Military Events in Syria and Iraq thread #3

Discussion in 'World Events' started by Yazata, Apr 5, 2016.

  1. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Yes, I can support this from Russian sources. The first group is out. In fact, nobody cares that much if these are really only civilians, anyway the fighters will be evacuated too. I think the reason one cares about that at all is that there is also, at the same time, some evacuation of civilians and wounded from Foa and Kafrija. The non-wounded fighters from these Shia enclaves don't want to leave at all. So, to make an agreement that, first, all civilians and wounded from Aleppo and Foa/Kafrija, and only after that the fighters from Aleppo, makes some sense. So that, in case the terrorists attack the transport from Foa/Kafrija, there remains a way to retaliate by attacking the fighters, which yet remain there.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member


    How long do you think the war in Syria, against the Assad/Putin regime, may continue for?

    What needs to happen before the conflict can be resolved?
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2016
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Some terrorist gangs in Idlib have burned five busses which were on the way to Fua and Kafriya, killed one of the bus drivers.

    It looks like even most terrorist groups now distance themselves from this scum. So, there is yet some hope for peaceful evacuation. Of course, after this incident all was stopped, with some negotiations following. The latest news are that some other busses have now (empty) reached Fua and Kafriya, some other busses and ambulances, with women and children only, have moved from Aleppo.
    Very different, very speculative question. Some scenarios:

    Scenario 1.) The most pessimistic. Clinton somehow takes the power, and starts a no fly zone as promised. That means war. With subvariants
    1a.) Nuclear war, short time, ends together with humanity.
    1b.) Vietnam variant: Nuclear war avoided, the Russians remain involved and send weapons, the US does not attack the Russian deliveries to avoid (a). So, a long time war starts, until some American peace movement stops it. Length completely unpredictable, probably > 4 years.
    1c.) Libya variant: Russia leaves to prevent nuclear war. Assad will be murdered, the state is destroyed, genocid against Christians, Alewites and other religios minorities, with endless civil war. Length completely unpredictable, probably > 20 years.

    Scenario 2.) The medium scenario. The US continues Obama politics, no escalation, but also no stop of support for the terrorists, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel and Qatar also continue their support for terrorists as now. Then everything continues on the ground in similar temps as today. 1/2-1 year for clearing all the remaining enclaves around Damascus and Rastan, half a year for for clearing the Jordan border, half a year for Idlib, a year for the IS. After this long peace talks with the Kurds and Turks, so 3/4 years, and given that all this was quite optimistic, 5/6 years may be more realistic.

    Scenario 3.) The very optimistic one. The US really changes its Syrian politics, no longer any Western support for any Syrian terrorists, and adds some pressure to Saudi Arabia and Qatar to stop this too (for this, it is sufficient to explain them that the US will not defend them if Iran attacks them because of their support for terrorists). Erdogan finds agreement with Assad based on the shared interest to prevent a Kurdish state. Then, most of the terrorist enclaves could simply give up and run away, in the South they will make peace, creating a legal opposition party, Idlib will collapse in short time militarily. The Kurds will accept some weak autonomy status, and all these negotiations may be finished in half a year. Then, with a safe background and in cooperation with the Kurds Daesh may be finished in half a year. So, this could be one year.

    (3) would be nice, of course, but I think yet (2) is more realistic, something between them being possible too. The probability of (1) can heavily increase/decrease tomorrow.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Do you seriously believe the war will stop whilst Assad is in power?
  8. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Or maybe I should just simply ask what creates a terrorist? In your opinion what circumstances force an individual to become a terrorist?
  9. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Yes, of course. He already has the support of the majority. He has the support of the Russians, who have already successfully pacified regions with strong terrorist forces, and now teach the Syrians how to do it.

    So, if the war stops, it will be with Assad in power. Except America seriously enters the war, in this case the opinion of the Syrian people no longer matter at all.
    In Syria, the most important thing which creates a terrorist is high payment from Saudi-Arabia and a strong enough belief that you are on the winning side. The Syrians are Arabs, not Russians, they do not have a culture of defending the own nation even if you have no chance to survive. They do not have the fighting power neither of the Chechens, nor of the Afghans. If an Arab force is obviously loosing in the long run, it is dead, because once the own fighters begin to understand this, they start to run away.
  10. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Maybe I should rephrase the question:
    What makes a farmer, for example, abandon his farm and pick up a gun instead?
  11. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    The answer will be the same. There is nearby a strong enough gang which makes a good enough offer, in dollar, for fighting with this gang. And if the gang seems to loose, he will probably run away.

    Actually, Daesh already had to cut the payments for its fighters seriously (half of what was before or so), since Russia started to hit the IS oil business seriously, which has already reduced the number of new fighters for them.

    There are, of course, some fanatics, who participate out of religious reasons. For those, what matters most is the religious indoctrination. These guys give jihadist groups much more power, simply because they are better fighters, don't run away immediately, and, moreover, have a lower tendency to rob civilians, which makes these groups less hated by them.

    Fighting for democracy makes no sense to them, for freedom of press too (they usually don't read the press anyway), freedom of speech is nothing they miss, they talk with their friends anyway as they like. The national idea is quite irrelevant for them, what matters is the family. But the family matters a lot. So, if some member of the family has a high position in government, the whole family will not fight against Assad. On the other hand, families can break apart. The main support of the anti-Assad forces in the West comes from a split in the Assad family, between the father of Assad and his brother, who tried to take power, and was, (their mother managed this) allowed to emigrate instead of being killed. Now his family sits in London and rules most of the secular opposition to Assad. So, one theory who is behind SOHR, the main if not only news source of the West about Syria, is that it is this part of the Assad clan. (The other popular theory is that it is MI5).
  12. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Reports that the Russian Ambassador to Turkey has been shot and killed in Ankara while speaking at an art exhibit by a gunman shouting "Allah akbar! We die in Aleppo, you die here!". Photos show the assassin strutting around in front of the crowd with his pistol as the dying ambassador lay sprawled on the floor, apparently trying to lecture everyone, before guards shot and killed him.

    Still no word on who he was or what his associations were.

    Edit: News is now reporting that the shooter was a plain-clothes Turkish police officer, perhaps part of the security detail at the event.
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2016
  13. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Putin should be congratulated by the Russian people; he has succeeded in spreading violence to their doorstep. This is essentially what the US and allied nations have been warning Putin about for years now. There isn't a violent solution to what troubles Syria. Yet Putin has continued to escalate the violence in Syria, and now he is reaping the fruits of his actions. Putin has succeeded in spreading the violence in Syria to his doorstep.

    Russia's role in the Aleppo massacre will have consequences. When you commit atrocities like the ones wittnessed in Aleppo, there will be consequences. There will be blowback. This assassination is just the first of those consequences. The Russian ambassador was an easy target. I wouldn't at all be surprised to see more of these kinds of incidents sprouting up within Russia proper. Putin is reaping what he has sown. First Putin lost a civilian airliner, then he suffered military casualties, a Russian warplane was shot down, and now his ambassador has been assasinated.

    One has to wonder if Putin really is that dumb or is he using these incidents to further consolidate his power as he did with the Russian apartment building bombings?
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2016
  14. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    What I have seen, joepistole is happy, all the Ukrainian Nazis are also very happy, as expected.

    The Russians have interpreted these US "warnings" as threats. Not implausible, given joepistole's response, that these threats have now been executed.

    But the Russians know very well that Syria was intended to become the base for international terrorism sufficiently close to Russia, with many thousands of Russian-speaking terrorists receiving training, weapons and fighting experience there. And already thousands of them have been killed by the Russians. How many Russians would they have succeeded to kill in Russia, if Russia would not have killed them now? No amount of terrorism against Russia will be able to show that the decision was wrong, given all these already killed terrorists.

    And Chechnya shows that one can win against the terror. It was ruled by terrorists, but now it is safe. And almost all the remaining Chechen terrorists fight in Syria and Iraq now.
  15. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    22,882 can always be counted on to come to Putin's rescue comrade. He should give you something extra in your paycheck. What did I write that would lead anyone to conclude that I'm happy? I'm definitely amused by your response. I merely pointed out that your beloved Mother Putina had succeeded in once again bringing violence to Russia. There is nothing happy in that. It's just a statement of fact.

    Russians have interpreted what ever Putin tells them to interpret and more than that, he tells them what, how and when to interpret.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    What a nice guy. Russians don't even need to think. Comrade Putina takes care of all that for them.

    The US and allied nations have repeatedly told Russia that the only viable solution in Syria is a political solution. So, Russia thinks that is a threat...really? Don't you think that's being more than a little paranoid?

    Do they now? So you think a distance of 3,400 miles is "sufficiently close"...really? Is 12,000 miles sufficiently close also? That sounds like more of that well known Russian paranoia. Who are these Russian terrorists who receive training from the Syrian rebels? Please do be specific and show your evidence.

    The fact is there were no Syrian terrorists in Russia before Mother Putina's military adventurism in Syria. But as a result of Mother Putina's military adventurism, as previously pointed out, he is bringing terrorism home to the Russian people. As I previously posited, is it because Putin is that dumb or is it intentional on his part like the previously referenced Russian apartment buildings?

    Is Chechnya safe? No. It's still not safe. The insurgency continues. You just don't hear about it as much because guess who owns and controls the Russian media? Your beloved Mother Putina owns and controls the Russian media. And it's not in his interest to show or tell the truth of the matter. So he doesn't.–Russian_conflict#Ongoing_Chechen_insurgency

    The fact remains, Russia had no problem with Syrian rebels prior to Russia's intervention in Syria's civil war. But since Putin's involvement Russia has suffered a number of casualties and the casualties continues to grow as Russia escalates the violence in Syria. First it was an airliner, then it suffered military casualties which are ongoing, and now its the Russian ambassador to Turkey who has fallen victim to that violence. Russian participation in the atrocities in Aleppo has caused Russia to suffer more violence in retaliation. That's a fact, and it's not over. And it won't be over until there is a political solution... a peaceful solution in Syria.

    There really is only one question at this point. Is Putin really that dumb or is he using this to further consolidate his power domestically as he did with the bombing of Russian apartment buildings?

    The truth is Putin is repeating the mistakes of the former Soviet Union. He is squandering critical Russian resources in a vain attempt to glorify himself. Putin is trying to make Russia look like something it isn't and it's an expensive deception.

    Russia is in a state of decline. It's economy is in decline. It's economy has continued to shrink year over year. It's population is declining and becoming older and sicker. The brighter and more talented are fleeing the Mother Russia. Russia can ill afford Putin's delusions.

    And the fact is, that as more and more ethnic Russian flee Mother Russia and Russia becomes more Muslim and more Muslim, Putin is setting himself up for longer term problems with his atrocities in Syria, which is a predominately Muslim country.

    I think the only question now is at what point does Russia once again become a complete basket case and need to be bailed out by the West once again?
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2016
  16. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Usual joepistole "facts" nonsense disposed
    Russia came at the end of September 2015. So let's see: is from May 2015, thus, before the start of the Russian action. The numbers given there seem quite conservative, I have seen much higher ones, but so what, they were there already before. More close to these from 09/24/15
    Omar Al Shishani (the Chechen in Arabic) came there 2013 fighting for Daesh. But not all the Chechens came to Daesh, a large part of them was in Latakia, for this simple reason that this mountain region remembers Chechnya. And this was one of the main reasons why Russia cared, first of all, about liberating Latakia - because, by the way, this would mean to kill a major part of the Chechen forces in Syria.

    One hears from time to time about some terrorists catched by the police. Regarding safety against terrorism, Russia is comparable with Europe, so, nothing to care about. Your wiki source mentions two attacks attributed to Chechens, 2010 and 2011, each with an order of 40 deaths. Compare this yourself with the number of deadly street accidents.

    The main power of Chechen terrorism was and is now in Syria/Iraq.
  17. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Isn't that strange... you've missed one of the most important factors:

    "The fight against injustice and it's twin nasty brother, revenge"

    The Assad regime soldiers kills a 5 year old child for the crime of "political" graffiti and tells his father no to worry, he can always have another son, is the sort of thingo that drives terrorism.

    Social justice and the fight against religious or racial discrimination gives birth to terrorism.

    "Mercenaries make lousy fighters"

    If Putin had provided sound leadership for the Chechen people he wouldn't have to go to Syria to fight with them...
    If Putin had provided sound leadership his Ambassador to Turkey would be still alive to enjoy the new year and he would have billions of dollars to spend on his Russian population that has other wise been spent on propping up an unjust Assad regime
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2016
  18. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Come on Comrade Smelzer, for once, try being honest.

    And how is any of that relevant to the question which was put to you? It isn't. There is no question that ISIS has attracted fighters from across the globe. But that's not the issue. Do you not remember your assertion? You asserted that Syrian rebels represented a terrorist threat to Mother Russia. Then you said Mother Putina's brutal atrocities worked in Chechnya so they should also work in Syria. I suggest you read previous posts including yours.

    The fact remains, contrary to your previous assertion and per my previous post, the Chechen war isn't over as you had asserted. The violence continues. And you have no idea how many people fall victim to the war, because your beloved Mother Putina controls what you hear and what you see.

    If that is so, then how are Chechen forces a threat to Mother Russia? You are contradicting yourself comrade. You can't have it both ways. If Chechen forces are in Syria, they aren't in Russia posing a threat to Russia. Contrary to your previous assertion, Syria and Russia aren't geographically close.

    One more point, you have repeatedly failed to understand the difference between Syrian rebels and ISIS. There is a difference. There is a very big difference. Lumping Syrian rebels in with ISIS as you have repeatedly done, is just flat out dishonest. But it is what you and your beloved Mother Putina have repeatedly done. Chechen figthers are not fighting with the Syrian rebels. They are fighting with ISIS and your beloved Mother Putina isn't fighting ISIS. He is fighting the rebels.
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2016
  19. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    And that is the most important point in this discussion with Schmelzer the sheer fact that he has no idea what is happening in Russia due to the incredible manipulation being applied to Russian media. (makes USA media look angelic when compared)

    Example: Putin, a climate change denier, has prevented news of massive permafrost thaw issues blighting the Northern cities and lands of Russia. He denies climate change publicly but has to rebuild most of his Northern cities... bah!
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2016
    joepistole likes this.
  20. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Of course, such stories tend to drive terrorism, and that's why they are distributed by pro-terrorist media. Unfortunately, they drive terrorism even if they are simply media inventions. That's why media like to invent them.
    He has. Else, he would have to fight them in Chechnya, instead of Syria. The terrorists have gone to Syria because they have no longer any strong enough base in Chechnya.
    Putin does not deny climate change. tried to present this last year as some change in Putin's position, quoting him in 2003 saying "that climate change could have the advantage of causing Russians to spend less on fur coats". But even this is not a denial of climate change, but a comment on its consequences for Russia, which may appear less harmful than for other states.
    So, thousands of Russian-speaking terrorists, well equipped and experienced, paid by the US and Saudi terrorist supporters, who have been known to support Chechen terrorists in the past too, are not a thread to Russia?
    Stop lying.
    ISIS prefers a khalifat, that means, a sort of separate state as the base for expansion, Al Qaida prefers other terrorist methods, roughly, making terror everywhere without a well-defined base state.
    That's a difference in the military strategy, but not a difference in the political aims. Their aim is the same, an extremist variant of the Sharia state.

    And there are, of course, lots of other fighters. Usually fighters from local militias, which have, usually, signed some cooperation agreements with bigger terror groups to prevent them from robbing their villages. To separate these many local fighters from the hardcore terrorists is a main aim of what Russian and Syrian negotiators try to reach on the ground in Syria. And they reach reasonable successes in this way.

    The technique: They encircle a town, and then negotiate. The proposal is that those who want to fight, as well as foreigners, go to Idlib with green busses, those who want to stay give away their weapons and receive amnesty. So, those local forces remain there, the civil war is stopped in that town, the hardcore terrorists are moved away. You see, to make a difference between moderate rebels and terrorists is the main point of the actual strategy of Syrian/Russian fighting on the ground.

    In Aleppo, where this separation has been applied too, it looks like those locals who have used the amnesty are of order 3-4 000, hardcore terrorists moving to Idlib of order 6-7 000.
    First, no, I do not confuse them. Instead, I have had a lot of fun seeing that the US officials have claimed to have hit some ISIS forces in Idlib. Then, as I have explained, there are a lot of Chechen fighters part of ISIS, in particular was even one of the most important ISIS military leaders. Others have been fighting in Latakia, as separate terror gangs as well as part of Al Nusra. In Latakia was never any big ISIS presence (even if there have been photos of Turkish grey wolfes flags peaceful together with ISIS flag) and therefore also no fighting between them. So, Chechen fighters fighting ISIS are your invention.
  21. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Can you offer any criticism of Putin or Russia at all?
    or are you afraid of being considered as Western propaganda when you do?
  22. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    He cannot. I have had that discussion with comrade Schmelzer numerous times before. I don't think he is worried about being considered as Western propaganda. I think he is more concerned about being fined, an unfortunate accident, or winding up in a gulag.
  23. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Yes I can. But I'm not interested doing it here, in a forum full of pro-Western propaganda. I offer my criticism of Russia where it is appropriate, namely in pro-Russian forums.

    But, ok, some of my objections against Putin/Russia you can simply derive from my objections against the US which I have made here, so that I can make here an exclusion from this.

    So I have criticized the US as the country with highest incarceration rates, and the largest prison population. (Ok, tells us that Seychelles have an even higher rate, but that does not really matter, I think.) 700 or so per 100 000 in jail is a horribly large gulag, and comparable with Stalin's gulag itself, see for some numbers.

    But Russia with its 450 per 100 000 is not that much better. Many European countries have rates below 100 per 100 000. And this is something which can be reached not only by rich countries, but even many Third World countries have such rates below 100 per 100 000. Ok, in these cases one may be afraid that this simply means that many criminals are not catched. But this makes not really sense for Europe. So, I consider incarceration rates greater than 200 per 100 000, that means more than two times the typical European rate, an indication that something is wrong with the legal system, that it is in obvious need of some liberalization. So, Russia fits, and has to be criticized for this too.

    Then I have already criticized here horrible penalties for simply owning pictures in the US. Owning pictures is a clear case of a thought crime, and, as I have discussed in detail, a very dangerous one, because it is easy to fake such "crimes", a simple hacking is sufficient. Russia has now similar laws against owning similar pictures, following here the US. So, Russia also has to be criticized for having similar dangerous thought crimes in its penal code.

Share This Page