News Iraqi unrest, Syrian unrest, and ISIS/ISIL/Daesh

[Astronuc]

Apparently some countries will provide air support while others will provide air support and troops. The troops may support logistics are bases outside of Iraq and Syria, but possibly in Iraq. Perhaps special forces would be embedded with Iraqi units or Peshmerga.

Mideast complexities confound US coalition effort
http://news.yahoo.com/mideast-complexities-confound-us-coalition-effort-054749375.html

UK's Cameron resists calls for air strikes despite hostage killing
http://news.yahoo.com/islamic-state-video-purports-show-beheading-uk-hostage-000725613.html

France ready to participate in Iraq airstrikes
https://news.yahoo.com/france-insists-name-mideast-extremists-145623952.html Meanwhile -
Tehran ridicules anti-jihadist front without Damascus
http://news.yahoo.com/tehran-mocks-anti-jihadist-front-without-damascus-110139901.htmlAnd let us not forget Syria's refugees
https://news.yahoo.com/video/syrias-refugees-092329383.html

Sorry for a long and quite incoherent post but I am trying to make any sense of what's going on. I guess we'll have to wait and see how will the events unfold.

I believe a lot of us are trying to make sense of this and many other crises in the world.

 

[Astronuc]

and getting messier

Qaeda branches urge unity against US-led 'war on Islam'
http://news.yahoo.com/key-qaeda-branches-urge-united-jihadist-front-against-130311846.htmlJihadists confiscate non-Sunni assets in Iraq's Mosul
http://news.yahoo.com/jihadists-confiscate-non-sunni-assets-iraqs-mosul-152402906.htmlMeanwhile - Saudi Arabia's top clerics speak out against militancy
http://news.yahoo.com/saudi-arabias-top-clerics-speak-against-militancy-103209117.html

and - German Muslims invite all faiths to day of prayer against Islamic State
http://news.yahoo.com/german-muslims-invite-faiths-day-prayer-against-islamic-173555758.html

 

[Dotini]

and getting messier

...and weirder.

Fun reading about what John Kerry had to say today about Iran taking on ISIS.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...fight-against-Isil-if-US-fails-miserably.html

 

[nsaspook]

John Kerry needs to learn when to stop talking.

 

[Astronuc]

What's in a name?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...nd-replacing-it-with-a-label-the-group-hates/

 

[HossamCFD]

I'm not sure what to make out of this:

Video of British hostage John Cantlie released
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29258201

This doesn't fit with the picture they were selling to the world earlier when they released the beheading videos. Are they starting to realize that intimidation doesn't quite work? Or is this intended for sympathisers and potential recruits who were put off by their excessive brutality.

 

[OmCheeto]

...and weirder.

Fun reading about what John Kerry had to say today about Iran taking on ISIS.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...fight-against-Isil-if-US-fails-miserably.html

Fun is what wasn't said by Kerry.

From your article:

But this week Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, claimed that the US had privately approached Tehran seeking cooperation against Isil. He rejected the approach, saying the US had "corrupt intention and stained hands".

What's in a name?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...nd-replacing-it-with-a-label-the-group-hates/

Hence, why I thought it was once worth an attempt to learn Farsi. Unfortunately, I decided I was too old to learn a new language, much less a new alphabet, which is both backwards, and, IMHO, has way too many dots. I can't even remember people's names.

I was once discussing the Middle East situation on another science forum, with someone named Mohammad that claimed to be from Amman Jordan. It was a very strange, and delightful discussion. Delightful, in that I learned a lot about the Middle East. Strange, in that Mohammad's tone changed from one post to another. I eventually decided that I was conversing with a multitude of people, all using the same account.

To correlate this with your "What's in a name"? comment, I asked them about people that blew themselves up. The "suicide bombers", as we call them. They referred to them as "Jokers".

I knew at that moment, that we had a severe communication breakdown.

I could also tell that one of my "Mohammad kids" was not too up on photoshop, as they posted the following:

It struck me as odd. But then again, maybe the kid in the middle didn't like his dad.

I responded with the following:

Posted 6/22/2007​

To show, that cardboard signs on the internet are not really a great source of truth.

The aforementioned forum no longer exists. I wish it did. We had some good times. And, it is always sad, when you lose a potential friend.

-----------------------------
Lance Corporal Boudreaux himself insisted that the sign originally read 'Welcome Marines'.
ok2di&b :(

 

[lisab]

To show, that cardboard signs on the internet are not really a great source of truth.

So true. It might as well say, "Your message here!"

Photoshop makes it just too easy.

 

[HossamCFD]

What's in a name?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...nd-replacing-it-with-a-label-the-group-hates/

I think the reason why the term DAESH (al-Dawla Al-islameya fil Eraq wal SHam, Islamic state in Iraq and al-Sham) is hated by its members is that acronyms that don't by themselves make out a word are not common in Arabic and can be seen as derogatory. For instance HAMAS and FATAH are both acronyms but they both are arabic words as well (FATAH is actually a reverse acronym for this same reason)

 

[HossamCFD]

I prefer to call them Isis for this reason:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isis#mediaviewer/File:Isis.svg

 

[HossamCFD]

and, IMHO, has way too many dots.

Believe me, that's a good thing. In the old days, arabs used to infer the dots and some vowels from the context. For example, the syntax for B, T, and TH is exactly the same without dots. You tell which is which from the meaning.

We don't do that now but we still imply the minor vowels. It's somehow considered impolite if you explicitly write them down (for non-religious text), implying that the readers are too stupid to work them out from the context.

 

[OmCheeto]

Gads. I want to quote this whole article:

Bill Clinton tells Jon Stewart: ‘We can’t win a ground war in Iraq — we proved that’

Former President Bill Clinton endorsed the U.S.’ current approach to targeting the extremist group Islamic State (ISIS) on Thursday in an interview with Daily Show host Jon Stewart.

It's really short, and to the point.

[edit: FYI, the first 5 minutes of the Clinton video interview is in regards to the Ebola outbreak in Africa.]

 

[HossamCFD]

A very good analysis of the environment and historical background that led to groups like al-qaeda and ISIS:

The collapse of Arab civilisation
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/09/the-barbarians-within-our-gates-111116.html?ml=m_po#.VB2kKvHVEeI

It's a bit long but I definitely recommend it.

 

[nsaspook]

A very good analysis of the environment and historical background that led to groups like al-qaeda and ISIS:

The collapse of Arab civilisation
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/09/the-barbarians-within-our-gates-111116.html?ml=m_po#.VB2kKvHVEeI

It's a bit long but I definitely recommend it.

Very good read. I hope our latest expedition will be effective so this madness can be reduced to the 'normal' levels of Arab/Islamic democide as I don't see any hope of stopping them from killing each other for a long time.

 

[Astronuc]

A very good analysis of the environment and historical background that led to groups like al-qaeda and ISIS:

The collapse of Arab civilisation
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/09/the-barbarians-within-our-gates-111116.html?ml=m_po#.VB2kKvHVEeI

It's a bit long but I definitely recommend it.

That is an excellent article.

Militants threaten ancient sites in Iraq, Syria, just as the Taliban destroyed ancient sites in Afghanistan, or folks looted museums in Baghdad and other major cities following the US invasion of Iraq.
http://news.yahoo.com/militants-threaten-ancient-sites-iraq-syria-071459378.html

BAGHDAD (AP) — For more than 5,000 years, numerous civilizations have left their mark on upper Mesopotamia — from Assyrians and Akkadians to Babylonians and Romans. Their ancient, buried cities, palaces and temples packed with monumental art are scattered across what is now northern Iraq and eastern Syria.

Now much of that archaeological wealth is under the control of extremists from the Islamic State group. The militants have demolished some artifacts in their zealotry to uproot what they see as heresy, but they are also profiting from it, hacking relics off palace walls or digging them out to sell on the international black market.

Antiquities officials in Iraq and Syria warn of a disaster as the region's history is erased.
. . .

 

[HossamCFD]

Very good read. I hope our latest expedition will be effective so this madness can be reduced to the 'normal' levels of Arab/Islamic democide as I don't see any hope of stopping them from killing each other for a long time.

Or we can just keep spouting this old nonsense; blaming colonialism, economic difficulties, and bizarrely enough climate change.
(warning: reading may cause blood pressure elevation)
http://www.juancole.com/2014/09/political-civilization-unique.html

Seriously though, I believe this crisis is yet another cycle of the broader struggle between Islamists (both militant AKA Al-Qaeda/ISIS and political AKA Muslim brotherhood and its offshoots) on one hand and secular repressive anti-democratic military dictatorship on the other. The current expedition can only hope to limit the threat and make it a local Syrian problem rather than a global one. Only for something similar to emerge somewhere else in the middle east few years down the line.

I believe this perpetual cycle of violence, which has been the only political paradigm in the middle east ever since its independence, will only be broken if/when a third option emerges, that is liberal democracy. I was one of those naive people who believed that the Arab spring provided that third option, and to be fair it did for a short while, but unfortunately it was too weak and too alien to the public that it didn't survive for long. I am not sure I'll witness another attempt in my lifetime. But I have no doubt there will be another attempt.

 

[jim hardy]

Just what did Assad do to become such a villain?
Use his military to put down a rebellion?
honest question, not asserting anything.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/04/how-bashar-al-assad-became-so-hated/275058/

When he assumed power, the lifestyle the West still occupied Assad's mind -- In his inaugural speech he emphasized that it was time to begin modernizing Syria. But to modernize Syria and remake it in the "image" he desired, he needed to adopt neo-liberal and capitalist policies, both of which stirred up a strong resistance from his father's old guard, who founded the socialist and secular Ba'ath Party. Not knowing the long-term consequences of marrying neoliberalism with the authoritarian structure, Bashar gained short-term benefits with his vast changes, but he also planted the seed of revolution.

In the beginning of his rule, he introduced the Damascus Spring, which included some political reforms that would suit the economic changes he planned. But when he saw that the reaction to his political shake-up was endangering his own throne, he retreated to old policies of mass repression, relying on Mukhabarat, the secret security police, to enforce his commands.

 

[HossamCFD]

Just what did Assad do to become such a villain?
Use his military to put down a rebellion?
honest question, not asserting anything.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/04/how-bashar-al-assad-became-so-hated/275058/

I would say what made him such a villain is the willingness to kill around 150,000 of his own civilians, forcing millions to emigrate, and committing some of the most horrific torture in the modern world. All of this just to avoid having to step down.

Warning: Very graphic images included in the video
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/20/world/syria-torture-photos-amanpour/

The modernization rhetoric and "creating a Switzerland in Syria" is very appealing indeed. But I doubt Switzerland parliament had to amend the constitution to lower the minimum age for a president from 40 to 34 just to allow a son to succeed his father to the republic's 'throne'. Of course after winning the public vote with 99.7%. For some time this made Syria a joke within the rest of middle eastern republics, but the joke soon became too old when both Mubarak and Qaddafi started grooming their sons to succeed them, which resulted in uprisings in both Egypt and Libya that ended with toppling both of them.

 

[nsaspook]

Just what did Assad do to become such a villain?
Use his military to put down a rebellion?
honest question, not asserting anything.

I would say that Assad acted with ruthless not 'evil' intent to win. If you're on the receiving end of his actions it doesn't matter much but it does matter when you have to work a deal with that person after the violence is over. ISIS IMO is in the 'evil' category of 'our way or die' so dealing with them for a settlement is almost impossible.

 

[OmCheeto]

A very good analysis of the environment and historical background that led to groups like al-qaeda and ISIS:

The collapse of Arab civilisation
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/09/the-barbarians-within-our-gates-111116.html?ml=m_po#.VB2kKvHVEeI

It's a bit long but I definitely recommend it.

A bit long? If it were any shorter, it would have been a tweet!

But I like this, Hisham Melham, guy.

America can degrade ISIS, Arabs should destroy it
Saturday, 13 September 2014
Ultimately, the defeat of ISIS can be achieved, only when the Arabs exorcise the political and ideological demons that created Islamic extremism that metastasized over the years and morphed into ISIS. In this epic battle, the U.S. can and should help, since it did contribute its share to the environment that created ISIS following its invasion of Iraq.

I don't agree with everything he says. But then again, I don't know what I'm talking about.

----------------------------------
ps. 4 young men from Dubai dropped by the beach yesterday.
It appeared that they just wanted to play some volleyball.
After a bit of time, a couple of Tea-billies found out they were Arabic, and let loose:
Mrs. Teabillie; "We don't want to have to push '1' to speak. You people need to learn english!"
Mr. Teabillie; "Why are you people bringing Sharia law over here?"
It went on for a while.
It appeared to me that none of the 4 men quite understood what was being shouted at them.
After the Teabillies got bored, I went over and asked one of them a question.
It took him about 10 minutes to give me the answer, so I'm fairly certain none of them could understand more than 5% of what was coming out of the Teabillie's mouths.
Which is probably a good thing, as nothing they were shouting made any sense to me either.

And the answer to my question was; "Anna araf la shay".

 

[OmCheeto]

Or we can just keep spouting this old nonsense; ..., economic difficulties, ...

So far, I've enjoyed all of your posts, but would be curious if you could expand on the above. (I couldn't complete the article after the "global warming" comment. I was laughing.)

I've always heard that a strong middle class is vital for a stable nation, so I googled "Middle class Iraq", and found the following article, dated April 24, 2002:

Iraq's middle class wiped out
In the days before the Gulf War, people in the Arab world mocked big spenders by telling them to stop being such Baghdadis.

But since 1991, life in Iraq has changed dramatically - the country's GDP has dropped from US$3,000 to $715 and doctors have had to learn anew how to treat diseases that had disappeared from Iraq in the 1980s such as cholera and diphtheria.

For the past 12 years, the country has been struggling under UN-imposed sanctions, which have greatly affected the life of the Iraqis but done little to undermine the power of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

This article was written a year before Hussein was toppled.

I would quote Al Jazeera's more recent 2013 article, but it appears to be more of a tweet, than an article.
They claim income inequality has increased in the last 10 years.

 

[HossamCFD]

So far, I've enjoyed all of your posts, but would be curious if you could expand on the above. (I couldn't complete the article after the "global warming" comment. I was laughing.)

I just found the article very frustrating. I am used to the pro-arabic narrative of blaming colonialism for all our problems, but I don't really expect it from a well known western political commentator. I find this very misleading and it undermines attempts of trying to understand the roots of the problem. Apart from that I found the rest of the article just really, really bad.

He starts with ascertaining that there is no problem with the Arab civilisation and then cites the urbanisation underwent in the last 50 years as a proof of that. The connection just didn't click in my mind. I mean you shouldn't really be happy with a massively urbanised people where, in some places, black magic and blasphemy are crimes punishable by beheadings, while in other places the public would always vote for either a ruthless military dictator or a theocratic organisation.

He then blames the current difficulties on economic struggles (which is the result of colonialism) and high birth rates. In his mind climate change is a contributor to both. Here are two relevant quotes:

The Arab world is full of states that have had relatively high rates of population growth for 150 years. I have a hypothesis that this population boom is related to global warming, which also began in earnest about 150 years ago

The collapse of Syria is certainly caused in some important part by climate change. Egypt also has a water crisis, and in villages in Upper Egypt protests over insufficient water were part of the unrest during the 2011 revolution and after.

He then says that what the Arab world is facing now is not unique, as Europe faced similar problems in the 20's and 30's moving away from democracy and creating fascists regimes everywhere. But that's exactly the point. There WAS something wrong with Europe then the same way there IS something wrong with the middle east today.

I mean if I saw parts of this article on a forum without reading the author's name I could easily mistake it for sarcasm.

And then he ends with this:

Don’t beat yourself up so much, Hisham.

I do believe that economic problems may play a role, I just don't see how that could be the dominant one. Saudi Arabia is definitely not struggling economically, yet they are complicit in the creation of both Al-Qaeda and ISIS in many ways.

I've always heard that a strong middle class is vital for a stable nation, so I googled "Middle class Iraq", and found the following article, dated April 24, 2002:

I do remember the days before the first gulf war when Iraq was the number one destination for Egyptian workers where I was growing up. Most of them returned before the war, especially that Egypt participated in the coalition. I haven't heard of anyone going back there after the war ended.

 

[jim hardy]

oopss double post deleted (i hope)

 

[HossamCFD]

I would say that Assad acted with ruthless not 'evil' intent to win. If you're on the receiving end of his actions it doesn't matter much but it does matter when you have to work a deal with that person after the violence is over. ISIS IMO is in the 'evil' category of 'our way or die' so dealing with them for a settlement is almost impossible.

I completely appreciate that a lot depends on the perspective. If you're a westerner you'll probably see ISIS as the biggest enemy, as we haven't heard of any Assad loyalists plotting terrorist attacks at home. You'll also probably have a different opinion if you have family in Aleppo.

The decapitation of western journalists and aid workers in front of the camera is horrific beyond words, but so is the bombing of tens of thousands of Arabs. In my opinion that does make Assad evil in every sense of the word the same way Saddam and Qaddafi were evil. He might not be a direct enemy to the west but that doesn't make him less of an evil. 'Our way or die' does indeed apply to Assad as well for any Syrian who dares to defy him.

I have to admit that, although I understand the reasoning behind it, it does upset me when people suggest that Assad is the lesser of two evils and may become a partner in this conflict. As far as atrocities and number of killings are concerned he is as much of a monster as Al-Baghdadi. But even from a completely pragmatic point of view, he is a main and direct cause of the apparent success and scale of ISIS. Nothing is more efficient in recruiting Jihadists than having to drag the corpse of a family member from under the rubble of their house that collapsed after a barrel bomb fell on it. The hundreds of westerners who joined ISIS, many of them wouldn't have been able to cite more than two Syrian cities before they set off, were initially moved by the sight of those atrocities (most of them were later brainwashed and became complete nutters). The Arab spring uprisings were most significant in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Syria. The only two that turned into full scale civil wars were the ones where the ruler didn't hesitate in using the full scale of his army machinery against his population. That is not to say that Tunisia and Egypt don't have their fair share of militant jihadists, and indeed they provided thousands of those to the fighting in Syria, but the relative peacefulness and quick stepping down of Ben Ali and Mubarak took away from them their most successful recruiting weapon.

 

[Astronuc]

Or we can just keep spouting this old nonsense; blaming colonialism, economic difficulties, and bizarrely enough climate change.
(warning: reading may cause blood pressure elevation)
http://www.juancole.com/2014/09/political-civilization-unique.html

Seriously though, I believe this crisis is yet another cycle of the broader struggle between Islamists (both militant AKA Al-Qaeda/ISIS and political AKA Muslim brotherhood and its offshoots) on one hand and secular repressive anti-democratic military dictatorship on the other. The current expedition can only hope to limit the threat and make it a local Syrian problem rather than a global one. Only for something similar to emerge somewhere else in the middle east few years down the line.

I believe this perpetual cycle of violence, which has been the only political paradigm in the middle east ever since its independence, will only be broken if/when a third option emerges, that is liberal democracy. I was one of those naive people who believed that the Arab spring provided that third option, and to be fair it did for a short while, but unfortunately it was too weak and too alien to the public that it didn't survive for long. I am not sure I'll witness another attempt in my lifetime. But I have no doubt there will be another attempt.

Excellent post, and very insightful. It's the legacy of the 20th century, which of course was built on the legacy of 19th century and so on.

Colonialism certainly was a factor, as is economics (a la deprivation or socio-politico-economic inequality), as is illiteracy, corrupt government, tribalism, militarism, ethnocentrism, . . . . We could probably spend a while creating a list of the world's ills.

In the background is the national rivalries, e.g., the Great Game between England (or Great Britain/UK) and Russia, then the power struggles among the various European powers, followed by their destabilizing influence in Central Asia, Africa and Middle East.

We seem to be lacking world leadership on many levels.

 

[nsaspook]

I completely appreciate that a lot depends on the perspective. If you're a westerner you'll probably see ISIS as the biggest enemy, as we haven't heard of any Assad loyalists plotting terrorist attacks at home. You'll also probably have a different opinion if you have family in Aleppo.
...
I have to admit that, although I understand the reasoning behind it, it does upset me when people suggest that Assad is the lesser of two evils and may become a partner in this conflict. As far as atrocities and number of killings are concerned he is as much of a monster as Al-Baghdadi. But even from a completely pragmatic point of view, he is a main and direct cause of the apparent success and scale of ISIS.
...

Yes, I see this from the western prospective of thinking how can we stop this from reaching our shores in my evaluation of Assad and ISIS. While we might feel bad about the internal evil of Assad the cold hard truth is we will look away and wash our hands after dealing with him in private if we think his primary objective is internal security instead of the sadistic pleasure I see on the faces of the criminals and psychos with ISIS that goes far beyond revenge for wrongs committed. Ruthless evil strong men, dictators and despotic rulers while bad still fall under diplomacy and the rules of law/war but pirates like ISIS do not when they wage a War of aggression.
I don't see ISIS as 'the biggest enemy' anymore than I see a mad dog that's needs to be put down as the enemy. The 'mad dog' and ISIS are carriers of a lethal agent that can't be allowed to roam free. I'm not upset to say Assad is the 'lesser of two evils' today , to say otherwise is to deny reality under most definitions of levels of evil.

 

[HossamCFD]

I don't see ISIS as 'the biggest enemy' anymore than I see a mad dog that's needs to be put down as the enemy. The 'mad dog' and ISIS are carriers of a lethal agent that can't be allowed to roam free. I'm not upset to say Assad is the 'lesser of two evils' today , to say otherwise is to deny reality under most definitions of levels of evil.

All I'm hoping for is that there are ways of putting down this mad dog without massively helping Assad.

 

[jim hardy]

The 'mad dog' and ISIS are carriers of a lethal agent that can't be allowed to roam free.

Indeed. Any microbe that caused such behavior would be stamped out in a hurry.

 

[nsaspook]

All I'm hoping for is that there are ways of putting down this mad dog without massively helping Assad.

It has started.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/23/world/middleeast/us-and-allies-hit-isis-targets-in-syria.html

The strikes in Syria occurred without the approval of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, whose government, unlike Iraq, did not ask the United States for help against the Sunni militant group. Mr. Obama has repeatedly called on Mr. Assad to step down because of chemical weapons attacks and violence against his own people, and defense officials said Mr. Assad had not been told in advance of the strikes.

But administration officials acknowledge that American efforts to roll back the Sunni militant group in Syria cannot help but aid Mr. Assad, whose government is also a target of the Islamic State.

Without the approval but with the acceptance of the al-Assad military as it would be foolish for us to degrade the Syrian military as long as they focus mainly on ISIS during our strikes.

 

[Astronuc]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. and five Arab countries launched airstrikes Monday night on Islamic State group targets in Syria, expanding a military campaign into a country whose three-year civil war has given the brutal militant group a safe haven.
. . . .
U.S. officials said the airstrikes began around 8:30 p.m. EDT, and were conducted by the U.S., Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates. The first wave of strikes finished about 90 minutes later, but the operation was expected to continue for several more hours, according to one U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly by name about an ongoing mission.
. . . .

http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-us-partners-begin-airstrikes-syria-014519586--politics.html

Meanwhile, former Secretary of Defense was critical of the Obama administration concerning the failure to arm moderate Syrian rebels and allowing Dash to develop to the to the extent it has.

It turns out President Obama was urged to intervene in Syria much earlier. In a new book, "Worthy Fights," former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta writes that, in a meeting in the fall of 2012 he, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the director of the CIA and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs all urged the President Obama to arm moderate Syrians who had started the revolution against the dictatorship to begin with. That might have left no room for ISIS to grow.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/isis-islamic-state-repercussion-leon-panetta-king-abdullah-jordan/

 

[HossamCFD]

It has started.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/23/world/middleeast/us-and-allies-hit-isis-targets-in-syria.html

Let's hope they have the maximum effect in destroying this cancer.

Meanwhile, former Secretary of Defense was critical of the Obama administration concerning the failure to arm moderate Syrian rebels and allowing Dash to develop to the to the extent it has.

I agree that an early Libya-style intervention in the first 6 months of the Syrian rebellion would've put the moderate opposition in a much better place early on in this fight. However, since everything is so chaotic, and seeing how events in Libya turned out, I can't really say with certainty that we would've had a better outcome.

Moreover, I can't really blame the Obama administration for not intervening for a few reasons. First, the Syrian army, while is no match to any modern western army, is still much more capable than the Libyan one, and its air defences might have put the American pilots lives at risk. Second, any intervention would've had to circumvent the UN since Russia would've veto'd it. And even then I don't really know how Russia might've reacted. Iran would've also not liked it at all and I think there's a good chance they might've got involved militarily on Assad's side, causing a much bigger and destructive war.

 

[HossamCFD]

Speaking of arming the 'moderate' Syrian rebels, one thing that's puzzling me is the strategy towards Al-Nusra front. So far they've been allied with the FSA and the 'moderate' factions against both Assad and ISIS. They also see the conflict as a local Syrian struggle and oppose extending it to beyond the Syrian borders. At the same time they are the official Al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria and one thing they have in common with ISIS is that when all this ends, Sharia must be the rule of the land. Are the western intel agencies, or whoever is doing the arming of the rebels, taking precautions that those weapons don't end up in Al-Nusra's hands? Also would the recent air strikes, and the fact that Arabic governments are officially in now, convince them to join forces with ISIS?

 

[HossamCFD]

And I thought Game of Thrones was a bit too convoluted...

Silly me

 

[mheslep]

so is the bombing of tens of thousands of Arabs. In my opinion that does make Assad evil in every sense of the word the same way Saddam and Qaddafi were evil.

And in my opinion.

 

[mheslep]

It has started.
...Without the approval...

... of Congress, at least not explicit approval, nor is any constitutional rationale offered.

 

[mheslep]

...that is liberal democracy. I was one of those naive people who believed that the Arab spring provided that third option, and to be fair it did for a short while, but unfortunately it was too weak and too alien to the public that it didn't survive for long.

Don't forget Iraq, where democracy still survives. Malaki's peaceful departure has not received its due, and should be declared a wonder of the world.

 

[HossamCFD]

Don't forget Iraq, where democracy still survives. Malaki's peaceful departure has not received its due, and should be declared a wonder of the world.

I can't really tell if you were being sarcastic. At the risk of appearing daft I'm going to assume you were not.

I wouldn't call Iraq a true liberal democracy at all. It's a majority rule dictated by ethnic and religious guidelines; the president has to be a Kurd, the PM a shiite Arab, and the speaker of the house a sunni Arab. A major reason behind the rapid advance of ISIS in the Iraqi north is that the Sunnis were too frustrated with the government, whether that frustration is warranted or not is a different matter.

Maliki's departure has a lot to do with Sistani, and by extension Iran, seeing him as a liability and pretty much telling him to go.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...3426cf-60ee-4856-ad26-d01a9c6cc9c3_story.html

There is a lot to be said about a 'democracy' where a religious leader's 'opinion' is the final say.

 

[edward]

... of Congress, at least not explicit approval, nor is any constitutional rationale offered.

Yet this is exactly what the right has been wanting for a number of months now. Fox news has told the entire country about it ten time a day, since forever. This isn't about kids playing Candy Land. Should Obama have waited for anything out of a totally non productive congress?

This was a strike while the iron was hot situation, we can't debate when or where.

 

[mheslep]

Just what did Assad do to become such a villain?
Use his military to put down a rebellion?
honest question, not asserting anything.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/04/how-bashar-al-assad-became-so-hated/275058/

You've not heard of the war there, the near 200K killed? The use of nerve gas?

 

[OmCheeto]

You've not heard of the war there, the near 200K killed? The use of nerve gas?

A "civil" war.

Seems like you could accuse Abraham Lincoln of the same thing: 260,000 confederates killed.

And I've yet to see proof that Assad ordered the gassings.

And even if he did, didn't Truman nuke some 200,000 people, because, they were going to fight to the end?

This Daesh problem is going to take some time to resolve, IMHO.

ps. I just discovered that my cousin's 11th generation grandmother was hung as a witch. She was 71 years old.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Nurse

 

[jim hardy]

You've not heard of the war there, the near 200K killed? The use of nerve gas?

Did you not watch his interview with Charlie Rose? I'm not convinced the gassing was his doing. But i wasn't over there so don't really know.
He said to effect "I am head of the elected government and foreigners are in my country starting a revolution. You're darn right I'm being hard on them. You would be too."
He just might have a point.
As OM points out we put Grant on our money. Jackson too, who was rough on our Indians..

The torture though i can't excuse. Atlantic says he inherited a rough bunch from his father. If they ran roughshod over him, well then he's not the right man for the job.

old jim

 

[mheslep]

Did you not watch his interview with Charlie Rose? I'm not convinced the gassing was his doing.

The gas was the sarin nerve agent.

...He said to effect "I am head of the elected government and foreigners are in my country starting a revolution. You're darn right I'm being hard on them. You would be too."
He just might have a point.
As OM points out we put Grant on our money. Jackson too, who was rough on our Indians..

The torture though i can't excuse. Atlantic says he inherited a rough bunch from his father. If they ran roughshod over him, well then he's not the right man for the job.

old jim

Sorry, "elected"? To what? I wonder if Rose would have done an interview with Mao, or Pol pot. Charles Manson? Vogue did a nice piece on his wife's flair for fashion, which I think is as appropriate as fashion article on Eva Braun at the time.

Assad's father probably was more ruthless. Browse the story of the Hama Massacre sometime, a resurrection of ancient world style destruction that inserted the phrase "Hama rules" into the language.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Hama_Massacre

 

[mheslep]

I can't really tell if you were being sarcastic. At the risk of appearing daft I'm going to assume you were not.

I wouldn't call Iraq a true liberal democracy at all. It's a majority rule dictated by ethnic and religious guidelines; the president has to be a Kurd, the PM a shiite Arab, and the speaker of the house a sunni Arab. A major reason behind the rapid advance of ISIS in the Iraqi north is that the Sunnis were too frustrated with the government, whether that frustration is warranted or not is a different matter.

Maliki's departure has a lot to do with Sistani, and by extension Iran, seeing him as a liability and pretty much telling him to go.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...3426cf-60ee-4856-ad26-d01a9c6cc9c3_story.html

There is a lot to be said about a 'democracy' where a religious leader's 'opinion' is the final say.

The Iraqi system has its flaws, but Malaki was nonetheless selected by popular vote, as was his replacement. Their political parties are not the stuff of the Muslim Brotherhood. Neither man arrived at power at the point of a gun or by massacre, as did their Iraqi predecessor and many of their middle eastern peers. Yes Sistani has *influence*, a great deal, but I'd not say he had the last word. One could argue the US President held more sway (e.g. refusal to allow US to be a Shia Air Force). Other world leaders have been influenced, almost commanded, by those out of government power; the coal union leadership in the the UK in the 1970s comes to mind. This hardly disqualifies these countries as democracies.

 

[lisab]

(snip) In my opinion that does make Assad evil in every sense of the word the same way Saddam and Qaddafi were evil. He might not be a direct enemy to the west but that doesn't make him less of an evil. 'Our way or die' does indeed apply to Assad as well for any Syrian who dares to defy him.

I have to admit that, although I understand the reasoning behind it, it does upset me when people suggest that Assad is the lesser of two evils and may become a partner in this conflict. As far as atrocities and number of killings are concerned he is as much of a monster as Al-Baghdadi.

If we can apply math to evil, the evil of Assad is probably equal to the evil of ISIS. Yet ISIS is the bigger threat because Assad is an evil who will stay in place. ISIS is guaranteed to spread.

But even from a completely pragmatic point of view, he is a main and direct cause of the apparent success and scale of ISIS. Nothing is more efficient in recruiting Jihadists than having to drag the corpse of a family member from under the rubble of their house that collapsed after a barrel bomb fell on it. The hundreds of westerners who joined ISIS, many of them wouldn't have been able to cite more than two Syrian cities before they set off, were initially moved by the sight of those atrocities (most of them were later brainwashed and became complete nutters). The Arab spring uprisings were most significant in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Syria. The only two that turned into full scale civil wars were the ones where the ruler didn't hesitate in using the full scale of his army machinery against his population. That is not to say that Tunisia and Egypt don't have their fair share of militant jihadists, and indeed they provided thousands of those to the fighting in Syria, but the relative peacefulness and quick stepping down of Ben Ali and Mubarak took away from them their most successful recruiting weapon.

I'm so glad you're posting here, Hossam!

 

[OmCheeto]

Did you not watch his interview with Charlie Rose?

Wow. As painful* as it was to watch, I watched the whole thing.

Very interesting, in hindsight.

*I've always had the greatest of admiration for Charlie Rose. It may be what has transpired in the last 12 months, which he could not foresee, which now makes him sound like, IMHO, an idiot. Sorry Charlie!

 

[HossamCFD]

The Iraqi system has its flaws, but Malaki was nonetheless selected by popular vote, as was his replacement. Their political parties are not the stuff of the Muslim Brotherhood. Neither man arrived at power at the point of a gun or by massacre, as did their Iraqi predecessor and many of their middle eastern peers. Yes Sistani has *influence*, a great deal, but I'd not say he had the last word. One could argue the US President held more sway (e.g. refusal to allow US to be a Shia Air Force). Other world leaders have been influenced, almost commanded, by those out of government power; the coal union leadership in the the UK in the 1970s comes to mind. This hardly disqualifies these countries as democracies.

Well, in my original comment to which you were replying I was suggesting pluralistic, western style, liberal democracy as the third option, not merely majority rule and public vote. Maliki's departure could've been much more violent, and yes Obama's reluctance to come to his aid did play an important role, but his legacy also includes ISIS capitalising on his failing to represent his constituents.

Mubarak won the public vote several times, and he did leave relatively peacefully. He certainly wasn't as bad as Assad or Qaddafi, but he's not what I had in mind when I was speaking about a cure for the middle east, neither is Maliki.

 

[HossamCFD]

If we can apply math to evil, the evil of Assad is probably equal to the evil of ISIS. Yet ISIS is the bigger threat because Assad is an evil who will stay in place. ISIS is guaranteed to spread.

I completely agree with that. I think their unprecedented brutality and preposterous ambition is going to accelerate their downfall. Unfortunately their ideology may survive for much longer.

I'm so glad you're posting here, Hossam!

That's very kind of you. Thank you very much indeed :)

 

[mheslep]

...
Mubarak won the public vote several times, ...

You contend Mubarak won a fair election with opposition? Ever? Mubarak was re-elected in 1999 with 93% of the vote, where the vote could only be yes or no to Mubarak.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/mubaraks-election-landslide-rigged/2005/09/10/1125772720211.html

 

[HossamCFD]

You contend Mubarak won a fair election with opposition? Ever? Mubarak was re-elected in 1999 with 93% of the vote, where the vote could only be yes or no to Mubarak.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/mubaraks-election-landslide-rigged/2005/09/10/1125772720211.html

The 2005 election, which was my first ever voting experience, was a contested not a yes or no vote. Whether it was rigged or not is very hard to determine, but in my opinion there was no need to rig it at all (though they might have rigged it just in case). Mubarak won with 88% and Ayman Nour, who had my vote, came second and was sent to jail shortly afterwards under allegations of forgery. Mubarak's party (the NDP then) and the government were one and the same. I didn't do any public opinion polls but my feeling was that most people voted for Mubarak for various reasons. And so eventhough it was a public vote the atmosphere in which the elections took place was as further away from a true democracy as you can get.

We're getting a bit off topic here but my point is that there's more to liberal pluralistic democracy than public vote. Both islamists and secular Arab dictators, despite being arch-enemies, are willing to play that game and have shown a big success in doing so. The muslim brotherhood did win both the parliamentary and presidential elections, so did Al-Sisi after orchestrating a coup/revolution/whatever-you-want-to-call-it against the MB.

 

[HossamCFD]

... ISIS is guaranteed to spread.

It's happening with a terrifying speed:
ISIS-linked group in Algeria behead a French citizen
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-29352537

Jund al-Khilafa (Soldiers of the Caliphate) pledged allegiance to IS on 14 September.