Middle East 14 - You know nothing ...

[Istakhr]

Unfortunately our Mideast discussions have been urning into conspiracy and absurdity central.

Let's start with pipelines: This conspiracy theory is one of the most fucking stupid things told about syrian war.

First Saudi Arabia has already rejected Qatar's request to build that same pipeline to the Red Sea, why would they want to help Qatar now?

Second, if you bother to look at a map you'll see Qatar's "syrian pipeline" has to go through Iraq or Saudi Arabia, again why would Saudis suddenly become so selfless and if it is going through Iraq anyway, why not go through Turkey and why would the Turks want to loose business?

The real reason for Saudi, Qatari, Turk intervention in Syria is simple: Helping Islamist Sunnis, a consistent part of all these countries foreign policy in the last few years. For Saudi Arabia, weakening Iran is also another important reason for their intervention.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

I think you're overestimating the US government's ability to gain anything from such an initiative.

If it had been Obamas initiative, the Russians wouldnt have lifted a finger, and Assad would have taken his chances rather than give up his chemical weapons. The US has gone out of their way to minimize what the actual involvement would be, and as you yourself have pointed out, a few cruise missiles is not like to account for much.

Edited by KAH, Today, 04:51 PM.

I wouldn't have expected him to accept, but making a reasonable demand logically tied to the offense might make it easier to rally support. "Turn over that poison gas you just used or else" is a better argument than "we're going to drop some bombs on you to make a statement, though we don't really expect it to accomplish anything."

[KAH]

I wouldn't have expected him to accept, but making a reasonable demand logically tied to the offense might make it easier to rally support. "Turn over that poison gas you just used or else" is a better argument than "we're going to drop some bombs on you to make a statement, though we don't really expect it to accomplish anything."

If you mean the rest of the world and the American public would have been more positive wrt an American strike if it was coupled with that specific demand, no argument there.

But they didn't expect the Russians to come aboard with that, and indeed, I think 90 % of the reason the Russians did make this initiative in the first place was that Kerry pretty much said "Pshaw, like the Russians would ever do that!" They left Kerry with egg on his face, which was the only way this would happen at all.

Anyway, I guess, count your blessings.

[KAH]

Unfortunately our Mideast discussions have been urning into conspiracy and absurdity central.

Let's start with pipelines: This conspiracy theory is one of the most fucking stupid things told about syrian war.

Don't be silly. Don't you know that terror, unrest and instability are necessary conditions for pipeline building and operation?

[Ms Tyrell]

Key reasons not to support Obama's war on Syria:

1. No one knows who used those chemicals, but the weight of real evidence is against the rebels, who are definitely guilty of shocking atrocities against civilians as well as captured government soldiers;
   
   
2. Obama´s plan would turn the US Air Force into Al Qaeda´s Air Force and the USS Nimitz into the USS Bin Laden. On the eve of 9/11, it would be unforgiveable to use American tax dollars to bomb Al Qaeda into power in Syria;
   
   
3. America can´t afford another multi- billion dollar war. Neither the cost of the missiles, the lives that will be lost once the US is dragged in on the ground, nor gas at $400 a barrel;
   
   
4. If the Islamist rebels win in Syria, they will slaughter the Christian minority, just as they have already massacred thousands in captured Christian villages, including those which are the last places on Earth where people speak Aramaic;
   
   
5. If Obama gets his war, the rebels will seize the Syrian government´s arsenal of weapons. To prevent them being used against American troops overseas and American civilians in terror attacks at home, US troops will HAVE to be sent in. So a vote to bomb Syria is a vote for boots on the ground and more coffins drapped with the Stars and Stripes. That´s why it´s patriotic to say ´No´ to Obama.
   

[Usotsuki]

Well I suppose there's a certain pride to be taken in the fact that this forum is regarded as sufficiently popular to merit someone taking three seconds out of their day to copy and paste the BNP memo on Syria, and in large font too.

*feels special*

[MinDonner]

Well, the OP did promise conspiracy and absurdity, which had so far been sadly lacking in this iteration. Nice of the fl00b to step up.

[Horza]

Human Rights Watch have released their own report on the gas attack (warning: graphic).

The key evidence pointing to Syrian regime responsibility is the use of dozens of surface to surface rockets - a Syrian army delivery system not in evidence in the rebel arsenal - with chemical weapons warheads that appear to have been industrially produced by the Syrian regime.

The HRW report uses a range of sources, including open-source evidence gathered by Brown Moses and does a much better job of explaining public domain evidence than the factsheets presented by the US and UK govts; which even pro-airstrike analysts find lacking.

[flinn]

Hey guys, I know this is HARD to believe for you Obama lovers but Saudi shot down a pipe line from Qatar BUT BUT BUT>>>>>

SAUDI WANTS IT'S OWN PIPELINE THAT RUNS UP THE COAST!!!!!

It would go FROM SAUDI THROUGH JORDAN THROUGH SYRIA INTO TURKEY!!!!

Just because you don't understand doesn't mean it isn't true.

Saudi WANTS it's own PIPELINE FOR NATURAL GAS.

[MinDonner]

And I WANT a PONY!!!

[Horza]

Previously I was sceptical but now that the claims have been presented using all caps and multiple exclamation points I pronounce myself convinced. Ponies for all.

Anyway, nothing like the Torygraph for sober-minded exaggerations. I find the basic argument hard to disagree with though:

Chemical weapons are relatively easy to make and store (and fire), but much harder to dismantle safely. The chemicals themselves are fiendishly dangerous and need to be destroyed with specialist equipment without creating environmental hazards. Plus the explosive part of the delivery shell needs careful handling. Destroying CW stocks is therefore a complex and expensive operation, even under calm conditions. Both the United States and Russia have both heavily failed to meet internationally agreed deadlines for destroying their massive Cold War legacy chemical weapons stocks.

There is no precedent for attempting anything like this in a country wracked by civil war. It just can’t happen. No Syrian chemical weapons will be destroyed or "handed over" quickly.

Meanwhile any new process of setting up an international monitoring and destruction regime will require painstaking UN and wider negotiation with the Assad regime, thereby giving Assad and his state apparatus a massive boost of renewed confidence and legitimacy. Before long Washington may find itself locked on to implicitly or even explicitly supporting Assad in his civil war as the best chance to get some sort of internationally agreed CW destruction programme delivered in Syria.

[Morienthar]

I seriously hope the US doesn't go into Syria,Fuel is costly enough as it is here i.e 80 rupees a liter(About 1.5 dollars),I can't afford to pay more than that.

[The Iceman of the North]

I seriously hope the US doesn't go into Syria,Fuel is costly enough as it is here i.e 80 rupees a liter(About 1.5 dollars),I can't afford to pay more than that.

Why would US bombing Syria affect fuel prices?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

FLINN!

ALL CAPS ARGUMENTS LOOK RIDICULOUS!

FYI

[Usotsuki]

Anyway, nothing like the Torygraph for sober-minded exaggerations. I find the basic argument hard to disagree with though:

Clearly you have been neglecting to read Janet Daley and Con Coughlin, there's absolutely no sign of sobriety there at all.

But given that Congress is about as likely to authorise use of force as it is to replace "under God" in the Pledge with "being carefully touched by the Noodly Appendage" I'm not entirely sure what alternate course of action is being proposed other than being resolute, regularly and in public.

[Istakhr]

Don't be silly. Don't you know that terror, unrest and instability are necessary conditions for pipeline building and operation?

The sad thing is, there is the exact same conspiracy theory about Pakistan's main reason for the support of Taliban in Afghanistan and after 20 years of unrest and civil war in Afghanistan some people still believe it. If your highest priority in another country is building a pipeline through it, you'll want them stable, not in a never ending cycle of violence.

[The Iceman of the North]

The sad thing is, there is the exact same conspiracy theory about Pakistan's main reason for the support of Taliban in Afghanistan and after 20 years of unrest and civil war in Afghanistan some people still believe it. If your highest priority in another country is building a pipeline through it, you'll want them stable, not in a never ending cycle of violence.

That does not compute with the constant Canadian interference in the US driving up the terror, unrest and instability in the territories where their grand pipeline were supposed to be built.

[awesome possum]

1. Obama´s plan would turn the US Air Force into Al Qaeda´s Air Force and the USS Nimitz into the USS Bin Laden. On the eve of 9/11, it would be unforgiveable to use American tax dollars to bomb Al Qaeda into power in Syria;
   

Even if I were to forgive you for your hideous copy and paste job, you only make non-interventionists look bad with incredibly stupid shit like this.

There are plenty of reasons to say No to Syria that are completely based in reality. Let's stick with those, shall we?

[Horza]

Clearly you have been neglecting to read Janet Daley and Con Coughlin, there's absolutely no sign of sobriety there at all.

But given that Congress is about as likely to authorise use of force as it is to replace "under God" in the Pledge with "being carefully touched by the Noodly Appendage" I'm not entirely sure what alternate course of action is being proposed other than being resolute, regularly and in public.

If the only course of action that doesn't make you look like an incoherent shambles is an unworkable thought-bubble spun out of your SecState's sarcastic quip by your best mates the Russians, that isn't exactly disproving ambassador Sombrewood's 'Worst. Diplomacy. Ever.' accusations.

[Usotsuki]

I wasn't as far as I can tell taking issue with any criticisms of John "Shambles" Kerry, I'm just not clear what concrete alternative there is, absent congressional authorisation, to a flawed, porous and time-consuming effort to reduce the stockpiles of readily accessible chemical weaponry of the Assad regime