Syria - What should we do if anything?

[PELHAM 10]

So the FSA are occupying all the houses and entire cities must be destroyed? In Homs, Idlib, Deraa, Rastan the damage can be measured in square kilometres now. You still want to describe this as some sort of minority rebellion? If it was they wouldn't have the men to occupy such a vast area of the country. If Assad's army isn't targeting an entire section of the population why hasn't Syrian state media told civilians to evacuate cities in rebel hands? There have been no orders to leave and Assad refused to allow UN aid into Syria until pressured to do so in June 2012. The only place most refugees can find help is outside the country, similar tactics were used by Assad's father in the 1980s.

Juret Al Shayah - Homs July 27th 2012

Edited July 31, 2012 by PELHAM

[hellfire257 3]

The bunker penetrating nuke is news to me, however I'm going to call it another RT failure. They probably got mixed up with the MOP bomb.

Anyone remember the "Apache helicopters dropping bunker-busting bombs" spectacular from RT? It makes me wonder if they do it on purpose or they are actually that retarded.

[-GR-Operative 10]

An external international intervention is in my judgement, significant, only if it ensures that islamists don't get involved in any form, to the politics of the nation once it is fully freed.

Asking islamists to do not interfere in the subjects of their own country doesn't make much sense.

Tunisia, Egypt and Lybia freedoms are in a certain way established, but in another one, they went 60 years back... Had the chance to judge on my own by getting to Tunisia a few months ago... : /

All free, all dictatorships (sharia and all) now.

[batto 17]

The bunker penetrating nuke is news to me, however I'm going to call it another RT failure. They probably got mixed up with the MOP bomb.

Anyone remember the "Apache helicopters dropping bunker-busting bombs" spectacular from RT? It makes me wonder if they do it on purpose or they are actually that retarded.

1) I didn't read this on RT (only the rest), 2) They probably said that it's capable of breaking through Iran nuclear bunkers

Apologies.

Here are some recent photos from Aleppo www.teleportd.com/capsule/c792c61e53b6e91e8b4c9e4f1309f8c1afd00174

[PELHAM 10]

Ref Tunisia, Libya and Egypt:

Operative;2198651']All free' date=' all dictatorships (sharia and all) now.[/quote']

Really? Can you name the dictators for us please lol. As for Sharia, Tunisia has decided not to include it in the constitution and Libya and Egypt have not yet decided on a system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunisian_Constituent_Assembly_election,_2011

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libyan_General_National_Congress_election,_2012

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_parliamentary_election,_2011%E2%80%932012

Edited July 31, 2012 by PELHAM

[-GR-Operative 10]

Really? Can you name the dictators for us please lol.

If I were to say it here, I would be called anti-muslim, which's not the case. But it's only one, and you know it.

Also reading wikipedia, I've found some nice articles:

Ennahda Movement (Tunisian)

National Forces Alliance (Lybian)

New Wafd Party (Egyptian)

Edited July 31, 2012 by [GR]Operative

[eble 3]

Interesting, Iran has a defence treaty with Syria and said it will inforce it if Syria is attacked?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Syria_relations

If Turkey attacked the Kurds in North East Syria, and Iran responded would NATO be drawn if? this could messy real quick

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19058704

As the crisis deepened, Iran - a close ally of Damascus - warned Turkey not to intervene militarily, the Syrian state-controlled al-Watan newspaper said.

"Any attack on Syrian territory will meet with a harsh response, and the Iranian-Syrian mutual defence agreement will be activated," it reported on Monday.

The newspaper said Turkey and the US were planning to create "a safe haven guarded by the armed gangs" in the north of Syria.

"Turkey has received very strong warnings in the past few hours and the following message - beware changing the rules of the game," al-Watan said.

[PELHAM 10]

Interesting, Iran has a defence treaty with Syria and said it will inforce it if Syria is attacked?

You got that slightly wrong and the importance is significant. According to the link, it was the Syrian state-controlled al-Watan newspaper, not the Iranians themselves that said this, possibly a sign of Syrian regime desperation. No one actually knows the extent of the treaty, it was simply described as "agreement for military cooperation". It's likely to be another bluff.

The Iranians will not attack Turkey, it would be suicidal for them. At most they will plant a few bombs on buses etc., they would never attack as the resulting defeat would show how weak they really are and encourage their own population into uprising. Don't forget the average Iranian lives in fear of his own govmnt in exactly the same way the average Syrian does. Protests in Iran are frequently put down in the same way and the people arrested, tortured and raped in prisons. We all remember the Basij shooting dead Neda in 2009 and the harassment of her family afterwards.

---------- Post added at 10:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:40 PM ----------

Operative;2198791']If I were to say it here' date=' I would be called anti-muslim, which's not the case. But it's only one, and you know it.[/quote']

No I'm still utterly mystified, no idea what point you are trying to make at all, if you write things that are contrary to a mountain of evidence please give us your reasons. (Edit: if you mean the founding prophet, thats not really true either)

Edited August 1, 2012 by PELHAM

[spooky lynx 73]

So the FSA are occupying all the houses and entire cities must be destroyed? In Homs, Idlib, Deraa, Rastan the damage can be measured in square kilometres now.

Had you measured all destroyed houses there personally or you, like gypsy, may say the truth only looking at couple of photos?

You still want to describe this as some sort of minority rebellion? If it was they wouldn't have the men to occupy such a vast area of the country. If Assad's army isn't targeting an entire section of the population why hasn't Syrian state media told civilians to evacuate cities in rebel hands? There have been no orders to leave and Assad refused to allow UN aid into Syria until pressured to do so in June 2012. The only place most refugees can find help is outside the country, similar tactics were used by Assad's father in the 1980s.

You know, that rebels can move from house to house... Moreover, they can stay in many houses and stay there in small groups. During first Chechen war about a half of chechens supported Dudayev and his guys. And not everybody in Grozny belonged to rebels. But the city was destroyed. Because army and rebels moved from place to place. Nobody will stay in one place waiting for the death of entire group. If the group of rebels occupying the building is hit by artillery or tank shells and took casualties they won't stay there anymore:) They will go to another, more safe place. That place may be hit by shells again.

Why hasn't Syrian state media told civilians to evacuate cities in rebel hands? But do you know exactly that they hadn't? And do you know rebels often don't allow civilians to leave the area? So people have the choice between being shot by rebels immediately (and become the source of rebels propaganda posthumously) or have a chance to escape during battle between army and rebels.

[oxmox 73]

I have the feeling people here want to top the other one with videos or images, such a discussion leads to nowhere. Get it real, this is war and destruction aswell death happens unfortunately and both sides have their gruesome parts. You can show as many videos or images from militant rebels or from the government militia and you will find everywhere questionable content, overall the conflict in Syria is not an exception.

In conflicts lead by western forces we talk often about collateral damage. Alone in the first months in Afghanistan in 2001, many of civilians did die due to collateral damage from air attacks on cities, not to mention the Iraq war. During the Gaza conflict in 2008/2009, phosphor and conventional bombs/rockets were used in civilian areas and the overall air attacks lead to a high number of civilian casualties.

You can find images from conflicts in the last ten years without mentioning the conflicts in the decades before, with a similar destruction and recklessness shown like on the pictures here in the forum. I understand the anger, but to throw around images and videos only to top humanitarian desasters from each side is rather chitchat. So far the veto against the UN mandate, wasnt maybe the worst happening. The number of victims can only raise if even more military forces would enter this area and take part in these fights.

Edited August 1, 2012 by oxmox

[PELHAM 10]

Why hasn't Syrian state media told civilians to evacuate cities in rebel hands? But do you know exactly that they hadn't? And do you know rebels often don't allow civilians to leave the area? So people have the choice between being shot by rebels immediately (and become the source of rebels propaganda posthumously) or have a chance to escape during battle between army and rebels.

There are countless interviews now with refugees who refute blatant lies like the above. Lost the argument so now making it up? The civilians that stay are the families of the rebels, they can't leave because the Shabiha will kill them and openly admit it, you say the rebels will shoot their own families for propaganda purposes? ROFL:

Syria: Shabiha Militia Member Tells It Like It Is "Sunni women are giving birth to babies who will fight us in years to come, so we have the right to fight anyone who can hurt us in the future,"

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/world/jan-june12/syria_06-15.html

@oxmox, curiously you scrupulously avoid mentioning Libya, the direct parallel and most recent example where thousands of lives were saved, there is no refugee crisis and very few bystanders killed by air strikes. So few, that Gadaffi was caught faking collateral damage on several occasions. The various stalling measures by Russia and China have made the situation so bad, it's now possibly too late for UN action. Assad will drive everyone who doesn't support him out of the country and kill as many as he can. I think Russia should do the right thing and remove their dictator themselves, I don't see why the West should always be responsible for clearing up the hangovers of the USSR.

Edited August 1, 2012 by PELHAM

[spooky lynx 73]

There are countless interviews now with refugees who refute blatant lies like the above. Lost the argument so now making it up? The civilians that stay are the families of the rebels, they can't leave because the Shabiha will kill them and openly admit it, you say the rebels will shoot their own families for propaganda purposes? ROFL:

I don't trust such refugees especially been interviewed by those who earlier showed the same refugees been wounded in Gori by evil Russkies' shells.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/world/jan-june12/syria_06-15.html

RT-style?:confused: No way.

[icebreakr 3100]

So, all that RT posts is a lie? No research done by reporters?

http://www.rt.com/news/syria-rebel-base-turkey-qatar-230/

http://www.rt.com/news/government-rebels-training-us-301/

[PELHAM 10]

So, all that RT posts is a lie? No research done by reporters?

http://www.rt.com/news/syria-rebel-base-turkey-qatar-230/

http://www.rt.com/news/government-rebels-training-us-301/

The 1st one is basic rumour spreading from an un-named "source" hundreds of miles away and offers no proof, it also fails to list other arms supplies including the main sources, which are captured weapons (it says looted which is not the same thing) and weapons supplied by defectors (we can't mention the thousands of defectors can we?, that would expose the fact that the country is split and not united). There is also a long standing problem with arms smugglers in the region. Concerning the Americans it contradicts itself, 1st it says they are supplying Russian weapons then changes it's tone and says they are not directly involved, so which is it?

The 2nd version is correct as it is copied and pasted from other reliable media that ran the story the day before RT did. However it tries to give the impression that the US State Department Directly funded the education when that is not the case. It provides some funding to USIP. RT is quick to try and point the finger at foreign intervention whilst ignoring the continuing Russian presence in Syria and the supply of arms to Assad. (everyone knows the Russian landing craft that docked in Tartus recently were not empty lol)

So your point is what exactly?

Edited August 1, 2012 by PELHAM

[hellfire257 3]

So, all that RT posts is a lie? No research done by reporters?

http://www.rt.com/news/syria-rebel-base-turkey-qatar-230/

http://www.rt.com/news/government-rebels-training-us-301/

Not a lie, but just laughably wrong far too often to be taken seriously.

[-GR-Operative 10]

... and very few bystanders killed by air strikes...

Differences in population concentration?

[PELHAM 10]

Operative;2199438']Differences in population concentration?

Population density differences between the coastal area in Libya where most of the population lives' date=' Afghanistan and Iraq are negligible, there are a few tens per km squared difference. The main factor is the improvements in technology and tactics since the initial Iraq and Afghanistan air campaigns, more accurate target identification systems and better weapons such as Brimstone which reduces collateral damage. During the 1st Iraq war F-16 pilots had to use binoculars to look for targets, things have moved on since then.

Edited August 1, 2012 by PELHAM

[oxmox 73]

So, all that RT posts is a lie? No research done by reporters?

http://www.rt.com/news/syria-rebel-base-turkey-qatar-230/

http://www.rt.com/news/government-rebels-training-us-301/

Its probably always good to check other serious press sources if they did release similar informations. The main media magazines, newspaper and so on dont always have their own reporters, they buy articles from press agencies who trade with such informations, getting them often from freelancer journalists. Famous ones like reuters, adp, AP, Upi, Itar-Tass, AFP, and so on..there are many out there but only some really big ones.

With a quick google search I could find core infos about the same toppic from press agencies itself, in this case reuters. But also from newspapers like Haaretz, Chicago Tribune, .....

The infos about heavy weapon deliveries from Turkey into Syria was several times reported already on our main TV stations in the last days.

You can find loads of news reports from the 2nd report aswell, the israelian newspaper Haaretz reports that the US did finance a part of the training. The Australian a daily newspaper writes, the driving force behind the project is the US institute for peace (USIP) which is funded by bodies including the US State Department, the Swiss Foreign Ministry and Dutch and Norwegian non-governmental organisations.

RT will often have a different view, since russia has a different sphere of influence and interest in comparison to the US, the EU or other nations which makes RT sometimes an interesting news page. Nevereless, always good to check back the press releases with other sources.

Edited August 1, 2012 by oxmox

[PELHAM 10]

Too late for UN intervention? I now think so, there is too much hate involved at this stage. Shame something couldn't be done earlier:

On Tuesday, embittered Rebels in Aleppo execute some Shabiha they have captured. I guess they will all fight till there is nothing left now.

Amateur video shows Syria rebels killing 'Assad loyalists' (sanitized for your protection, it's available elsewhere uncut.)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19083915

[oxmox 73]

You could find such videos already longer ago, there is no side who fights "clean" in this conflict like in most wars. I did found a longer version on youtube, they were auto firing for over 40 seconds on target and in the air. What I notice is that the main media isnt reporting that much one sided anymore. They release suddenly more negative reports about rebels, either videos about executions or muslim extremists, about Al Qaeda influence, they report about heavy weapon deliveries from abroad, the UN warns about a religious conflict and on TV news they report suddenly about the Iran-Syria-Lebanon Axis and the purpose to weaken it which experts did mention already months before. Maybe Iam wrong but I just have the feeling about it that news reports did change.

Pelham, I was talking about collateral damage before and took only examples which are more well known, I did hear or read about Libya with just too many different stories and death toll numbers. But if there would have been no military intervention in Libya, Gaddafi would have been probably swept away the rebels with his tank columns. Most of his tanks got destroyed by NATO air at the gates of Bengasi. No need to shed tears over Gaddafi although it is not worthy for a democratic movement that he got impaled with an iron bar before his death. The scandal was that western nations made friends with Gaddafi after all the crimes he did, shaking hands and doing business like a good friend. The conflict isnt over in Libya, militant groups are still fighting but the press doesnt report a lot about it and the chaos in this country. You can only hope that the future of Libya wont be like in Somalia, where since 1991 no effective working government exists after the overthrow of the dictator Siad Barre.

It is similar with Syria, although the conflict is a lot more dangerous and complicated, if the regime would be on its own the conflict would have ended already. But there are interests to topple the regime from outside.

Edited August 1, 2012 by oxmox

[PELHAM 10]

@oxmox Good grief, I have posted link after link of the Libyan election, oil production, evidence of international investment and the economic progress, they even have athletes at the Olympics. There is some lawlessness and some political tensions which leads to the odd gunfight and kidnapping and recently people have been throwing bombs at the empty intelligence headquarters building in Benghazi as a night time prank. Apart from that, things are rapidly turning around. If you have specific evidence to the contrary, please post it.

The scandal of western leaders shaking hands with Gadaffi exists only with naive people who don't understand international relations. Democratic leaders were never friends with Gadaffi. They were obliged to deal with him after he renounced WMD and the UN and other sanctions were lifted. That is how things work, no matter how unpleasant the person, it's called diplomacy. The myth that a shake of hands and some limited cooperation meant more that it did, is a figment of the imagination of the far left. Since when did the handshake of a politician mean anything? No treaties were signed apart from the $5billion Italian colonial reparation agreement which was a bribe to get Gadaffi to manage illegal imigration. Nothing gave him immunity from slaughtering the oposition or absolve Libya's international obligations under the UN Charter or Geneva Conventions.

I will be 40 in November, I have lived in 5 different countries on 3 different continents and experienced war, terrorism, sanctions and various other political strife and really don't need explanations like the above, I have seen the various media/political slides and spin from all sides. Mumbling the same thing over and over again will not convince me. If you would like to compare Syria's future to that of Somalia that would make some sense, we have Russia to thank for it after they allowed x2 peace plans to fail.

The new myth that all Syria's problems are somehow caused by outside interference doesn't stack up at all. The people who have the greatest interest in seeing the regime topple are the Syrian Majority - the Sunnis who make up 70% of the population. The attempts by Assad and Putin to wash them out of the equation show just how dishonest their position is.

Edited August 1, 2012 by PELHAM

[hellfire257 3]

Dunno if you guys have seen this, but go onto LiveLeak and search for "The Free Syrian Army destroyed Russian BMP". Pretty sure that's not a BMP, but look at how that damn thing cooks off!

[slatts 1978]

Dunno if you guys have seen this, but go onto LiveLeak and search for "The Free Syrian Army destroyed Russian BMP". Pretty sure that's not a BMP, but look at how that damn thing cooks off!

On good ol' YT

W5o1YWRe1mc

[Fenrisulven 1]

.. What government would do that to their own people?

Pretty much any government. Don't matter if it's a democracy or dictatorship. No need to be a conspiracy theorist to understand it either. All you need is a little knowledge of military history.

[oxmox 73]

@oxmox Good grief, I have posted link after link of the Libyan election, oil production, evidence of international investment and the economic progress, they even have athletes at the Olympics. There is some lawlessness and some political tensions which leads to the odd gunfight and kidnapping and recently people have been throwing bombs at the empty intelligence headquarters building in Benghazi as a night time prank. Apart from that, things are rapidly turning around. If you have specific evidence to the contrary, please post it.

The scandal of western leaders shaking hands with Gadaffi exists only with naive people who don't understand international relations. Democratic leaders were never friends with Gadaffi. They were obliged to deal with him after he renounced WMD and the UN and other sanctions were lifted. That is how things work, no matter how unpleasant the person, it's called diplomacy. The myth that a shake of hands and some limited cooperation meant more that it did, is a figment of the imagination of the far left. Since when did the handshake of a politician mean anything? No treaties were signed apart from the $5billion Italian colonial reparation agreement which was a bribe to get Gadaffi to manage illegal imigration. Nothing gave him immunity from slaughtering the oposition or absolve Libya's international obligations under the UN Charter or Geneva Conventions.

I will be 40 in November, I have lived in 5 different countries on 3 different continents and experienced war, terrorism, sanctions and various other political strife and really don't need explanations like the above, I have seen the various media/political slides and spin from all sides. Mumbling the same thing over and over again will not convince me. If you would like to compare Syria's future to that of Somalia that would make some sense, we have Russia to thank for it after they allowed x2 peace plans to fail.

The new myth that all Syria's problems are somehow caused by outside interference doesn't stack up at all. The people who have the greatest interest in seeing the regime topple are the Syrian Majority - the Sunnis who make up 70% of the population. The attempts by Assad and Putin to wash them out of the equation show just how dishonest their position is.

The international relationship and diplomacy is often double-edged, you call something naive and others missing further insight about a different view of it. Of course diplomacy is connected with own interests of individual countries, confederations or other close linkage with agreements and we all profit from it. But this doesnt mean that what you call "how things work" is the only viewpoint of it, there is is another side of the coin. If you follow the world history at least since the beginning of the 19th century a lot of the political including geopolitical and military decisions in international relationship are based on similar diplomacy and leads like a red line until nowaday. And yes some call it a scandal that democratic diplomacy goes along with dictatorships or set it up as far they profit from it, but quickly get rid of it with a wagging finger if it doesnt fit anymore with future plans and relationships, Gadaffi is just a tiny example out of others. Iam not a peace activist or someone who babbles solely about humanitarian aid, but I try to get things straight. Its not bad to make some thoughts about unpleasant parts of our western international relationship in our world aswell, the historical events help a lot to understand the present events.

You are right, the situation did rapidly turn around in Libya and Iam not saying the fights and clashes dominate the whole country or have a big impact, but you can read in the news or hear on TV dicussions sometimes infos about it, there were still sporadic firefights between clans a while ago. In general the infos in the main media are rather scarce.

I didnt read about Somalia that much and the reason for russian vetos..probably diplomacy and "how things work", but I know that russia isnt the only nation who did block UN mandates and peace plans.

Where did you get the message from that "all" Syrias problems are caused from outside, didnt mean that so maybe this is a missunderstanding. I am not sure about the percentage and how many are against the regime, but at the end it is important that the regular people can live in peace and have an existence to live from, a quick end of the slaughtering without provoking new ones. These are the ones who suffer most in a conflict.

You seem to have seen a lot in your life already, branded from not so nice expiriences. Well I can understand that you react different to certain toppics with such expiriences. Iam not so far away from your age, have seen many parts of the world just as a backpacker, the good and the ugly, but live and grew up in Europe which offers a rather calm life.

"The Free Syrian Army destroyed Russian BMP"

Holy shit, how this light tank blows up....wow.

Edited August 2, 2012 by oxmox