Military Events in Syria and Iraq Thread #4

There are rumours Al Qaeda is renting Antonovs from Russia to drop the gas. Seriously, no shit it's completely obvious who's been behind nearly every such attack, there's only one faction in Syria with such capabilities at its disposal.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The "media rumor" is AFAIU based on some government or deep state claim, I have not backtracked it if it was an official claim or the usual "some unnamed government sources". Some Russian commentators think this as a sort of message to the terrorists to start the fake attack.

In principle, chlorine gas in itself is not a chemical weapon, thus, there would be even no point of doing anything. And, again, whatever FUKUS is doing in Syria without UNSC approval is a serious violation of international law. If it would not even be lethal, there would be not even a point for some propaganda.

So the Western "reaction" would have nothing at all to do with the imaginary use of chlorine gas at all. It would be simply another repetition of demonstration that the West f.... international law completely, and does not even care to create a plausible excuse for the propaganda.

It is a purely political chicken game. And now with an open war against Russia as the result if nobody appears to be the chicken. Given that everybody thinks that Trump will be the chicken (he was the chicken the two times before), so that there is not really any hope that Assad/Putin will be the chicken, it is not clear at all what is the aim of these games. Finding a propaganda reason for yet more anti-Russian sanctions? What would be the point? I see no way how the actual Western behavior would make sense.

Maybe they have really gone insane and decided that if they do not start the nuclear war now, their hopes for world rule are gone forever, so they have to start it now? I hope not. If not, what else?

The Russian proposal is clear enough: Return to international law. That simply means, FUKUS has to go out of Syria and to start military actions only with UNSC approval. This is obviously not the intention.

The most optimistic version would be Trump plays escalation toward such a point that even the hawks would prefer peace, and then is able to start a rational policy and go out of Syria. But this is, certainly, a quite optimistic scenario. Reality may be much worse.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It is claimed by https://russian.rt.com/world/news/553374-idlib-syoki-provokaciya-himoruzhie that the videos from the fake gas attack are already in the process of production, with TV teams from Arab as well as a local filial from some American TV station working in Dshisr Al Shugur.

So, the Russian game looks quite clear: They seem to have sufficiently good information about the TV operators actually doing the fake attacks, and will try to make the attacks as implausible as possible by declaring about them when they are in the process of doing. And, in particular, not attack the particular place where the fake is produced. Of course, a difficult game - the US can easily stop the fake attacks in preparation once the Russians make declarations about them. But given the behavior of the West during the last fake attack, it looks like the West no longer cares about plausibility of the attack. So, they may simply continue, despite all the Russian claims, the Western sheeple will not care anyway.

We will see.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The West is concerned about an upcoming attack because it happened last time Russia has accused of rebels preparing a fake attack, minus any evidence of said fakery, with plenty of evidence of Assad's guilt to be found instead. Here you cite Russia as the source of this "information" once again just like you did before the last attack. Mind you, I'm pretty sure you already mentioned this specific Idlib chlorine claim in the recent past and obviously forgot the original source, because it's old info. If the rebels were really preparing a false-flag chlorine attack and Russia knew all about it, and Russia was concerned with fighting terror, it would be taking some kind of meaningful action over the weeks and months it's had this "info" to stop such an attack instead of just whining about it on Twitter.

It's interesting that you don't think the prospect of Russia violating its own ceasefire agreements and creating another million refugees in itself warrants international action and concern, you're only worried about whether the West uses chemical attacks as a pretext. They don't need any such pretext, Russia already deserves to face global isolation (along with China too if it tries to help them) even if it miraculously held back the invasion of Idlib altogether.

 

Russia is not whining on Twitter, but gives official information about what it knows about the planned fake attacks. This is the meaningful action if one learns about such planned fake attacks. What else would you propose? To bomb those TV teams during their fake shows would even help them, transforming the fake attack into some real attack (even if the fake part remains). Some inside report with filming the preparations so that the fake becomes obvious even for the sheeple (of course, CptBork would not be convinced anyway, whatever the evidence) would require some success which even the GRU is unable to do reach all the time. All one can reasonably hope for is to get enough information about the planned attacks to make such announcements, as the Russians actually do. Those who prepare the fake attacks have a clear advantage here - they can prepare this in secret, they don't need many people involved, they can shift the date, even the place, in quite short time.

Simply because there is no ceasefire agreement violated by Russia. There never has been one with Hatesh and its associates. Those forces who have made ceasefire agreements without time limit and do not violate them have no problem.

I know, these Russian subhumans deserve to be exterminated anyway. But, sorry, no chance for this, if you try you will end up exterminated too by the second strike.

 

I wasn't aware that stopping Russians from raping other populations amounted to extermination. Nonetheless if WW3 is the only way to stop that from happening over and over again, then I'm all for it, nuke away.

 

1) They aren't minor - they are fundamental differences in economic organization, which corporate rightwing propaganda has been attempting to conceal.
2) It's an observation, only insisted upon because you keep denying it. You want the benefits of contracts and ownership and so forth, but without the entity responsible for the definition and enforcement of such things - that entity we name "government".
You want a free lunch. There is no free lunch.

Not at all. The concept of contracts enforced and crime punished and fraud made good by their victims complaining on some computer bulletin board was especially entertaining.
Any idea who is winning the twitter war in Syria? I think maybe the Russians. The real one as well.
That would be a point in favor of your fantasy - maybe twitter can organize the men with guns. On the other hand, the twitter appears to be organized by a State - back to square one.

 

anarchy = property rights maintained by ...?

 

It will, no doubt , be interesting to see how Syria, Iran and Russia will deal with the massive humanitarian disaster that is about to unfold. How they provide support to over 1 million children etc. and then how they will rebuild the city not to mention the country.
Are they expecting the world to pick up the humanitarian tab for the consequences of their military actions?

 

Yeah just like we're going to rebuild Syria by lining up and paying to rub Putin's shiny bald head for luck. Or maybe Russia plans to send all their toothless babooshkas over to work our street corners with their one and only useful talent (aside from getting drunk and making borsht).

There's no word for "humanitarian" in the Russian dictionary, they've taken in a grand total of like 10 refugees from Syria since the war started (by Yuri's count, that would be 10,000,000-9,999,990 which is far more respectable).

 

and the worst part is that they may have to do it all over again in a few years because the issues that caused this war have not been resolved.
Assad and Putin might regain control of Syria but they will never gain control of the people...a large portion of which are not even in Syria.
Futility!

 

There is information that the terrorists really plan to murder some children for the fake chemical attack.

“Militants have selected 22 children with their parents from the communities of Zitan, Zerbeh and Birnah in the Aleppo Governorate for participation in staged chemical attacks. One more group of orphans abducted from refugee camps and intended for the filming of lethal scenes is being kept in a cell in the al-Iqab prison controlled by the terror group Jabhat al-Nusra,” http://tass.com/defense/1021318

The Russian UN ambassador Nebensia has emphasized that there are now even direct threats of attacks against Syria unrelated to any chemical attack. So, there seems to appear a new variant - the West understands that the fake chemical attack will be unbelievable and stops it, but there will be nonetheless an attack, for other "humanitarian" reasons.

The same way they have handled the "massive humanitarian disasters" in East Ghouta and in Daraa. The city named Idlib is not really big, below 200000, there are as far no big desctructions, and probably will not be too. Most Idlib is rural area, and most of the fighting will be around the greater towns. Nothing is expected from the world, and all what is expected from the West is destruction.

IOW, there is no ownership without support by the state. This is the only form of ownership iceaura names ownership.

It may be entertaining too, but reputational enforcement of contracts works as long as the information about contract breaking reaches all relevant participants.

Of course, in iceaura's world everything is organized by the government. I would guess the darknet too.

BTW, reputational enforcement makes only one thing: To ensure that information about contract breakers is distributed in such a way that you can break contracts only once - because after this one will not find people ready to make contracts with you.

This is not at all about winning wars. Even if winning wars has strong enough reputational elements too. Which is something the US seems to have either forgotten or not understood.

 

Government, not "state".

Bizarrely false statement.

No, it doesn't. Either one - it doesn't reach everybody, and it wouldn't work if it did.

That is fantasy. People are often willing to make contracts with those known to break them sometimes - especially in the absence of government, when coercion and threats are involved.

For fifty years now the US has been making war in situations in which it has no solid criteria for victory in the first place. Iraq is one those, Afghanistan another, and Syria of course.

 

Entirely true, and a good reason why the US should never go to war unless it's prepared to do anything necessary to win right down to poisoning the water supply. Russia doesn't have this problem because they can target hospitals and kindergartens full of children, and insecure, uneducated, dirt-scratching slavs demanding a show of Russian might will cheer and call the kids terrorists. The Russian army runs the media and decides public opinion, so unlike the US army, their only constraint is when they run into a stronger force like NATO.

 

NorthAtlanticTreatyOrganization
hmmmmm
Syria
hmmm
Atlantic
hmmm
north
hmmm

In a political world
It would seem that my study of geography
is meaningless

 

The name is out of date, but the alliance is still relevant wherever its members have legitimate interests, including Syria.

 

according to whom?

 

In the anarchist vs. statist discussions, there is no difference. If there is something worth to be named "government", it is not an anarchy, but a society with a state or at least state-like institutions which are equally evil from an anarchist point of view.

If you use "government" for something essentially different, like "some group of organizers" or so, don't use "government".

What I remember - too lazy to search - even building roads or a simple market place requires government. And certainly contract and ownership. What I see is a bizarre confusion of words, I try my best to make sense of it, but have to acknowledge that this may be impossible.

Information about the reputation has to reach all relevant persons, not everybody. Given that everybody cannot be reached with old information technology, people have found ways to reduce the number of relevant people for particular issues, by artificial restrictions to small groups. For the peasants, it is the village, for the leaders the nobility, for different professions guilds and so on.

You confuse "willing" with "being forced". You may be forced to "contract", but this is not really a contract. It is usually a perversion created by state coercion (like your evangelicals forced to "contract" with gays).

 

According to fascist Russians who create millions of refugees and try to send them our way.

 

Actually, it's gays being forced to contract with evangelicals. Accepting others in your society (along with their rights) is normally one of the preconditions for your own inclusion.