bittah.com!~ [review] Syria

Tribes 1, Tribes 2 and Midair gaming hub for the Australia and New Zealand communities.
We don't mention vengeance or ascend.

bittah:// Community / Safe House / 

Moderator: Super Moderators

Discord


Online now
  • Recent Topics
1 2 3 4 5

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 5:02 pm

[review] Syria

so NK + Iran fizzled but what happens next in syria should be interesting.
usa/france/england vs syria/iran/russia

as usual this latest flare up is just ... weird. in 2011 it was just another country taking part in the "arab spring" uprisings. since then 100,000+ are dead, the side with the upper hand seems to change every week and as i understand it the rebels started accepting help from jihaadists, mercs and al qaeda(if such a thing exists) which rapidly caused highly confused liveleak commenters to turn against them. they cheer at every LL clip that turns out badly for FSA because another terrorist/muslim has died. "take that snackbar" etc. anyway...

FSA - Free Syrian Army
rebels, supplied by black market and whatever they can steal from SAA

SAA - Syrian Arab Army
army still loyal to assad, supplied by russia

it's a bit confusing, there's like one letter of difference between the leaders asaad (FSA) and assad (SAA) plus the fact that al qaeda (if such a thing exists) was responsible for taking out one of the FSA commanders, who they were helping. i remember radio national in aus used to cross to various locals in syria as the righteous rebels took back their country. after the civilian casualties started spiking thanks to both sides, they don't cross to syria anymore. cities were re-captured and captured again, seems to be a tie now.

present day: "irrefutable" evidence has emerged that assads brother (who runs an elite armor unit) green lit the use of chemical weapons (possible sarin) and killed a lot of civilians. this apparently isn't the first time because UN inspectors were in fucking damascus investigating the use of chemical weapons when the latest incident happened. this means assads brother is either a monumental retard or FSA did it to force an intervention from the west to break the stalemate. who knows?

there seems to be zero chance of a "boots on the ground" kind of intervention from the west. there will however be a crapload of cruise missiles and airstrikes which obama says won't "turn the tide" but is more of a show of force to send a message to any other country considering using chemical weapons (as he eyeballs iran).

fireworks may begin on friday
Nasty Hobbit
bittah, jaded, anti social freak
bittah, jaded, anti social freak
 
Posts: 9672
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2002 11:44 pm
Website: http://nastyhobbit.org
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 5:11 pm

FSA - Free Syrian Army
rebels, supplied by CIA/Israel/US/UK

SAA - Syrian Arab Army
army still loyal to assad, supplied by russia
Fixed that for ya
ImPaLoR
PLEASE EXPLAIN!
PLEASE EXPLAIN!
 
Posts: 4359
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2004 8:45 pm
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 5:23 pm

http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfi ... syria_and/
Copy and pasted from Similar thread. This is all from Memory. None of it will be properly referenced. This may be more detailed that you need, but other may find it useful, and also, some of the issues mentioned earlier on become important later on.
INTRODUCTION Syria is 'run' by the Al-Assad family. It has been for many years. The Assad's are member of the Alawite sect of Shia Islam.
Long story short, pretty soon after Islam was founded, Shia and Sunnis split. And they hate each other in the way that only former friends can.
REGIONAL BALANCE OF POWER Up until 2003, Iran was the only majority Shia country on the planet. Every other muslim country was EITHER 1) A sunni Majority, or 2) Had a Sunni ruler in place. This was the cause of the civil war in Iraq, Saddam had been Sunni, but the country was majority Shia.
Syria is a majority Sunni country, BUT, the ruling group (Asad's) are Shia. There is also a sizeable Christain minority. Iran and Syria are close, as they are both Shia governed countries. But Syria, as mentioned, is different to Iran in that Shia are the minority.
The other major country to note here is Saudia Arabia. Sunni Islam, and really dislike Shia muslims.
ARAB SPRING In Early 2011, a fruit vendor in Tunisia, protesting against corruption and the difficulty in eeking out a subsistence, set himself on fire, and with him, went the whole region. Morroco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Eygpt, Yemen and Syria all saw significant protests against the ruling Parties (Countries where living was not as difficult/the ruling party was popular/ countries were better governed saw some protests, but generally, concessions were made and agreements were reached). They all ended differently.
Morrocco and Alegeria saw the Monarchs make promises/ reprimand the government, promise increased freedoms. This combined with the better local living conditions saw the protests peeter out. Bahrain put down their protests with no aversion to violence. The west kept relatively quiet about this. Tunisia, Yemen and Eygpt saw their governments overthrown.
Only in Libya and Syria did it go to an all out civil war. In Libya, Gaddaffi was already unpopular with the west for his state-sponsorship of terrorism. Assad had generally flown under the radar, but people didn't like him as he was close to Iran (for reasons mentioned earlier).
WHAT RUSSIA AND SYRIA LEARNT FROM LIBYA. Gaddaffi, already a cartoon villian in the west, went out 'guns blazing' against the protester-come-rebels. Uprisings in various cities (Bengahzi etc) were being put down. Libya's limited airforce was proving a decisive factor both militarially and psychologically. Before long, it was clear to the rebels that victory, without air assets would be costly and expensive. To drive this point home, Gaddaffis air assets were hitting civilian and military targets as if to suggest that there was nothing they could do to resist him. No-where to hide.
The UN Secuirty Counsel, as a result of air assets being used in civilians, passed a resolution enforcing a no-fly-zone over Libya. (Note about the UNSC. It is 15 members, but the 5 that count are the 5 victorious powers from WWII, Russia, China, USA, UK and France. They all have a 'Veto' ie, if something is proposed for the UNSC to do, any 1 of these 5 can veto it, and it is dead, no matter the opinion of the other 14 members. In practice this means convincing Russia and China to let the resolutions that US/Uk/'the west' want to go through, to be allowed to pass.)
The idea being that Libyan air planes would no longer be free to bomb civilians. However, at the risk of using imflamatory terminology, China and Russia were upset at how 'Protection of Civilians' turned into 'UK/US providing air support to Rebels to oust Gaddaffi'. The Wests air support sung the tide of battle and Tripoli fell to the Rebels weeks later. Gaddaffi was found in a ditch and shot. Government of 40+ years over. Democracy? We'll see.
RUSSIA: 'FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU'. This left just one country in a state of flux. Syria. Already unpopular with the west due to it's 'closeness' to Iran, Syria's unpopularity deepened when the Government refused to make deomcratic reform (objectionable to 'Western Countries') and started cracking down on/ torturing pro-democracy supporters (really objectionable to 'Western Countries').
Russia was much more attached to Syria. It's closer geographically, culturally, economically. Russia liked the Government in Syria, and frankly, Russia isn't too fussed if you are heavy-handed with protestors. But most importantly. Russia only Port in the Mediterrainian Sea is in Syria. If it loses that, no russian warships could be in the Mediterrainian except as Turkey or UK/Spain permit.
So, for economic, cultural and religious reasons. SYRIA IS NOT SO MUCH IMPORTANT TO THE WEST, AS IT IS IMPORTANT TO RUSSIA AND IRAN. AND THE LOSS OF THE ASSAD GOVERNMENT IN SYRIA WOULD REPRESENT A BLOW TO RUSSIA AND IRAN. ALSO, ALL THE TORTURE AND REPRESSION BY ASSAD MAKES THE SYRIAN GOVERNMENT VERY UNPOPULAR IN THE WEST.
So when Western Governments came to the UNSC and said 'We must do for Syria what we did for Libya', the Russians and Chinese shut that down. No way. Not going to happen. Without a UNSC mandate to intervene, any action would be in breach of international law. Which brings us too...
'WESTERN' DEMOCRATIC VALUES The West likes to support people who will be democratic and follow international laws. To this end, Obama has stated that the use of Chemical weapons in Syria would represent a 'red line' which would trigger NATO intervention, regardless of UNSC approval. Fact is, if you are going to break with international law and invade a country, you need a damn good excuse. Chemcial weapons are such an excuse.
Fair or not, Western Countries are seen as protectors world-wide. When the Genocide in Rwanda happened, it was condemned as a War Crime. But who was responsible for sitting back and doing nothing? US, Canada, UK, France, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Holland, Spain 'Western Countries'. No-one blamed the Chinese or Russians for their failure to act.
Casting themselves in this role, it is these countries that people look to for support against dictators.
CHANGING NATURE OF THE REBELLIION The rebels, when originally formed, were seen in a almost universally positive light, defectors from a corrupt regieme, and brave freedom fighters looking to overthrow a dictator.
As time went on, and as more and more focus was placed on the rebels, Western Governments grew suspicious that these were not/were no longer brave freedom fighters, but Al Qieda/ Taliban/ Anti-West fighters, who were interesting in using the fluid state of Syria to win the rebellion and set up a hardline muslim country.
WHERE DOES THAT ALL LEAVE US? Time and again the West calls for democratic reform. And will support rebels with this goal. The West finds the repression of protests, along with the torture of protesters and the use of chemical weapons particularly objectionable. This, and Syria's relationship to Iran, and Russia, particularly the projection of Russian sea power, has meant that the west sees Syria as a Government, which if it were to fall, would not be missed. Knowing that UNSC approval for military intervention would be impossible, President Obama stated that UNSC approval or no, we'd go and take out the Syrians if Chemical weapons were used.
Chemcials weapons have been used, but we can not confirm by whom.
So we watch, and we wait. Russia has made it obvious that it will stand by Syria. Whether that means actual military actions against US and other western nations should they try to intervene in Syria, it's not clear. Also the problem of after-math rears its ugly head. Since the 'Red line' comment, there are more and more indicators, that the Rebels might not just be freedom fights, but islamists and others, who would establish a Islamic state. It is important to note, that this would be a Sunnni islamic state, as most of these fighters come from Sunni countries. And if there was a Sunni Islamic state, you can be fairly sure that teh Shia minority would have a torrid time, after the events of the past few weeks. A genocide could be possible. And stopping that sort of shit is why the West wanted to go in to Syria in the first place. Annoyingly, it could be that Assad would be the least brutal ruler of Syria.
CONCLUSIONS The Fact is, who is running Syria and why we should be involved is not as important to us as it is to other Countries. Russia and Iran both, for different reasons, like the Syrian Government and want it to stay in Power. Saudia Arabia, USA's close ally, dislike Syria, for mainly religious reasons, and want them gone. And finally, Western Governments find their approach to the pro-democracy protests as well as the use of chemical weapons an unacceptable way for a government to behave.
The West doesn't like them, the West regional allies don't like them. And they support the West Geo-political opponents. Thats the reason.
EDIT: For Spelling EDIT 2: Bashir changed to Assad. I shouldn't really write as though i'm on first name terms with the President of Syria.
EDIT 3: I confused the government response in Yemen with Bahrain. And forgot that the Egypt controlled an entrance to the Mediterranean. Fixed mow.
Bash
bittah tardleader
bittah tardleader
 
Posts: 3370
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 10:47 pm
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:05 pm

You seem to be missing an important part of all reviews.

Hobbs, what do you award this conflict out of 10?
The reports of recent gas attacks, either confirmed or not, surely has to gain some points.
MetalSutton
annoyed
 
Posts: 741
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 5:27 am
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:09 pm

PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR PETRODOLLAR
shikarri
bittah
 
Posts: 914
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 3:52 am
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:36 pm

Why would Assad use chemical weapons when he was winning and knew what the repercussions were?

Could it be that he was framed by the rebels who have a history of using chemical weapons AND making false videos?

Also USA/Israel jumping the gun in declaring Assad the perp when the UN inspectors hadn't even arrived.

Not that the USA have ever listened to the UN.
Funks
unsettled
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:35 pm
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 7:22 pm

Based on the little evidence I know, it would be the Syrian government who did the attacks. They're in a losingish battle and they're getting desperate... especially when they have a stockpile of chemical weapons they've admitted to having.
KraKen
bittah
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2002 11:19 pm
ICQ: 117641474
Yahoo Messenger: friend
AOL: suck
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 7:27 pm

Based on the little evidence I know, it would be the Syrian government who did the attacks. They're in a losingish battle and they're getting desperate... especially when they have a stockpile of chemical weapons they've admitted to having.
All is fair in love and war? :P
(not really)
Many countries stockpile chemical and nuclear weapons - The US are the only country to have used a nuke offensively.

Anyways, The US surely can't fucking have an opinion on chemical warfare.................. Vietnam (Agent orange), Iraq/Afganistan - depleted uranium rounds, white phosphorus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phos ... _on_people

This is just ANOTHER blatant excuse for the US to make a war - <insert false flag event like 9/11 here>

So the warmachine can go fuckitself for all i care.
Last edited by ImPaLoR on Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ImPaLoR
PLEASE EXPLAIN!
PLEASE EXPLAIN!
 
Posts: 4359
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2004 8:45 pm
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 7:44 pm

Hasn't china warned us as well?

Edit: what shik said!
XU1
bittah doyen
bittah doyen
 
Posts: 4474
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 10:27 am
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 7:50 pm

aren't we overdue for a mega cluster fuck world war anyway?

Let the usa invade and watch russia and china go to arms, iran and nk will jump on their bandwagons and shit will really hit the fan. Could be fun until we see the mushroom clouds... of course that is only if everyone suddenly forgets about all the essential economic ties they have with each other. -_-
ta|on
calm
 
Posts: 214
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 7:23 pm
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 7:53 pm

I have some great business ideas for war profiteering, so please go start ww3.
Bash
bittah tardleader
bittah tardleader
 
Posts: 3370
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 10:47 pm
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:26 pm

I have some great business ideas for war profiteering, so please go start ww3.
Like selling your deepfried roaches by the abandoned highway after the nuclear holocaust?
ImPaLoR
PLEASE EXPLAIN!
PLEASE EXPLAIN!
 
Posts: 4359
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2004 8:45 pm
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:25 pm

Why would Assad use chemical weapons when he was winning and knew what the repercussions were?

Could it be that he was framed by the rebels who have a history of using chemical weapons AND making false videos?

Also USA/Israel jumping the gun in declaring Assad the perp when the UN inspectors hadn't even arrived.

Not that the USA have ever listened to the UN.
My first thought was how do we know who was at fault. I would not put it past either side to take out civilians and pass blame onto the other side. Then the govt sent a fighter in a bombed the crap out of the area. Why would they do that?
Duff5000
bittah freak
bittah freak
 
Posts: 1825
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 10:11 am
ICQ: 23133155
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:58 pm

I like how Obama was awarded a Nobel peace prize when he's about to have troops deployed in 7 countries.
This is just ANOTHER blatant excuse for the US to make a war - <insert false flag event like 9/11 here>
I agree. This whole event is just screaming false flag. Might have a lot to do with that Oil pipeline between iran, iraq and syria
shikarri
bittah
 
Posts: 914
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 3:52 am
[ignore]

Post » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:12 pm

interestingly the victims did not display the symptoms of sarin or most nerve toxins

sarin, VX etc are all high toxicity on the victims skin meaning those people touching them would start to show symptoms, they apparently also have other physical symptoms we didnt really see like alot of twitching, violent spasms and extremely dilated pupils

from the footage we saw its inconclusive but the issue of sarin remaining highly toxic on the skin is important as u could clearly see people handling the dead and injured without having the effects themselves

false flag is possible but who knows, all i know is no matter what richy richs wins and loads of arabs die
whitewhale
bittah, jaded, anti social freak
bittah, jaded, anti social freak
 
Posts: 6549
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 1:22 pm
[ignore]

Post » Thu Aug 29, 2013 12:31 am

EVIDENCE suggests that some kind of chemical "substance" was used in Syria that may have killed more than 1000 people, but any military strike in response must first gain UN approval.
Like we're all chomping at the bit for the US to show em whos boss?

Fucking bullshit mainstream media outlets.
ImPaLoR
PLEASE EXPLAIN!
PLEASE EXPLAIN!
 
Posts: 4359
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2004 8:45 pm
[ignore]

Post » Thu Aug 29, 2013 1:33 am

Bomb the Serbs for they are running Nazi like death camps.

Image

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xox7TR11evI[/youtube]


Iraq needs to be bombed. Saddam has soldiers ripping babies out of incubators in Kuwait and many have died. How much longer can we let this go on?
JackBootedThug
Official bittah.com Chief Conspiracy Theorist
 
Posts: 1182
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2002 6:02 pm
ICQ: 5179150
Yahoo Messenger: Skinski7
Location: Banana Republic USA
[ignore]

Post » Thu Aug 29, 2013 8:51 am

Re: [review] Syria

This will be interesting & pretty scary to see go down given how hard Russia are backing Syria (mainly cos of their massive naval base there which is one of their most important strategic bases)

Here in the UK since the alleged chem attack the press has ramped up in a way that makes US/UK intervention seem like a foregone conclusion - following a similar pattern to pre-Iraq invasion, with big "breakdowns" of forces available to be deployed, locations of Syrian airbases and even "known chemical weapons facilities" (literally 30+ on the map I saw today).

One can only hope the spectre of Russian retaliation & subsequent/likely global escalation that could follow will keep these hawks at bay, but the signs in the media don't look too good IMO.
Iscariot
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 3279
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2002 11:03 pm
Website: http://www.team-ava.com
[ignore]

Post » Thu Aug 29, 2013 9:05 am

Man, if the US go into yet another country, then a big fat oh em gee + picard double facepalm
Deepjay
bittah, jaded, anti social freak
bittah, jaded, anti social freak
 
Posts: 13696
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 1:33 am
[ignore]

Post » Thu Aug 29, 2013 9:13 am

i would be extremely surprised to see an actual US invasion like iraq or afghanistan

more like standard divide and conquer, support the rebel, get him to power then replace with puppet

normally works and its cheaper...saddam was just to clever and stubborn the second time round
whitewhale
bittah, jaded, anti social freak
bittah, jaded, anti social freak
 
Posts: 6549
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 1:22 pm
[ignore]