Syria

[Syferus]

I didn't realise the Brit bashing here extended to Syria. Ffs, when you're even thinking about siding with Assad, now probably the most despicable ruling tyrant on Earth, and fûcking Vladimir Putin you might cotton onto the fact you're onto a loser and your own biases are at play.

The West ain't angels but there's a hell of a gap between it and those despot regimes.

[Rossfan]

Saudi Arabia, Bahrain. .... ..

[Esmarelda]

Not sure anyone here is taking Fisk's word without question.  I posted a link to the article because it is by a reputable journalist calling into question the line that has been given in the media about gas attacks, and thus deserves attention.  And because he, like the British military people I also linked, cannot be dismissed as a crank, conspiracy theorist or Russian puppet.

Regarding the gas attack, if that's what it was, the U.N. has claimed that both sides in Syria have used chemical weapons.  http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/08/24/u-n-claims-syrian-regime-and-islamic-state-used-chemical-weapons/. So if there was indeed a gas attack, it is hardly a huge leap to wonder whether the rebels rather than Assad's forces were behind it.

And in any event, to bomb Syria before examining evidence regarding what happened, well, that's back in "but Saddam has WMD, we know this" territory.

A hugely logical post.

I didn't realise the Brit bashing here extended to Syria. Ffs, when you're even thinking about siding with Assad, now probably the most despicable ruling tyrant on Earth, and fûcking Vladimir Putin you might cotton onto the fact you're onto a loser and your own biases are at play.

The West ain't angels but there's a hell of a gap between it and those despot regimes.

A close second

[seafoid]

One aspect of the Syrian war that doesn't get enough attention is  climate change. Syria is in large part desert apart from the strip around the coast inland as far as Damascus.  Syria doesnt have a lot of water. In the east there is the Euphrates river but Turkey has built dams upstream.

The population grew a lot post WW2.  The education system is poor so young men don't have many skills. And kids need to be fed. So a lot of marginal land was brought into use in order to keep pace with population growth .  Between 1988 and 2014 the population increased by 70%.
It is not that different to Connacht in the  early 1840s in fact.

The Euphrates isn't what it used to be and climate change introduced desertification which banjaxed a lot of marginal land. Subsistence farmers started to move to the cities- Aleppo and Damascus-especially poor areas such as Ghouta - and people felt they had nothing to lose and started agitating for change.

The bIg question is how many people Syria can support.
It is very easy to increase a population but very hard to decrease it back to a stable level when food production goes into crisis.
In Ireland in the 1840s the Brits chose a Famine . The cultural repercussions are still visible. Famine and war are Traumas.  After the Famine the age of marriage rose drastically and sexual relations between men and women were policed by the wider society. Any activity that might threaten the food supply was shunned. 

Syria is next door to Israel so there is no  way it'll be allowed to run a couple of decades of political experimention to come up with something that might work. Egypt also borders Israel and the model there is brutal repression and stagnation

Ireland was treated similarly in the 19th century because of its strategic location between England and the US. There was no way the Fenians were going to get control.

The brutality of the war is trauma. Syria is working its way to a new equilibrium. It was just as bad in Connacht or West Cork in the 1840s. It doesn't really matter whether people die by hunger or by being bombed.
There is no groovy way to do it.

[seafoid]

Regime change in Syria–good for Israel; good for the U.S.

Hillary Clinton Email Archive

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/18328
—————————————————————————–

UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05794498 Date: 11/30/2015 RELEASE IN FULL

The best way to help Israel deal with Iran's growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad.

Negotiations to limit Iran's nuclear program will not solve Israel's security dilemma. Nor will they stop Iran from improving the crucial part of any nuclear weapons program — the capability to enrich uranium. At best, the talks between the world's major powers and Iran that began in Istanbul this April and will continue in Baghdad in May will enable Israel to postpone by a few months a decision whether to launch an attack on Iran that could provoke a major Mideast war. Iran's nuclear program and Syria's civil war may seem unconnected, but they are. For Israeli leaders, the real threat from a nuclear-armed Iran is not the prospect of an insane Iranian leader launching an unprovoked Iranian nuclear attack on Israel that would lead to the annihilation of both countries.

What Israeli military leaders really worry about — but cannot talk about — is losing their nuclear monopoly. An Iranian nuclear weapons capability would not only end that nuclear monopoly but could also prompt other adversaries, like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, to go nuclear as well. The result would be a precarious nuclear balance in which Israel could not respond to provocations with conventional military strikes on Syria and Lebanon, as it can today. If Iran were to reach the threshold of a nuclear weapons state, Tehran would find it much easier to call on its allies in Syria and Hezbollah to strike Israel, knowing that its nuclear weapons would serve as a deterrent to Israel responding against Iran itself.

Back to Syria. It is the strategic relationship between Iran and the regime of Bashar Assad in Syria that makes it possible for Iran to undermine Israel's security — not through a direct attack, which in the thirty years of hostility between Iran and Israel has never occurred, but through its proxies in Lebanon, like Hezbollah, that are sustained, armed and trained by Iran via Syria.

The end of the Assad regime would end this dangerous alliance. Israel's leadership understands well why defeating Assad is now in its interests. Speaking on CNN's Amanpour show last week, Defense Minister Ehud Barak argued that "the toppling down of Assad will be a major blow to the radical axis, major blow to Iran.... It's the only kind of outpost of the Iranian influence in the Arab world...and it will weaken dramatically both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza."

Bringing down Assad would not only be a massive boon to Israel's security, it would also ease Israel's understandable fear of losing its nuclear monopoly. Then, Israel and the United States might be able to develop a common view of when the Iranian program is so dangerous that military action could be warranted.

Right now, it is the combination of Iran's strategic alliance with Syria and the steady progress in Iran's nuclear enrichment program that has led Israeli leaders to contemplate a surprise attack — if necessary over the objections of Washington. With Assad gone, and Iran no longer able to threaten Israel through its, proxies, it is possible that the United States and Israel can agree on red lines for when Iran's program has crossed an unacceptable threshold. In short, the White House can ease the tension that has developed with Israel over Iran by doing the right thing in Syria.

The rebellion in Syria has now lasted more than a year. The opposition is not going away, nor is the regime going to accept a diplomatic solution from the outside. With his life and his family at risk, only the threat or use of force will change the Syrian dictator Bashar Assad's mind.

[Jell 0 Biafra]

OPCW leaked document suggests that the Douma 2018 gas cannisters were not dropped from aircraft,but were manually placed there:

https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2019/05/peter-hitchens-empty-green-seats-that-prove-we-are-careering-towards-a-catastrophe.html

"The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the international body which examines alleged incidents of the use of poison gas, has just confirmed to me that a devastating leaked document from its Dutch HQ is genuine.

The document, written by one of the OPCW's most experienced investigators, shows that it is highly unlikely that gas canisters found at the scene of an alleged poison gas attack in Douma, Syria were actually dropped from helicopters – as has been widely believed and claimed."

For those interested, the original leaked document can be viewed here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ayBv-nEOMTtIc-QOvejQBdCnZQXTuJ5z/view

It ends with this:  "In summary, observations at the scene of the two locations, together with subsequent analysis, suggest that there is a higher probability that both cylinders were manually placed at those two locations rather than being delivered from aircraft."

[Esmarelda]

OPCW leaked document suggests that the Douma 2018 gas cannisters were not dropped from aircraft,but were manually placed there:

https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2019/05/peter-hitchens-empty-green-seats-that-prove-we-are-careering-towards-a-catastrophe.html

"The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the international body which examines alleged incidents of the use of poison gas, has just confirmed to me that a devastating leaked document from its Dutch HQ is genuine.

The document, written by one of the OPCW's most experienced investigators, shows that it is highly unlikely that gas canisters found at the scene of an alleged poison gas attack in Douma, Syria were actually dropped from helicopters – as has been widely believed and claimed."

For those interested, the original leaked document can be viewed here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ayBv-nEOMTtIc-QOvejQBdCnZQXTuJ5z/view

It ends with this:  "In summary, observations at the scene of the two locations, together with subsequent analysis, suggest that there is a higher probability that both cylinders were manually placed at those two locations rather than being delivered from aircraft."

Ah will ya get away outta that

[Jell 0 Biafra]

OPCW scientists leak document showing Douma report on alleged Chemical attack was falsified.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7718627/Sexed-dossier-furore-alleged-poison-gas-attack-Assad.html

[Esmarelda]

Good man Jell O, but nobody's listening.

Shocked that the mail had it though.

[Jell 0 Biafra]

Not sure why Hitchens works for the mail. He's been good on this topic.

[DrinkingHarp]

Rebel forces moved quickly and have captured Damascus in a week's time.

Assad has fled the country and his whereabouts are unknown. Pretty sure he left with a sizable amount of money.

[gallsman]

As ever with Syria, it's what comes next that matters. Israel and the Americans (the Russians too if they have any capacity) won't allow an Islamist regime to consolidate power and the cycle of violence will continue.

[theskull1]

People need to read up on the 'Clean Break' policy paper written the very year Satanyahu came to the throne (after Yitzhak Rabin, Israel's "dovish" Prime Minister, was assassinated by a right-wing zealot... definitely not mossad)

It's all coming to pass

The concept of "A Clean Break" refers to a 1996 policy paper written by a study group led by Richard Perle for Benjamin Netanyahu, then the Prime Minister of Israel. The paper, titled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," advocated for a radical overhaul of Israel's approach to regional security, including regime change in several Middle Eastern countries.

The paper's authors, including Perle, Douglas Feith, and other neoconservatives, proposed a strategy based on "Western values" and aimed at containing and rolling back perceived threats to Israel, including Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Iran. The plan involved:

Regime change: Toppling Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq and containing Syria by engaging in proxy warfare and highlighting its possession of "weapons of mass destruction."
Changing relations with Palestinians: Israel was advised to abandon the slogan "comprehensive peace" and instead focus on containing and destabilizing Palestinian society, including upholding the right of "hot pursuit" into Palestinian areas and nurturing alternatives to Yasser Arafat's leadership.
Cooperation with Turkey and Jordan: Israel was encouraged to work closely with these countries to contain and roll back threats to its security.
The "Clean Break" paper was later linked to the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a neoconservative think tank founded in 1997. PNAC's own policy paper, "Rebuilding America's Defenses," published in 2000, echoed many of the same themes and goals, including regime change in Iraq and the Middle East.

PNAC's Role in Regime Change
PNAC's members, including Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, John Bolton, and Richard Perle, played a significant role in shaping US foreign policy and advocating for regime change in Iraq. PNAC's influence was evident in the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq in 2003, which was justified as part of the "war on terror."

Consequences and Criticisms
The implementation of the "Clean Break" and PNAC agendas has been widely criticized for:

Lack of transparency: The true motivations and beneficiaries of these policies were obscured, leading to widespread misinformation and public deception.
Humanitarian costs: The wars and regime changes sparked by these policies have resulted in significant human suffering, displacement, and loss of life.
Economic and strategic failures: The invasions and occupations have drained US resources, destabilized the region, and created new security threats.
In conclusion, the "Clean Break" and PNAC agendas represent a significant departure from traditional US foreign policy, advocating for regime change and aggressive intervention in the Middle East. While these policies were sold as necessary for US security and democracy promotion, they have been widely criticized for their lack of transparency, humanitarian costs, and strategic failures.

[Milltown Row2]

Regime changes, coups and the rest have been going on in every part of the world for 1000's of years and will continue to do so, there's one going on in Ukraine

Countries looking after themselves is not new, and if this paper is real, it's not really a shocker is it?

The people living through these upheavals, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and the African countries and that's not taking in the crazy world of the drug cartels in central and South America are living in constant fear, is anyone surprised people in the dead of night in winter get into a dinghy and hope they get across a sea to land somewhere were they won't get raped, terrorised, brutalised, made into slaves and so on?

Israel are the eyes and ears for the western world in the Middle East, seems supplying information gives them a free pass

The CIA have been involved with thousands of regime changes, what can actually be done about it?

[theskull1]

Get the feeling your not remotely interested in questioning if you know enough MR.

The people driving this Neocolonialist bus are full on Israel first. The west has been completely subverted by Zionists. They are using our taxes to do their bidding. Western populations don't want any this.