Aleppo Crisis

[Shofercia]

Yes, I know that ISIS is a sympton, but when you're coughing profusely, first you need to deal with the cough, before orally taking the medicine. Otherwise, you're just going to, inadvertently, spit out the medicine. ISIS must be removed before major reconstruction can being. Also, Chinese loans are probably going to be under a very low APR, and China understands that they have to develop a country before extracting payment. We're not talking about all resources being surrendered, just some resources.

Regarding Assad, I'm going to put this very clearly: it's not your choice, it's not my choice, it's not Obama's choice, it's not Putin's choice. It's the choice of the Syrian people. If they genuinely want him gone, as you allege, he will be gone. If they don't, he won't be. So, where has China failed in reconstruction? I'm not talking about loaning money to Venezuela; the country didn't just come through a civil war; I'm talking about China failing in war torn countries, not because Americans upset the oil market, while Russians and Saudis went, "hey, let's all go weeeeeeehaaaawwww!" If OPEC plus Russia plus US get together, the price of oil could easily increase, and help Venezuela's economy, but I doubt that'll happen; that's not China's fault.

Well sure ISIS needs to be taken care of. The question is "what then"? Reconstruction without a good government is impossible. The money will just get wasted and lost.

As far as it being the choice of the Syrian people, how can they choose if anybody who chooses somone other than Assad gets killed or tortured? Assad was forced on the Syrian people. The civil war started when they demanded a right to chose and he responded by torturing and shooting whoever dared advocate change. Clearly a lot of people genuinely want him gone. That is why they started rebelling in the first place!

Moreover the US let the Iraqi people choose their own leader. Did not work so well. The Syrian people are not permitted to chose as Assad will not let them. And they might not choose well. So just saying "oh they will choose" means nothing at all. See this is why this is a snake pit. There is no easy way out. Once you get in you are fucked. Now you have decades of shit to deal with. Or you just leave, solving nothing and ISIS or some equilivlebt will come right back. You really think this is going to be quick cheap and easy?! Yeah I know the few bombings have not been that costly, but that is the easy and cheap part.

Now while China has not tried rebuilding a country from war, their loans only benefit China. China is not in the charity bussiness and drives a very hard bargain. And they do not care what happens in Syria as long as they can take its resources. But that means Syria would lose control over at least part of its resources. And again you have yet to show how much China is actually going to spend. You cannot bet everything on a vague Chinese (you cannot trust their government) promises to provide some help.

Venuezla's problems go much deeper than oil prices you know. The recent increase has not helped them one bit. Their oil industry is collapsing from corruption and mismanagement, no other oil producer is doing nearly as badly.

Their production is falling due to them not investing in new wells or maintaining old ones. Political hacks who know nothing about oil or bussiness run their oil industry. But the fact that much of the oil they produce has to be sent for China as debt repayment and thus they cannot make any money off it does not help. But their problems go deeper than just oil.

And oil is sold at the market price. Why the hell should the US engage in price fixing with OPEC?!. Russia does not work with OPEC anyways. Oh and price fixing is illegal in the US BTW. What you propose is illegal. US oil is made produced by private companies who cannot legally work together to drive up prices. Nor should they. OPEC can burn in hell. Fuck them. Oil prices are where they should be.

Again a small increase in oil prices would not solve Venezuela's problems anyways.

The Crimeans chose their own leader. Seems to be working quite well for the Crimeans. And yes, Reconstruction isn't possible without a good government, so - got any suggestions for Syria? Other than not Assad. When I ask for suggestions, I ask for who to nominate, not for who to not nominate. You keep on saying that it'll be a hard route. I'm saying that we'll see. Call it optimism. And I think that China's Government's speeches are probably the best indicator of what China's Government will do.

Regarding oil, why would the US work with OPEC/Russia? Probably because of something like this: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... f-defaults

Investors are facing $19 billion in energy defaults as the worst oil crash in a generation leaves drillers struggling to stay afloat.
The wave could begin within days if Energy XXI Ltd., SandRidge Energy Inc. and Goodrich Petroleum Corp. fail to reach agreements with creditors and shareholders. Those are three of at least eight oil and gas producers that have announced missed debt payments, triggering a countdown to default.

So we'll see where that goes.

[Costa Fierro]

And yes, Reconstruction isn't possible without a good government, so - got any suggestions for Syria? Other than not Assad. When I ask for suggestions, I ask for who to nominate, not for who to not nominate.

This man? Former economics professor at the University of Damascus (until he criticized the government) and currently working overseas in the UAE. Not Western educated and has his alma mater from the University of Moscow.

[Vubaria]

So we'll see where that goes.

It is really hard to take your argument seriously when you propose the US fix oil prices with its geopolitcial rivals.

Any administration that did that would lose the election in a landslide. What on earth gave you the idea that was something good to do. The last time OPEC fixed prices for political reasons the US went into a recession.

[Vubaria]

I would also like to remind people that the ebels have broken the siege of Aleppo and allowed military supplies to move in.

The rebels were in a pretty grim situation but their forces have become very efficient over the year; this offensive was truly extraordinary.

The SAA is attempting to cut of the supply chain as we speak and claim to have captured over 1040 apartments - though this could be hollow propaganda considered they claimed this at the beginning of the battle and turned to be a flat out lie.

The situation will likely escalate.

[Shofercia]

And yes, Reconstruction isn't possible without a good government, so - got any suggestions for Syria? Other than not Assad. When I ask for suggestions, I ask for who to nominate, not for who to not nominate.

This man? Former economics professor at the University of Damascus (until he criticized the government) and currently working overseas in the UAE. Not Western educated and has his alma mater from the University of Moscow.

Could be, but I'm not sure how divisive he is, mostly because of his support for Damascus Spring. Had it not been for that, I'd say - good suggestion. But I'm unsure as to how the Syrian People with Damascus Spring.

So we'll see where that goes.

It is really hard to take your argument seriously when you propose the US fix oil prices with its geopolitcial rivals.

Any administration that did that would lose the election in a landslide. What on earth gave you the idea that was something good to do. The last time OPEC fixed prices for political reasons the US went into a recession.

And where am I suggesting that this should be done for political reasons? I'm pointing out that the economic benefits of enlarging OPEC are quite hefty. I'm not suggesting that anyone fix oil prices for politics. Furthermore, I didn't propose it; I mentioned it as a possibility. The word I used was would, not should. It's hard to take someone who doesn't even read the post that they're responding to, seriously.

[Vubaria]

And where am I suggesting that this should be done for political reasons? I'm pointing out that the economic benefits of enlarging OPEC are quite hefty. I'm not suggesting that anyone fix oil prices for politics. Furthermore, I didn't propose it; I mentioned it as a possibility. The word I used was would, not should. It's hard to take someone who doesn't even read the post that they're responding to, seriously.

To even mention it as a possibility shows ignorance on how oil in the US, or anywhere in the world operates.

The reason you want it expanded is to bring stability to Syria, and for that to work it requires higher oil prices.

The effects may be economic in nature but it's being done for political purposes. Whoever does it will be painted as pro-Saudi and pro-Russia at the same time, and meanwhile reduce US influence abroad, and hurt the American consumer.

There are 0 benefits for the US, why even mention it.

[Vubaria]

A Brief Glimpse into the War Crimes committed everyday.

It is really hard to support anybody, but I find the support for Assad as a little hard to believe.

[Vubaria]

https://twitter.com/theatresofwar/statu ... 4864822272

Rebels are launching offensive on Loyalist supply lines. If successful, they will be cut off from the main forces, and stuck between the rebels and ISIS. The Aleppo siege would be effectively reversed.

[Baltenstein]

And where am I suggesting that this should be done for political reasons? I'm pointing out that the economic benefits of enlarging OPEC are quite hefty. I'm not suggesting that anyone fix oil prices for politics. Furthermore, I didn't propose it; I mentioned it as a possibility. The word I used was would, not should. It's hard to take someone who doesn't even read the post that they're responding to, seriously.

To even mention it as a possibility shows ignorance on how oil in the US, or anywhere in the world operates.

The reason you want it expanded is to bring stability to Syria, and for that to work it requires higher oil prices.

The effects may be economic in nature but it's being done for political purposes. Whoever does it will be painted as pro-Saudi and pro-Russia at the same time, and meanwhile reduce US influence abroad, and hurt the American consumer.

Don't forget pro-Iranian.

Oh yeah, I'm sure America's non-oil-producing Western Allies would also love such a move. Especially because Europe's relations with Russia are so flowery right now.

[Shofercia]

And where am I suggesting that this should be done for political reasons? I'm pointing out that the economic benefits of enlarging OPEC are quite hefty. I'm not suggesting that anyone fix oil prices for politics. Furthermore, I didn't propose it; I mentioned it as a possibility. The word I used was would, not should. It's hard to take someone who doesn't even read the post that they're responding to, seriously.

To even mention it as a possibility shows ignorance on how oil in the US, or anywhere in the world operates.

The reason you want it expanded is to bring stability to Syria, and for that to work it requires higher oil prices.

The effects may be economic in nature but it's being done for political purposes. Whoever does it will be painted as pro-Saudi and pro-Russia at the same time, and meanwhile reduce US influence abroad, and hurt the American consumer.

There are 0 benefits for the US, why even mention it.

If I mention something as a possibility, that doesn't mean that I want it to happen. I live in California, so I'm quite happy with low oil prices. However, as someone who can grasp the difference between possibilities and wants, I try to consider the possibilities that I don't want. One of such possibilities can occur because the US has those things called lobbyists, perchance you've heard of them? And lobbyists are employed by oil companies. So while it's something that might not benefit the US as a whole, it will benefit the oil companies, hence it would make sense to mention the possibility of oil companies employing lobbyists to achieve a certain result. Oh, and if you were to go back to my original post, you'd see that I was making fun of Russia and Saudi Arabia for not wanting price controls, and the last time I checked, neither Russia, nor Saudi Arabia, are part of the US. Let's take at the original post, shall we?

I'm talking about China failing in war torn countries, not because Americans upset the oil market, while Russians and Saudis went, "hey, let's all go weeeeeeehaaaawwww!" If OPEC plus Russia plus US get together, the price of oil could easily increase, and help Venezuela's economy, but I doubt that'll happen; that's not China's fault.

I underlined a certain part of it for you, just in case you want to pretend that I said something I didn't, yet again. No wonder you didn't want to quote all of the actual post in your response, Vubaria, as that would undermine your "glorious triumph" over the nonexistent argument.

[Novus America]

Well sure ISIS needs to be taken care of. The question is "what then"? Reconstruction without a good government is impossible. The money will just get wasted and lost.

As far as it being the choice of the Syrian people, how can they choose if anybody who chooses somone other than Assad gets killed or tortured? Assad was forced on the Syrian people. The civil war started when they demanded a right to chose and he responded by torturing and shooting whoever dared advocate change. Clearly a lot of people genuinely want him gone. That is why they started rebelling in the first place!

Moreover the US let the Iraqi people choose their own leader. Did not work so well. The Syrian people are not permitted to chose as Assad will not let them. And they might not choose well. So just saying "oh they will choose" means nothing at all. See this is why this is a snake pit. There is no easy way out. Once you get in you are fucked. Now you have decades of shit to deal with. Or you just leave, solving nothing and ISIS or some equilivlebt will come right back. You really think this is going to be quick cheap and easy?! Yeah I know the few bombings have not been that costly, but that is the easy and cheap part.

Now while China has not tried rebuilding a country from war, their loans only benefit China. China is not in the charity bussiness and drives a very hard bargain. And they do not care what happens in Syria as long as they can take its resources. But that means Syria would lose control over at least part of its resources. And again you have yet to show how much China is actually going to spend. You cannot bet everything on a vague Chinese (you cannot trust their government) promises to provide some help.

Venuezla's problems go much deeper than oil prices you know. The recent increase has not helped them one bit. Their oil industry is collapsing from corruption and mismanagement, no other oil producer is doing nearly as badly.

Their production is falling due to them not investing in new wells or maintaining old ones. Political hacks who know nothing about oil or bussiness run their oil industry. But the fact that much of the oil they produce has to be sent for China as debt repayment and thus they cannot make any money off it does not help. But their problems go deeper than just oil.

And oil is sold at the market price. Why the hell should the US engage in price fixing with OPEC?!. Russia does not work with OPEC anyways. Oh and price fixing is illegal in the US BTW. What you propose is illegal. US oil is made produced by private companies who cannot legally work together to drive up prices. Nor should they. OPEC can burn in hell. Fuck them. Oil prices are where they should be.

Again a small increase in oil prices would not solve Venezuela's problems anyways.

The Crimeans chose their own leader. Seems to be working quite well for the Crimeans. And yes, Reconstruction isn't possible without a good government, so - got any suggestions for Syria? Other than not Assad. When I ask for suggestions, I ask for who to nominate, not for who to not nominate. You keep on saying that it'll be a hard route. I'm saying that we'll see. Call it optimism. And I think that China's Government's speeches are probably the best indicator of what China's Government will do.

Regarding oil, why would the US work with OPEC/Russia? Probably because of something like this: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... f-defaults

Investors are facing $19 billion in energy defaults as the worst oil crash in a generation leaves drillers struggling to stay afloat.
The wave could begin within days if Energy XXI Ltd., SandRidge Energy Inc. and Goodrich Petroleum Corp. fail to reach agreements with creditors and shareholders. Those are three of at least eight oil and gas producers that have announced missed debt payments, triggering a countdown to default.

So we'll see where that goes.

Well I am not going to go into the Crimea thing. But sure the Syrians might choose a good leader. They might not (like Iraq). But how can the choose? Syria has no civil society, no free speech r press and no free and fair elections. What about that?

Hope is not a strategy. You can hope for the best but always must prepare for the worst. What is the back up plan?

Anyway not only does the Chinese government lie, they never said they are going to cover all or even most of the costs. Not what their terms will be.

As to who I said the King of Jordan. But I do not know every Syrian poltician and intellectual. You would need people with extensive knowledge to choose an interim leader who is good.

On the oil thing it illegal and there is no legal mechanism for it. And the market is over saturated. Some of the weaker less innovative companies will fail and get taken over by the stronger. This will be beneficial.

And no American politician will ever ever talk about or vote for working with the evil OPEC cartel.

But I am loving it. Watching OPEC cry is great. Though time we finished them off for good. Maybe place an oil embargo on them, see how they like it. And watch it shatter as countires leave to escape it.

Oil prices historically were stable until OPEC came along and screwed eveything up by pushing oil bubbles.

[Baltenstein]

But I am loving it. Watching OPEC cry is great. Though time we finished them off for good. Maybe place an oil embargo on them, see how they like it. And watch it shatter as countires leave to escape it.

Seeing how less and less people will even want their oil, thanks to Fracking in the US and regenerative energies in Europe, I don't think an embaro will be necessary. In a couple of decades, they'll be forced to hand out their oil for crumbs.

[Summertime Question Dime]

I really really really like OPEC's logo though.

[Shofercia]

The Crimeans chose their own leader. Seems to be working quite well for the Crimeans. And yes, Reconstruction isn't possible without a good government, so - got any suggestions for Syria? Other than not Assad. When I ask for suggestions, I ask for who to nominate, not for who to not nominate. You keep on saying that it'll be a hard route. I'm saying that we'll see. Call it optimism. And I think that China's Government's speeches are probably the best indicator of what China's Government will do.

Regarding oil, why would the US work with OPEC/Russia? Probably because of something like this: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... f-defaults



So we'll see where that goes.

Well I am not going to go into the Crimea thing. But sure the Syrians might choose a good leader. They might not (like Iraq). But how can the choose? Syria has no civil society, no free speech r press and no free and fair elections. What about that?

Hope is not a strategy. You can hope for the best but always must prepare for the worst. What is the back up plan?

Anyway not only does the Chinese government lie, they never said they are going to cover all or even most of the costs. Not what their terms will be.

As to who I said the King of Jordan. But I do not know every Syrian poltician and intellectual. You would need people with extensive knowledge to choose an interim leader who is good.

On the oil thing it illegal and there is no legal mechanism for it. And the market is over saturated. Some of the weaker less innovative companies will fail and get taken over by the stronger. This will be beneficial.

And no American politician will ever ever talk about or vote for working with the evil OPEC cartel.

But I am loving it. Watching OPEC cry is great. Though time we finished them off for good. Maybe place an oil embargo on them, see how they like it. And watch it shatter as countires leave to escape it.

Oil prices historically were stable until OPEC came along and screwed eveything up by pushing oil bubbles.

You don't know whether or not Syria has a Civil Society. And I don't remember too many American Elections prior to George Washington being chosen, at least not on the national level. Don't underestimate people in the Middle East, they're talented, diligent, hard working, just like people everywhere else.

Regarding oil, I'm just going to point out that by limiting supply, you can increase the price, but I'm not sure if that's legal or not. Then again, I'm not even sure how you'd enforce that. "Thou must produce x amount of oil!" I think it's what OPEC used to do. And yes, the US will most likely not cooperate with OPEC, I was just pointing out a remote possibility, so regarding watching OPEC cry, you're probably right.

[Novus America]

Well I am not going to go into the Crimea thing. But sure the Syrians might choose a good leader. They might not (like Iraq). But how can the choose? Syria has no civil society, no free speech r press and no free and fair elections. What about that?

Hope is not a strategy. You can hope for the best but always must prepare for the worst. What is the back up plan?

Anyway not only does the Chinese government lie, they never said they are going to cover all or even most of the costs. Not what their terms will be.

As to who I said the King of Jordan. But I do not know every Syrian poltician and intellectual. You would need people with extensive knowledge to choose an interim leader who is good.

On the oil thing it illegal and there is no legal mechanism for it. And the market is over saturated. Some of the weaker less innovative companies will fail and get taken over by the stronger. This will be beneficial.

And no American politician will ever ever talk about or vote for working with the evil OPEC cartel.

But I am loving it. Watching OPEC cry is great. Though time we finished them off for good. Maybe place an oil embargo on them, see how they like it. And watch it shatter as countires leave to escape it.

Oil prices historically were stable until OPEC came along and screwed eveything up by pushing oil bubbles.

You don't know whether or not Syria has a Civil Society. And I don't remember too many American Elections prior to George Washington being chosen, at least not on the national level. Don't underestimate people in the Middle East, they're talented, diligent, hard working, just like people everywhere else.

Regarding oil, I'm just going to point out that by limiting supply, you can increase the price, but I'm not sure if that's legal or not. Then again, I'm not even sure how you'd enforce that. "Thou must produce x amount of oil!" I think it's what OPEC used to do. And yes, the US will most likely not cooperate with OPEC, I was just pointing out a remote possibility, so regarding watching OPEC cry, you're probably right.

Yeah, and look who America chose these 2016 elections...

And the US did have a very robust press, civil society and elections at the local level before independence. For every Georg Washington there are hundreds of Yeltsins and Al Malikis.

And after seeing what Iraq chose I have little faith. The Middle East also has among the world's worst education systems, rampant corruption, and backwards social values.

And how can Syria have developed much of a civil society after decades of crushing oppression and poverty?

But again you have still answered how are elections going to be held? Assad will not permit free and fair elections.

[Kernen]

You don't know whether or not Syria has a Civil Society. And I don't remember too many American Elections prior to George Washington being chosen, at least not on the national level. Don't underestimate people in the Middle East, they're talented, diligent, hard working, just like people everywhere else.

There were several elected presidents prior to George Washington.

[Shofercia]

You don't know whether or not Syria has a Civil Society. And I don't remember too many American Elections prior to George Washington being chosen, at least not on the national level. Don't underestimate people in the Middle East, they're talented, diligent, hard working, just like people everywhere else.

Regarding oil, I'm just going to point out that by limiting supply, you can increase the price, but I'm not sure if that's legal or not. Then again, I'm not even sure how you'd enforce that. "Thou must produce x amount of oil!" I think it's what OPEC used to do. And yes, the US will most likely not cooperate with OPEC, I was just pointing out a remote possibility, so regarding watching OPEC cry, you're probably right.

Yeah, and look who America chose these 2016 elections...

And the US did have a very robust press, civil society and elections at the local level before independence. For every Georg Washington there are hundreds of Yeltsins and Al Malikis.

And after seeing what Iraq chose I have little faith. The Middle East also has among the world's worst education systems, rampant corruption, and backwards social values.

And how can Syria have developed much of a civil society after decades of crushing oppression and poverty?

But again you have still answered how are elections going to be held? Assad will not permit free and fair elections.

Yeltsin wasn't democratically chosen, and the 1996 election was arguably the most rigged election in Russia. As for his first term, I don't think that tanks firing at Parliament constitutes voting.

Trump/Clinton was the result of trolling. It's just that Republicans are angrier than Democrats, but both parties effectively trolled Americans with the Clinton/Bush nomination, leading to Clinton/Trump. Lawrence Lessig explains why the primaries are fucked up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mw2z9lV3W1g

And Adam Connover explains what's wrong with the General Election: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90RajY2nrgk

However, that's not the model that I'm proposing for Syria. There is going to be a transition period, where Assad's power is minimized, and I doubt that he'll be asked whether he'll permit free and fair elections. Putin didn't exactly ask him to cooperate with the Kurds either. The countries investing in Syria, Russia & China, need popular support. Before Crimea's Annexation, Putin conducted a shadow poll, and found that there was 75% support in favor of annexation. Would he have annexed Crimea had the exact opposite been the case? Who knows, but I highly doubt it. Both Russia and China are populist, and they are not going to let Assad stay in power, if he cannot rally the majority.

As to how the election will be conducted, now that presents an interesting, and fertile, ground for hypotheticals. Costa already provided a potential, if controversial, leader, maybe he'll add something. Rio Cana's interested in researching stuff like this. I always welcome Risottia's opinion. Obviously we are going to have to be very creative, and ensure that there's no fear among the voters, meaning that, at least for a certain period of time, Assad will be practically powerless.

[Rangila]

Someone might've said about this already, but it is annoying that western media completely ignores the three or so aid routes that Russian and Syrian forces have set up into Aleppo.

[Alsheb]

And yes, Reconstruction isn't possible without a good government, so - got any suggestions for Syria? Other than not Assad. When I ask for suggestions, I ask for who to nominate, not for who to not nominate.

This man? Former economics professor at the University of Damascus (until he criticized the government) and currently working overseas in the UAE. Not Western educated and has his alma mater from the University of Moscow.

Working in the UAE...
Yeah, no thank you.

[Vubaria]

If I mention something as a possibility, that doesn't mean that I want it to happen.

Yeah, that;s certainly how you phrased. Oh wait no you didn't, it's really not out of your wheelhouse considering you unwavering support of Assad and Russia, whom this deal would help the most.

I live in California, so I'm quite happy with low oil prices. However, as someone who can grasp the difference between possibilities and wants, I try to consider the possibilities that I don't want. One of such possibilities can occur because the US has those things called lobbyists, perchance you've heard of them? And lobbyists are employed by oil companies. So while it's something that might not benefit the US as a whole, it will benefit the oil companies, hence it would make sense to mention the possibility of oil companies employing lobbyists to achieve a certain result.

Lobbyists are not magical warriors of the dark gods. They can not convince the entirety of Congress to make decision that would be political suicide. The oil companies are not omnipotent. Purposelly raising oil prices would be almost as bad for the average voter as enacting draft; you really fail to grasp how this would end anyone's career who does it. This is not a dictatorship like Syria, politicians can not do whatever they want and fuck the consequences.

Oh, and if you were to go back to my original post, you'd see that I was making fun of Russia and Saudi Arabia for not wanting price controls, and the last time I checked, neither Russia, nor Saudi Arabia, are part of the US. Let's take at the original post, shall we?

You're suggesting it as a course of action to be taken. Stop trying to hide behind it, you're defending it even as you simultaneously claim you never said it. Why bother defending the idea when A) don't want it, and B) now claim you never said it?

Honestly when arguments devolve into this point when you're just saying "No! I meant X! It was a joke!" or some such nonsense as you always do it's a signal that it's time to leave.

I underlined a certain part of it for you, just in case you want to pretend that I said something I didn't, yet again. No wonder you didn't want to quote all of the actual post in your response, Vubaria, as that would undermine your "glorious triumph" over the nonexistent argument.

I don't understand why you put quotes around something I never even said. That's a line of ad hominem you use if it's something someone actually said. There's no one hear to persuade Shof, this isn't RT you can't make shit up on the spot and get a paycheck for it.

[Vubaria]

This man? Former economics professor at the University of Damascus (until he criticized the government) and currently working overseas in the UAE. Not Western educated and has his alma mater from the University of Moscow.

Working in the UAE...
Yeah, no thank you.

Where do you want him to go considering he was imprisoned and tortured by Assad? Stay in Syria, where he would no doubt have been executed?

[Internationalist Bastard]

If it means anything, UNICEF recently released a figure that around 80% of the deaths in the Syrian conflict are children.If even a quarter of that is true, that's fucking horrible

[Kubra]

If it means anything, UNICEF recently released a figure that around 80% of the deaths in the Syrian conflict are children.If even a quarter of that is true, that's fucking horrible

I don't believe that fr a second.
You'd have to straight up go house to house rounding up children and killing them to approach a figure like that, or have an absurdly young population. Not that the real figures would be any less nauseating, tho.

[Rio Cana]

The US wants the Syrian President out by March 2017 if possible. They do not want him to run for re-election in the Presidential elections of August 2017. The Russians commented in December 2015 on Assad maybe continuing on a little longer. The UN wants him out before the next elections and the opposition to get involved has soon has possible. Then we have the problem of which opposition. Some might be pro-Western but highly corrupt. And no one seems to be asking what do the ordinary Syrians themselves want.

Assad has said he will continue on until the war has ended. The problem he faces is that at least half of his military is being propped up by foreign allies. If not for this propping up his forces would have been overwhelmed ages ago. More likely he would have retreated to the coastal strip and set up his own independent nation.

Some here say Assad is unpopular. That may be true to a certain extent. But I would think he has supporters especially on the coast and Damascus. The places which have remained pretty stable and not seen any heavy fighting. I would think most ordinary Syrians seeing the destruction of Syria and the never ending violence would rather have a stable Syria under Assad, even if they do not really care for him, then continue living in a Syria with no schools, no jobs, no electric power, no water, no supermarkets, crumbling buildings all over and snipers/boobytraps everywhere. Generally, the areas controlled by the government are better off. They have schools, water to a certain extent, power, food and so on. There is even law and order. The government seems to be working. The Syrian President even seems to be doing his job. (see quote)

university students
President Bashar al-Assad on Tuesday issues decree no. 246 for 2016 on granting extra exam courses and extra academic years for university students.
The extra courses are granted to primary university stage students, students in qualifying and specialization studies, and Master’s degree students who failed any subject in the 2015-2016 academic year, and the exams will be held in the 2016-2017 academic year.

The decree also grants primary university stage students, students in qualifying and specialization studies, and Master’s degree students who exhausted opportunities for applying to exams an extra academic year in the 2016-2017 academic year.

Given time, I think Syria could have been politically transformed without the destruction which they say will take 25 years and billions to restore. In the end, if the Syrian President leaves and takes his croonies which is what the US and UN want then I would think Syria will most likely be partitioned since most of the Alawite minority group he represents will not want to be a minority of a Syria they do not control. Centuries ago, the Alawite people tended to live and hide in the mountains since the so called majority did not tolerate them. I do not think they would like a repeat.

Off-topic - Found out they had a car rally just outside Damascus. Thirty contestants.

[Pope Joan]

There are two groups remaining in Aleppo: Christians, who have benefited from Assad's years (his group had profitable communications partnerships with Christians) and ISIS fighter that we persist in calling "activists and rebels".