• President Putin has confirmed the Russian military's participation in the Syrian civil war on behalf
    59 replies, posted
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;48627682]Well them winning isn't really relevant, Explosions was talking about the FSA when that comment was made and if they did somehow win the government would be a hell of a lot more tolerable than Assad's government. I have Kurdish friends who tell me some pretty fucked up stuff they had to endure and the really scary part is they act like it's not a big deal.[/QUOTE] The FSA will not make life better for your Kurdish friends. The PKK and Iraqi Kurdistan is a bunch of terrorists just like any other armed group of rebels in the Middle East. I don't understand why people still think life in the Middle East would get better after some rebellion. All sorts of rebels start civil wars there all the time, and it only gets worse if they win
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;48633924]The FSA will not make life better for your Kurdish friends. The PKK and Iraqi Kurdistan is a bunch of terrorists just like any other armed group of rebels in the Middle East. I don't understand why people still think life in the Middle East would get better after some rebellion. All sorts of rebels start civil wars there all the time, and it only gets worse if they win[/QUOTE]what The PKK is a terrorist group but the Kurdish forces in Iraq and the YPG are pretty level-headed and by all accounts it seems like they only reluctantly joined the fighting. YPG formed directly as a result of the need for a Kurdish militia in Syria, and the KDP in Iraq helped overthrow Saddam and has kept Northern Iraq very fucking stable since then. Throughout it all they've been sticking to Kurdish lands so I don't know what the hell you're talking about. Kurds didn't start this shit, maybe you should educate yourself. [editline]7th September 2015[/editline] Plus the aim of the PYD in Syria (the YPG's parent organization) is for autonomy just like the Kurds in Iraq have. Assad or the FSA would have to give it to them after all that's happened. Either way the Kurdish forces would have accomplished their goals.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;48634247]what The PKK is a terrorist group but the Kurdish forces in Iraq and the YPG are pretty level-headed and by all accounts it seems like they only reluctantly joined the fighting. YPG formed directly as a result of the need for a Kurdish militia in Syria, and the KDP in Iraq helped overthrow Saddam and has kept Northern Iraq very fucking stable since then. Throughout it all they've been sticking to Kurdish lands so I don't know what the hell you're talking about. Kurds didn't start this shit, maybe you should educate yourself. [editline]7th September 2015[/editline] Plus the aim of the PYD in Syria (the YPG's parent organization) is for autonomy just like the Kurds in Iraq have. Assad or the FSA would have to give it to them after all that's happened. Either way the Kurdish forces would have accomplished their goals.[/QUOTE] Depends if the rumors of ethnic cleansing of Arabs in conquered or reconquered Kurdish lands is true in Iraq and Syria by YPG and other militias. [editline]7th September 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=ripsipiirakk;48631592]While Assad is a dictator he is still lesser evil than ISIS. [/QUOTE] Hmm, one side willingly uses gas attacks on civilian areas while the other side actively persecutes anyone not following their rigid, corrupt ideology Hard to tell, I think they're mostly the same, not one better than the other in some way or form.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48634913]Depends if the rumors of ethnic cleansing of Arabs in conquered or reconquered Kurdish lands is true in Iraq and Syria by YPG and other militias. [/QUOTE] The Lions of Rojava (The YPG's foreign volunteer recruitment page) and the American volunteers I follow are saying the rumors were made by groups like ISIS in order to spread fear to the arab populations to get them to resist the YPG. There seems to be some truth to ISIS spreading those rumors as well. They've also made fake Kurdish facebook profiles to spread false propaganda to make the Kurds look evil. I can't exactly say if the YPG has or hasn't done ethnic cleansing, just the information I have heard makes it seem like that is not the case.
Good. Assad in power is the best choice for speedy recovery.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48634913]Depends if the rumors of ethnic cleansing of Arabs in conquered or reconquered Kurdish lands is true in Iraq and Syria by YPG and other militias.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Pilot1215;48635289]The Lions of Rojava (The YPG's foreign volunteer recruitment page) and the American volunteers I follow are saying the rumors were made by groups like ISIS in order to spread fear to the arab populations to get them to resist the YPG. There seems to be some truth to ISIS spreading those rumors as well. They've also made fake Kurdish facebook profiles to spread false propaganda to make the Kurds look evil. I can't exactly say if the YPG has or hasn't done ethnic cleansing, just the information I have heard makes it seem like that is not the case.[/QUOTE]It's extremely unlikely that any ethnic cleansing has happened since HMR has access to Kurdish areas as do other international aid groups. What [i]has[/i] happened as far as not-nice things go is the Kurds have apparently evicted Arabs from their homes forcibly to keep them out of the fighting. I don't know the exact specifics, but I'm under the impression they did this because the Kurds suspected they were sympathetic to the Daeshbags. [editline]8th September 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Stolons;48635729]Good. Assad in power is the best choice for speedy recovery.[/QUOTE]There is no "speedy recovery" anymore, that ship has sailed, sank, and now there's little fish living in the wreck.
It's possible the Kurds did it for that reason. Anyway, the only side I support now in Syria is the YPG.
[QUOTE=Pilot1215;48637353]It's possible the Kurds did it for that reason. Anyway, the only side I support now in Syria is the YPG.[/QUOTE]Yeah, I feel the same way. Either way the Kurds didn't explicitly kill anyone, even though forcible eviction for whatever reason is a dick move.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;48637361]Yeah, I feel the same way. Either way the Kurds didn't explicitly kill anyone, even though forcible eviction for whatever reason is a dick move.[/QUOTE] That is true, and agreed.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48634913]Depends if the rumors of ethnic cleansing of Arabs in conquered or reconquered Kurdish lands is true in Iraq and Syria by YPG and other militias. [editline]7th September 2015[/editline] Hmm, one side willingly uses gas attacks on civilian areas while the other side actively persecutes anyone not following their rigid, corrupt ideology Hard to tell, I think they're mostly the same, not one better than the other in some way or form.[/QUOTE] One might argue that the side which allows more freedoms to do as one wishes is the better side. In that respect, Assad reigns supreme. It might not seem like it from an outsider's perspective, but ethnic and religious minorities were not being slaughtered by the dozen in pre-war Syria, nor were Christians and Jews forced to convert to Islam or suffer beaheading, nor were the Christians or Jews taxed. Nor were they even bound by Islamic personal law! Syria has its own courts for each religious group. By all means, Bashar al-Assad is the least terrible choice remaining that is actually feasible, by a long shot and it's not stupid to consider his continued rule because anything more preferable would most likely require direct military intervention as a prerequisite.
Its the Korean war, or the Vietnam war all over again.
[QUOTE=Milkdairy;48637500]One might argue that the side which allows more freedoms to do as one wishes is the better side. In that respect, Assad reigns supreme. It might not seem like it from an outsider's perspective, but ethnic and religious minorities were not being slaughtered by the dozen in pre-war Syria, nor were Christians and Jews forced to convert to Islam or suffer beaheading, nor were the Christians or Jews taxed. Nor were they even bound by Islamic personal law! Syria has its own courts for each religious group. By all means, Bashar al-Assad is the least terrible choice remaining that is actually feasible, by a long shot and it's not stupid to consider his continued rule because anything more preferable would most likely require direct military intervention as a prerequisite.[/QUOTE] What Jews exactly?
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;48634247] Assad or the FSA would have to give it to them after all that's happened. Either way the Kurdish forces would have accomplished their goals.[/QUOTE] Explain why they would HAVE to give it to them. You really think the Assad or the FSA would just give them land because they fought ISIS?
[QUOTE=-n3o-;48637505]Its the Korean war, or the Vietnam war all over again.[/QUOTE] More like Afghanistan.
[QUOTE=ScumBunny;48637590]What Jews exactly?[/QUOTE] The very few that remained in Syria, though I can't recall if this was more than a hundred or so, or if they even remained in more recent years before the civil war (maybe you can expand on this?). Syria is really not the place to be if you're a Jew, as you probably know judging by your flagdog. The main point is on the Christians/Catholics, and Muslim sects. Syria is by its own admission a secular state, so to call Islamic State rule and rule under Assad one and the same is misguided. When comparing life in cities under Islamic State rule (from what we know) to life before the war, I'd say life before the war was significantly better and more free without making the assumption that Assad's state was in itself free just because it is relative to rule under the Islamic State. Maybe I misjudged what you were trying to say, Scorp. In hindsight you were probably comparing the moral standing of the two parties. In that sense I guess you could say that both are as bad as each other. They both kill innocent people and do bad stuff, but the way they govern renders Assad a much more preferable choice, as much of an issue that poses for our Israelite friends. [editline]8th September 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Araknid;48637642]Explain why they would HAVE to give it to them. You really think the Assad or the FSA would just give them land because they fought ISIS?[/QUOTE] The legitimacy of Kurdish autonomy is probably going to be one of the top debates regarding the region in the future. Honestly, I don't expect them to gain independence, but I don't think the Syrian Arab Army nor whatever remains of the FSA will be able to actually do anything about it anyways, following the conclusion of this war.
[QUOTE=Araknid;48637642]Explain why they would HAVE to give it to them. You really think the Assad or the FSA would just give them land because they fought ISIS?[/QUOTE]All the guns, armored vehicles, and pissed off Kurds that would most assuredly start shooting the moment Assad rolls in and tries to treat them like shit again? They would have just beaten the shit out of the #1 public enemy in the world, do you [i]really[/i] think they'd succumb to some two-bit dictator? The [i]same[/i] two-bit dictator that they all remember to be a real mean son of a bitch, by the way. [editline]8th September 2015[/editline] They want autonomy, only a fucking idiot would say "lol nope, you can't have it" and then kick off another round of fighting.
[QUOTE=Milkdairy;48637722]The very few that remained in Syria, though I can't recall if this was more than a hundred or so, or if they even remained in more recent years before the civil war (maybe you can expand on this?). Syria is really not the place to be if you're a Jew, as you probably know judging by your flagdog. The main point is on the Christians/Catholics, and Muslim sects. Syria is by its own admission a secular state, so to call Islamic State rule and rule under Assad one and the same is misguided. When comparing life in cities under Islamic State rule (from what we know) to life before the war, I'd say life before the war was significantly better and more free without making the assumption that Assad's state was in itself free just because it is relative to rule under the Islamic State. [/QUOTE] I'm not an authority on this, but [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Jews"]Wikipedia says[/URL] there are currently 22 Jews in Syria at most. Most of the thousands of Jews that lived in Syria fled the contry since the establishment of the State of Israel following pogroms against Jewish communities and ever increasing restrictions imposed on Jews by the government, [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Syria#Post-1948"]like[/URL]: [QUOTE]The Syrian government passed a number of restrictive laws against the Jewish minority. In 1948, the government banned the sale of Jewish property. In 1953, all Jewish bank accounts were frozen. Jewish property was confiscated, and Jewish homes which had been taken from their owners were used to house Palestinian refugees.[46] In March 1964, a new decree banned Jews from traveling more than three miles from their hometowns.[46] Jews were not allowed to work for the government or banks, could not acquire drivers' licenses, and were banned from purchasing property. Although Jews were prohibited from leaving the country, they were sometimes allowed to travel abroad for commercial or medical reasons. Any Jew granted clearance to leave the country had to leave behind a bond of $300–$1,000 and family members to be used as hostages to ensure they returned. An airport road was paved over the Jewish cemetery in Damascus, and Jewish schools were closed and handed over to Muslims. The Jewish Quarter of Damascus was under constant surveillance by the secret police, who were present at synagogue services, weddings, bar mitzvahs, and other Jewish gatherings. The secret police closely monitored contact between Syrian Jews and foreigners and kept a file on every member of the Jewish community. Jews also had their phones tapped and their mail read by the secret police.[45][48] After Israel's victory in the 1967 Six-Day War, restrictions were further tightened, and 57 Jews in Qamishli may have been killed in a pogrom.[49] The communities of Damascus, Aleppo, and Qamishli were under house arrest for eight months following the war. Many Jewish workers were laid off following the Six-Day War.[/QUOTE] So all in all, it probably wasn't the best thing ever to be a Jew in Syria, though it would probably suck even more to like under ISIS rule.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;48637774] They want autonomy, only a fucking idiot would say "lol nope, you can't have it" and then kick off another round of fighting.[/QUOTE] Well Assad isn't exactly the brightest star in the sky, he did everything he could to first light it all up and then kept the flames up. That's exactly the kind of person to say "lol nope, you can't have it, even though my country looks like a field of archaeological study and I have no army to speak of at this point".
[QUOTE=gudman;48638237]Well Assad isn't exactly the brightest star in the sky, he did everything he could to first light it all up and then kept the flames up. That's exactly the kind of person to say "lol nope, you can't have it, even though my country looks like a field of archaeological study and I have no army to speak of at this point".[/QUOTE]Well then it's not really an issue because the Kurdish forces would be able to enforce their own autonomy, I think this is likely how it will play out even with your country's support. Really though the Kurds would like to go for independence, but Turkey said flat-out they'd invade if the Kurds did that so it looks like they'll still be stuck with Assad in some format. Though miracles sometimes happen so maybe the FSA will figure out how to summon Zeus or something.
Honestly, this whole thing why Democracy doesn't work in the middle east comes down to one simple thing: Culture. Culture in the Middle East has always, and especially recently with the rise of Wahabism (Islam is a violent religion, but only when it's followed directly of what is said, it's just like every other Abrahamic religion), had a sort of idea that violence and aggressiveness is the way to go. That's the reason why dictators always turn out to be the leader of their government because they are the ones that have the ability to be the most dominating (IE violent and aggressive) force in the nation. This also explains why when you try to overthrow the dictator (IE the most dominating force) and implement democracy it doesn't work because everyone and their mother shows up to try to be the most dominating force, it either turns into a coup like Egypt or like Iran in the 50s and how Libya is right now.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;48641165]Well then it's not really an issue because the Kurdish forces would be able to enforce their own autonomy, I think this is likely how it will play out even with your country's support. Really though the Kurds would like to go for independence, but Turkey said flat-out they'd invade if the Kurds did that so it looks like they'll still be stuck with Assad in some format. Though miracles sometimes happen so maybe the FSA will figure out how to summon Zeus or something.[/QUOTE] Russia will not likely mix into the equation, we're not quite [b]there[/b] yet to interfere into that kind of affairs so far outside of our "sphere of influence" so to speak. What is currently happening is likely only actually happening because the main enemy is ISIS, and a) we're interested in kinda not having those guys around and b) there won't be much repercussions from supporting Assad against ISIS, since they've managed to make an enemy out of everyone at this point. I remember forswearing from making any kind of predictions on what my country would and won't do some time ago, but in this case I'm confident enough.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;48641165]Well then it's not really an issue because the Kurdish forces would be able to enforce their own autonomy, I think this is likely how it will play out even with your country's support. Really though the Kurds would like to go for independence, but Turkey said flat-out they'd invade if the Kurds did that so it looks like they'll still be stuck with Assad in some format. Though miracles sometimes happen so maybe the FSA will figure out how to summon Zeus or something.[/QUOTE] Where's the source on Turkey claiming it would "flat out invade" any Kurdish state, even if not composed of its own territory?
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;48641564]Honestly, this whole thing why Democracy doesn't work in the middle east comes down to one simple thing: Culture. Culture in the Middle East has always, and especially recently with the rise of Wahabism (Islam is a violent religion, but only when it's followed directly of what is said, it's just like every other Abrahamic religion), had a sort of idea that violence and aggressiveness is the way to go. That's the reason why dictators always turn out to be the leader of their government because they are the ones that have the ability to be the most dominating (IE violent and aggressive) force in the nation. This also explains why when you try to overthrow the dictator (IE the most dominating force) and implement democracy it doesn't work because everyone and their mother shows up to try to be the most dominating force, it either turns into a coup like Egypt or like Iran in the 50s and how Libya is right now.[/QUOTE] Democracy would have worked in Syria were the ability to form a coup not so incredibly easy in the time they happened. Technically, Syria is a democracy. It's just been under emergency martial law for the past 50 years or so. This mechanism of state of emergency pretty much suspends the constitution of Syria and allows Assad to do anything he pleases, for the most part. And that's what he and his father have been doing. The lack of any strong structural systems of democracy in middle eastern nations does not rule out their capability for democracy. Several middle-eastern governments have functioning democracies. They're just weak.
[QUOTE=gudman;48641698]Russia will not likely mix into the equation, we're not quite [b]there[/b] yet to interfere into that kind of affairs so far outside of our "sphere of influence" so to speak. What is currently happening is likely only actually happening because the main enemy is ISIS, and a) we're interested in kinda not having those guys around and b) there won't be much repercussions from supporting Assad against ISIS, since they've managed to make an enemy out of everyone at this point. I remember forswearing from making any kind of predictions on what my country would and won't do some time ago, but in this case I'm confident enough.[/QUOTE] Russia has a navy base in [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_naval_facility_in_Tartus"]Tartus[/URL]. It's their only port and naval facility in the Mediterranean so I imagine they'll defend it at all cost.
[QUOTE=gudman;48641698]Russia will not likely mix into the equation, we're not quite [b]there[/b] yet to interfere into that kind of affairs so far outside of our "sphere of influence" so to speak. What is currently happening is likely only actually happening because the main enemy is ISIS, and a) we're interested in kinda not having those guys around and b) there won't be much repercussions from supporting Assad against ISIS, since they've managed to make an enemy out of everyone at this point. I remember forswearing from making any kind of predictions on what my country would and won't do some time ago, but in this case I'm confident enough.[/QUOTE]Yeah, I highly doubt Russia's going to support Assad to that point but it seems Russia's keen on having somebody in the Middle East who will play ball with a Russian agenda. Of course this is assuming that your country cares to that point, there is less strategic significance there than in previous decades and as time goes on the Middle East will become less relevant as we transition away from petroleum. People talk a lot of shit about Russians but you guys aren't retarded, I mean making gas stations have mandatory electric vehicle charging ports is a pretty big step into removing Russian dependence on fossil fuels. In the meantime though I imagine Assad would be a nice asset to have, and even though the guy's an asshole I really don't think Assad would push the Kurds to give up their land. He'd probably give them autonomy and call it a day because they've proven themselves capable fighters despite having jack shit to work with. [QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48641842]Where's the source on Turkey claiming it would "flat out invade" any Kurdish state, even if not composed of its own territory?[/QUOTE][url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/turkey/11706383/Turkey-planning-to-invade-Syria.html[/url] [quote]“We will never allow the establishment of a state in Syria’s north and our south,” Mr Erdogan said at the weekend. “We will continue our fight in this regard no matter what it costs.” [/quote]
[QUOTE=Taepodong-2;48624600]If they're ramping up involvement to take on ISIS I'm honestly not all that surprised seeing as most Islamist Chechens are starting to align themselves with ISIS now rather than Al Qaeda. I say let them at it, Spetsnaz are going to shit fury all over ISIS the likes of which they've never seen.[/QUOTE] Or those poor conscript farmboys are gonna get torn up in the streets just like Chechnya. And the conflict spirals out of control into and adds time to a already long lasting insurgency. If the any military wanted to go boots on the ground they should've done it when ISIS was still a fledgling group.
[QUOTE=ScumBunny;48644183]Russia has a navy base in [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_naval_facility_in_Tartus"]Tartus[/URL]. It's their only port and naval facility in the Mediterranean so I imagine they'll defend it at all cost.[/QUOTE] I imagine the naval base wouldn't really be under threat, AFAIK the treaties are pretty binding, whoever potentially comes into power instead of Assad will just have to deal with it. [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;48644295]Yeah, I highly doubt Russia's going to support Assad to that point but it seems Russia's keen on having somebody in the Middle East who will play ball with a Russian agenda. Of course this is assuming that your country cares to that point, there is less strategic significance there than in previous decades and as time goes on the Middle East will become less relevant as we transition away from petroleum. People talk a lot of shit about Russians but you guys aren't retarded, I mean making gas stations have mandatory electric vehicle charging ports is a pretty big step into removing Russian dependence on fossil fuels. In the meantime though I imagine Assad would be a nice asset to have, and even though the guy's an asshole I really don't think Assad would push the Kurds to give up their land. He'd probably give them autonomy and call it a day because they've proven themselves capable fighters despite having jack shit to work with. [/QUOTE] I'm not commenting on economy (because I don't know shit, for a start), but as far as foreign policy goes, our government is pretty adamant in not losing assets no matter how useless or even actually harmful they are, unless it's a deal about giving up some territories to China again, that is. [editline]9th September 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Slim Charles;48644333]Or those poor conscript farmboys are gonna get torn up in the streets just like Chechnya. And the conflict spirals out of control into and adds time to a already long lasting insurgency.[/QUOTE] That's what most likely going to happen in an event of direct confrontation. Look at how our brave supersoldiers are doing in Ukraine - and that's against exactly the same conscripts known as "ATO forces", most likely even worse. Despite what our government desperately wants to show, our army really can't fight, I'm surprised it doesn't lose to "hypothetical adversary forces" in military exercises. The combat readiness is abysmal, we're starting to have people commit suicides all over the place and desert in the army again, first cases in what, four-five years? On top of that the military losses (both combat and out-of-combat ones) is a highly classified information now, military secret, so you talk about it - you're fucking done, boi. Speaking doctrine-wise, well, our military's reliance on artillery has only increased, at the cost of mobility and combined arms warfare, particularly at the expense of close air support, so to effectively engage in combat and have any hopes of advancing (as opposed to just forcing a stalemate) our detachments will have to do it Afghan-style. Plow the place up with artillery and send in flying tanks to clear out survivors. Really not in the best of shapes right now to flex muscles now.
[QUOTE=-n3o-;48637505]Its the Korean war, or the Vietnam war all over again.[/QUOTE] can people stop saying this every fucking war is the "vietnam war all over again" except its not. The political, cultural and military circumstances are all completely different. The only thing these wars have in common is a state military fighting against non-state actor(s). Which resembles a list of conflicts longer than anyone would care to post. Its such a non-statement.
[QUOTE=gudman;48644335]I imagine the naval base wouldn't really be under threat, AFAIK the treaties are pretty binding, whoever potentially comes into power instead of Assad will just have to deal with it. [/QUOTE] I can't imagine the Islamic State respecting a treaty that crushed their allied Islamic Chechen not so long ago :v:
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48646159]I can't imagine the Islamic State respecting a treaty that crushed their allied Islamic Chechen not so long ago :v:[/QUOTE] If I was talking about Islamic State I wouldn't say "whoever comes into power". "Whoever destroys Syria" fits better since ISIS aren't keen on keeping existing states' borders as they are.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.