Latest attack in Syria

[Jammybean]

Just watching BBC news, they were frantically trying to save a toddler who was convulsing . I feel physically sick.

Skulll & Bones is not like the Bullingdon Club!

Math - why are you trying to paint Russia as a noble bystander? They are the ones who have been arming the regime?!

Also, it is far to early to paint Libya as some kind of disaster, they have already held democratic elections successfully. There may be some unrest in the Benghazi region, but this is not unexpected in the wake of such a long period of autocratic rule, particularly as Libya is such a huge and diverse country.

Tbh, I find there something rather unpleasant in the way people seem to rather relish the difficulties in other countries, as if they should be happy to accept dictatorship, as democracy is obviously not for the likes of "those people"..

Nice guy - again you are completely ignoring the FSA, who comprise the vast majority of the rebels. They are not backed by Al Qaeda, nor do they support them.

KungFu - you do know that the current head of the SNC is a Christian? The majority of the rebel are Sunni, because the majority of the country is Sunni, but there are certainly Druze and Christian s fighting in the FSA. The fact is, the people lived in harmony prior to the regime, it is classic Assadist "Us or nothing" sloganeering to suggest the people need a dictatorship to stop sectarianism happening.

GoshAnneG - Arab countries are washing their hands of this.

Would those be the Arab countries who have housed hundreds of thousands of refugees (and Turkey too + Iraqi Kurdistan), thus allowing them to flee to safety? Is that washing your hands?

Or would they be the Arab countries - Saudi and Qatar who are arming the rebels? Is that also washing your hands?

But people are saying that our role should be humanitarian and you are disagreeing. The Arab world won't intervene militarily and won't support military intervention. Why?

Why don't they do more than arming the rebels? We are feeding the rebels too and sending medical aid.

If you think humanitarian intervention is enough for the Arab world, why is it not enough for the west?

hello?

You yourself are ignoring the al-qaeda links. This is a Bloomberg analysis.

"More than two years into Syria?s civil war, radical Sunni Islamists are emerging as the prevalent force seeking to topple President Bashar al-Assad, according to military analysts in Europe and the Middle East. Their influence is among the biggest challenges facing the U.S. and allies such as Saudi Arabia as they decide which anti-Assad forces to back and how.

?Two of the most powerful insurgent factions in Syria are al-Qaeda factions,? Evan Kohlmann, senior partner at Flashpoint Partners in New York, said by telephone. ?Even were the Assad regime to fall and there be some kind of takeover by rebels, there?s not a clear understanding that everyone here will be able to agree and form any kind of government.?

Libya, Iraq
The struggle echoes the tumultuous transitions of power in Arab countries rocked by revolts since 2011, as well as the sectarian conflict in Iraq following the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

In Libya, armed militias that helped end Muammar al-Qaddafi?s rule have refused to lay down their weapons, obstructing the North African oil-producer?s efforts to restore order and revive the economy.

The rise of radical Islamists in Syria came as attempts by Western and Arab countries to support moderate anti-Assad groups failed to unite the opposition or bolster the rebel Free Syrian Army, led mainly by former Assad army officers. Instead, what began as a peaceful uprising turned into a war involving about 1,200 groups, according to U.S. intelligence estimates. Now, some of them have turned against each other."

Do we need to be part of this

Gosh - Turkey's government has ulterior motives. They are letting in huge numbers of Syrians and strategically placing them in cities where fundamentalist religious types their supporters are in low numbers, in preparation for the upcoming elections.

This is Izmir, on the Western coast of Turkey right opposite Greek islands. About 900 km to Syria. How and why do you think all those refugees got to Izmir?

Crumbled - I am not at your beck and call. Do not Hello? me, I have other things to do aside from reply to this thread. Is housing refugees not humanitarian then? Also are the Red Crescent and many others, unknown organisations to you.

One uncited, unlinked report isn't hugely persuasive either.

Cote - If the refugees are not Turkish citizens, how will they be able to vote? I'm aware that anti AKP paranoia is sizeable, but really?

:)
If you think humanitarian intervention is enough for the Arab world, why is it not enough for the west?

The Red Crescent is an unknown organisation to me? Is it really?

See - this is why i don't get into politics, i hate arguing. I just know i want it to stop - im being niave aren't i?

Gosh, that isn't what Walnuts asked you.
She asked that if humanitarian aid was all that the countries surrounding Syria and the Arab league were offering, why is that not an acceptable response from 'the west' as well?
Why is more expected by some?

Gosh: - the Arab world won't even come out in vocal support of missile strikes, never mind join in. They're not being asked to sacrifice their sons and daughters - how about they give unequivocal backing in words? How about that? Are they ? No they aren't.

Silver - I have explained the non humanitarian aid being offered too. I would absolutely support more arms being sold to the FSA. But the Arab countries, for all their money, do not have the airborne expertise or experience, that the Western countries do, and this expertise could bring the fall of the regime to a much swifter conclusion, as happened in Libya and was used to end Serb hostility in Kosovo.

There is also the idea that using CW should be punished, I would agree with this. The use of such weaponry should be condemned by humanity.

I will conclude with this. It maybe that people have decided that Syria is beyond help. But that such a huge and bloody conflict has emerged and the UN is absolutely powerless to intervene bodes very poorly for the future. Very poorly indeed. Some may like to think that they would never be in such a situation, such atrocities could never happen to them...but who can be certain?

I opposed the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and have already explained why upthread, to me this is very much like The Boy Who Cried Wolf, but it's the Syrian people who are paying the price.

They could support it in words. Why don't they?

They could offer military support, however nominal. Saudi Arabia could help easily.

Why don't they? Why is it up to the west? It will sure as hell be turned on its head on the nasty infidels as soon as it suits the fundamentalists.

"If the refugees are not Turkish citizens, how will they be able to vote? I'm aware that anti AKP paranoia is sizeable, but really?"

How naive of you. Bless

I guess you would believe Peter Pan flew those refugees from Syria all the way to Izmir so they can camp out in the parks

They will of course be given nationality, very quickly. That is what happened to the 200,000 Kurds who came into Turkey fleeing Saddam. AKP never won in Izmir. It is not paranoia to see that "homing" Syrians in Izmir has a purpose and that is to increase AKP's natural voter base of religious, conservative, fundamentalist, covered-up-from-head-to-toe people. Your people, Gosh Maybe you should offer them a place in your neighbourhood?

crescent - "Turkey has had Syria shoot down a plane killing a citizen and also send shells across the border into its territory killing turkish citizens. they are a member of NATO and could have invoked the clause that NATO member states have to come to the defence of any member country that is attacked. i wonder why they havent?"

Because that is not war and Syria is no military threat to Turkey, who has the second largest army of NATO after the US.

"syrian refugees trying to get to europe via Greece. Izmir is probably their crossing point to those greek islands."

They might hope that but I doubt any/many will succeed. Due to obvious historical tensions, any such crossing between Turkey and Greek islands is very heavily regulated. Even residents of Izmir have to get visas in advance to make that crossing.

My point was: How did so many of them make it to Izmir? Why not any of the neighbouring cities who are just as close to many Greek islands?

I had no idea about Izmir. Such an education. Will read more.

Niceguy -your points are very well made.
Intervention is completely otiose without a clear attainable objective. Chucking stones in the general direction of a bully to show you disapprove of his actions - utterly pointless.
Michael Gove has gone down in my estimation - until now, I was his last remaining fan in the general electorate.
Chumming up to the American President, DC trying to emulate Bliar, lining up the lucrative sinecures after office, but with Afghanistan TB pulled the drawbridge up after him.
Send your sons to war, TB and DC is you believe in it, don't send ours to flatter your egos with wargames.

takver thank you for the link! It definately explains why Obama is more interested in the humanitarian crisis in Syria more than Sudan or Zimbabwe

"Takver - If our govts really are evil behind-the-scenes manipulators, then it absolutely is up to us to hold them back."

I'm not sure that considering the interests of their own citizens (ie the desire of the majority for a reliable source of fossil fuels at a low price) makes governments 'evil behind the scenes manipulators' necessarily. At the least, I'd say it is an arguable point. (Personally, I'd rather see a major shift to renewables, and drop in consumption, but I don't think most voters would agree with me.)

BUT I have to say that in my lifetime, I don't see evidence of such interventions ending well for any parties - the people on the ground don't appear to end up any better off, and the western states don't seem to get the compliant and reliable regimes that they want.

The one exception I can think of - though it is hard to know what the 'hands off' scenario would have been - is the Balkans in the 90s, and it was rather different in that AFAIK there wasn't any resource issue underlying it, and they are much closer & part of Europe.

GoshAnne -- I am not painting Russia as a noble bystander. It has armed the regime, just as the US armed Mubarrak's regime (and only recently did a rethink about continuing to ship arms to the Egyptian Army). For all its faults it is better than the Muslim Brotherhood so imo the rethink is a mistake on the part of the US, which continues to overlook the value of stability as a political aim in the region. You would think the US wasn't still dependent on foreign oil, or that its ally Israel wasn't in any sort of jeopardy.

Russia is at least not sentimental and pursues a policy of self interest that is not patronising or likely to come back and bite it in the bum in the sense that they will not add grist to the mill of the fundamentalists (about whom they have no illusions).

The disaster I referred to is the attack on the US embassy, the murder of the ambassador and others Americans, and the failure of the State Department in the runup to it to take the ongoing and remorseless fundamentalist threat seriously. The recent closure of embassies all over the ME in response to the threat is a reaction to the way it was burned in Libya.

The debacle there shows the fundamentalists are thankless and ruthless, and that any attempt to remove regimes by the west (under what authority?) needs to also remove the threat of the fundamentalists. Removing Assad from Syria would only be the first phase of any envisioned conflict. Part Two would involve waging a civil war against the fundamentalist elements. So much for 'democracy' - they do have some support after all.

The Bloomberg analysis sounds very sane and I hope it is being read in the White House and that no-one there thinks the magic wand of 'democracy' can be waved and all will be fine.