Need a cliff notes outline of Syria situation

[gatoveintisiete]

I thought we learned that when you topple dictators in the Middle East that you create power vacuums that tend to make the countries more unstable and don't necessarily breed democracies, so why arm rebels against Assad in the first place? 

[MakeItRain]

Yeah, you added the political/geopolitical interest that brings me much closer to agreeing with you. We have never ever ever made a humanitarian decision based solely or even mostly based on economics. I actually the scale of the atrocities being committed matters a lot as well. The rest of the world had the luxury the last couple of years of hiding behind the political complexities  of not getting involved in the humanitarian efforts but that's becoming much harder to do. You can certainly point to other atrocities around the world that we have ignored and you can make the claim that economics are the motivation not to get involved but I'm not that cynical. There are several issues in Africa you can point to that we didn't get involved in but I think that's more about the Somalian failure than anything else.

[MakeItRain]

I thought we learned that when you topple dictators in the Middle East that you create power vacuums that tend to make the countries more unstable and don't necessarily breed democracies, so why arm rebels against Assad in the first place?

In fairness those two things happened almost simultaneously. Assad was gassing his own people and we tried something, it clearly didn't work. That's my frustration with dax not wanting to do anything but shove this down our throats, no one is arguing that we did the right thing in Syria.

[gatoveintisiete]

Do you believe Sryrian people would be in better shape if we had not got involved?

[114Hickory]

Yeah, you added the political/geopolitical interest that brings me much closer to agreeing with you. We have never ever ever made a humanitarian decision based solely or even mostly based on economics. I actually the scale of the atrocities being committed matters a lot as well. The rest of the world had the luxury the last couple of years of hiding behind the political complexities  of not getting involved in the humanitarian efforts but that's becoming much harder to do. You can certainly point to other atrocities around the world that we have ignored and you can make the claim that economics are the motivation not to get involved but I'm not that cynical. There are several issues in Africa you can point to that we didn't get involved in but I think that's more about the Somalian failure than anything else.

Thanks for the response.  I suppose I'm a bit more cynical, especially regarding the situations in Africa which you raised. 

[MakeItRain]

Yeah, you added the political/geopolitical interest that brings me much closer to agreeing with you. We have never ever ever made a humanitarian decision based solely or even mostly based on economics. I actually the scale of the atrocities being committed matters a lot as well. The rest of the world had the luxury the last couple of years of hiding behind the political complexities  of not getting involved in the humanitarian efforts but that's becoming much harder to do. You can certainly point to other atrocities around the world that we have ignored and you can make the claim that economics are the motivation not to get involved but I'm not that cynical. There are several issues in Africa you can point to that we didn't get involved in but I think that's more about the Somalian failure than anything else.

Thanks for the response.  I suppose I'm a bit more cynical, especially regarding the situations in Africa which you raised.

I think some of the issues in Africa in some ways mirror what's happening in Syria. There's no defined good v. evil and it's a whole lot of innocent people paying the price. In Africa it's usually a "democratically elected" regime against some rogue warlord kidnapping boys to fight against the army.

[Woogy]

Anybody - particularly diplomat, politician, or journalist - who read this 25 years ago and thought Syria of the last 3-4 years would be any different is just a dumb ass.

Hama Rules: From Beirut to Jerusalem:Friedman

[sonofdaxjones]

I mean I don't know about the other "libs" you speak of, but on this blog the only Syria conversations I can remember are ones when people are talking about the humanitarian angle then you thunder in with some long winded partisan rant filled with dax catchphrases.

I see your frustration that no one will engage the political conversation though. The closest I'll get is to say unfortunately there is no right answer. There's nothing the United States, Russia, or the UN can do to fix this. Best solution is for Assad to get assassinated and hope that there is a Democratic election that doesn't elect another murderous despot or that allows ISIS to control Syria.

The reason it's unfixable is because the only course of action the US has sought since day one is regime change.   No you can continue to spew your partisan deflection bullshit while avoiding reality all day long.  But that doesn't change the fact that this war exists because of the United States and its surrogates want it to be this way. 

[MakeItRain]

I mean I don't know about the other "libs" you speak of, but on this blog the only Syria conversations I can remember are ones when people are talking about the humanitarian angle then you thunder in with some long winded partisan rant filled with dax catchphrases.

I see your frustration that no one will engage the political conversation though. The closest I'll get is to say unfortunately there is no right answer. There's nothing the United States, Russia, or the UN can do to fix this. Best solution is for Assad to get assassinated and hope that there is a Democratic election that doesn't elect another murderous despot or that allows ISIS to control Syria.

The reason it's unfixable is because the only course of action the US has sought since day one is regime change.   No you can continue to spew your partisan deflection bullshit while avoiding reality all day long.  But that doesn't change the fact that this war exists because of the United States and its surrogates want it to be this way.

That's stupid and you know it, just shut the eff up, I'm tired of reading your nonsense. At least fsd is entertaining, you're a dumb ass angry old troll.

[sys]

the alternate histories propagated on this sub-forum at times defy comprehension.  the united states is not an all-powerful colossus bestriding the world, nor does the rest of the world sit in stupor awaiting our direction.  we can at times nudge events here and there, but we do not control.  we generally deserve less credit and less blame than we seem to prefer to think.

this short piece outlines well how little we have done in syria.  despite how poorly events have unfolded, i'm not sure i agree that we should have done more.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/aleppos-fall-is-obamas-failure/2016/12/15/5af72640-c30f-11e6-9a51-cd56ea1c2bb7_story.html?utm_term=.b04e713a4359

[gatoveintisiete]

  some people can't handle this thread

[sonofdaxjones]

I mean I don't know about the other "libs" you speak of, but on this blog the only Syria conversations I can remember are ones when people are talking about the humanitarian angle then you thunder in with some long winded partisan rant filled with dax catchphrases.

I see your frustration that no one will engage the political conversation though. The closest I'll get is to say unfortunately there is no right answer. There's nothing the United States, Russia, or the UN can do to fix this. Best solution is for Assad to get assassinated and hope that there is a Democratic election that doesn't elect another murderous despot or that allows ISIS to control Syria.

The reason it's unfixable is because the only course of action the US has sought since day one is regime change.   No you can continue to spew your partisan deflection bullshit while avoiding reality all day long.  But that doesn't change the fact that this war exists because of the United States and its surrogates want it to be this way.

That's stupid and you know it, just shut the eff up, I'm tired of reading your nonsense. At least fsd is entertaining, you're a dumb ass angry old troll.

Yes, it is completely worthless to engage someone who reads a couple of headlines and thinks he knows WTF is going on.   The fact that you can't bring yourself to realize that the U.S. (and Saudis-Jordan-UAE, NATO partners and others) have propagated and expanded the nightmare in Syria, and have made virtually no overtures for peace tells me all I need to know.   

The training program, which in 2013 began directly arming the rebels under the code name Timber Sycamore, is run by the C.I.A. and several Arab intelligence services and aimed at building up forces opposing President Bashar al-Assad of Syria. The United States and Saudi Arabia are the biggest contributors, with the Saudis contributing both weapons and large sums of money, and with C.I.A. paramilitary operatives taking the lead in training the rebels to use Kalashnikovs, mortars, antitank guided missiles and other weapons.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/27/world/middleeast/cia-arms-for-syrian-rebels-supplied-black-market-officials-say.html?_r=0

When President Obama secretly authorized the Central Intelligence Agency to begin arming Syria’s embattled rebels in 2013, the spy agency knew it would have a willing partner to help pay for the covert operation. It was the same partner the C.I.A. has relied on for decades for money and discretion in far-off conflicts: the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Since then, the C.I.A. and its Saudi counterpart have maintained an unusual arrangement for the rebel-training mission, which the Americans have code-named Timber Sycamore. Under the deal, current and former administration officials said, the Saudis contribute both weapons and large sums of money, and the C.I.A takes the lead in training the rebels on AK-47 assault rifles and tank-destroying missiles.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/24/world/middleeast/us-relies-heavily-on-saudi-money-to-support-syrian-rebels.html

[sonofdaxjones]

http://www.salon.com/2015/05/28/the_benghazi_outrage_we_actually_should_be_talking_about/

Overthrow one government, "watch" (yeah, just "watch) the old regimes weapons be shipped off to use for another regime change.   

[MakeItRain]

This rough ridin' moron keeps arguing for a point I've yet to argue against. Get a hobby, shitbird.

[sonofdaxjones]

This rough ridin' moron keeps arguing for a point I've yet to argue against. Get a hobby, shitbird.

 

Then WTF is your point besides your sudden concern for the "women and children" of Syria and the fact that your just a partisan dumbass who can't handle any criticism of Obama? 

Just say NO to regime changes and unending wars:  Unless Barrack Obama is President

It must be fantastic to know (or in your case be too rough ridin' dumb to know) that Obama is just carrying forth the plans of the Pentagon who targeted Syria (and Libya) as one of seven countries (Iraq, Lebanon, Somalia, Sudan, Iran, Syria, Libya) that the United States targeted for regime change shortly after 9-11 (Hey look at that, Barrack got 1 and is trying like hell to get 2 out of the 7).   




https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/15/west-ignored-russian-offer-in-2012-to-have-syrias-assad-step-aside

Russia proposed more than three years ago that Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, could step down as part of a peace deal, according to a senior negotiator involved in back-channel discussions at the time.

Former Finnish president and Nobel peace prize laureate Martti Ahtisaari said western powers failed to seize on the proposal. Since it was made, in 2012, tens of thousands of people have been killed and millions uprooted, causing the world’s gravest refugee crisis since the second world war.

http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/civilians-killed-rebels-shell-government-held-aleppo-685601309

But not a peep out of MIR, who is now all of sudden concerned about the "women and children" because in reality he can't handle any criticism of Obama.


 

[michigancat]

Anybody - particularly diplomat, politician, or journalist - who read this 25 years ago and thought Syria of the last 3-4 years would be any different is just a dumb ass.

Hama Rules: From Beirut to Jerusalem:Friedman

Good read.

[Cartierfor3]

Maybe this should go in the Obama legacy thread. Rany thinks he made a blunder that cost millions of lives not intervening in the biggest humanitarian crisis in years.

https://theringer.com/syria-barack-obama-legacy-853644abdd1b#.gt2wcz958

[LickNeckey]

To think that we started this regime change would be incorrect.

Whether we assisted too much or too little is largely up to personal biases and politics.

Assad is a brutal dictator who has pursued genocide against his people. 

[sonofdaxjones]

To think that we started this regime change would be incorrect.

Whether we assisted too much or too little is largely up to personal biases and politics.

Assad is a brutal dictator who has pursued genocide against his people.

No one has said we started this regime change, but we firmly placed ourselves back in the business of regime change (once again) once Hillary-Panetta-Obama thought they saw an opening.    A blind person could see that a post regime change Syria would be a worse bloodbath then the actual regime change itself . . . which has been awful in it's own right.   Even more stunning is the faux incredulous reaction by the U.S. (and others) that Russia is standing by their client state.  As if we'd just stand by and watch Russian backed militants overthrow, say, the regime in the UAE. 

[LickNeckey]

without further research my general recollection is that most of our support for regime change occurred prior to Russia's formal involvement

by the time Russia joined the fray it seemed we had moved more towards the balance of supporting the Kurds against DAESH and pacifying Turkey about this support