call, the White House said Obama stressed "the importance of rapidly implementing humanitarian access to besieged areas of Syria and initiating a nationwide cessation of hostilities."[/quote]
Source: [url]http://edition.cnn.com/2016/02/14/politics/obama-vladimir-putin-syria/[/url]
In the video, John McCain accuses Russia of purposefully exacerbating the refugee crisis at the 2016 Munich Security Conference.
*[url]http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7a9feb9a-d327-11e5-8887-98e7feb46f27.html#axzz40AqfKcQ5[/url]
[video=youtube;FTFhCwGrYcU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTFhCwGrYcU[/video]
[video=youtube;XQheUx9WpN8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQheUx9WpN8[/video]
I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around why John "songbird" McCain is still considered relevant.
I get that Assad is pretty much a crock of shit in so many ways, but moving the goalposts of the intervention against IS now that they're almost of the map is a low blow and this is not what we should be in the middle east for -that is, if we have any business intervening in the middle east to begin with.
So much for discrediting accusations of US and Saudi propping up rebels in Syria and destabilizing the region in general.
I cannot fucking believe my country might be going to war in order to support the rise of a new sharia shithole, and possibly supporting outright chaos in the middle east. The rebels at this current moment in time are losing ground and forces every day, and to some degree they are becoming far more extremist and aligning themselves with groups like Al Nursa, and many other groups that were involved with the killing of our own men and women about five years ago in Iraq.
Seriously, with how the situation is unraveling, I'd rather see the Saudi royal family disposed of and let Assad control Syria. At least then we'd have a somewhat commonsense government in place in Syria, and not some medieval oil state, which promotes genocide of groups that don't agree with them. As for the current administration in the United States which got us into this mess, I sincerely hope they are tried for treason in the coming years along with the Bush dynasty and are given the same treatment that took down Mussolini.
I find it incredibly hilarious to hear the US accuse Russia of using the middle east as a testing ground for their modernized army, and how the US claims Russia is killing civilians it labels as terrorists.
If the irony was any thicker, McCain would've needed to wear scuba gear during his speech.
If Saudi Arabia pokes at the bear that is Russia I hope they get mauled to bits.
What a mess. All of it.
Saudi,Turkey, please stop. Let Assad take the country back.
[QUOTE=RG4ORDR;49742024]Saudi,Turkey, please stop. Let Assad take the country back.[/QUOTE]
why
I don't think Russia will make it through another Cold War
[QUOTE=efecanefe;49742067]why[/QUOTE]
Because stable secular dictatorship > Sharia shithole. Democracy can't work in Syria until they get over the whole Sunni - Shia thing, if we overthrow Assad it's going to be a shithole.
[QUOTE=efecanefe;49742067]why[/QUOTE]
As much I hate the fucking regime as Syria, especially with that they've done. They're the lesser of so many evils that are currently stewing about that cluster fuck. Many of the rebel groups especially larger ones such as Al-Nursa,Ahrar Al Sham,Islamic Front, and what ever constitutes as the FSA now are either Islamic Salafist mini-ISIS clones(Nursa and Al Sham) or are plague by hundreds of jihadist trying to fuck over what the original groups ideologies and goals once were.
Assad is a terrible person for what he's done but he's is much better than what is being offering in Syria outside of the PYD.
You fucking idiots. Saying shit like "we want to stabilize the region" is a lie. Once Assad is removed and some stupid rebel and US backed government is installed or whatever, it will become just as unstable as Libya. Why aren't they fighting the ISIS instead?
[editline]14th February 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=RG4ORDR;49742152]As much I hate the fucking regime as Syria, especially with that they've done. They're the lesser of so many evils that are currently stewing about that cluster fuck. Many of the rebel groups especially larger ones such as Al-Nursa,Ahrar Al Sham,Islamic Front, and what ever constitutes as the FSA now are either Islamic Salafist mini-ISIS clones(Nursa and Al Sham) or are plague by hundreds of jihadist trying to fuck over what the original groups ideologies and goals once were.
Assad is a terrible person for what he's done but he's is much better than what is being offering in Syria outside of the PYD.[/QUOTE]
The middle east doesn't deserve democracy. Dictatorships like Assad, Iran and Saudi Arabia to some extent are what is keeping the rest of the region as stable as it is.
[QUOTE=efecanefe;49742067]why[/QUOTE]
One less part of the mideast on fire is a nice thing to have?
[QUOTE=efecanefe;49742067]why[/QUOTE]
Lesser of a couple hundred evils.
I'm confused as to why Saudi Arabia and Turkey feel the need to get involved in this fucked up situation and fuck it up even more.
[QUOTE=Taepodong-2;49742146]Because stable secular dictatorship > Sharia shithole. Democracy can't work in Syria until they get over the whole Sunni - Shia thing, if we overthrow Assad it's going to be a shithole.[/QUOTE]
but you're assuming that Assad could even set up his safe dictatorship now that all the elements for jump-starting insurgent groups are in place and most likely quite firmly rooted. i think even if he "wins" he'll still be getting worn down for years to come, and without a firm grip on the region i don't see how he's any lesser an evil.
[QUOTE=Reaper297;49742312]I'm confused as to why Saudi Arabia and Turkey feel the need to get involved in this fucked up situation and fuck it up even more.[/QUOTE]
Because we all decided to get involved with a political agenda and they've seen that Putin's airstrikes are restabalising Assad.
[QUOTE=RG4ORDR;49742024]Saudi,Turkey, please stop. Let Assad take the country back.[/QUOTE]
good sentiment, but even if he could claim ownership of his entire country, he won't ever be able to take it back, not with thousands of pissed off, well armed rebels and terrorists running around, they'll be fighting till the last man woman and child in northern syria is killed and every building is flattened. russia for their part are going to provide him the means to make such a claim, but they're nowhere near as prepared to ensure that he remains in control, Russians haven't had many casualties yet, but when this turns from an open war into an insurgency, they'll hit the Russian bases
I don't get it when people say "if Assad goes Syria could become unstable, he sucks but he's the only force who can keep it stable" as if it has been totes stable under his rule and he's done a great job of preventing any major unrest or civil strife from breaking out
[QUOTE=smurfy;49743553]I don't get it when people say "if Assad goes Syria could become unstable, he sucks but he's the only force who can keep it stable" as if it has been totes stable under his rule and he's done a great job of preventing any major unrest or civil strife from breaking out[/QUOTE]
Yeah seriously Assad is exactly why shit hit the fan in the first place. The guy's a monster and even if he somehow regained control I doubt he's going to just forgive and let live the hundreds of thousands that opposed his rule or even simply lived outside of it.
[QUOTE=smurfy;49743553]I don't get it when people say "if Assad goes Syria could become unstable, he sucks but he's the only force who can keep it stable" as if it has been totes stable under his rule and he's done a great job of preventing any major unrest or civil strife from breaking out[/QUOTE]
Syria was stable under the Assad family until the Saudis and Turks started funding jihadis.
[QUOTE=Taepodong-2;49743618]Syria was stable under the Assad family until the Saudis and Turks started funding jihadis.[/QUOTE]
It was also Russia's go-to place for launching Middle Eastern military operations and their biggest economic partner in the region since Bashar's father started negotiating contracts with the Soviets back in the 1970s.
Removing Assad has more important geopolitical implications than what a lot of people are acknowledging here. I don't know why. I'm betting it's because they simply don't understand in the first place that this situation is more complex than just "Assad = stability", "Saudis are evil", and "ISIS/al-Nusra are waging jihad". He needs to go. The whole family and their supporters need to be swept out of Syria, and a new government that's friendly to the West needs to be introduced by us to curb Russian influence and ensure we've got a foothold in the region. ISIS and their buddies need to be destroyed as well, of course. The Saudis and Turks need to be put back in their place and made to understand, in an abundantly clear fashion, that their behavior will not be tolerated and it's time to step down; in the meantime, this coalition they've got going could be useful to us-- at least against Assad and the Russians.
I'm honestly fine with this. We know what we need to do, for our benefit, now we just need to commit ourselves to doing it.
[QUOTE=Govna;49743968][B]and a new government that's friendly to the West needs to be introduced by us to curb Russian influence and ensure we've got a foothold in the region.[/B]
I'm honestly fine with this. We know what we need to do,[B] for our benefit[/B], now we just need to commit ourselves to doing it.[/QUOTE]
Well then,[I] for our benefit[/I], i am glad Russian VKS keeps bombing run and US can't do much about. Our force's presence is balance keeper - ever since Turkey shot down our jet window for having a momentum is closed for any other foreign power in Syria, with anti-air working 24/7 we can ensure that no other dickhead would attempt to jeopardize Syrian Army's success, since we do actually work in Syria by official request of Damask, that means we actually capable of legally supporting country's defence from foreign intrusion by demand.
I mean, Assad's goverment[B] is the only one[/B] that is officially recognised by UN, soo if they ask, we sure going remove kebab.
[QUOTE=Govna;49743968] He needs to go.[/QUOTE]
He does. Who takes his place? And how? Because there're two ways about it. Ones is bringing the civil war either to an end or to a standstill and then do diplomacy, push Assad out and have someone from the current government/elite take place. The other is Iraq - Assad is removed RIGHT NAO, however the fuck it's accomplished, with him goes the entire government, all of the elite (you know, 'cause they're religious minority there and would be slaughtered) is gone. Someone takes the wheel in the interim period - who? That's not gonna be SDF - they don't give a shit about ruling Syria, they just want to be left alone and have their peace. Oh and Turkey won't agree on SDF being in charge because Erdogan can't contain his hateboner. Whoever else it might be, most other opposition groups will disagree and will fight.
And lets not forget that with Assad gone, government gone and elite gone, the entirety of Syrian (loyalist, SAA) military structure will collapse in on itself and soldiers will just join refugee waves, and there's no local opposition groups big enough to stabilize the front, all of them combined isn't going to be enough. GG getting rid of the biggest faction containing terrorists.
So there're the options. Either everyone deals with Assad for the time being, or there won't be much of Syria left, and it has nothing to do with Assad being good or bad, lesser or bigger of evils there. Assad family have built their regime this way. Yes, so did Saddam and Gaddafi - the difference is, they were removed [i]at the end[/i] of the conflict, so there was time for negotiations and all of the political stuff.
[QUOTE=Taepodong-2;49743618]Syria was stable under the Assad family until the Saudis and Turks started funding jihadis.[/QUOTE]
An interesting idea of "stable." Being terrified of having secret police come to your home and murder everyone because your equally terrified neighbor reported on you isn't exactly what I think of when looking for a stable society.
At the end of the day all the options are shit but if we had to choose we need to understand what the lesser evil is. None of the options are good for the country so we might as well decide which one other nations can trust more
Does anyone have any good reference on Saudi Arabia's military? I was always under the impression they had a lot of money to buy expensive things but their actual personnel are inexperienced and don't have training to the degree of most other 1st world nations.
Like, I thought their military was mostly for show.
All I ever see are pictures of soldiers standing in rows awkwardly with their battle rattle flopping all over the place with big expensive toys in the background all posed nicely.
[QUOTE=SebiWarrior;49744728]At the end of the day all the options are shit but if we had to choose we need to understand what the lesser evil is. None of the options are good for the country so we might as well decide which one other nations can trust more[/QUOTE]
Assad's Army's victory is the lesser evil.
[editline]15th February 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Da Bomb76;49744671]An interesting idea of "stable." Being terrified of having secret police come to your home and murder everyone because your equally terrified neighbor reported on you isn't exactly what I think of when looking for a stable society.[/QUOTE]
Wishing for a better society is great concept and all in that, but you'd be terrified to see what kind of alternative can bring those who you see opposing Assad "in the name of freedom".
Secret police? nah, the neighbor would come cut your throat by himself, and people would cheer up to him at street.
[editline]15th February 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=gudman;49744662]Yes, so did Saddam and Gaddafi - the difference is, they were removed [i]at the end[/i] of the conflict, so there was time for negotiations and all of the political stuff.[/QUOTE]
I would not say that Gaddafi was removed precisly at the end, more like by the mid way.
And it sure shows, with Lybia being what it is right now.
[QUOTE=karimatrix;49744742]
I would not say that Gaddafi was removed precisly at the end, more like by the mid way.
And it sure shows, with Lybia being what it is right now.[/QUOTE]
His death signified the end of the hottest phase of the conflict, that's what I meant. Sure it smouldered for some time after that, but the civil war was mostly all over. My main point is that there wasn't as much infighting between Libyan opposition groups, and there were no "third" force there (ISIS).
I'm inclined to want assad in power over anything Saudi tries fuck that.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.