Consolidated Syria Conflict Thread

Started by Mr. Bigglesworth, September 19, 2015, 04:08:26 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mr. Bigglesworth

My solution to the Syria problem is redo Germany 1945. You cannot get the Russians out without a fight, so let them control a region like East Germany. The EU can control a region bordering Turkey. The US can control a region bordering Israel.

Thoughts? Other ideas?




(mod edit to consolidate threads under 1 title)
"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more; "
- Shakespeare's Henry V, Act III, 1598

Gusington

The problem with that is Germany had surrendered in 1945 in a traditional way. No one in Syria will surrender that way and until that happens, there is no control.


слава Україна!

We can't live under the threat of a c*nt because he's threatening nuclear Armageddon.

-JudgeDredd

Mr. Bigglesworth

You are saying nobody wants to put their troops in that shithole? Russia is already doing it. If the US and the EU does not move in, Russia alone will dictate what happens after fighting Isis.
"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more; "
- Shakespeare's Henry V, Act III, 1598

LongBlade

What incentive do the Russians or the Syrians have to allow this - even if any other country wanted to give it a go?
All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost;
The old that is strong does not wither,
Deep roots are not reached by the frost.

Mr. Bigglesworth

They would take the opportunity to cement their control of a Med region, with port, for 2-3 generations. Assad they would throw from the window if they could take direct control of a region. Being right beside EU and US regions, they cannot make it a missile base. The threat is minimal, with missiles being easy energy weapon targets at launch.
"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more; "
- Shakespeare's Henry V, Act III, 1598

OJsDad

I think it's way to early to declare the Russian intervention into Syria a success.  They could end up in a protracted conflict like the US did in Iraq. 

Also, given the current presidents inept handling of foreign policy, I don't think I want him taking on something like this. 
'Here at NASA we all pee the same color.'  Al Harrison from the movie Hidden Figures.

Gusington

I didn't say no one wants to put their troops in Syria - like you said they (Russia) already have. But having troops there and having 'control' are very different. And 'after ISIS' has the potential to be very similar to 'during ISIS' and just as bad as 'before ISIS.'


слава Україна!

We can't live under the threat of a c*nt because he's threatening nuclear Armageddon.

-JudgeDredd

Mr. Bigglesworth

Both replies seem very reasonable to me.

I found an old NYT article yesterday evening, from a few years back, talking about rejigging the whole middle East to their tribal regions to reduce conflict. It was not talking about imposed externally, just the natural tendencies. Very interesting. If I find it again, I will link it here.
"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more; "
- Shakespeare's Henry V, Act III, 1598

Mr. Bigglesworth

"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more; "
- Shakespeare's Henry V, Act III, 1598

Gusington

^I definitely want to read that when I get the chance.


слава Україна!

We can't live under the threat of a c*nt because he's threatening nuclear Armageddon.

-JudgeDredd

Nefaro

Even if it were divided up along majority tribal lines, there would still be conflict regarding areas which each tribe thinks they should own.  Plus the inevitable imbalance, or perceived imbalance, of resulting resource distribution.  Inevitable minority populations backed by force from new neighboring states.  Etc.

It could cause as much conflict as it may solve. 

Gusington

I believe that is called "a clusterf*ck" by those in the know.


слава Україна!

We can't live under the threat of a c*nt because he's threatening nuclear Armageddon.

-JudgeDredd

OJsDad

Biggs, weren't you in favor of the US getting out of Iraq.  Why would you advocate for getting out then but not just going back in now, but staying.
'Here at NASA we all pee the same color.'  Al Harrison from the movie Hidden Figures.

Mr. Bigglesworth

Quote from: OJsDad on September 20, 2015, 12:35:49 PM
Biggs, weren't you in favor of the US getting out of Iraq.  Why would you advocate for getting out then but not just going back in now, but staying.

There was no relation between Iraq and 9/11, which was masterminded by a Saudi, out of Afghanistan. The neocons wanted Iraq as a start of planted democracy, which would spread, while allowing energy companies to go in to make big profits.

In the current case of Syria, the people are leaving to get to a western lifestyle. If social unrest spreads over the EU, it is a big NATO problem. Therefore I think it is better to set up a region of EU control in Syria, then move those migrants into it. Let those that want the current regime go to a Russian region. Let the US region protect Isreal's flank, to offset the deal with Iran. It also lets the US keep cleaning out ISIS from Iraq.

We cannot go back to the dark ages with Isis. It is a bigger threat to the west than Saddam ever was.
"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more; "
- Shakespeare's Henry V, Act III, 1598

OJsDad

I would say we're far from certain that those fleeing to Europe want a "western lifestyle".  We already see many that came to Europe and the US want those countries to adapt to their beliefs.

You may have been opposed to the US going into Iraq to start with, but, as many have pointed out, pulling out to soon has proven to be a disaster.  Now you want to go back in with an even more confused and limited scope.  Doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
'Here at NASA we all pee the same color.'  Al Harrison from the movie Hidden Figures.