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

[Socialist Czechia]

Still not sure, though, why western media and politics are full of 'Iran nuclear danger' which doesn't actually exist.

This nuclear danger, though, is very real, unstable and bothers me much more. What about you? Does it fill you with sense of security?

[Starblaydia]

This nuclear danger, though, is very real, unstable and bothers me much more. What about you? Does it fill you with sense of security?

The difference is that India and Pakistan are only likely to fling them at each other, rather than the great Satan of the Western hemisphere. Danger to someone else is not the same as danger to yourself.

[Socialist Czechia]

This nuclear danger, though, is very real, unstable and bothers me much more. What about you? Does it fill you with sense of security?

The difference is that India and Pakistan are only likely to fling them at each other, rather than the great Satan of the Western hemisphere. Danger to someone else is not the same as danger to yourself.

But Iran is still more stable than Pakistan. Latter is likely to became theocratic or militarist hell anytime as well, perhaps even worse one, although it tries hard to look legit.

And sorry if I don't fell very comfortable about likely Pakistani-Indian nuclear war, which will likely lead to WW3 anyway.

[Pilarcraft]

The difference is that India and Pakistan are only likely to fling them at each other, rather than the great Satan of the Western hemisphere. Danger to someone else is not the same as danger to yourself.

But Iran is still more stable than Pakistan. Latter is likely to became theocratic or militarist hell anytime as well, perhaps even worse one, although it tries hard to look legit.

And sorry if I don't fell very comfortable about likely Pakistani-Indian nuclear war, which will likely lead to WW3 anyway.

Iran is already a militarist and a theocratic hell though.

[Socialist Czechia]

But Iran is still more stable than Pakistan. Latter is likely to became theocratic or militarist hell anytime as well, perhaps even worse one, although it tries hard to look legit.

And sorry if I don't fell very comfortable about likely Pakistani-Indian nuclear war, which will likely lead to WW3 anyway.

Iran is already a militarist and a theocratic hell though.

Like Pakistan isn't already military dictatorship, in fact.

When army coups or assassinates whoever is elected or dare to make policy they dislike, it is effectively their rule.

[United Islamic Commonwealth]

Iran is already a militarist and a theocratic hell though.

Like Pakistan isn't already military dictatorship, in fact.

When army coups or assassinates whoever is elected or dare to make policy they dislike, it is effectively their rule.

The last coup was 10 years ago and Pakistan is currently presided over by a President who was democratically elected in 2013 and a Prime Minister elected by Parliament in 2017. Quit fear mongering.

[Socialist Czechia]

Like Pakistan isn't already military dictatorship, in fact.

When army coups or assassinates whoever is elected or dare to make policy they dislike, it is effectively their rule.

The last coup was 10 years ago and Pakistan is currently presided over by a President who was democratically elected in 2013 and a Prime Minister elected by Parliament in 2017. Quit fear mongering.

Look on Egypt, as another example. Would you give it nuclear weapons?
From one dictatorship to another, with Muslim Brotherhood regime in the middle. Pakistan is very much similarly 'stable'.

Unless Pakistanis mercilessly purge islamists and impose government able to truly control army (not government controlled by the army) I must put there 'high liability risk' stick.
They are even unable to purge Taliban from it's territory and tribal law still rules over much of rural areas. That's not reassuring either.

India should totally use pre-emptive strike against their nuclear facilities, without asking. Before Pakistan gets reliable ICBMs.

[MERIZoC]

But Iran is still more stable than Pakistan. Latter is likely to became theocratic or militarist hell anytime as well, perhaps even worse one, although it tries hard to look legit.

And sorry if I don't fell very comfortable about likely Pakistani-Indian nuclear war, which will likely lead to WW3 anyway.

Iran is already a militarist and a theocratic hell though.

lol

[Pilarcraft]

Iran is already a militarist and a theocratic hell though.

lol

Suggesting the Wilayat-i-faqih isn't a recipe for theocracy, and that the Sepaah hasn't effectively been in charge of the country since the 09 protests -now, mind you, the last few months did show that the Ministry of Intelligence (وزارت اطلاعات) and the Sepaah are in some sort of shadow war, but that doesn't change the truth.

[United Islamic Commonwealth]

The last coup was 10 years ago and Pakistan is currently presided over by a President who was democratically elected in 2013 and a Prime Minister elected by Parliament in 2017. Quit fear mongering.

Look on Egypt, as another example. Would you give it nuclear weapons?
From one dictatorship to another, with Muslim Brotherhood regime in the middle. Pakistan is very much similarly 'stable'.

Unless Pakistanis mercilessly purge islamists and impose government able to truly control army (not government controlled by the army) I must put there 'high liability risk' stick.
They are even unable to purge Taliban from it's territory and tribal law still rules over much of rural areas. That's not reassuring either.

India should totally use pre-emptive strike against their nuclear facilities, without asking. Before Pakistan gets reliable ICBMs.

Why does it seem like every solution that you propose is basically "nuke the fuck out of it lmao"? Are you capable of thinking beyond that bull-headed approach?

[Kvatchdom]

Iran is already a militarist and a theocratic hell though.

lol

Nice pfp and sig. Ya Nasrallah

[MERIZoC]

lol

Suggesting the Wilayat-i-faqih isn't a recipe for theocracy, and that the Sepaah hasn't effectively been in charge of the country since the 09 protests -now, mind you, the last few months did show that the Ministry of Intelligence (وزارت اطلاعات) and the Sepaah are in some sort of shadow war, but that doesn't change the truth.

Theocratic, sure. That's not what I was challenging you on.

[Pilarcraft]

Suggesting the Wilayat-i-faqih isn't a recipe for theocracy, and that the Sepaah hasn't effectively been in charge of the country since the 09 protests -now, mind you, the last few months did show that the Ministry of Intelligence (وزارت اطلاعات) and the Sepaah are in some sort of shadow war, but that doesn't change the truth.

Theocratic, sure. That's not what I was challenging you on.

then was it the part where the Sepaah effectively couped a few weeks after the 09 protests? (I mean, they didn't effectively declare the regime toppled so there's that, I guess)

[MERIZoC]

lol

Nice pfp and sig. Ya Nasrallah

tak

Haven't seen you around much recently

[Ascysia]

lol

Nice pfp and sig. Ya Nasrallah

How is it nice?? Nasrallah is a terrorist and so are Hezbollah.

[Ascysia]

The last coup was 10 years ago and Pakistan is currently presided over by a President who was democratically elected in 2013 and a Prime Minister elected by Parliament in 2017. Quit fear mongering.

Look on Egypt, as another example. Would you give it nuclear weapons?
From one dictatorship to another, with Muslim Brotherhood regime in the middle. Pakistan is very much similarly 'stable'.

Unless Pakistanis mercilessly purge islamists and impose government able to truly control army (not government controlled by the army) I must put there 'high liability risk' stick.
They are even unable to purge Taliban from it's territory and tribal law still rules over much of rural areas. That's not reassuring either.

India should totally use pre-emptive strike against their nuclear facilities, without asking. Before Pakistan gets reliable ICBMs.

Agreed 100%. We should've invaded Pakistan long ago. Letting them get nuclear weapons was weak. They're no ally.

Look on Egypt, as another example. Would you give it nuclear weapons?
From one dictatorship to another, with Muslim Brotherhood regime in the middle. Pakistan is very much similarly 'stable'.

Unless Pakistanis mercilessly purge islamists and impose government able to truly control army (not government controlled by the army) I must put there 'high liability risk' stick.
They are even unable to purge Taliban from it's territory and tribal law still rules over much of rural areas. That's not reassuring either.

India should totally use pre-emptive strike against their nuclear facilities, without asking. Before Pakistan gets reliable ICBMs.

Why does it seem like every solution that you propose is basically "nuke the fuck out of it lmao"? Are you capable of thinking beyond that bull-headed approach?

Nuclear weapons should be a last ditch however using them tactically should always be on the table.

[Kvatchdom]

Nice pfp and sig. Ya Nasrallah

tak

Haven't seen you around much recently

I come around now and then.

[Socialist Czechia]

Nuclear weapons should be a last ditch however using them tactically should always be on the table.

Most importantly, pre-emptive strike doesn't have to be nuclear: few waves of guided missiles and few squadrons of fighter bombers should do the work just fine.

Anyway, tactical nukes are not so dangerous, when you realize, there could be worse things: like orbital weapon platforms built only by greatest superpowers, effectively making rest of their world their bitches.
Send doomsday station to around orbit is much harder than built a 'simple' nuke basically almost any state can built.

[Ascysia]

Nuclear weapons should be a last ditch however using them tactically should always be on the table.

Most importantly, pre-emptive strike doesn't have to be nuclear: few waves of guided missiles and few squadrons of fighter bombers should do the work just fine.

Anyway, tactical nukes are not so dangerous, when you realize, there could be worse things: like orbital weapon platforms built only by greatest superpowers, effectively making rest of their world their bitches.
Send doomsday station to around orbit is much harder than built a 'simple' nuke basically almost any state can built.

Okay but building an orbital weapons platform would be a really good idea.

[Kramanica]

Really interesting article from The New York Times about how ISIS managed the territories under their control. Apparently they were just as effective at managing a bureaucracy as they were at killing, which is what allowed them to fund their operations even when pretty much every country in the world had cut of all trade to those areas.

[United Islamic Commonwealth]

Most importantly, pre-emptive strike doesn't have to be nuclear: few waves of guided missiles and few squadrons of fighter bombers should do the work just fine.

Anyway, tactical nukes are not so dangerous, when you realize, there could be worse things: like orbital weapon platforms built only by greatest superpowers, effectively making rest of their world their bitches.
Send doomsday station to around orbit is much harder than built a 'simple' nuke basically almost any state can built.

Okay but building an orbital weapons platform would be a really good idea.

It would also be illegal.

[Ascysia]

Okay but building an orbital weapons platform would be a really good idea.

It would also be illegal.

I don't care about following the law as long as western interests are protected.

[Aeken]

It would also be illegal.

I don't care about following the law as long as western interests are protected.

I'd rather have the Iranians nuclearize rather than to have that happen.

[Ascysia]

I don't care about following the law as long as western interests are protected.

I'd rather have the Iranians nuclearize rather than to have that happen.

I'd rather have the Iranians get nuked than to have that happen.

[Negarakita]

I'd rather have the Iranians nuclearize rather than to have that happen.

I'd rather have the Iranians get nuked than to have that happen.

I'd personally rather a non nuclear solving of the western problem tbh, so that the civilised world isn't damaged by its end.