Syria

[mids2019]

Has Syria been forgotten and who is to blame for civilian deaths in this region. It is Assad or rebel groups?

(Its a conflict in the middle East with huge civilian casualties but doesn't involve Israel so I guess this thread will for a death)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_civil_war#:~:text=The%20Syrian%20civil%20war%20(Arabic,sponsored%20and%20non%2Dstate%20actors.

@BelleHathor

But I understood that Isis prisoners are held by the US backed Kurdish forces in the part of Syria that they have been controlling. 10,000 of them apparently. Surely it's in the interest of these rebels to keep ISIS locked up. Non military Isis members are also kept in detention camps by the same forces.

Most of the time the west interfere for reasons of security or for their own economic reasons. We act in self interests not in the interests of the people living under a draconian government. I'm not sure that we are trying to be the world police.

It seems sensible here to offer financial incentives if this new government agree to meet certain criteria.

So many different rebel groups with various viewpoints. Camps and prisons full of ISIS members. And Israel seem to be going rogue from the looks of what the UN and the US are saying. The whole thing is a tinder pot.

@1dayatatime But as @SharonEllis points out there are many that criticise the West for not supporting the "brave resistance " trying to overthrow the evil dictators only to subsequently criticise the West for getting involved.

I have not heard anyone criticizing the West for not getting involved. The only criticism I have heard is where we are supporting a specific regime.

India, China, Brazil or Russia (obvious exceptions) don't tend to get involved in other countries wars. Are you seriously suggesting the people opposed to western intervention in other countries affairs are simply negative bores?

Interesting this non involvement policy is what Trump is also advocating.

Yes, those who prefer no involvement will more likely get that wish with Trump in power

I question this automatic knee jerk west is bad, ME not when such draconian laws and punishments are meted out. At the same time as posting on mn about this and freedoms for dc as if they are irrelevant and not to be protected.

It concerns me as people sound as if they'd give some of those things away

@Daftasabroom

"I have not heard anyone criticizing the West for not getting involved. The only criticism I have heard is where we are supporting a specific regime."

You may not remember but there was a lot of coverage about the "barrel bombs" in Syria pressure from the media and protesters for something to be done by protesters to stop the deaths of innocent civilians.

Equally in the Libyan conflict the position of Obama on 28 March 2011 was

“The task that I assigned our forces [is] to protect the Libyan people from immediate danger and to establish a no-fly zone.… Broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake.”

Assistant Secretary of State Philip Gordon added “The military mission of the United States is designed to implement the Security Council resolution, no more and no less.… I mean protecting civilians against attacks from Qaddafi’s forces and delivering humanitarian aid.”

This was again in response to media coverage of Libyan jets bombing civilians. But the imposition of a no fly zone had the result of ending the Gadaffi regime.

Right now Russian troops have invaded Ukraine and without Western military support it is almost certain that they would have succeeded in toppling the Zelensky Gov and replacing it with one sympathetic to Russia as well as permanently seizing large areas of Ukrainian territory.

As a yes no question do you think that previous and ongoing Western military intervention in support of Ukraine is right or wrong?

@Daftasabroom

"India, China, Brazil or Russia (obvious exceptions) don't tend to get involved in other countries wars. Are you seriously suggesting the people opposed to western intervention in other countries affairs are simply negative bores?"

It is perfectly rational to be in favour or against military intervention. The issue I have is with those in the West that firstly call for Western Governments to do something to stop atrocities happening in a certain country and then condemn the same Western countries when they do intervene.

A good example is those who complained about US and UK presence in Afghanistan but now complain about nothing being done to help the harsh treatment of women under the Taliban. You can't have it both ways.

@EasternStandard

"I question this automatic knee jerk west is bad, ME not when such draconian laws and punishments are meted out. At the same time as posting on mn about this and freedoms for dc as if they are irrelevant and not to be protected.

It concerns me as people sound as if they'd give some of those things away"

The issue I have is say for example Putin decides to successfully invade the UK then the section of society that would be most impacted by the loss of freedom of speech, civil rights etc etc (vocal liberal, left wing and female) would be expecting that section of society that would be least impacted by the removal of such rights (right wing, white, working class males) to do the fighting and dying on their behalf to preserve such freedoms.

Russia doesn't get involved in other people's wars? How about the Central African Republic, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, Tajikistan and of course Syria, to name a few......

The issue I have is say for example Putin decides to successfully invade the UK then the section of society that would be most impacted by the loss of freedom of speech, civil rights etc etc (vocal liberal, left wing and female) would be expecting that section of society that would be least impacted by the removal of such rights (right wing, white, working class males) to do the fighting and dying on their behalf to preserve such freedoms.
What? I would expect the British army to do the fighting and whoever is in a position to get conscripted. Are you suggesting that certain groups of people would sit back and let others do their fighting? And what makes you think it would only be white working class males that would "do the, fighting". Women would sit back, black people would sit back, other minority ethnic communities would sit back? Bizarre

Russia doesn't get involved in other people's wars? How about the Central African Republic, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, Tajikistan and of course Syria, to name a few......

Russia does get involved a fair bit, including Assad regime

I recall a US spokesperson talking about withdrawing more and people realising the downside of that

Idk why posters are so aligned to those who are against us. Why so little value for what we have

Its mind boggling. Russia has continued the USSR's extensive involvement in Africa and other parts of the world. Not to mention all the wars in the ex-Soviet states and extensive meddling in their politics. I mean, I read jaw-dropping stuff on this website every day but this is something else.

There was a recent spate of regime critical russians falling out of windows in the homeland, never an easy place to be a dissident.

It's surprising how much willy waving goes on in such a cold climate. I wonder how Assad is settling in.

😆 its true. No doubt someone will come along to tell us that Putin's not so bad. I've travelled there and found nothing but kindness but its a nasty, nasty place politically. I hope Assad is surrounded by the bastards.

For people that think Russia doesn't get involved in foreign interventions they have their own state funded mercenary group specifically for this purpose, as well as their own direct military intervention. Here's a map of places the Wagner group has been involved in.

Talking of Russia, I wonder what will happen to the Russian bases in Syria now? Is there still any Russian military personnel in Syria or have they all retreated. I can't see their presence being welcome there now.

Someone from Soas on the news said Russians were basically still around and described their relationship with HTS as 'cordial'.

Rather than just piling in and fighting, I guess that each are finding out what they can do for the other.
Time will tell.

@Dulra

So in the British military 11.3% self identified as belonging to an ethnic minority group compared to 17.1% of the UK working age population.

Similarly only 11.7% of the British military is female compared to 51% of the UK work age population.

Whilst it is impossible to know the political views of those in the military it would be fair to say that the nature of the job doesn't really attract those of a liberal viewpoint.

As for conscription any new major conflict wouldn't really allow time to conscript and train new recruits plus relying on latte swilling, city dwelling liberal minded females as your new recruits is not really going to win conflicts.

I don't think most of us mind that most of the UK military are male for obvious reasons. As for Russians (our enemy) causing trouble all over the places that is well known. The Financial Times had an article yesterday assessing Russian presence in Syria based on aerial photos etc which was quite interesting https://on.ft.com/41BpOsK (i.e Russian keen to disassemble it's stuff and start to withdraw a bit)

It's a good question. For the moment they are still at the Tartous Naval Base and Khmeimim airbase. It's a bit early to tell what will happen but Russia has invested heavily in Tartous and it has a massive strategic position for them in the Eastern Mediterranean so they really need to keep hold of it. Although the rebels/ new government/ faction/ civil war etc etc may have a different view on this.

obvious exceptions

obvious exceptions

obvious exceptions

obvious exceptions

obvious exceptions
obvious exceptions
obvious exceptions