Ok, picking sides and assisting them with non-lethal equipment and vehicles, money and training from our side and small arms from the Russian side. Although the US has been supplying or supervising the supply of weapons on the quiet.blue underpants said:We have not armed any side since the civil war startedpee dubya said:By picking sides and arming them.blue underpants said:Its a civil war, the dirtiest and nastiest form of warfare you can get, brother killing brother, son killing father etc, the people killing each other are Arabs, did the Arabs send men to fight in the American Civil War or stick their noses into our long ago Civil War, NO.
The Assad regime is a nasty regime but there are nasty regimes all over the world, the difference being he is fighting an insurgency of fanatical jihadists who have now taken over the struggle from the well meaning civil fighters who fought the first battles 2 years ago and frankly dont give two fucks how many Syrians die in there quest to destabalise another Arab country and see the whole Middle East fall under their sphere of influence.
I might be missing a trick mate but how is the West and the Russians playing silly buggers in such a civil war?
Assads regime bought military hardware of the UK years ago, but who hasnt bought off us?
The only time we have sent anything to help anybody in this war was a couple of months ago then it was to the so called rebels and it was non lethal hardware like night vision goggles and military radios, truth is we should not have even sent that.
The Russians like us will sell arms to anybody at the right time but apart from automatic weapons and hand held rocket launchers they have kept the Assad regime starved of heavy weight weapons otherwise the Assad regime would have crushed the jihadists by now, the Russians are clearly binding their time
Correct, its too late now, we should have left well alone from the startpee dubya said:Ok, picking sides and assisting them with non-lethal equipment and vehicles, money and training from our side and small arms from the Russian side. Although the US has been supplying or supervising the supply of weapons on the quiet.blue underpants said:We have not armed any side since the civil war startedpee dubya said:By picking sides and arming them.
Assads regime bought military hardware of the UK years ago, but who hasnt bought off us?
The only time we have sent anything to help anybody in this war was a couple of months ago then it was to the so called rebels and it was non lethal hardware like night vision goggles and military radios, truth is we should not have even sent that.
The Russians like us will sell arms to anybody at the right time but apart from automatic weapons and hand held rocket launchers they have kept the Assad regime starved of heavy weight weapons otherwise the Assad regime would have crushed the jihadists by now, the Russians are clearly binding their time
I totally agree with you that we should have left it well alone right form the start. But the problem is we didn't, we got involved and therefore it is not now just an Arab problem, we've made it our problem for whatever reason.
SoDakBlue said:This entire conflict is about natural gas pipelines.
Previously, when looking at the real underlying national interests responsible for the deteriorating situation in Syria, which eventually may and/or will devolve into all out war with hundreds of thousands killed, we made it very clear that it was always and only about the gas, or gas pipelines to be exact, and specifically those involving the tiny but uber-wealthy state of Qatar.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-16/mystery-sponsor-weapons-and-money-syrian-rebels-revealed
Imagine you are an embattled regime fighting against a rising tide of foreign-funded protesters. The entire world is watching, one nation is already under creeping foreign invasion for "waging war against his own people," your nation has been warned that it is next and has been on a 20 year waiting list for regime change, and your opposition is gathering to bury dead protesters from a recent clash with security forces. What do you do?
Spot on mate, Aid not Arms, the trouble is we have a cock badger of a PM and an even bigger cock of a FS, add to that on this occasion Obama is behaving like a huge cock and Putin has out cock badgered them all, which is one big cock up!DavidSilvasLeftFoot said:Have we actually seen any evidence yet that it was Assad's Government that launched these chemical attacks? The way I see it, is that the Rebels would have much more to gain form such attacks. Do we know that is is the majority that support the Rebels or a minority? Assad clearly is clearly a dick, but what would his alternative be? We should be sending aid to Syria not arms.
DavidSilvasLeftFoot said:Have we actually seen any evidence yet that it was Assad's Government that launched these chemical attacks? The way I see it, is that the Rebels would have much more to gain form such attacks. Do we know that is is the majority that support the Rebels or a minority? Assad clearly is clearly a dick, but what would his alternative be? We should be sending aid to Syria not arms.
IMHO i think they BOTH have them and both are more than willing to use them, like i said in an earlier post its a civil war, civil wars are nasty affairs, usually a fight to the death with no quarter given and anything goesSoDakBlue said:DavidSilvasLeftFoot said:Have we actually seen any evidence yet that it was Assad's Government that launched these chemical attacks? The way I see it, is that the Rebels would have much more to gain form such attacks. Do we know that is is the majority that support the Rebels or a minority? Assad clearly is clearly a dick, but what would his alternative be? We should be sending aid to Syria not arms.
Here's evidence that the rebels have been storing chemical weapons for use: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-07-14/assad-army-discovers-syrian-rebels-chemical-weapons-cache
And here's some pretty damning evidence that the rebels were more than likely the users of the recent chemical weapon attack: http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/video-shows-rebels-launching-gas-attack-in-syria/
You're finding this thread insightful? Good lord, where's my cyanide?Blueband Brother said:This is a very good thread. A lot of industry and insightful information and opinions about this very very critical issue not only for the Syrians but also for the Middle east region and the world in general.
Keep it up guys and keep discussing.
Saudis offer Russia secret oil deal if it drops Syria
The revelations come amid high tension in the Middle East, with US, British, and French warship poised for missile strikes in Syria. Iran has threatened to retaliate.
The strategic jitters pushed Brent crude prices to a five-month high of $112 a barrel. “We are only one incident away from a serious oil spike. The market is a lot tighter than people think,” said Chris Skrebowski, editor of Petroleum Review.
Leaked transcripts of a closed-door meeting between Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan shed an extraordinary light on the hard-nosed Realpolitik of the two sides.
“We understand Russia’s great interest in the oil and gas in the Mediterranean from Israel to Cyprus. And we understand the importance of the Russian gas pipeline to Europe. We are not interested in competing with that. We can cooperate in this area,” he said, purporting to speak with the full backing of the US.
The talks appear to offer an alliance between the OPEC cartel and Russia, which together produce over 40m barrels a day of oil, 45pc of global output. Such a move would alter the strategic landscape.
The details of the talks were first leaked to the Russian press. A more detailed version has since appeared in the Lebanese newspaper As-Safir, which has Hezbollah links and is hostile to the Saudis.
As-Safir said Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord. “I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us,” he allegedly said.
Prince Bandar went on to say that Chechens operating in Syria were a pressure tool that could be switched on an off. “These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role in Syria’s political future.”
President Putin has long been pushing for a global gas cartel, issuing the `Moscow Declaration’ last to month “defend suppliers and resist unfair pressure”. This would entail beefing up the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF), a talking shop.
Mr Skrebowski said it is unclear what the Saudis can really offer the Russians on gas, beyond using leverage over Qatar and others to cut output of liquefied natural gas (LGN). “The Qataris are not going to obey Saudi orders,” he said.
Saudi Arabia could help boost oil prices by restricting its own supply. This would be a shot in the arm for Russia, which is near recession and relies on an oil price near $100 to fund the budget.
But it would be a dangerous strategy for the Saudis if it pushed prices to levels that endangered the world’s fragile economic recovery. Crude oil stocks in the US have already fallen sharply this year. Goldman Sachs said the “surplus cushion” in global stocks built up since 2008 has been completely eliminated.
Mr Skrebowski said trouble is brewing in a string of key supply states. “Libya is reverting to war lordism. Nigerian is drifting into a bandit state with steady loss of output. And Iraq is going back to the sort of Sunni-Shia civil war we saw in 2006-2007,” he said.
The Putin-Bandar meeting was stormy, replete with warnings of a “dramatic turn” in Syria. Mr Putin was unmoved by the Saudi offer, though western pressure has escalated since then. “Our stance on Assad will never change. We believe that the Syrian regime is the best speaker on behalf of the Syrian people, and not those liver eaters,” he said, referring to footage showing a Jihadist rebel eating the heart and liver of a Syrian soldier.
Prince Bandar in turn warned that there can be “no escape from the military option” if Russia declines the olive branch. Events are unfolding exactly as he foretold.
Skashion said:You're finding this thread insightful? Good lord, where's my cyanide?Blueband Brother said:This is a very good thread. A lot of industry and insightful information and opinions about this very very critical issue not only for the Syrians but also for the Middle east region and the world in general.
Keep it up guys and keep discussing.
Blueband Brother said:Skashion said:You're finding this thread insightful? Good lord, where's my cyanide?Blueband Brother said:This is a very good thread. A lot of industry and insightful information and opinions about this very very critical issue not only for the Syrians but also for the Middle east region and the world in general.
Keep it up guys and keep discussing.
dont do it.
Anyway, I encourage this kind of discussion and the posters are obviously showing interest and are making some good points and providing some good links. You can stay out if you don't want to be involved or better still you can contribute to the thread in terms of what is happening in Syria.
Escalation mate escalation, this has been coming for years ever since the Israelis gave out good thrashigs in Yom Kippur(SP) and other wars, the jihadists feel strong now especially with wet arses all over the world backing them morallyThe cookie monster said:Theres a guy on the bbc news channel
Adviser to Syria who said if they are attacked they will 100% attack Israel
blue underpants said:Escalation mate escalation, this has been coming for years ever since the Israelis gave out good thrashigs in Yom Kippur(SP) and other wars, the jihadists feel strong now especially with wet arses all over the world backing them morallyThe cookie monster said:Theres a guy on the bbc news channel
Adviser to Syria who said if they are attacked they will 100% attack Israel
I think that's very unlikely. The Syrian army have enough on their plate fighting the rebels without starting another conflict that they would be guaranteed to lose.The cookie monster said:Theres a guy on the bbc news channel
Adviser to Syria who said if they are attacked they will 100% attack Israel
Indeed, I have posted about why Syria is not simple. It is a huge collision of opposing interests. Shia, Sunni, Christian, Kurds. Sunni militants fighting with Kurd militants. Al Nusra threatening to massacre Shiites. As well as Assad fighting the rebels. Saudi Arabia is desperately trying to get Assad out to push forward Sunni Islam. Shiite Iran and Hezbollah opposing them to protect their interests. Israel nervous either way. Russia trying to protect its naval base. China has numerous economic interests in Syria. Gas pipelines also in play. This is a huge fucking power-keg. There is no simple answer. Western intervention on the side of the rebels would probably lead to Al Nusra taking power, and subsequent massacres against potentially 35% of Syria's population (the Shiites, Christians and Kurds combined). Arab League intervention could lead to the same thing as it is effectively a representation of Sunni Islam. Saudi Arabia will not be happy if Al Nusra take power and a second civil war will ensue with Sunni on Sunni violence this time, on top of the ongoing genocides that will be perpetrated by Al Nusra against Shiites, Christians and Kurds. I doubt very much if Iran and Hezbollah would throw in the towel either, or the Kurds. This could run and run and run. As far as I can see the best solution will be for Assad to win asap and then hopefully his scare will make him realise that he's fragile and has to be more open to more Sunni influence in running the country whilst Shiites remain in charge protecting Syria's Shiite, Christian and Kurdish minorities.nijinsky's fetlocks said:I think you will find that Skashion has contributed to the thread already, but thanks for the unwanted moderator audition.
Personally I haven't read anything insightful yet either, but I'm the eternal optimist.
nijinsky's fetlocks said:Blueband Brother said:Skashion said:You're finding this thread insightful? Good lord, where's my cyanide?
dont do it.
Anyway, I encourage this kind of discussion and the posters are obviously showing interest and are making some good points and providing some good links. You can stay out if you don't want to be involved or better still you can contribute to the thread in terms of what is happening in Syria.
So we can carry on with your full support and blessing?
That's nice.
I'm glad we are meeting up to your expectations.
I think you will find that Skashion has contributed to the thread already, but thanks for the unwanted moderator audition.
Personally I haven't read anything insightful yet either, but I'm the eternal optimist.
You could be right mate,was just passing on what was saidwest didsblue said:I think that's very unlikely. The Syrian army have enough on their plate fighting the rebels without starting another conflict that they would be guaranteed to lose.The cookie monster said:Theres a guy on the bbc news channel
Adviser to Syria who said if they are attacked they will 100% attack Israel
I believe the threat to attack Israel is purely to deter western intervention. Saddam Hussein made exactly the same threats before the 1990 gulf war to no effect.