Russian airstrikes in Syria

[Ayamar]

I was adding stuff to make it truer (if thats a word)

Stephen Colbert would love to have a word with you.

whos that

[New Tuva SSR]

There's really little in there to suggest they're broadly Marxist. There certainly could be Marxist elements within the FSA, but the FSA itself is a clusterfuck of amalgamated opposition groups built around a small core of Syrian Army defectors (who may or may not have any kind of broad operational authority over other groups included under their umbrella). So, by definition, the whole group can't be 'Marxist', the whole group isn't coordinated enough to have a set ideology beyond opposition to Assad and ISIS (and the latter one lapses sometimes).


Man, c'mon Ayamar, what did Wiki ever do to you?

I was adding stuff to make it truer (if thats a word)

No, you lied. The FSA is not Marxist or Terrorist.

[Conserative Morality]

Also, guys, as a general rule of thumb, when someone links to a Wikipedia article to support an argument, always check the history page to see if there is an active edit war, or recent controversial changes, or the article was written entirely by one user (which could indicate bias), or anything else like that.

Natch. Check the talk page too.

[The balkens]

Stephen Colbert would love to have a word with you.

whos that

He invented the word "Truthiness."

[Conserative Morality]

No, you lied. The FSA is not Marxist or Terrorist.

Dunno about the latter. The FSA is a pretty broad coalition.

[Ayamar]

I was adding stuff to make it truer (if thats a word)

No, you lied. The FSA is not Marxist or Terrorist.

they attacked innocent civilians which is terrorism and OK it's not my fault thats what my history teacher told me and my gran also said they were communists which is the same as marxists so

[The balkens]

No, you lied. The FSA is not Marxist or Terrorist.

Dunno about the latter. The FSA is a pretty broad coalition.

terrorism is somewhat of a broad statement nowadays.....

[Kingdom of the Carolinas]

either way, no one is coming out of this happy, when was the last time american and russian forces met like this in an active warzone, the worlds two biggest superpowers dont exactly get along, and its bad when both are trying to stop the same thing: ISIS.

Its going to be one big clusterfuck of epic proportions and all it takes to start a even bigger war is a couple of jets shooting at the wrong people

[Constantinopolis]

Uh, yes he is. I don't see anything in that article to challenge the view that Assad is the only reliable defender of the religious minorities.

Remember, the FSA is a decentralized, heterogeneous group that (1) doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning the war, and (2) would collapse and start infighting as soon as the war was won (just like its equivalent did in Libya).

And if you read the article, it also explains that:

1. Several minorities side with the opposition overwhelmingly over the government

I know they do. Probably because they have no choice. But the point is, they would get massacred in the inevitable infighting if the opposition won.

I repeat: The FSA is a joke. It cannot win, and would collapse into a new, Libyan-style civil war even if by some miracle it DID win.

When the dust settles, most of Syria's territory will be ruled either by Assad, or by ISIS, or possibly by al-Nusra (although that's a long shot). These. Are. The. Only. Options.

2. The government isn't preventing sectarian violence any more than most of the opposition.

I didn't say it was. I said it was defending the religious minorities. This involves a certain degree of sectarian violence against the Sunni Arabs. Because they are the main support base of the opposition (especially, you guessed it, ISIS and al-Nusra).

[The balkens]

And if you read the article, it also explains that:

1. Several minorities side with the opposition overwhelmingly over the government

I know they do. Probably because they have no choice. But the point is, they would get massacred in the inevitable infighting if the opposition won.

I repeat: The FSA is a joke. It cannot win, and would collapse into a new, Libyan-style civil war even if by some miracle it DID win.

When the dust settles, most of Syria's territory will be ruled either by Assad, or by ISIS, or possibly by al-Nusra (although that's a long shot). These. Are. The. Only. Options.

2. The government isn't preventing sectarian violence any more than most of the opposition.

I didn't say it was. I said it was defending the religious minorities. This involves a certain degree of sectarian violence against the Sunni Arabs. Because they are the main support base of the opposition (especially, you guessed it, ISIS and al-Nusra).

Have you ever thought of of WHAT IF! assad Dies?

[Lusai]

I know they do. Probably because they have no choice. But the point is, they would get massacred in the inevitable infighting if the opposition won.

I repeat: The FSA is a joke. It cannot win, and would collapse into a new, Libyan-style civil war even if by some miracle it DID win.

When the dust settles, most of Syria's territory will be ruled either by Assad, or by ISIS, or possibly by al-Nusra (although that's a long shot). These. Are. The. Only. Options.


I didn't say it was. I said it was defending the religious minorities. This involves a certain degree of sectarian violence against the Sunni Arabs. Because they are the main support base of the opposition (especially, you guessed it, ISIS and al-Nusra).

Have you ever thought of of WHAT IF! assad Dies?

See Libya Scenario.

[Conserative Morality]

I know they do. Probably because they have no choice. But the point is, they would get massacred in the inevitable infighting if the opposition won.

And you think Assad is going to sit back and play peacemaker with the religious minorities who've turned on him?

I repeat: The FSA is a joke. It cannot win, and would collapse into a new, Libyan-style civil war even if by some miracle it DID win.

When the dust settles, most of Syria's territory will be ruled either by Assad, or by ISIS, or possibly by al-Nusra (although that's a long shot). These. Are. The. Only. Options.

Not even fucking close. The only options are a peace settlement with a transitional government, or a civil war after the civil war.

I didn't say it was. I said it was defending the religious minorities. This involves a certain degree of sectarian violence against the Sunni Arabs. Because they are the main support base of the opposition (especially, you guessed it, ISIS and al-Nusra).

And what about attacks on Christians, Druze, Ismaili...?

Or is it that only the Shia that matter?

[Bulrosia]

[Redsection]

Good

[The balkens]

(Image)

Just not our Kebab.

[Imperial Valaran]

Russia keeps adding twists to the narrative.

I would be more open to tacit cooperation with another, less 'tainted' figure in the Syrian government who would replace Assad, and enact some reforms (mostly in the barrel bombing of civilian quarters department). IS is the greater threat, but the idea that Assad's regime is the key to solving the crisis is mistaken; the Syrian Army, even with Russian, Iranian and Hizbollah support, lacks the power to enforce its will across the former nation. Thus tacit cooperation should be tempered by some concessions.

[Lusai]

(Image)

Just not our Kebab.

It says KeGHaGH

like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanizat ... c#Examples

[Kingdom of the Carolinas]

either way, no one is coming out of this happy, when was the last time american and russian forces met like this in an active warzone, the worlds two biggest superpowers dont exactly get along, and its bad when both are trying to stop the same thing: ISIS.

Its going to be one big clusterfuck of epic proportions and all it takes to start a even bigger war is a couple of jets shooting at the wrong people

[Imperial Valaran]

either way, no one is coming out of this happy, when was the last time american and russian forces met like this in an active warzone, the worlds two biggest superpowers dont exactly get along, and its bad when both are trying to stop the same thing: ISIS.

Its going to be one big clusterfuck of epic proportions and all it takes to start a even bigger war is a couple of jets shooting at the wrong people

They already have made joint contingency plans and communicate regularly in the warzone.

For instance, the Russians informed the US an hour before they launched the strike.

Sure there is the possibility of accidents, but they both know how to deal with those without it blowing up in their faces. In fact, it is arguably safer with the Americans and Russians than with the US and the Syrian airforce.

[The Qeiiam Star Cluster]

Not surprised in the least. Russia clearly is desperate to hold onto their last ally in the region. I wouldn't be surprised if they intervene on the ground in the near future.

Not that they'd admit to it when they did.

Those are local self-defence militias who just happen to only speak Russian. The Russian uniforms and Russian military equipment they use were bought on the internet. Those tanks are from a car rental.

[Dundee Derry]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/30/opinion/thomas-friedman-syria-obama-and-putin.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

Mr. Friedman put it best.

That is actually a reasonable analysis. TBF.

[Rio Cana]

Russia keeps adding twists to the narrative.

I would be more open to tacit cooperation with another, less 'tainted' figure in the Syrian government who would replace Assad, and enact some reforms (mostly in the barrel bombing of civilian quarters department). IS is the greater threat, but the idea that Assad's regime is the key to solving the crisis is mistaken; the Syrian Army, even with Russian, Iranian and Hizbollah support, lacks the power to enforce its will across the former nation. Thus tacit cooperation should be tempered by some concessions.

Nations are not suppose to interfere in the internal matters of other nations. Having said that, Assad is still in power. So Assad has to have some type of popular support or he would have been tossed to the side a long time ago by his Generals or the foreign people propping him up.

Chances are he will survive has the President of a smaller Syria. Remember, he will have less people to worry about. Half have gone to Europe and chances are they will not go back but will send the Euros to families still in Syria.

[Risottia]

Russia stronk. Russia can into Middle East. Russia is of removing Isis and dollars from Syria, Tartus is Russian clay!

Seriously, Putin has a good case there, considering how the American strategy of giving weapons to the "rebels" is going... going only to make those weapons end up in Al-Qaeda's hands.

[Imperial Valaran]

Russia keeps adding twists to the narrative.

I would be more open to tacit cooperation with another, less 'tainted' figure in the Syrian government who would replace Assad, and enact some reforms (mostly in the barrel bombing of civilian quarters department). IS is the greater threat, but the idea that Assad's regime is the key to solving the crisis is mistaken; the Syrian Army, even with Russian, Iranian and Hizbollah support, lacks the power to enforce its will across the former nation. Thus tacit cooperation should be tempered by some concessions.

Nations are not suppose to interfere in the internal matters of other nations. Having said that, Assad is still in power. So Assad has to have some type of popular support or he would have been tossed to the side a long time ago by his Generals or the foreign people propping him up.

This logic really doesn't hold up. You could use the same logic and point out the regime holds (under) 25% of Syria, so 75% of the nation must hate him - it clearly isn't as a simple as that.

Assad is in power due to the fact that the Russians and Iranians keep him around. Popular support, a nebulous term in its own right, really doesn't belong to any of the major combatants, and Assad's forces would have melted away if the financing, arms and actual fighters from his backers didn't sustain him (these are more important factors in the regime's survival up to this point). He is the face of the regime, and the Russians/Iranians keep his underlings in line.

He has limited popular support, but this is confined to certain areas, and is not something that could be called 'nationwide'. And even then, this factor is only of some importance. If he did not have the backing, this support would not have stopped his fall.

Chances are he will survive has the President of a smaller Syria. Remember, he will have less people to worry about. Half have gone to Europe and chances are they will not go back but will send the Euros to families still in Syria.

I agree to a point. But first some corrections: under half have gone to Europe and typically their families and relations are not still in Syria (they are either internally displaced or in neighbouring nations or with them in Europe) so they won't send many remittances, nor are remittances enough to sustain its economy (let alone tax base), and nor are there reliable methods of sending most of those remittances.

Secondly, that may be true in the short-to-medium term, but even the rump state Assad will control cannot properly sustain itself. It will be constantly at war (unless peace is made soon and even that won't include the jihadist groups); its borders will not be secure; its economy, infrastructure, tax base, civil service and system of government will all have collapsed, as will have most industry and significant economic activity. It has nothing to sustain itself except Iranian and Russian handouts. This is not a tenable position in the long term, unless circumstances change signifanctly.

[United Fascist States of North America]

Tick

Tock

The Doomsday Clock

is ticking.