Post: #1

Quote:Turkey vowed to take “necessary steps” after concluding that Syria had shot down a Turkish fighter jet near the two countries’ border Friday, sending tensions soaring in the already fraught region.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/midd...ml?hpid=z2

I have to admit that I'm a little disappointed with the limp-wristed response from the Turks.

Syria: "We just shot down your plane, bitch."

Turkey: "We will make its final position known once the evidence is uncovered and will determinedly take necessary steps.” (actual quote)



On a serious note, I'm sure Turkey is itching to assert its rising power by showing off its military capabilities. If not on the Kurds, why not on the Syrians, especially since the US will give them a green light?

Post: #2

I fucking hope so. Theyre going to kill themselves regardless, I may as well get paid participating.

And Turkey has a bit of whoop ass they have been begging to unleash, can they stand to toe-to-toe with syria? Probably not but the US will come to their aid.

Post: #3

would love to see asaad's head on a platter.

Post: #4

I'm here in Kuwait right now. I'll let you know what's up as long as it is unclassified. We actually finished a unit run and my General wasn't in it. Maybe the attack had something to do with it. My unit is suppose to leave next month. I doubt they will extend this unit because the other unit will hit ground soon. Hopefully this will not affect our Afghan pull out (giggity). Who knows.

Post: #5

Turkey is easily the weakest state geo-politcally in the region and Its being used as a fallguy to coax Syria into a larger war with NATO.

Why was the airship in Syrian airspace? Would Washington be justified to shoot down a Canadian fighter jet that infringes D.C. airspace over the potomac? Of course.

Syria has the right just like any other nation to protect its sovereign airspace.

Turkey is playing with fire as they protect Islamic rebels while trying to be an appeaser the west and NATO. You can't play both sides like this and not expect it to end in a mess.

If the can of worms in Syria is let out Turkey will get the worst of it.

(06-22-2012 10:14 PM)bigxxx Wrote:  would love to see asaad's head on a platter.

For any haters on Assad I just ask this question because if you viewed both sides of this conflict you would make the obvious decision also:

Currently there is a drug war in Mexico between rival gangs and the Govt. Many have been killed even Americans. Now lets flip this for a second and imagine these drug lords are fighting in Texas and being armed by Mexican and Central American forces. The Texas national guard and USA army come in to protect its sovereignty against these fighters. Deaths happen on both sides.

Whom is right?

Is Assad wrong for protecting his nations sovereignty? Would you not expect your nation to do the same faced with foreign armed opposition?

Is Assad a saint? far from it. But neither is Bush, Obama, Clinton, Harper, Cameron, or Blair - all have blood on their hands. But you can't hate on somebody (presuming you know all the facts on the ground) from protecting his nation from outside forces, this is step 1 in Sovereignty. If you can not protect your borders or internal security you are not a functioning state. Period. Fuck democracy, and institutions, upholding the rule of law and stability is step 1 - all else follows that. You have Assad whom has put a new constitution to vote with a majority of its people supporting it (51.4%) and is giving in to internal pressures for more transparency whiten his government. Yet he is villafied while nobody takes his word or the SYRIAN PEOPLES words as truth. You have outsiders trying to dictate how a nation is to be protected and run. Fuck that. Why doesn't Hillary Clinton ask the people of Syria what they want? Not a bunch of rag tags mercs whom are paid with hookers and gold from the pits of whom knows where.

FSA is armed & funded by the West and Qatar [C.I.A aiding in steering arms to Syrian rebels] and are made up largely of Al-Qaeda defectors shipped in from the mess in Libya. You have former blood thirsty lunatics like Abdulhakim Belhadj whom killed American Solders in cold blood in Afghanistan, former leader of the Libyan rebels, now in Jordan helping to call the shots with the FSA. These goons don't even speak the same style of Arabic as Syrians yet are painted as "freedom fighters" for their nation. Garbage.

Look at both sides before you make broad judgments. If you we're in Assads shoes you would be doing the same.

*CNN Syria propaganda:




*Al Jazerra reporter resigns over "biased" Syria coverage

* BBC lies over Syria Masacare:

Quote:Much has been written about the barbarous massacre in the Syrian administrative area of Al-Houla on 25 May 2012, in which 108 persons are known to have died including 49 children. Absent a definitive report from the UN observer mission we are left with media and cyber speculation, much of which does not stand scrutiny.

The BBC is arguably the worst offender, having published a photograph submitted by an anonymous source which it was claimed depicted the bodies from the massacre. The photograph was in fact taken by Marco Di Lauro in Iraq in 2003. [1] The BBC claims to have followed its checking process on the photograph which yielded some information pointing to its veracity. This is simply not tenable. The bodies are all numbered and in the bottom of the picture can be seen consecutive numbering in Arab numerals from 382 to 386. The death toll at Houla was only 108, so that anyone with a limited knowledge of Arabic and a remote understanding of the story would be able to appreciate that there is something wrong with the claim made for this picture. Journalist Keith Harmon Snow rebuts any suggestion that the misinformation happened by accident:


In apologizing for this monumental ‘error’ Chris Hamilton wrote on the BBC Editor’s blog that “such mistakes are very rare”. [3] But even this claim was refuted only two days later when gross negligence gave way to farce and BBC News, intending to post the logo of the UN Security Council as background filler, filmed instead a logo of the fictional UN Space Command that originated in a commercial video game set in the 22nd century. [4]

Much of the mainstream media favoured the BBC’s slant. Nine days after the massacre a report in the Telegraph claimed that the crime had been perpetuated by the “pro-Assad thugs” of the Shabiha who had “slit the throats of anyone they came across”. The report written in London and Beirut said that a survivor identified the Shabiha because they were wearing white trainers. [5] Two points in this story later discredited the fabrication. White trainers of course are standard youth culture the world over, and video footage published on 10 June by the Telegraph itself, shows they are widely used by Syrian rebels. [6] The throat slitting is now generally rejected as an embellishment to the story and the allegation was refuted later in the week by Mary Dejevsky in the Independent and Jon Williams on the BBC blog. (Dejevsky said the victims had been killed when gunmen sprayed indiscriminately into homes, [7] while Williams said that Western officials had refuted the story to him while in Damascus. [8]) The calumny appears to have been started by Hervé Ladsous, the United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations, who according to Reuters, on 29 May accused the Shabihas of killing “the victims from knife wounds”. [9] On 8 June Reuters’ correspondent Erika Solomon again reported him saying that government troops or militia were probably responsible,[10] despite the fact that UN observers under his authority have still not been able to ascertain the truth.

Notes

[1] http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1...=3&theater
[2] Russia Today, 29 May 2012; Slaughter Slant: Houla massacre sparks media blame-game; 4:04minutes http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...RKj9dNVdF8
[3] Chris Hamilton, 29 May 2012; Houla massacre picture mistake; BBC News The Editors
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/20...l#comments
[4] Top Telly Fan, 2 June 2012; BBC News FAIL - claims Halo logo is for United Nations Security Command (Newswatch, 1.6.12); http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYIDjyVne...re=related
[5] Harriet Alexander, and Ruth Sherlock, 2 June 2012; The Shabiha: Inside Assad's death squads; The Telegraph, London;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...quads.html
[6] Anon, 10 June 2012; The Telegraph, London; http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...untry.html
[7] Mary Dejevsky, 8 June 2012; The Euro crisis will look like a walk in the park if Syria explodes; The Independent, London; http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/com...27751.html
[8] Jon Williams, 7 June 2012; Reporting conflict in Syria; BBC News The Editors; http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/20...l#comments
[9] Anon, 29 May 2012; West expels envoys over massacre of Syrian children; REUTERS AFRICA; http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/...P320120529
[10] Erika Solomon, 8 June 2012; Smell of death lingers at Syrian massacre village; REUTERS; http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/0...P020120608

Post: #6

Do not forget that Turkey was a Middle East badass for a thousand years.

Post: #7

Kosko, are you seriously trusting a 51% vote presented by a dictatorship to be genuine? I can't help but feel that your post is cut6paste without some critical proofreading for your own part.

Post: #8

(06-23-2012 10:50 AM)Vicious Wrote:  Kosko, are you seriously trusting a 51% vote presented by a dictatorship to be genuine? I can't help but feel that your post is cut6paste without some critical proofreading for your own part.

That vote was more transparent then the last Canadian or American primary is/was.

In Canada Harper has majority rule with only 23% support.

In America districts and delegates in many primaries such as New Hampshire and Iowa wern't counted to keep certain candidates from winning.

Syria is a democratic beacon in comparison to us in the west if you compare.

Plus

The Syrian vote was also monitored by outsider international observers, with citizens still marching out to vote with sniper fire and bomb threats being called out by the mercenaries.

Normally what happens in "dodgy" states is that a party or pact rejects the result and the International election observers recommondations. The outsider observers never viewed the results as shady.. thus why you never heard that a majority of citizens voted in a new constitution in the media as it goes agiainst the narrative of Syria that the people are in revolt and their leader Assad is as a blood thirsty killer of his own people with evreybody in revolt agianst him.

Exactly the same shit that is going on in Bahrain where in that tiny nation 85-90% show opposition to the brutal leader many have been killed. Its hypocracy at its finest (Since Bahrain is a USA and Saudi ally). I just call the kettle black when it is. The Syrian conflict is 100% manufactured for other goals. It is not what it appears to be on the surface.

Even Syrian Ally Russia calls for reforms in the country but asks that it takes place internally and naturally as it has been going. No through outside and brutal force that is being offered from NATO and the west.

Is my post cut and paste? Yea I pasted three instances where MSM - where the majority of people have gotten their views of Syria from - is being bullshit. I have studied this conflict since it started and since I am bad and known for long winded posts, last thing I want to do is go on a 8 page rant trying to break down the Syrian conflict piece by piece. Do the research on your own.

Don't attack the style of how I present things to you. You can be critical of my style, grammar, and form being rough and unpolished but try and refute the facts not how its presented to you.

So how about you go do the critical reading. I have done mine already.

Post: #9

Quote:Syria is a democratic beacon in comparison to us in the west if you compare.

This comment should tell everyone exactly what they need to know about kosko's political leanings.

Never mind that the Syrian elections are by default fraudulent because the government chooses the candidates that can be voted for. An election where your only choice is from a government approved list of candidates is not an election.

And it's funny you mentioned international monitors, considering the head of the UN, Ban Ki Moon, stated in front of the entire UN assembly, LESS THAN 2 WEEKS AGO,

Quote:"The situation in Syria continues to deteriorate. Each day seems to bring new additions to the grim catalogue of atrocities:

Assaults against civilians … brutal human rights violations … mass arrests … torture … execution-style killings of whole families.

For many months, it has been evident that President Assad and his Government have lost all legitimacy. The recent slaughter in El-Houla brought this fact into horrifying focus.

Men, women, even children were executed at point-blank range; some had their throats slit or skulls crushed.

The trail of blood leads back to those responsible. Any regime or leader that tolerates such killing of innocents has lost its fundamental humanity."

You make it seem as if the UN and international monitors have verified the results of a legitimate, democratic election when exactly the opposite is the case. The entire international community has called for Assad and his criminal regime to step aside.

Comparing an authoritarian dictatorship to the liberal democracies of the west is a frivolous and flippant remark.

The legitimacy of a government is derived from the consent of the governed. Assad's government is illegitimate by definition. Assad is finished. I give him less than 2 years in power before he is killed (hopefully with his bitch wife), in exile, or on trial in front of the ICC.

The Syrian people have a basic human right to choose their own government.

I sincerely can not believe you are defending a government that is committing genocide against its own population.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Post: #10

Kosko is of course completely correct.

Assad is assaulted from all sides, radical jihadists from within, and latter-day crusaders who wrecked Serbia, Iraq, Libya etc from without. A truly unholy alliance if there ever was one.

I for one am proud that my nation supports independent Syria to the hilt.

Post: #11

(06-23-2012 03:03 PM)Farmageddon Wrote:  

Quote:Syria is a democratic beacon in comparison to us in the west if you compare.

This comment should tell everyone exactly what they need to know about kosko's political leanings.

Never mind that the Syrian elections are by default fraudulent because the government chooses the candidates that can be voted for. An election where your only choice is from a government approved list of candidates is not an election.

I don't know much about Syria but do you really think this isn't how things are in the US?? Please.

Post: #12

War in the making? No, thanks to cool-headed approach by the Turkish PM...He is going against the natural "hot-head" instinct of Turks, it's a good approach to protect the current economic state of the country, however, it pains every single Turk that we haven't unleashed hell on Damascus, the lands we ruled from 16th century to 20th century... There is a reason why Syrian officials went on an apology storm afterwards, stating that they didn't know that it was a Turkish plane, and it wasn't a rocket but a anti-aircraft weapon that shot down the plane, while claiming it was in Syrian air space. The reason why Turkish officials want to examine the evidence is to take most correct action...The evidence so far indicates the jet was in international waters when it was shot down and ended up in Syrian waters once it was down. Given the recent pressures on Syria by NATO countries, Turkey does not want to be the puppet-head on a war...but Syrians will get their whether economically, politically, or as last resort, through force.

(06-22-2012 11:06 PM)kosko Wrote:  Turkey is easily the weakest state geo-politcally in the region

How so? I`m curious to learn with what evidence or statistics you came to that conclusion...

(06-22-2012 11:06 PM)kosko Wrote:  Why was the airship in Syrian airspace?

Evidence so far suggests that it was in international waters...Also Turkey has Air Force bases in Northern Cyprus, and use the that region for training purposes.

(06-22-2012 11:06 PM)kosko Wrote:  Turkey is playing with fire as they protect Islamic rebels while trying to be an appeaser the west and NATO.

I`m starting to think you are using ignorant stereotypes for your commentary rather than actual evidence. Please provide one credible source of Turkey protecting Islamic rebels.

(06-22-2012 11:06 PM)kosko Wrote:  If the can of worms in Syria is let out Turkey will get the worst of it.

Your history books may omit Empires other than the European or the Far East ones, however that does not change the reality. Ottoman Empire, present day Republic of Turkey, ruled over Syria from 16th century to 20th century. The famous infantry quote "What makes the green grass grow? Blood, blood, blood." is far more true in Turkey than most of the other countries, including Syria. Turks have never lived under a mandate or rule of any other country, and until 1963, Syrians did not know what freedom was. So if a war breaks out, you can bet that Turks will flatten those lands. In many armies soldiers are taught to kill, and in few armies including the Turkish Army, soldiers are taught to die. A soldier may come back failing a mission to kill, but you don't have many option when you are there to die. That's why in Turkey at soldier funerals mothers say "my only son is the country"...Last few lines may be strange to Westerners, or to people from nation with history full of mandates, but to truly free people like Turks, they will mean that Syrians will do anything to avoid a war with the Turks. Hence the reason why they, today, offered Turkish officials to come to Syria and investigate the evidence from their end. It's funny that someone with a home country of Canada speak on wars, but I do understand your desire to comment on such serious national matters. I, too would be frustrated if I was from a butt-of-a-joke country and laughter was the response back every time to a simple question of "where are you from?"....

Post: #13

Ofi, you ok? You sound very defensive and outraged... like you took what he said personally.

You/Turkey should worry more about the manipulations of the US govt and Israel moreso than Syria shooting down a jet. Turkey and Syria are just disposable pieces on the board for the BIGGER and MORE POWERFUL players in the world. Don't be so proud if Turkey goes to war in Syria. Turkey won't benefit from it. It could end really bad for Turkey... as in a new independent Kurdistan all of a sudden appearing, anchored in northern Iraq. You do know Israel is close with Kurds? You do know Israel thrives on creating chaos in muslim countries? You do know there are such things as false flag operations and Turkey may not be so innocent in this case?

By your assessment, since my home country is the USA that means I'm an authority on speaking about wars since we're so dominant militarily, more dominant than Turkey even. Turkey is just a pawn to get NATO and the big badass USA involved since Russia and China won't quietly allow another Libya to happen this time.

Post: #14

Why would Turkey attack Syria alone when she can use this as fodder to push NATO to spend its money (i.e. western money) attacking Syria. NATO takes action and Turkish leaders don't have to deal with an uprising in their country over attacking another nation of muslims. Sure the two countries don't like each other, but muslims typically don't like waging war on other muslims -- except when they get a crazy leader like Saddam, who could give a shit.

Accidental shootings happen every few years. Anyone remember the Iranian airliner? We blasted that sucker out of the sky...oops.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

Post: #15

what i wrote wasn't friendly but far from an outrage...also up until the last portion, i used the opinions and view from the Turkish side to add bit of insight from a different angle....and last thing I would want is for Turkey to go to war with anyone..in fact last thing I would want for any country is to go to war...Nato already stated that they wouldn't take action and more than likely Turkey will resolve this similar to the flotilla incident....and the whole comment about home countries and being in a position to speak on war was to exemplify what biased stereotypes would lead to..."Peace at home, Peace at world"...Ataturk

Post: #16

(06-25-2012 01:04 PM)ofigennyj Wrote:  I`m starting to think you are using ignorant stereotypes for your commentary rather than actual evidence. Please provide one credible source of Turkey protecting Islamic rebels.

It was posted in the NYT article in my first post by Eric Schmidt here is a paraphrase of Turkey's role:

Quote:The New York Times claims that, "the C.I.A. officers have been in southern Turkey for several weeks, in part to help keep weapons out of the hands of fighters allied with Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups, one senior American official said," a unsubstantiated claim that was similarly made in Libya before Al Qaeda flags were run up poles in Benghazi by rebels flush with NATO cash and arms used to collapse the government of Muammar Qaddafi. In fact, it is confirmed that Libyan LIFG rebels, led by Al Qaeda commander Abdul Hakim Belhaj, have now made their way by the hundreds to Syria (and here).

Despite months of the US claiming the "international community" sought to end the violence and protect the population of Syria, the New York Times now admits that the US is engaged in supporting a "military campaign" against the Syrian government aimed at increasing "pressure" on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Efforts to impose an arms embargo on Syria is now revealed to be one-sided, aimed at giving rebels an advantage in the prolonged bloodbath with the intent on tipping the balance in favor of Western proxy-forces - not end the violence as soon as possible as claimed by the UN, and in particular, Kofi Annan.

The Times also reported that Turkey has been directly delivering weapons to terrorists operating in Syria - Turkey being a NATO member and implicating NATO as now being directly involved in perpetuating bloodshed in the Middle Eastern nation. For months, Turkey has been allowing terrorists to use its border region as a refuge from which to stage attacks against Syria.

(06-25-2012 08:47 PM)Smitty Wrote:  Why would Turkey attack Syria alone when she can use this as fodder to push NATO to spend its money (i.e. western money) attacking Syria. NATO takes action and Turkish leaders don't have to deal with an uprising in their country over attacking another nation of muslims. Sure the two countries don't like each other, but muslims typically don't like waging war on other muslims -- except when they get a crazy leader like Saddam, who could give a shit.

Accidental shootings happen every few years. Anyone remember the Iranian airliner? We blasted that sucker out of the sky...oops.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

You sound like Turkey pushes the NATO agenda? As I said Turkey is being thrown into the meat grinder here they have indeed the most to loose. they have a thin alliance with NATO, and ethnic spillovers on thier doorstep waiting to explode. To bad the USA has been promoting de-stabilization in Kurdistan and to bad it will not give a shit if that situation explodes into a crisis in Turkey.

The funny thing is Syria for the most part has enjoyed reflective peace agmonst its borders prior to this outside invasion. It has enjoyed the most peaceful border in the Arab world with Israel and aside from its own internal ethnic and religious strife (which is contained whiten Syria's society and institutions) it still largely does not have the mess of fringe border containment to deal with like Iraq, Pakistan, Iran, or Turkey.

This is why Turkey has the most to loose half of their country will be carved out if the poke the sleeping Kurdish bear and this is exactly what the USA wants. Ethnic strife between small groups with little autonomy or true power they want the Serbian/Yugoslavian treatment for the Middle East. The Balkanization of formidable states means petty players whom are more easy to manipulate and toss aside if needed. .

This is USA policy it does not have the balls to go after China or Russia head on (you can argue the other side(s) does not either ) so it beats up on small states and sends in operatives to de-stabilize and cause turmoil (i.e. Pakistan, etc).

Turkey has the most to loose because it has jumped into bed with a decaying NATO order which has little relevance (you don't negotiate or play the game with only one hand). Syria can play Israel, Russia, and Iran of each other to at least attain what it needs. Russia won't loose its strongest position on the Mediterranean and will thus veto any UN measures the USA or NATO tries to creep though. Syria can also keep Israel at bay and let it focus on the bigger fish it wants to go after in Iran. Israel would rather run air strikes far away and take its chances versus unleashing a war on its doorstep and being coaxed to bomb a Country that has a significant population of Jewish people.

Don't belive me? behind the smoke screen of this incident is the fact that Syira and Turkey still have open diplomatic ties and are jointly on rescue missions after this incident even though Turkey is pounding thier chests while Syria is doing the hop-scotch in the press:

Quote:According to a NATO Spokesperson, 'envoys from NATO member states will meet on Tuesday after Turkey requested consultations over the downing of its military jet by Syria".

According to NATO sources, "Turkey has requested consultations under article 4 of NATO's founding Washington Treaty. Under article 4, any ally can request consultations whenever, in the opinion of any of them, their territorial integrity, political independence or security is threatened." The North Atlantic Council (NAC) is slated to meet on Tuesday.

While these reports tend to dramatize the situation, pointing to a possible NATO "humanitarian" intervention against Syria, what is not mentioned is that consultations have also been launched between Ankara and Damascus.

Beneath the media hype pertaining to possible action against Syria by Turkey and NATO, Turkey's network TV suggests a different picture.

According to a statement by Turkey's foreign minister, Syria and Turkey are collaborating in the search operations in the Eastern Mediterranean off the Syrian coastline.

On Sunday, Turkish TV confirmed that the Turkish and Syrian search teams had located the wreckage of the fighter jet at a depth of 1,300 meters, in Syrian territorial waters, thereby refuting the allegations that the plane had been shot down in international waters.

Look at Turkey talk and bluff. Was in not about a year and some ago the Israelis killed their people in cold blood on the flotilla and Turkey has not done a damn thing after they cried and screamed that the sky over Tel Aviv would fall - they are just full of air. They will beat their chest on this issue too then behind the scenes mend the wounds like they did with Israel.

Syria has the diplomatic upper hand in this situation. It shows it has weapon capabilities to blast down NATO fighet jets and behind the scenes still is on stable terms. This will deter dummy NATO states like Canada with its arcahac fighter jet fleet to think twice about jumping into a battle where they will loose hardware and lives. This isn't Libya which had a no fly zone slapped on and was bombed to hell a few weeks before it was supposed to receive anti-aircraft missiles. Syria is a legitimate micro military power, and fighter planes are not cheap. Only the USA, France, and UK could afford to loose a few.... other nations not so much.

Turkey is geo-politically bankrupt and ripe for exploitation by the USA and NATO.

If you still doubt that Turkey is a non-important peice on the chess board ask: Not what would Turkey do.... Ask what it can do.

Post: #17

Turkey could obliterate Syria if it wanted to but it's unwise for them to militarily retaliate without some measured response and delay while reviewing this very sensitive series of events. Their decision to exercise restraint while allowing an investigation to unfold reflects well upon them as a leading member of NATO, and especially in their prospective efforts to one day join the European Union. Turkey also bears tremendous responsibility and unrivaled clout among Muslim states in the region, being a model of the marriage of secularism and Islam, particularly for budding democracies in Tunisia and Egypt. Muslims around the region look to Turkey as the example to emulate in obtaining progress in their respective societies.

Further, the Syrian regime is on the verge of collapse, with soldiers and officials defecting by the day. Even senior members of Bashar Al-Assad's administration are said to be preparing to defect. There are many delicate issues in Syria that prohibit a direct military course to remove Assad from power. You have a highly fragmented society (including a divided opposition) with diverse groups ranging from Shias, Sunnis, Druze, and Christians. There are already foreign proxies - namely the Saudis and the Iranians, and to a lesser extent the Americans, Russians, Chinese and Israelis - aiding the different factions in the hopes of seeing their unique agendas come to fruition.

In the meantime, a wait and see response, while exerting tremendous pressure on Bashar Al-Assad's government, is probably the most appropriate course of action. Turkey knows what they're doing.

Post: #18

Turkey has been responsible in world affairs since the Cyprian affair, so I trust it to do the right thing. Although, I do hope that it doesn't invade Syria and get mired in the same bullshit like US did in Iraq. Just supporting the rebels Libya-style would be nice though.

Post: #19

War in the making?? Not, in the making. There is a war. Not only is Turkey harbouring the rebels it is the main conduit for Saudi and Qatari weapons to the rebels. Turkey wouldn't do this without the blessing of the US.

I very much doubt that Turkey will launch a full scale war on Syria, but it might use it as a pretext to put a 'buffer zone' or a 'peacekeeping force' inside Syria's borders...to protect the refugees you understand.

There is a lot of upside to the departure of Assad. For one, Iran will lose its only major ally. Hezbollah will be f'ked because its major supporters will be gone. Israel will have a tad more security. Perhaps a deal could be done with the Golan heights. There might be more stability in Lebanon whose politics have been interfered in to the detriment of the people.

There's quite a bit of downside. Assad provided stability in a multi-ethnic and sectarian state. Assad comes from the Alawite minority which many muslims consider apostates. There could be a massacre. Syria also has a large Christian population that might be the target of massacres and terrorist attacks. Speaking of terrorists, it is almost certain al Qaeda will develop a strong presence there among the Sunni majority. If there is instability in Syria this could spread to Lebanon and other countries. The demise of Iranian-backed Hezbollah could be accompanied by the rise of peninsula-backed al Qaeda.

Basically, it all sucks.

Post: #20

It surprises me to see so many people sympathising with the Turks who are part of a coalition of countries engaged in an illegal war against the Syrian state. The starting point for any objective person would be that Syria is a multi religious country with a large Christian population as well as Shias and Alawites. All of those people are protected by the current Syrian government and all of them will be in mortal danger if the Sunni, Salafist Jihadis and foreign mercenaries succeed in imposing regime change.

Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey are collaborating with the CIA and the foreign services of the UK and France in particular to organise, fund, arm and propagandise these Islamist terrorists who have carried out many massacres (which they blame Assad's government for) and they have ethnically cleansed entire areas of their Christian population.

Again, I can't wrap my head around why ordinary people in the West would support Al Qaeda being used as a proxy army by the Wahabbists of Saudi Arabia and also the CIA to attack a secular state and to oversee the imposition of an extremist Sunni theocracy which would no doubt massacre Christians and Alawites in large numbers.

Post: #21

(06-23-2012 11:44 AM)kosko Wrote:  

(06-23-2012 10:50 AM)Vicious Wrote:  Kosko, are you seriously trusting a 51% vote presented by a dictatorship to be genuine? I can't help but feel that your post is cut6paste without some critical proofreading for your own part.

That vote was more transparent then the last Canadian or American primary is/was.

In Canada Harper has majority rule with only 23% support.

Harper gained majority rule with 53.9% of seats in the House of Commons and 39.6% of the popular vote, not "23% support".

Post: #22

(07-12-2012 12:51 PM)Soma Wrote:  

(06-23-2012 11:44 AM)kosko Wrote:  

(06-23-2012 10:50 AM)Vicious Wrote:  Kosko, are you seriously trusting a 51% vote presented by a dictatorship to be genuine? I can't help but feel that your post is cut6paste without some critical proofreading for your own part.

That vote was more transparent then the last Canadian or American primary is/was.

In Canada Harper has majority rule with only 23% support.

Harper gained majority rule with 53.9% of seats in the House of Commons and 39.6% of the popular vote, not "23% support".

Because of the way ridings are structured and weighted only 23-30% of Canadians voted for the conservatives in the last election. Maybe my exact number was off but he has majority rule with minority public support.

The PM in Canada aside from being removed from penciling laws him self has more authoritative powers over the frame of Government then the USA president. The PM makes more appointments, can control the agenda of parliament, and can stack committees and the courts. These things would have to go via congress in America but not here.