Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

And next, Syria?

Most clusterbombs have a fairly shocking failure rate western ones are often painted bright orange to aid clear up off get mistaken for toys :(

As long as it was delivered within parameters I've never seen a BL/RBL 755 not deploy correctly. The charmingly named 'HADES' variant of the RBL 755 used the HB submunition which didn't immediately detonate by design. It could be set to 'wait' anything up to 24 hours for area denial purposes.
 
Several things wrong with this. Firstly the jihadists have been involved in the armed uprising from very early on and a NATO intervention would have been providing cover and safe zones for them. Secondly, most analysts agree that the conflict was going to be protracted regardless of whether there was an intervention - citing lack of a definite front and the unreadiness of the opposition to assume power. Thirdly the Arab countries in question are Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE and Jordan, who would have been supporting the jihadists anyway for ideological reasons. Fourthly the intervention would have been conducted from Turkey and the Turkish strategy would be to support forces which are opposed to the Kurds. Fifthly the aim of the intervention would have been to marginalise Iran rather than to liberate Syria and thus would have leaned heavily on Sunni sectarian forces in any case.
Had NATO intervened early on supporting the secular opposition, the jihadists would be much weaker than they are now. Just look at Libya. It's the lack of intervention that has allowed them to grow to the extent they have. As for the Kurds & Iran......fuck um. You prefer Shia Islamists to Sunni ones? Long past time for the west to strongly back the SLA. Pretty clear to me that the Assad regime is going down eventually. The best way to prevent Islamists filling the the power vacuum is for NATO to back the SLA.
 
@TomUS, I presume you mean Free Syrian Army when you say SLA. But the various brigades of the FSA have long made clear their Sunni sectarian appeal/agenda just going by their very names. Plus the "secular" political opposition that would have been supported was the Syrian National Council, which never got it's act together and is dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood. There was never a chance that NATO would back the secular, leftist opposition in Syria such as the National Democratic Coordinating Committee, who opposed military intervention in any case.
 
Scuds are accurate enough to hit a country there a modernised version of a german V2.
Patriot wasnt succesful against it because it was such an ancient bit of junk
Dutch troops "lack experience" on Patriot missiles in Turkey
reuters Dec 19, 2012
"About 20 percent of those going have no experience with these systems," said Wim van den Burg, chairman of AFPM, the largest military trade union, referring to the Dutch.

"There are concerns that they will not be ready when the situation heats up and they need to use these rockets."
The stationing of Dutch, German and American Patriot batteries in Turkey has angered neighboring Iran, whose military chief told an Iranian news agency at the weekend that it risks escalating the Syrian conflict into a world war.
I can't see it spreading unless Russia or China get involved militarily? Iran can't do anything on its own.
Kuwait to host Syria crisis meeting, envoy meets Assad
reuters Dec 24, 2012
Assad is under growing pressure from rebel forces in the 21-month-old war that activists say has killed more than 44,000 people. However, diesel from his main international ally, Russia, has arrived in Syria, providing the first significant amounts of the fuel in months to power industry and the military, generate electricity and heat homes during the winter.
An Italian shipowner said two cargoes of Russian diesel had reached the Syrian port of Banias this month. It was unclear who was behind the shipments and there was no evidence they violated international sanctions against Syria.

"(Our vessels) loaded two cargoes of gasoil in Russia at the beginning of December for delivery to the East Mediterranean. The charterer then asked us to deliver the volumes to Banias," said Paolo Cagnoni, who heads Mediterranea di Navigazione S.p.A., the family-run Italian tanker firm.
I can't find any reports if it's a trade or a gift?
 
Well the atrocities just keep on coming. For no apparent reason the Syrian airforce have bombed a petrol station in Damascus. Carnage. :(

Please be warned, grim as fuck footage.

 
Well the atrocities just keep on coming. For no apparent reason the Syrian airforce have bombed a petrol station in Damascus. Carnage. :(
I'd say the reason is pretty apparent....to terrify & slaughter the population into submission like they've attempted to do with bombing bakeries & bread lines. With every one of these atrocities, the repels are strengthened.

Assad is making Bibi look like an angel by comparison.
 
Taken from the channel four news email.

Assad condemns opposition as 'western puppets'
President Assad of Syria has made a theatrical appearance at the Damascus opera house to condemn his opponents as terrorists and puppets of western enemies.
He offered the prospect of constitutional change as he has before but refused to talk to those fighting against him. The rare appearance was as heavily stage managed as the location would demand with cheering crowds and security forces deployed in large numbers.
But there was little acknowedgement of the gains made by the opposition or of the deaths brought by months of fighting since his last public appearance.
Foreign Secretary William Hague tweeted that the speech was "beyond hypocritical".

William Hague tweets a response. Just, like, what? I don't know. I'm not keeping up 100 per cent nor am I completely au fait with whats going on in Syria generally, nor do I want to see an ill judged invasion or whatever. But the longer this goes on the more I get really uneasy about what's going on.
 
The Onion excels itself: The 6 Best Dresses At The Golden Globes

And just in case you were wondering, the above is in response to this:

And the winner is … Islamophobia

America's Middle East policy has been enthusiastically endorsed. Not at the UN or Arab League, however, but by the powerbrokers of Hollywood. At the Golden Globes, there were gongs for a heroically bearded CIA spook saving hostages and American face in Iran (the film Argo); a heroically struggling agent tracking down Bin Laden (Zero Dark Thirty) and heroically flawed CIA operatives protecting America from mindless, perpetual terror (TV series Homeland).....
 
Be nice if the Americans could be talked into using one of their drone missiles. Think of the lives that might be saved. Of course they would have to find some way to say Israel did it, and the Israelis aren't likely to cooperate.
 
Taken from the channel four news email.



William Hague tweets a response. Just, like, what? I don't know. I'm not keeping up 100 per cent nor am I completely au fait with whats going on in Syria generally, nor do I want to see an ill judged invasion or whatever. But the longer this goes on the more I get really uneasy about what's going on.

You can read Assads speech here:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-we...ssads-historic-speech-full-transcript/5317977

I'd have quoted it directly but he does ramble on a bit. I find it suspicious that all we hear of the speech is Billy Hague saying "nyar nyar nyar nyar don't listen to him people it's all bullshit nyar nyar nyar" in fact I will now make a point of reading the speech, than have some slimey mendacious fuck tell me to pay it no mind.

Assad asks in the speech "who are we supposed to negotiate with?" a reasonable question if you ask me.
 
Assad asks in the speech "who are we supposed to negotiate with?" a reasonable question if you ask me.
I think most all the rebels would say "We don't want to negotiate with him. We want to kill him." In fact I saw one being interviewed recently who said exactly that. Sounds reasonable to me.
 
I think most all the rebels would say "We don't want to negotiate with him. We want to kill him." In fact I saw one being interviewed recently who said exactly that. Sounds reasonable to me.

Yup, we'll blast our way through rivers of blood and make hills of Syrian skulls to smash Assad, turn Syria into a smoking ruin with a volume of atrocities not seen since the Mongol invasions, because Assad stepping down before 2014 is the most important consideration above all else.

The same could be said of Assad, but like he asked, who would the Syrian State desolve itself to make way for... The Army of Allah's Most Devout Warriors, or Those Who Tag Their Names with the Entrails of the Unbelievers, or maybe a gaggle of quarreling godloon expats rounded up by the CIA and given a script to read from while living in hotels paid for by the Kingdom of Saudi Fucking Arabia?
 
The same could be said of Assad, but like he asked, who would the Syrian State desolve itself to make way for...
That's not up to Assad to decide or question. He has proven himself over almost 2 yrs to be a butcher. He is only prolonging the carnage & has no role in any negotiations. It's simply time for him to go. Remember Gaddafi dear leader Assad. You're next, but then you probably have multiple escape routes to Teheran.
 
That's not up to Assad to decide or question. He has proven himself over almost 2 yrs to be a butcher. He is only prolonging the carnage & has no role in any negotiations. It's simply time for him to go. Remember Gaddafi dear leader Assad. You're next, but then you probably have multiple escape routes to Teheran.

Kind of is actually, as he's the head of state in command of the armies of the state of Syria. It is foolish to just declare that there's no need to negotiate with the sitting head of state. Do you really think this is just some troublesome chieftain back in the days of Victoria that we can just have a gun-boat and a few hired warriors from the tribe across the mountain come in and shoo away? Not how things work fella. Negotiation is the only alternative to war here.
 
i agree with Camouflage on this point - while you can make a case that Assad doesn't have the right to decide whether he stays or goes, he does have a responsibility (yes, i know...) to ensure that there is some kind of coherent handover, and he has a responsibility as to who he hands over to.

just fcuking off and having the Syrian Army/security apparatus disintegrate/Balkanise is not a good outcome - internally it would cause chaos and probably open warfare amongst the myriad opposition groups, some of whom are undoubtedly very nasty indeed, and it would also create a free for all amongst such nasties for possession of Syrias stocks of MANPADS and CW. these are not good results, either for Syrians or anyone else.

Syria is a shit sandwich, there is no longer a 'good' outcome available - the more moderate political/military groups have long been eclipsed by the serious Islamist/Jihadist groups, and Assad has done so much damage that any kind of transitional, stable (ish) arrangement that combines him leaving and another group(s) taking full charge in a coordinated way is unthinkable.

i was in favour of, at the begining of this, western military intervention to give his regime the shove while the more moderate/democratic opposition groups were the leaders of this insurgency - allowing a 'Libya, but better' result - but this is no longer available. the options are civil war with Assad as Mayor of Damascas, or you can have Syria with either one group of nasties in charge, or Syria split up into a couple of seperate feifdoms with several groups of nasties in charge.

those are the options, and both are shit.
 
Syrian rebels accuse jihadist groups of trying to hijack revolution

A schism is developing in northern Syria between jihadists and Free Syrian Army units, which threatens to pitch both groups against each other and open a new phase in the Syrian civil war.

Rebel commanders who fight under the Free Syrian Army banner say they have become increasingly angered by the behaviour of jihadist groups, especially the al-Qaida-aligned Jabhat al-Nusra, who they say aim to hijack the goals of the revolution....
 
Anybody know what the power ratio between the jihadists and the FSA is?
If, to a degree money is power I would imagine the former have the upper hand as they are financed in the main by Saudi Arabia and there have often been complaints that they are hanging on to all the weapons and ammunition that they either obtain from outside or capture. The reality though is bound to be more complicated than that.
 
Aren't, or weren't, the FSA getting money from Saudi and Qatar as well? Not to mention Turkey and NATO.
 
Aren't, or weren't, the FSA getting money from Saudi and Qatar as well? Not to mention Turkey and NATO.

if the FSA are getting money from NATO they aren't achieving much with it. going on previous events - Afghanistan in the 80's - whatever Saudi Arabia does dwarfs what everyone else does: most off the stuff i've seen on funding of the various Mujahadeen groups suggests that the Saudi's (both private donations and official state funding) were funding them to the tune of 10 - 15 times what the US, UK, France, Germany were sending put together - and the Saudi's only fund groups that reflect their views/interests.
 
Aren't, or weren't, the FSA getting money from Saudi and Qatar as well? Not to mention Turkey and NATO.
I guess it all depends on what you mean by the FSA. In the early days I would say it was seen more as an encompassing umbrella organisation and as a consequence was probably receiving monies from many sources and still is receiving money from Turkey and Nato. But what with the recent divisions and disagreements I reckon the more extreme Jihadi types may be getting more of the lion's share from the Saudis and Qatar.
 
It's my understanding that the Jihadists are the hard-core crack-troops of the rebels, they have the experience and the ruthlessness to be most effective on the battle-field re special operations and so on. Good soldiers don't make good democrats or good human-rights activists. Angry godloons make excellent fighters.
 
It's my understanding that the Jihadists are the hard-core crack-troops of the rebels, they have the experience and the ruthlessness to be most effective on the battle-field re special operations and so on. Good soldiers don't make good democrats or good human-rights activists. Angry godloons make excellent fighters.

its an inevitable consequence of the protests/insurgency not getting very far when it started, and the savagery of Assads response - as the people got more desperate they turned to people they previously wouldn't have touched with a barge pole, and the middle-aged law professors and dentists (oh, the irony) just got swept aside by frightening, but equipped, trained, experienced and motivated islamist/jihadist groups.
 
Syrian Kurds Battle Extremist Fundamentalists

In a potentially very bad sign for the Syrian Revolution, Agence France Presse Arabic reports that in the town of Ra’s al-Ain in the province of Hasaka on the border with Turkey, heavy fighting has been raging between local Syrian Kurds and an invading force of Muslim fundamentalist Arabs that deployed tanks and artillery against them. The Kurdish forces claimed victory, saying that they had captured a tank being used by Jabhat al-Nasr (Succor Front), which the US considers a terrorist organization with ties to the Iraqi al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia. The Kurds, who either actively or passively oppose the government of Bashar al-Assad, are bitter that the opposition should have captured a tank and then used it against them instead of against the ruling Baath Party. The fundamentalists accuse the local Kurdish party, a branch of the Kurdish Workers Party, of being pro-Assad, which they deny.
 
I read the speech in the link above, very interesting seeing the regimes point of view. Assad seems to have the rebels number, but the Western media don't seem to have Assads. When you read it you see how slanted even the reporting of the speech has been.

We are fighting those, most of whom are non-Syrians, who came for twisted concepts and fake terms they call Jihad, but nothing can be farther from Jihad and Islam. Most of them are terrorists instilled with al-Qaeda thought, and I believe that most of you know how this kind of terrorism was fostered three decades ago in Afghanistan by the West and with Arabs’ money.

After the mission of these terrorists ended with the disintegration of the Soviet Union and its departure from Afghanistan, terrorism broke loose and started hitting everywhere in the Arab world, the Islamic world and then moved to the West. They tried to get rid of it through the Afghanistan War and in the aftermath of Iraq’s War, but this terrorism was unyielding and pervasive, and started to infiltrate Western societies. So, the events in the Arab world, especially in Syria, presented the Western powers with an opportunity to transfer as many terrorists as possible to Syria to turn it into the land of Jihad, hence dispensing with two troublesome rivals at the same time through getting rid of the terrorists and weakening Syria which is a nuisance for the West.

An organization specialized in terrorism issued a month or so ago a report on the decrease in terrorist acts in general, especially in the Middle and East Asia, which is true, because most of the terrorists came to Syria from these countries and some even come from the Western countries. Those terrorists’ infiltration into any society is a security threat, but it is possible to vanquish them when we have the will to do so. The most dangerous still is a social and intellectual infiltration. When this kind of thought infiltrates into a society, it becomes deformed unless this issue is seriously tackled regardless of the crisis in Syria. We have to be above differences. Otherwise, we would bequeath blood to our sons and grandsons. Syria, as we know it, won’t be there, not necessarily geographically speaking, but Syria as a society, because this thought incites sedition and destroys geography and the political meaning of any society which it invades. This is a great responsibility, and we have to unite in order to shoulder it.

The crisis has other dimensions, not only internal ones as it became clear to all who want to see. Regionally, there are parties who seek to divide Syria, others to weaken it, and some parties are providing the criminals with funds and weapons, while others are providing them with support and training. We were not surprised at what some neighboring countries have done to weaken and control the Syrian people, and the countries who sought a place in a history they don’t have, writing it instead with the blood of innocent Syrians, but Syria and the Syrian people are strong, and they vow that they will not forget.

Ouch... is that conspiraloon tin-fedora nonsense or has he kinda got us there? Bolded bit was interesting to me measured against the anti-christian and "Kill Alawitey" type secterianism that the rebels seem to be up for.

Reform without security is like security without reform. Neither will be successful without the other. Those who keep parroting that Syria has opted for a security solution do not see or hear. We have repeatedly said that reforms and politics go in one hand and eliminating terrorism in the other.

And to those who twist facts we say: when someone is attacked and he defends himself, do we say that he defended himself or he chose the security solution? Why when a state defends its people and when people defend their homeland, they say that they have opted for the security solution?

Defending the homeland is a duty that isn’t up for discussion and is a legal, constitutional and religious duty and is the only choice. The security solution is no choice. Here there is one choice, which is self-defense. If we chose the political solution and sought it since the first days, this doesn’t mean not to defend ourselves, and if we chose the political solution since the first days, this means that we need a partner that is capable and willing to move in a political process and enter a dialogue process on the national level. If we chose the political solution and didn’t see a partner, that doesn’t mean that we didn’t desire one; this means that we didn’t see a partner during the past stage. To be clearer, for instance, if someone wants to get married and sought a partner but didn’t find someone to desire and accept them, this doesn’t mean that he doesn’t want to be married. Therefore, any proposition that the state in Syria chose the security solution is incorrect and wasn’t proposed at any time; and no state official announced that we chose the security solution.

When you’re under attack and you defend yourself, it’s called self-defense, not choosing a security solution. We didn’t choose war; war was imposed on Syria, and when the state defends the people and we defend ourselves, no reasonable person can call that choosing a security solution. Defending the homeland is a duty and an only choice, ad accepting the political solution doesn’t mean not defending ourselves, but also accepting the political solutions means the existence of a political partner that is capable of dialogue and willing to engage in it.

We never rejected the political solution as we have adopted it since day one based on dialogue as its main pillar as we lend our hands to those who have a national political project that moves Syria forward. But who do we conduct dialogue with? With those who are carrying extremist thinking, and do not believe except in blood, killing and terrorism.

Should we conduct dialogue with gangs that receive their orders from abroad and follow a foreigner who orders them to reject dialogue because it believes that dialogue will foil his schemes aiming at weakening and undermining Syria?


The leaders of some regional countries know that if Syria came out of the crisis, it will undermine their political future after they were involved and drowned their peoples with lies, spent their countries’ potentials in supporting terrorism and involved in the bloodshed and the killing of the innocent.

As for the west, the descendant of colonialism and owner of the first seal in the policy of division and despicable sectarian strife, it is the one who closed the door of dialogue not us, because it’s used to giving orders to the submissive, and we’re used to sovereignty, independence and freedom of decision, because it’s addicted to hirelings and the subjugated and because we’re raised on dignity and pride, and so shall we remain. So, how can it hold dialogue with us, and why would it hold dialogue with us?

b25ce1.jpg


He goes on to set out a fairly reasonable outline for peace, including a Truth & Reconcilliation process, the drafting of a new constitution, amnesty, all marked by a series of national referendums etc.

Not to forget that this is the figurehead of a notoriously brutal regime but certainly what Assad sets out here sounds worthy of engaging with seriously for Syrias armed-reformists, considering that the alternative is ongoing war and destruction. I think it's a mistake to under-estimate the extent to which many Syrians consider themselves under attack from external forces, if you bother to read this speech and bear in mind Assad's significant support base in Syria even amongst the unarmed reformists, the "No Negotiation" brigades do look pretty blatantly like agents of foreign aggression.

Also I thought this was an interesting observation...

They call it a revolution, but in fact it has nothing to do with revolutions. A revolution needs thinkers. A revolution is built on thought. Where are their thinkers? A revolution needs leaders. Who is its leader? Revolutions are built on science and thought not on ignorance, on pushing the country ahead not taking it centuries back, on spreading light not cutting power lines. A revolution is usually done by the people not by importing foreigners to rebel against the people. A revolution is in the interest of people not against the interests of people. Is this a revolution? Are those revolutionaries?
 
By the way, does anyone know about the whole Syrian Observatory for Human Rights thing? This guy (it's a one-man operation apparently) is always being sourced in the media for quotes from "activists". Apparently he hijacked the former organizations domain name and has been the source about what's going on in Syria regarding atrocities and casualties ever since.

Here's an article I just googled that seems to go into this, dunno who al-akhbars shady backers (if any) are mind:
http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/syrian-observatory-inside-story

Not surprisingly our glorious media here in the West hasn't bothered to examine any of this as far as I'm aware, they continue to source the bloke in London though.

If only foreign journalists could have unrestricted access to report directly, lest we end up buying any old bollocks some bloke in London tells us about the situation. Seems to be the way of war now, media black-outs and in-bedded 'journalists'.
 
Back
Top Bottom