Islamic State Crisis Megathread (ISIS/ISIL/IS) II

[Ganos Lao]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34511134

This is now so messed up: “This for That” revenge is making the situation a whole lot worse.

No, let me try to negotiate a solution to the Syria crisis – where has the idea of a unity government gone so that we can facilitate a peaceful transition?

It's a mess huge fucking proportions.

Say that when the shit really starts to hit the fan, my man. This is small fry compared to what's to come.

[Ganos Lao]

Throughout the cold war, any dictator could commit massive human rights crimes as long as they said the magic words "I hate communism". How many right wing dictatorships in Latin America were imposed by the west, and supported with advice in torture techniques (Brazil) or death squads (Central America)?

And throughout the Cold War, any dictator could commit massive human rights crimes as long as they said the magic words "I hate capitalism."

How many left wing dictatorships were imposed by the Soviet Union and supported with arms and manpower? The problem is that too many people think of this shit as a fault of the West, and not a fault of us all as human beings, and that's what prolongs the problems we face as human beings and we suffer accordingly as a result.

[CTALNH]

Throughout the cold war, any dictator could commit massive human rights crimes as long as they said the magic words "I hate communism". How many right wing dictatorships in Latin America were imposed by the west, and supported with advice in torture techniques (Brazil) or death squads (Central America)?

And throughout the Cold War, any dictator could commit massive human rights crimes as long as they said the magic words "I hate capitalism."

How many left wing dictatorships were imposed by the Soviet Union and supported with arms and manpower? The problem is that too many people think of this shit as a fault of the West, and not a fault of us all as human beings, and that's what prolongs the problems we face as human beings and we suffer accordingly as a result.

Yeah us as we are what we are and not a bunch of post humans gods that never age,feed from sunlight and fuck all day then those things are gonna happen.

A lot.

[Uxupox]

Throughout the cold war, any dictator could commit massive human rights crimes as long as they said the magic words "I hate communism". How many right wing dictatorships in Latin America were imposed by the west, and supported with advice in torture techniques (Brazil) or death squads (Central America)?

And throughout the Cold War, any dictator could commit massive human rights crimes as long as they said the magic words "I hate capitalism."

How many left wing dictatorships were imposed by the Soviet Union and supported with arms and manpower? The problem is that too many people think of this shit as a fault of the West, and not a fault of us all as human beings, and that's what prolongs the problems we face as human beings and we suffer accordingly as a result.

Exactly. Its just not the west that has fucked up badly but everybody and their mother since everybody is looking for a piece of the "action".

[Ganos Lao]

And throughout the Cold War, any dictator could commit massive human rights crimes as long as they said the magic words "I hate capitalism."

How many left wing dictatorships were imposed by the Soviet Union and supported with arms and manpower? The problem is that too many people think of this shit as a fault of the West, and not a fault of us all as human beings, and that's what prolongs the problems we face as human beings and we suffer accordingly as a result.

Exactly. Its just not the west that has fucked up badly but everybody and their mother since everybody is looking for a piece of the "action".

Didn't someone once say human history is something you're doomed to repeat if you don't pay it much mind? Well, I think that's a pretty apt summary of how things go these days.

And some people want that. They want that future where the human face is trampled forever and ever, insofar as they can use it to bolster their flimsy narratives about how bad the West (i.e. America) is all the while acting like some dictator from a fetid backwater is actually some sort of hero.

[Ganos Lao]

And throughout the Cold War, any dictator could commit massive human rights crimes as long as they said the magic words "I hate capitalism."

How many left wing dictatorships were imposed by the Soviet Union and supported with arms and manpower? The problem is that too many people think of this shit as a fault of the West, and not a fault of us all as human beings, and that's what prolongs the problems we face as human beings and we suffer accordingly as a result.

Yeah us as we are what we are and not a bunch of post humans gods that never age,feed from sunlight and fuck all day then those things are gonna happen.

A lot.

It was once said that out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made. But rather than try to make something good out of the timber, so many just resort to burning it.

[DBJ]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34511134

This is now so messed up: “This for That” revenge is making the situation a whole lot worse.

No, let me try to negotiate a solution to the Syria crisis – where has the idea of a unity government gone so that we can facilitate a peaceful transition?

Minor things. In a civil war, no one keeps his white vest clean.

[Trumpostan]

Throughout the cold war, any dictator could commit massive human rights crimes as long as they said the magic words "I hate communism". How many right wing dictatorships in Latin America were imposed by the west, and supported with advice in torture techniques (Brazil) or death squads (Central America)?

And throughout the Cold War, any dictator could commit massive human rights crimes as long as they said the magic words "I hate capitalism."

How many left wing dictatorships were imposed by the Soviet Union and supported with arms and manpower? The problem is that too many people think of this shit as a fault of the West, and not a fault of us all as human beings, and that's what prolongs the problems we face as human beings and we suffer accordingly as a result.

The difference being that the west claimed to be about freedom, democracy and human rights. The facts on the ground in the many proxy wars in smaller countries around the globe proves otherwise. The west claimed the moral high ground, but freedom, democracy and human rights are only concerns as long as the resources (oil ea) keep flowing. Saudi Arabia, one of the serial violators of human rights has not ever even had the slightest official condemnation from any western country, apart from some mealy-mouthed stuff like "well when I go there I'll mention human rights". No, the western world thinks its just a grand idea to put them in charge of the human rights commission of the UN... not one peep from any government leader of a major western country.

Most western vs soviet proxy wars in smaller countries were eventually 'won' by the side backed by the west. Usually followed by the aforementioned right wing dictatorships and CIA trained death squads (school of the Americas) or MI5/6 trained torturers (ask Dilma Rousseff about that).

[Uxupox]

And throughout the Cold War, any dictator could commit massive human rights crimes as long as they said the magic words "I hate capitalism."

How many left wing dictatorships were imposed by the Soviet Union and supported with arms and manpower? The problem is that too many people think of this shit as a fault of the West, and not a fault of us all as human beings, and that's what prolongs the problems we face as human beings and we suffer accordingly as a result.

The difference being that the west claimed to be about freedom, democracy and human rights. The facts on the ground in the many proxy wars in smaller countries around the globe proves otherwise. The west claimed the moral high ground, but freedom, democracy and human rights are only concerns as long as the resources (oil ea) keep flowing. Saudi Arabia, one of the serial violators of human rights has not ever even had the slightest official condemnation from any western country, apart from some mealy-mouthed stuff like "well when I go there I'll mention human rights". No, the western world thinks its just a grand idea to put them in charge of the human rights commission of the UN... not one peep from any government leader of a major western country.

Most western vs soviet proxy wars in smaller countries were eventually 'won' by the side backed by the west. Usually followed by the aforementioned right wing dictatorships and CIA trained death squads (school of the Americas) or MI5/6 trained torturers (ask Dilma Rousseff about that).

If the "east" won they would have a similar situation as what happened in many countries in Eastern Europe where they in mass revolted against the head government as their own government decided to mass arrest and mass kill their own citizens to keep hold onto their own power. Heck the communist government of Cuba also had a revolt which is called the Escambray rebellion.

[Ganos Lao]

And throughout the Cold War, any dictator could commit massive human rights crimes as long as they said the magic words "I hate capitalism."

How many left wing dictatorships were imposed by the Soviet Union and supported with arms and manpower? The problem is that too many people think of this shit as a fault of the West, and not a fault of us all as human beings, and that's what prolongs the problems we face as human beings and we suffer accordingly as a result.

The difference being that the west claimed to be about freedom, democracy and human rights. The facts on the ground in the many proxy wars in smaller countries around the globe proves otherwise. The west claimed the moral high ground, but freedom, democracy and human rights are only concerns as long as the resources (oil ea) keep flowing. Saudi Arabia, one of the serial violators of human rights has not ever even had the slightest official condemnation from any western country, apart from some mealy-mouthed stuff like "well when I go there I'll mention human rights". No, the western world thinks its just a grand idea to put them in charge of the human rights commission of the UN... not one peep from any government leader of a major western country.

Most western vs soviet proxy wars in smaller countries were eventually 'won' by the side backed by the west. Usually followed by the aforementioned right wing dictatorships and CIA trained death squads (school of the Americas) or MI5/6 trained torturers (ask Dilma Rousseff about that).

You see, this is what exactly I'm talking about.

You talk about how the West claimed to be about freedom, etc? So did the Soviets and their allies. How many times were the Soviets, who established Manchukuo-style puppet states in Eastern Europe and Korea, heard talking about imperialism and the like? How many times did the Soviets and company disregard human rights? Hell, at least the West had democracy. What did the other guys have?

There is no difference. Both sides did the same shit. The West and the East engaged in the same exact sins. The fact you'd stoop to ignoring that makes you intellectually dishonest and quite offensive, I might add, but it's not surprising. You have a narrative to enforce, and you surely don't want those annoying facts getting in the way.

[Salus Maior]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34511134

This is now so messed up: “This for That” revenge is making the situation a whole lot worse.

No, let me try to negotiate a solution to the Syria crisis – where has the idea of a unity government gone so that we can facilitate a peaceful transition?

*Sigh*.... Why is Syria even a country?

[Ganos Lao]

The difference being that the west claimed to be about freedom, democracy and human rights. The facts on the ground in the many proxy wars in smaller countries around the globe proves otherwise. The west claimed the moral high ground, but freedom, democracy and human rights are only concerns as long as the resources (oil ea) keep flowing. Saudi Arabia, one of the serial violators of human rights has not ever even had the slightest official condemnation from any western country, apart from some mealy-mouthed stuff like "well when I go there I'll mention human rights". No, the western world thinks its just a grand idea to put them in charge of the human rights commission of the UN... not one peep from any government leader of a major western country.

Most western vs soviet proxy wars in smaller countries were eventually 'won' by the side backed by the west. Usually followed by the aforementioned right wing dictatorships and CIA trained death squads (school of the Americas) or MI5/6 trained torturers (ask Dilma Rousseff about that).

If the "east" won they would have a similar situation as what happened in many countries in Eastern Europe where they in mass revolted against the head government as their own government decided to mass arrest and mass kill their own citizens to keep hold onto their own power. Heck the communist government of Cuba also had a revolt which is called the Escambray rebellion.

Exactly.

But Trumpostan would rather forget all that just to demonize the West. You'd think the people who are so mad about how the big bad West disregards human rights in pursuit of oil would give a damn about those who disregarded human rights all over the world, but nope, if it ain't some American/European big shot we can rant about, it's not worth talking about. So all those people languishing in left wing dictatorships? Fuck 'em, because they don't have any value to the narrative, right?

I mean, notice the last bit of Trump's post:

"Usually followed by the aforementioned right wing dictatorships and CIA trained death squads (school of the Americas) or MI5/6 trained torturers (ask Dilma Rousseff about that)."

But there were no left wing dictatorships with Soviet backed death squads or anything. The Stasi? Totally a figment of imagination. Kim Il Sung? He got to power there because the people truly wanted him, not because Uncle Joe needed to secure his eastern sphere of influence.

I can go on and on, but you should already know what I mean.

Guys like Trump here are opportunistic hypocrites. They don't give a shit about human rights, and this just proves it.

[Ganos Lao]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34511134

This is now so messed up: “This for That” revenge is making the situation a whole lot worse.

No, let me try to negotiate a solution to the Syria crisis – where has the idea of a unity government gone so that we can facilitate a peaceful transition?

*Sigh*.... Why is Syria even a country?

Soon, you'll be thinking the same about Iraq.

[Salus Maior]

*Sigh*.... Why is Syria even a country?

Soon, you'll be thinking the same about Iraq.

I already think the same about Iraq. I'm in the divide-Iraq-up-between-Sunni/Shia/Kurds train.

[Yanitza]

Soon, you'll be thinking the same about Iraq.

I already think the same about Iraq. I'm in the divide-Iraq-up-between-Sunni/Shia/Kurds train.

im sure balkanising the middle east into ethno cratic states will be a simple process that will create viable economic states as well......

[Salus Maior]

I already think the same about Iraq. I'm in the divide-Iraq-up-between-Sunni/Shia/Kurds train.

im sure balkanising the middle east into ethno cratic states will be a simple process that will create viable economic states as well......

And Iraq is economically stable? Or stable, period? Endless ethno-religious conflict doesn't do the Iraqi people any favours, economically or otherwise.

[Salus Maior]

Kim Il Sung? He got to power there because the people truly wanted him,

More like Uncle Mao wanted him as a buffer.

[Ganos Lao]

Kim Il Sung? He got to power there because the people truly wanted him,

More like Uncle Mao wanted him as a buffer.

I was being sarcastic, friend.

[Yanitza]

im sure balkanising the middle east into ethno cratic states will be a simple process that will create viable economic states as well......

And Iraq is economically stable? Or stable, period? Endless ethno-religious conflict doesn't do the Iraqi people any favours, economically or otherwise.

and so yout solution to this is chop up iraq into and syria into neat little ethnic blocks tha t have never existed in the region. creating these ethnic blocs would more or less be condoning ethnic cleansing in those areas that don't fit into these states you have decided to create. iraqs in a pretty bad situation now but divying it up wont solve shit. and yes i would say modetn iraq would be a lot more stable than creating a rump kurdistan, Sunnistan and Shiastan

[Salus Maior]

And Iraq is economically stable? Or stable, period? Endless ethno-religious conflict doesn't do the Iraqi people any favours, economically or otherwise.

and so yout solution to this is chop up iraq into and syria into neat little ethnic blocks tha t have never existed in the region. creating these ethnic blocs would more or less be condoning ethnic cleansing in those areas that don't fit into these states you have decided to create. iraqs in a pretty bad situation now but divying it up wont solve shit. and yes i would say modetn iraq would be a lot more stable than creating a rump kurdistan, Sunnistan and Shiastan

Iraq isn't a natural entity either. It was arbitrarily drawn up by the British without thinking of the people actually living there.

If the past oh...20 years or so have proven anything, it's that Iraq is a failed state because the major groups within are constantly at each others throats trying to snatch power out from each other. Dividing Iraq will allow each group the representative government it wants and needs and will end the constant sectarian fighting and allow for some actual stability. Oh, and you didn't mention how united Iraq would be more stable. Might want to try that.

Anyway, Kurdistan is already independent, and they've stated that they want to keep it that way. And understandably so.

[Yanitza]

and so yout solution to this is chop up iraq into and syria into neat little ethnic blocks tha t have never existed in the region. creating these ethnic blocs would more or less be condoning ethnic cleansing in those areas that don't fit into these states you have decided to create. iraqs in a pretty bad situation now but divying it up wont solve shit. and yes i would say modetn iraq would be a lot more stable than creating a rump kurdistan, Sunnistan and Shiastan

Iraq isn't a natural entity either. It was arbitrarily drawn up by the British without thinking of the people actually living there.

If the past oh...20 years or so have proven anything, it's that Iraq is a failed state because the major groups within are constantly at each others throats trying to snatch power out from each other. Dividing Iraq will allow each group the representative government it wants and needs and will end the constant sectarian fighting and allow for some actual stability. Oh, and you didn't mention how united Iraq would be more stable. Might want to try that.

Anyway, Kurdistan is already independent, and they've stated that they want to keep it that way. And understandably so.

of course iraq isnt a natural entity, but how is setting up ethnically homogenous nations states any more natural in a region thats had a hetergous nature for thousands of years? will end yhe sectarian fighting i am sure mate how many people were killed carving out ethnic states in the indian subcontinent and the balkans? and do you think people will just forget about that once the blooshed is over? sectarian violence is certainly an issue but just ccarving up the place wont solve nothing

anyway we'll see how well kurdistan will last down the line, especially without an external threat to hold them together

[Ganos Lao]

anyway we'll see how well kurdistan will last down the line, especially without an external threat to hold them together

They won't last. Once they get told they won't have American support, they won't last.

[Trumpostan]

If the "east" won they would have a similar situation as what happened in many countries in Eastern Europe where they in mass revolted against the head government as their own government decided to mass arrest and mass kill their own citizens to keep hold onto their own power. Heck the communist government of Cuba also had a revolt which is called the Escambray rebellion.

Exactly.

But Trumpostan would rather forget all that just to demonize the West. You'd think the people who are so mad about how the big bad West disregards human rights in pursuit of oil would give a damn about those who disregarded human rights all over the world, but nope, if it ain't some American/European big shot we can rant about, it's not worth talking about. So all those people languishing in left wing dictatorships? Fuck 'em, because they don't have any value to the narrative, right?

I mean, notice the last bit of Trump's post:

"Usually followed by the aforementioned right wing dictatorships and CIA trained death squads (school of the Americas) or MI5/6 trained torturers (ask Dilma Rousseff about that)."

But there were no left wing dictatorships with Soviet backed death squads or anything. The Stasi? Totally a figment of imagination. Kim Il Sung? He got to power there because the people truly wanted him, not because Uncle Joe needed to secure his eastern sphere of influence.

I can go on and on, but you should already know what I mean.

Guys like Trump here are opportunistic hypocrites. They don't give a shit about human rights, and this just proves it.

Seems like you deliberately missed the point.

I never claimed the 'other' side didn't do exactly the same thing. But as I stated, the west, and particularly in the second half of the Cold War, consistently claimed the moral high ground on account of having elections, freedom of choice and how it didn't need to build walls to keep people. But did not live up to that moral high ground on the battlegrounds of the Cold War. No they did the same thing the other side did, as with the widely discussed dictatorship supported by whichever side won the local Cold War.

I even mentioned that Putin has committed violations of international law. However I think the western world cannot complain about these violations if it insists on committing its own, such as ignoring the UN charter when it comes to Syria and the support for socalled moderate rebels or engaging in secret renditions and torture as done in Iraq. Conspiracy to wage agressive war is a crime that both Bush and Putin are guilty of, as far as I can see.

Most of the current borders throughout Africa and the Middle East did not come into existance as the result of centuries of warfare, as happened in Europe. They were drawn on a map by colonial officials from countries that without exception later found themselves on the 'western' side of the Cold War. Of particular note are Britain and France in this respect, who had a habit of ignoring ethno-religious-cultural reality and carved out 'countries' that saw ethno-religious-cultural groups divided over two, three and sometimes four countries! And after 1918, the region where the ISIS/Syria/Iraq conflicts now rage, were under control of Britain and France, and not the Soviet Union (despite its later attempts to gain influence, which consistently failed). Britain and France decided the makeup of the region, drew a few lines on a map and proclaimed some local clan to be in charge.

Where exactly did you get the idea that I think the west was evil compared to a supposed noble east? I just pointed out the blatant hypocrisy in western countries (that last to this day) that will argue 'if Putin does it, it is evil, if Bush/Blair/Obama do it then it is OK' or the whole 'Kosovo can be detached from Serbia without its consent, but Crimea cannot be detached from Ukraine'.
I quite agree that it doesn't matter who does it, that human rights violations are always wrong. I quite agree that both sides in the Cold War did the same shit when they had the chance.
All I am saying is that I don't think our side can claim the moral highground. If we stop supporting dictatorships like Saudi Arabia ea then we can do so, but not before.
Right now, the leaders of western countries are always saying Assad in Syria has to go on account of being a dictator committing human rights violations. Yet when Saudi Arabia's human rights violations are mentioned, they are all silent, same for human rights violations Bahrain, Brunei, Qatar, Equatorial Guinee, Egypt and a few others.

Sure, the west had democracy during the Cold War (as well as now), but that was in Europe, Canada, USA, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and a few others here and there. But not in other countries where there had been a proxy war between west and east which was won by the side backed by the west. Those would usually have dictatorships. So west and east did the same thing, that was exactly the point I was getting at. All I ever did is say that the western world has no right to claim moral supremacy on account of what happened in countries where the 'west' backed side won the local Cold War. And in Latin America, and the Rep. Congo there were coups by groups backed by the west against governments that were often only marginally left wing and which in many cases were not even affiliated to Moscow, yet they had to go anyway. Allende? Out! Mossadegh? Out. Lumumba? Out. Iran-Contra another case. Guatemala, Brazil, Argentina, Nigeria etc...
Both sides did the same, but one side did that same thing more often. Where did the east win anyway? Cuba, China and Vietnam + a draw in Korea. The west won nearly every other proxy war (out of several dozen).

What's left of the old 'east' anyway? A hermit state North Korea, a largely neutralized Cuba that might well be westernized within a generation, China with its massive factory complexes mass producing for the west and Vietnam which is now communist in name only. Even Byelorussia doesn't really want to be in Moscow's zone of control and influence. There's nothing left, the old Comintern and Russia's sphere of influence is a pathetic joke compared to what it was and rightfully so.

I'm going to review my older comments to see if I claimed the other side in the Cold War was all warm and fuzzy, because I'm quite sure I did not.

[Salus Maior]

Iraq isn't a natural entity either. It was arbitrarily drawn up by the British without thinking of the people actually living there.

If the past oh...20 years or so have proven anything, it's that Iraq is a failed state because the major groups within are constantly at each others throats trying to snatch power out from each other. Dividing Iraq will allow each group the representative government it wants and needs and will end the constant sectarian fighting and allow for some actual stability. Oh, and you didn't mention how united Iraq would be more stable. Might want to try that.

Anyway, Kurdistan is already independent, and they've stated that they want to keep it that way. And understandably so.

of course iraq isnt a natural entity, but how is setting up ethnically homogenous nations states any more natural in a region thats had a hetergous nature for thousands of years? will end yhe sectarian fighting i am sure mate how many people were killed carving out ethnic states in the indian subcontinent and the balkans? and do you think people will just forget about that once the blooshed is over? sectarian violence is certainly an issue but just ccarving up the place wont solve nothing

anyway we'll see how well kurdistan will last down the line, especially without an external threat to hold them together

Is English your first language?

And as for the underlined, that's already happening as we speak. Many people are being killed RIGHT NOW because Iraq's government is utter shit and CAN'T hold itself together. And the bloodshed between the Ethno-religious groups has been going on for decades, so don't pretend that a division will somehow make it worse, because it won't. It will literally solve the issue.

What you describe with those sentences I've emboldened is something that's more likely to happen with a unified Iraq than a divided one. What do you think is going to happen once ISIS is dealt with?

Look here http://gulf2000.columbia.edu/images/map ... nic_lg.png As you can see, with some small exceptions, it's pretty clear that there's quite a clear split in Iraq's ethnic regions, and each group (outside of the Iraqi Kurds which are pretty diverse) has a large homogeneous region that could easily be broken off to form it's own state (with some small population trades). And frankly, no argument I've heard that's against such a solution is rather unconvincing, especially considering when you look how much trouble has been caused by forcing these peoples to live in one country.

[Salus Maior]

anyway we'll see how well kurdistan will last down the line, especially without an external threat to hold them together

They won't last. Once they get told they won't have American support, they won't last.

What makes you think that? If anything, Iraqi Kurdistan has been the most tolerant and decent of the factions present.