Middle East Conflict Megathread (Syria, Iraq, Yemen, etc)

[Shofercia]

If Al Sham would be so kind as to genuinely negotiate and stop raping women randomly, Russia would be glad to stop bombing them. Also, Russia doesn't want to leave Syria and there's still work to be done. It's just easier to let Turkey fail against the Kurds, than it is to explain to Erdogan why what he's doing is wrong.

Doesn't matter. Enemies in war will obviously attack one another, whether they hate each other or not.

Russia does want to leave Syria and has effectively made efforts to do so ever since it got involved. It has already been forced to put in more resources than it ever wanted.

The Turkish intervention/invasion is simply something Russia doesn't care about, and thus it isn't going to waste any resources on it.

The resources that the Russians are spending on Syria are minuscule on a national level. Russia is in Syria to stay. Do you know how much resources Russia spent on Syria? Because claiming that Russia was forced to put in more resources than anticipated, is a very tough claim to defend.

Russia has a de facto alliance with Syria, but the Syrian Government hasn't yet regained enough Syrian land for Russia to make that statement. The better tactic would be to limit supply lines to the US base, and force the Americans to withdraw, which would require more land acquisition. If in 2015 someone would've said that the Russo-Iranian intervention would've caused the Syrians to regain all land west of the Euphrates, he or she would've been painted as a crazy conspiracy theorist by the press; today it's a reality.

Russia won't make such a statement though, not even when Syria has regained more land. Russia doesn't want to commit to Syria in such a way, nor does it need to.

Russia is committed in Syria. Will Russia make such a statement? Probably not, but Russia may attempt to get countries to leave Syria through other means. There's no point in restoring Assad only to watch Syria be divided again.

[Durin VII]

You're right and wrong at the same time.
I think it really depends on what countries you include into the 'coalition', and what you see as 'support'.

In that case, what do you consider the coalition and how do you define support?

Well there's only one formalized coaliton, which would be the one against Daesh (CJTF–OIR). Thing is, that coalition includes many nations with various degrees of conflicting interests in Syria. Some of them certainly support the SDF, some the FSA, some Al-Qaeda and others are neutral in the matter.

Opposed to the actual coalition, the 'coalition' is generally viewed as a group of western states, mostly NATO members, although sometimes Turkey is not included. All with all it becomes a matter of who you ask when talking about the coalition.

I honestly don't know what i consider the coalition, i suppose the formalized one, but then, they only exist to fight Daesh and nothing more. When discussing such matters i usually prefer to mention the countries themselves rather than something as simple as 'the coalition'. I just named them 'the coalition' earlier due to the fact that it would become a long list of nations if i'd have to list them all seperatly.

As for support, i'd say political and/or military support in any way, shape or form.

Doesn't matter. Enemies in war will obviously attack one another, whether they hate each other or not.

Russia does want to leave Syria and has effectively made efforts to do so ever since it got involved. It has already been forced to put in more resources than it ever wanted.

The Turkish intervention/invasion is simply something Russia doesn't care about, and thus it isn't going to waste any resources on it.

The resources that the Russians are spending on Syria are minuscule on a national level. Russia is in Syria to stay. Do you know how much resources Russia spent on Syria? Because claiming that Russia was forced to put in more resources than anticipated, is a very tough claim to defend.

I think you underestimate the costs of a war. Russia is not an economic powerhouse and cannot afford longterm deployments like the US can. For several times already Russia has tried to pull back from Syria, which for a part succeeded, but for the other part not as it got pulled back in whenever shit happens. For Russia peace has become a priority in the war, hence why it is cooperating with Turkey.
I do not have the actual numbers, but it's quite obvious looking at the movements of Russia and the situation its in.

Russia won't make such a statement though, not even when Syria has regained more land. Russia doesn't want to commit to Syria in such a way, nor does it need to.

Russia is committed in Syria. Will Russia make such a statement? Probably not, but Russia may attempt to get countries to leave Syria through other means. There's no point in restoring Assad only to watch Syria be divided again.

There's a big difference between being de facto committed, and being committed by official means. Nobody knows what the war might bring, being officially committed would only force Russia to step up its military efforst even more, something Rusisa is avoiding at all costs.

[Costa Fierro]

https://twitter.com/CivilWarMap/status/960117939423862784

Turkey has some lovely new friends.

We're implying Turkey wasn't already supporting Islamists.

[The Knockout Gun Gals]

https://twitter.com/CivilWarMap/status/960117939423862784

Turkey has some lovely new friends.

We're implying Turkey wasn't already supporting Islamists.

Islamists more or less refer to states/nations/people who supported the ideology of Islam.

The group, on the other hand, use Islam as a basis of their actions. Those two are different terms.

[Costa Fierro]

We're implying Turkey wasn't already supporting Islamists.

Islamists more or less refer to states/nations/people who supported the ideology of Islam.

The group, on the other hand, use Islam as a basis of their actions. Those two are different terms.

I'm only going to give you one answer: I am right.

[Neanderthaland]

https://twitter.com/CivilWarMap/status/960117939423862784

Turkey has some lovely new friends.

You know, I used to try to defend Turkey. But there comes a point where you either have to give up on making excuses for them or else become like Shofercia.

[The Knockout Gun Gals]

https://twitter.com/CivilWarMap/status/960117939423862784

Turkey has some lovely new friends.

You know, I used to try to defend Turkey. But there comes a point where you either have to give up on making excuses for them or else become like Shofercia.

Turkey's foreign policy is an adaptive one.

[MERIZoC]

https://twitter.com/CivilWarMap/status/960117939423862784

Turkey has some lovely new friends.

We're implying Turkey wasn't already supporting Islamists.

Not particularly, just showing that these wonderful fellows are now helping out in the Afrin invasion.

[MERIZoC]

We're implying Turkey wasn't already supporting Islamists.

Islamists more or less refer to states/nations/people who supported the ideology of Islam.

The group, on the other hand, use Islam as a basis of their actions. Those two are different terms.

Islamists refer to anyone who takes a theocratic and fundamentalist approach to Islam, which Zenki are.

[Shofercia]

The resources that the Russians are spending on Syria are minuscule on a national level. Russia is in Syria to stay. Do you know how much resources Russia spent on Syria? Because claiming that Russia was forced to put in more resources than anticipated, is a very tough claim to defend.

I think you underestimate the costs of a war. Russia is not an economic powerhouse and cannot afford longterm deployments like the US can. For several times already Russia has tried to pull back from Syria, which for a part succeeded, but for the other part not as it got pulled back in whenever shit happens. For Russia peace has become a priority in the war, hence why it is cooperating with Turkey.
I do not have the actual numbers, but it's quite obvious looking at the movements of Russia and the situation its in.

Again, do you know how much this war is costing Russia? Because I don't think you do. Russia is deploying Special Forces and front line units, whose deployments are much easier to accomplish than the deployments of the regular armed forces. I did a Google search for the costs, skipped across the usual Russophobic drivel, (if an article is titled "the Syrian War will cost Russians Dearly, waaa!" I omitted that,) and came across this nice tidbit: http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/h ... ia/ri16759

There are two ways to count the cost of the Syrian operation. The first one is to count each expense: a cruise missile or a bomb dropped on terrorists, a ton of kerosene, one-hour flight time, salaries and uniforms for soldiers, shipping from Russia to Syria and so on. Journalists competed over experts able to count every element of the mosaic, coming up with 2.5 to 4 million EUR a day. Even the latter is not so much, bringing a year of the Syrian to 1.46 billion.

However, there is another equally reasonable way to count. Consider what those planes, pilots and ships would be doing if there were no operation in Syria. They would still be flying, burning fuel, and wearing out equipment bombing Russian testing ranges instead of Islamic terrorists. Supply and patrol ships would go on training exercises. 3M-54 Klub missile systems would be launched on training targets.

So let's say that the war actually costs Russia $1.5 billion a year. The GDP of Russia is $1,283 billion. That would place the war costs at 0.12% of Russia's GDP. But that, of course, neglects Russia's gains from the war. I am willing to bet you quite a bit that as a result of the war, Russian Arms Sales went up. Indeed, Russian Arms sales to the Middle East were worth... https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/ ... evels.html

Dubai Airshow 2017, one of the largest and most successful air shows in the world, ended on Nov.16, having drawn over 79,000 trade visitors, up around 20% over the last version of the event in 2015. The total order tally is $113.8 billion in orders. It nearly tripled from the $37.2 billion signed two years ago.

So Russia made $76.6 billion on arms sales increase. Of course that's gross revenue, but I doubt that net revenue would be any less than a quarter of said amount. Unlike the US in the Middle East, Russia is actually making money on this war, while kicking ass and taking names. But what of the servicemen being killed?

According to the Special Forces Doctrine, if you have less than 1% deaths, you are doing good. How many Russian Special Forces deployed to Syria? I'm not sure, but the Russians only had 45 deaths. So to summarize: the state is making money, the country is building its prestige, the servicemen are getting bonuses and the families of those who died are compensated for life. Tell me again, why would Russia stop?

Russia is committed in Syria. Will Russia make such a statement? Probably not, but Russia may attempt to get countries to leave Syria through other means. There's no point in restoring Assad only to watch Syria be divided again.

There's a big difference between being de facto committed, and being committed by official means. Nobody knows what the war might bring, being officially committed would only force Russia to step up its military efforst even more, something Rusisa is avoiding at all costs.

Why would Russia need to step up its military commitment? The current military commitment has been kicking ass and taking names. Why should said commitment be increased? It should be extended, and it will be extended. Russia's back, and Russia's there to stay, something the Kurds might want to appreciate, because at least the Russians will keep Assad off of their backs.

[Shofercia]

https://twitter.com/CivilWarMap/status/960117939423862784

Turkey has some lovely new friends.

You know, I used to try to defend Turkey. But there comes a point where you either have to give up on making excuses for them or else become like Shofercia.

I'm not defending Turkey; I'm saying that they'll fail. That's not a defense.

[Neanderthaland]

You know, I used to try to defend Turkey. But there comes a point where you either have to give up on making excuses for them or else become like Shofercia.

I'm not defending Turkey; I'm saying that they'll fail. That's not a defense.

Oh, we all know it's not Turkey you have a blind spot for.

[Socialist Czechia]

Looking on the Somalia and more recent example, Libya, is there really, literally any, viable alternative to Syrian regime?

If Assad's regime will fall, I see only worse things to come. I know you hate it to admit people, but he's still the best option here. Yes, despite all the nasty chemical and slaughtery things.

[Improved werpland]

Looking on the Somalia and more recent example, Libya, is there really, literally any, viable alternative to Syrian regime?

If Assad's regime will fall, I see only worse things to come. I know you hate it to admit people, but he's still the best option here. Yes, despite all the nasty chemical and slaughtery things.

The Syrian regime isn’t an option. It’s Iranian puppet regime V.S. Turkish puppet regime V.S. PKK.

[Pilarcraft]

Looking on the Somalia and more recent example, Libya, is there really, literally any, viable alternative to Syrian regime?

If Assad's regime will fall, I see only worse things to come. I know you hate it to admit people, but he's still the best option here. Yes, despite all the nasty chemical and slaughtery things.

The Syrian regime isn’t an option. It’s Iranian puppet regime V.S. Turkish puppet regime V.S. PKK.

honestly, I'd take an SDF ruled Syria over any other option any day. they're the best option (and that's not even saying much)

[Durin VII]

I think you underestimate the costs of a war. Russia is not an economic powerhouse and cannot afford longterm deployments like the US can. For several times already Russia has tried to pull back from Syria, which for a part succeeded, but for the other part not as it got pulled back in whenever shit happens. For Russia peace has become a priority in the war, hence why it is cooperating with Turkey.
I do not have the actual numbers, but it's quite obvious looking at the movements of Russia and the situation its in.

Again, do you know how much this war is costing Russia? Because I don't think you do. Russia is deploying Special Forces and front line units, whose deployments are much easier to accomplish than the deployments of the regular armed forces. I did a Google search for the costs, skipped across the usual Russophobic drivel, (if an article is titled "the Syrian War will cost Russians Dearly, waaa!" I omitted that,) and came across this nice tidbit: http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/h ... ia/ri16759

There are two ways to count the cost of the Syrian operation. The first one is to count each expense: a cruise missile or a bomb dropped on terrorists, a ton of kerosene, one-hour flight time, salaries and uniforms for soldiers, shipping from Russia to Syria and so on. Journalists competed over experts able to count every element of the mosaic, coming up with 2.5 to 4 million EUR a day. Even the latter is not so much, bringing a year of the Syrian to 1.46 billion.

However, there is another equally reasonable way to count. Consider what those planes, pilots and ships would be doing if there were no operation in Syria. They would still be flying, burning fuel, and wearing out equipment bombing Russian testing ranges instead of Islamic terrorists. Supply and patrol ships would go on training exercises. 3M-54 Klub missile systems would be launched on training targets.

So let's say that the war actually costs Russia $1.5 billion a year. The GDP of Russia is $1,283 billion. That would place the war costs at 0.12% of Russia's GDP. But that, of course, neglects Russia's gains from the war. I am willing to bet you quite a bit that as a result of the war, Russian Arms Sales went up. Indeed, Russian Arms sales to the Middle East were worth... https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/ ... evels.html

Dubai Airshow 2017, one of the largest and most successful air shows in the world, ended on Nov.16, having drawn over 79,000 trade visitors, up around 20% over the last version of the event in 2015. The total order tally is $113.8 billion in orders. It nearly tripled from the $37.2 billion signed two years ago.

So Russia made $76.6 billion on arms sales increase. Of course that's gross revenue, but I doubt that net revenue would be any less than a quarter of said amount. Unlike the US in the Middle East, Russia is actually making money on this war, while kicking ass and taking names. But what of the servicemen being killed?

According to the Special Forces Doctrine, if you have less than 1% deaths, you are doing good. How many Russian Special Forces deployed to Syria? I'm not sure, but the Russians only had 45 deaths. So to summarize: the state is making money, the country is building its prestige, the servicemen are getting bonuses and the families of those who died are compensated for life. Tell me again, why would Russia stop?

Good job on getting a whole lot of nothing into the argument. I'm not even going to bother responding to it as you clearly miss the entire point of my post, the position of the Russian Federation and their goals in Syria.

There's a big difference between being de facto committed, and being committed by official means. Nobody knows what the war might bring, being officially committed would only force Russia to step up its military efforst even more, something Rusisa is avoiding at all costs.

Why would Russia need to step up its military commitment? The current military commitment has been kicking ass and taking names. Why should said commitment be increased? It should be extended, and it will be extended. Russia's back, and Russia's there to stay, something the Kurds might want to appreciate, because at least the Russians will keep Assad off of their backs.

Because an official alliance would require exactly that.

Oh and no, it won't be extended and the Russians, as a deployed force, won't be there to stay at all.

Looking on the Somalia and more recent example, Libya, is there really, literally any, viable alternative to Syrian regime?

If Assad's regime will fall, I see only worse things to come. I know you hate it to admit people, but he's still the best option here. Yes, despite all the nasty chemical and slaughtery things.

Never hated to admit it, and have been saying it since 2012. The current government is the 'best' option out there in Syria.

[Socialist Czechia]

IMO best option would be Syrian Arab Army/SDF alliance: comprehensive agreement, like - SDF must swore loyalty to President Assad and he, in turn, must recognize SDF as autonomous region of Syria, with at least same degree of autonomy as Iraqi Kurdistan.

That would be pure, real compromise: because, people forget that, compromise is, when both sides hate it and it's born of pure pragmatism.

[Improved werpland]

The Syrian regime isn’t an option. It’s Iranian puppet regime V.S. Turkish puppet regime V.S. PKK.

honestly, I'd take an SDF ruled Syria over any other option any day. they're the best option (and that's not even saying much)

SDF taking over Syria would be the most just outcome to be honest, but Apo and his organization are still terrorists. I don't understand why they can't retreat back across the Euphrates. Erdogan wasn't even bombing them before they crossed that IIRC.

[Pilarcraft]

honestly, I'd take an SDF ruled Syria over any other option any day. they're the best option (and that's not even saying much)

SDF taking over Syria would be the most just outcome to be honest, but Apo and his organization are still terrorists. I don't understand why they can't retreat back across the Euphrates. Erdogan wasn't even bombing them before they crossed that IIRC.

Apo himself hasn't really done shit since... say... 1999. He's been in prison, IIRC. but in all seriousness, didn't both PKK and YPG declare that they weren't two wings of a single organization? like, afaik YPG (and much less the not even Kurdish exclusive SDF) aren't in tow with the PKK atm.
Do correct me if I'm wrong tho.

[Improved werpland]

SDF taking over Syria would be the most just outcome to be honest, but Apo and his organization are still terrorists. I don't understand why they can't retreat back across the Euphrates. Erdogan wasn't even bombing them before they crossed that IIRC.

Apo himself hasn't really done shit since... say... 1999. He's been in prison, IIRC. but in all seriousness, didn't both PKK and YPG declare that they weren't two wings of a single organization? like, afaik YPG (and much less the not even Kurdish exclusive SDF) aren't in tow with the PKK atm.
Do correct me if I'm wrong tho.

Yea but everyone knows they’re just saying that. The CIA even recognizes them as a branch of the PKK on their website.

[Durin VII]

IMO best option would be Syrian Arab Army/SDF alliance: comprehensive agreement, like - SDF must swore loyalty to President Assad and he, in turn, must recognize SDF as autonomous region of Syria, with at least same degree of autonomy as Iraqi Kurdistan.

That would be pure, real compromise: because, people forget that, compromise is, when both sides hate it and it's born of pure pragmatism.

Such agreement wouldn't solve anything except for the bloodshed between the two, which at the moment is almost nonexistent. The conflict in Syria is about the whole of Syria, and thus lies the solution with the whole of Syria.

honestly, I'd take an SDF ruled Syria over any other option any day. they're the best option (and that's not even saying much)

SDF taking over Syria would be the most just outcome to be honest, but Apo and his organization are still terrorists. I don't understand why they can't retreat back across the Euphrates. Erdogan wasn't even bombing them before they crossed that IIRC.

'SDF taking over Syria would be the most just outcome to be honest'
About as realistic as the FSA taking over, not going to happen in the end.

[Pilarcraft]

IMO best option would be Syrian Arab Army/SDF alliance: comprehensive agreement, like - SDF must swore loyalty to President Assad and he, in turn, must recognize SDF as autonomous region of Syria, with at least same degree of autonomy as Iraqi Kurdistan.

That would be pure, real compromise: because, people forget that, compromise is, when both sides hate it and it's born of pure pragmatism.

Such agreement wouldn't solve anything except for the bloodshed between the two, which at the moment is almost nonexistent. The conflict in Syria is about the whole of Syria, and thus lies the solution with the whole of Syria.

SDF taking over Syria would be the most just outcome to be honest, but Apo and his organization are still terrorists. I don't understand why they can't retreat back across the Euphrates. Erdogan wasn't even bombing them before they crossed that IIRC.

'SDF taking over Syria would be the most just outcome to be honest'
About as realistic as the FSA taking over, not going to happen in the end.

we're talking about the Best and most Just outcome, not the most possible one. though, it is possible, and it actually might happen. if they're smart at how they do it.

[Durin VII]

Such agreement wouldn't solve anything except for the bloodshed between the two, which at the moment is almost nonexistent. The conflict in Syria is about the whole of Syria, and thus lies the solution with the whole of Syria.



'SDF taking over Syria would be the most just outcome to be honest'
About as realistic as the FSA taking over, not going to happen in the end.

we're talking about the Best and most Just outcome, not the most possible one. though, it is possible, and it actually might happen. if they're smart at how they do it.

Arguing about the best and most just outcome, rather than the one that can be achieved, is pointless. It's obvious that the best and most just outcome would be to hand over Syria to Liechtenstein.

In any case, no, it really cannot happen no matter how they handle the matter. The SDF simply doesn't have the power or the support to take on the government.

[Pope Joan]

So now it looks like we are trying to smear Syria with the "OMG CHEMICAL WEAPONS!" scam we pulled in Iraq and Libya.

Just stop it already. The tired old ploy is tired and old

[Improved werpland]

So now it looks like we are trying to smear Syria with the "OMG CHEMICAL WEAPONS!" scam we pulled in Iraq and Libya.

Just stop it already. The tired old ploy is tired and old

What if it's true though? Those "secular Arab dictatorships" tend to do things like that.