|
Randarkman posted:Israel was French (and British) reactor technology I think, as well as substantial supplies of heavy water (useful for making plutonium from natural, rather than enriched, uranium) from Norway. So, yeah, don't think the US was involved there, then again Israel began its nuclear program sometime before they really were a US ally. Piggybacking off of Protagonist's comments, throughput is one major driver. There've been a few claims of wanting to sell/export LEU from Iran at some point. Moreover, any other enrichment path might be too politically risky. The heavy water reactor was one of the first things Iran gave up in negotiations. The Protagonist, they had a long-standing deal to import 20% U235 for the Tehran Research Reactor from Argentina - but it's a small reactor for physics & medical isotopes. http://www.nti.org/learn/facilities/182/
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 19:29 |
|
|
Mans posted:Who the gently caress is saying I support Assad? I loving despise the regime. Oh? So I take it you are opposed to US aid to the SDF? That won’t be a very popular opinion itt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
The US stopped SA from giving MANPADs to Al Qaeda because Obama secretly supports Assad, not because giving MANPADs to Al Qaeda is bad or anything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
Liberal affinity for hardline Sunni Islamists has always struck me as bizarre.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
Squalid posted:That won’t be a very popular opinion itt. Let's not pretend there's any thread zeitgeist except talking past eachother and constant ad hominems https://twitter.com/DavidMWitty1/status/936218559738507264 "ISIS leader Baghdadi calls on his followers to gather in southern Libya in order to target neighboring countries to compensate for losses in Syria & Iraq. " Libya just can't and appearently won't catch a break Surely it's about time for Babghdadi to be declared dead again
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Human Grand Prix posted:Liberal affinity for hardline Sunni Islamists has always struck me as bizarre. This thread is dedicated to the brave mujahideen fighters of Syria.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:Yeah, the short term calculus is different for sure. I love that photo because they're all natural rivals of each other. They're all smiling and shaking hands while holding daggers behind their backs. I'm not sure your weird fantasies have any bearing on reality. Iran and Russia are natural allies as long as US hegemony lasts, and it isn't going away anytime soon. Turkey I'm not so sure about.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Bohemian Nights posted:Let's not pretend there's any thread zeitgeist except talking past eachother and constant ad hominems So long as we acknowledge that as prelude to the upcoming civil war in the western world, sure.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Human Grand Prix posted:Liberal affinity for hardline Sunni Islamists has always struck me as bizarre. has it ever struck you as imaginary as well
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
tekz posted:I'm not sure your weird fantasies have any bearing on reality. Iran and Russia are natural allies as long as US hegemony lasts, and it isn't going away anytime soon. Turkey I'm not so sure about. I think these things because I think US hegemony is on its way out the door. Not that I want to get into an argument about that, I'm aware its not a popular opinion, but there ya go. Weird inputs give weird results I guess.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:I think these things because I think US hegemony is on its way out the door. Not that I want to get into an argument about that, I'm aware its not a popular opinion, but there ya go. Weird inputs give weird results I guess. It is, but US primacy will still be around for a while, and other powers will still seek to align to counter our interests for quite some time. China may be on our level a lot sooner than people think, but they're really the only ones with any shot of reaching parity in the next few decades unless we collapse like the Soviet Union or something, and while Chinese interests are steadily expanding, they aren't a realistic threat to vital US interests outside of East Asia for a while still. This seems interesting: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/witness-says-turkey-s-erdogan-ordered-movement-iranian-cash-n825271 The prosecution's star witness implicated Turkish President Recep Erdogan in a scheme to evade U.S. sanctions on Iran during a trial that has strained relations between the two countries. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Nov 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:I know a lot of you are trapped in the 60's, but I don't think you're going to find really anyone these days who's kneejerk response to condemnation of the US role in Vietnam is some stupid rear end "what about the Soviets and China, they've done way worse." I've certainly never so much as implied such a thing. For lack of such an enemy, you're fabricating them in your mind to justify taking agency away from people who are suffering, and reducing them to pawns on a game board in your childish vendetta against the government. If you're going to stand for something, stand for people, who all inherently deserve rights, dignity, and a representative government that treats them fairly in accordance with their values. Not for some dogmatic team bullshit that makes you look like a complete loving idiot to anyone who isn't a neo-nazi, a useful idiot for dictators, or the whitest of privileged Western lefties. oh, wholly agreed. it's the part where you transition to "therefore we should have backed the salafists harder" where you lose me it turns out, despite what that nice mister friedman told you, that Mohammed bin Salman is -also- a dictator, and the assertion civilians will necessarily be better off under his Al Qaeda proxies is, ah, disputed, to put it mildly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:It is, but US primacy will still be around for a while, and other powers will still seek to align to counter our interests for quite some time. China may be on our level a lot sooner than people think, but they're really the only ones with any shot of reaching parity in the next few decades unless we collapse like the Soviet Union or something, and while Chinese interests are steadily expanding, they aren't a realistic threat to vital US interests outside of East Asia for a while still. I guess you can quibble over "realistic threat to vital us interests" but it is clear China has made major inroads in Africa and across Eurasia. I guess you could argue those regions were never that vital to US interests in the first place, but they are also certainly outside of Eurasia. Also, it needs to be pointed out Russia-Chinese relations also seem to be strengthening and as discussed earlier, Russia clearly has growing interests in the ME and arguably Western countries as well. If US primacy means "we still have the largest fleet" then yeah it will probably take some time for that to change, but I do think the period of a being a "hyperpower" has ended and now we are back to being a super-power contesting other powers for control of the globe (China arguably will be a super-power soon if not already.) Ardennes fucked around with this message at 21:45 on Nov 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:It is, but US primacy will still be around for a while, and other powers will still seek to align to counter our interests for quite some time. China may be on our level a lot sooner than people think, but they're really the only ones with any shot of reaching parity in the next few decades unless we collapse like the Soviet Union or something, and while Chinese interests are steadily expanding, they aren't a realistic threat to vital US interests outside of East Asia for a while still. I view the US as being (by far) the strongest of the Great Powers, and no longer a Super Power. I think this lesson is being learned the hard way, certainly in the Middle East but now also with NK. It will take some bigger war to really take effect though. If the US successfully invades Iran and converts it to western democracy I'll eat my words and take all this back. Instead I think we'll see the US haphazardly try to run the world with decreasing resources while other countries gradually carve out their own spheres of influence. Anyway enough of the geopolitical wankery. Those tweets Trump sent out from that British fascist group are going to be really damaging in the muslim world. I mean most muslims are going to hate the guy anyway, but this is a serious escalation and very hard to refute. That there's a president that does this is... kinda scary.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 22:31
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:I view the US as being (by far) the strongest of the Great Powers, and no longer a Super Power. This is basically what I meant, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/egea_blog/status/936352887583772672 Sudan proposes to host a Russian base on the Red Sea. They can't offer a really strategic location, though, since they aren't Djibouti. Anyway I guess this shows that Russia has become an interesting friend for MENA countries in the throes of an endless civil war?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 01:48
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:I know a lot of you are trapped in the 60's, but I don't think you're going to find really anyone these days who's kneejerk response to condemnation of the US role in Vietnam is some stupid rear end "what about the Soviets and China, they've done way worse." I've certainly never so much as implied such a thing. pivoting to "b-b-b-but russia and china" happens all the time now, in the year 2017, on a variety of criticisms of the united states, especially any time a hypothetical end to us hegemony is brought up
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 02:17
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:I view the US as being (by far) the strongest of the Great Powers, and no longer a Super Power. I guess this could be true if you use some really dumb definitions. Could the US get there if they don't recover from Trump? Sure, but by any reasonable definition for super power you cannot make the argument the US is not one at this time. Russia could arguably be one as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 02:25
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:pivoting to "b-b-b-but russia and china" happens all the time now, in the year 2017, on a variety of criticisms of the united states, especially any time a hypothetical end to us hegemony is brought up The last two pages of this thread also proves that the reverse is true. I don't think "country X is worse" arguments have ever served much purpose besides deflection, but good lord do people love to deflect.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 02:26
|
|
|
For a perfect illustration of the distinctions between the two, just look back in the thread to Libya, where the great powers (NATO allies like France) couldn't even operate for more than a week or two without US support. Meanwhile the US could probably support 5-10 Libya like conflicts simultaneously for extended periods of time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
tsa posted:For a perfect illustration of the distinctions between the two, just look back in the thread to Libya, where the great powers (NATO allies like France) couldn't even operate for more than a week or two without US support. Meanwhile the US could probably support 5-10 Libya like conflicts simultaneously for extended periods of time. France and the UK aren't great powers anymore, though a genuine European force could be if they decided to or were forced to stop relying on the US. Russia (by punching above its weight class) and China (still punching below theirs) are great powers though. The US is still clearly superior to both, but can't just get its way by default around the world like it could in the 90's and 00's (before exposing the limits of getting its way by losing two wars and turning Libya into chaos slavery warlord land). I think our military superiority compared to our allies gave us an inflated sense of our greatness in the 90's in particular, but a lot of our great accomplishments have been with things like smart bombs and missiles that allow us to strike targets with fewer civilian casualties than ever before. That's great for PR and ethics (though it does create a moral hazard issue if you start feeling more free to launch these wars because you believe you'll be killing fewer people and things don't go as well as you'd hoped), but one way other powers can compete is just to not give a poo poo about how many civilians they kill. Russia's crude bombardment of Syria is pretty clearly less expensive than our own more sophisticated version, but has also been decisive in turning the tide in many parts of the country. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 04:10 on Dec 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 03:39
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:pivoting to "b-b-b-but russia and china" happens all the time now, in the year 2017, on a variety of criticisms of the united states, especially any time a hypothetical end to us hegemony is brought up This is rich coming from you, since you can't even hear criticism about the North Korean form of government without deflecting to the US and whining about how western propaganda is spreading lies about the noble leaders of the opposition. I don't even know how far someone would have to go to be your pro-Western equivalent. Saddam did have nukes, open your eyes sheeple?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:France and the UK aren't great powers anymore, though a genuine European force could be if they decided to or were forced to stop relying on the US. Yeah, Europe's economy and population dwarf that of Russia's: Russia only remains such a potential threat because Europe's military are split into dozens of national forces, each with their own recruitment bases, supply chains and command structures. There'll never be a single European army of course, as controlling your own military is so fundamental to a nation's existence that it could never realistically be given up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 06:25
|
|
|
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/world/middleeast/russia-egypt-air-bases.htmlquote:LONDON — Egypt, in what appeared to be a snub to the Trump administration, has reached a preliminary agreement to allow Russian military jets to use its airspace and bases, both sides said Thursday. Speaking of diminishing US influence. This is quite the turn for Egypt. Maybe a return to the play both sides like Egypt did during the 50s&60s during the Cold War. I’d like to also note the position of US ambassador to Egypt has been vacant since July.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 06:54
|
|
|
The regime of egypt saw how fr Russia is willing to go to help fascism genocide its populations so egypt wants in on that Bashar pie of placing themselves willingly under foreign protectorate system.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 07:12
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:This is rich coming from you, since you can't even hear criticism about the North Korean form of government without deflecting to the US and whining about how western propaganda is spreading lies about the noble leaders of the opposition. I don't even know how far someone would have to go to be your pro-Western equivalent. Saddam did have nukes, open your eyes sheeple? choosing to rebut his statement with "b-b-but other countries" is maybe not so much rebutting his point as it is confirming it
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 07:12
|
|
|
I have a hard time seeing this mean much in the long term, just as I see little of consequence changing in the relationship between the US and Turkey. Ultimately Russia just can't offer Egypt or Turkey the kinds of things the United States can. For example anyone hear about Filipino Rodrigo Duterte complaining about the U.S. lately? He shut-up pretty fast after he realized the U.S. was the only state capable of providing the kind of high-quality intelligence needed to drive IS out of the city of Marawi. Turkey's position will naturally foster tension between them and Russia. Meanwhile Egypt might flirt with Russia but Russia will never be able to afford the kind of bribes the Egyptian generals extract from America. Even Nasser's romance with the Soviets was ultimately short lived, only really lasting from the Suez crisis to the 1974 peace accord with Israel.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 07:14
|
|
|
Pistol_Pete posted:Yeah, Europe's economy and population dwarf that of Russia's: Russia only remains such a potential threat because Europe's military are split into dozens of national forces, each with their own recruitment bases, supply chains and command structures. There'll never be a single European army of course, as controlling your own military is so fundamental to a nation's existence that it could never realistically be given up. Yeah, I don't know how useful it is to talk about "Europe" as a single entity anymore considering how very clearly divided it is at the moment. You could add all its GDP and fighters together and it would look impressive, but wouldn't reflect any useful political reality. One thing it is clear that most European militaries at this point are really defensive forces at this point, and moreover, there isn't the political will to utilize them in a combined effort. If anything the political will to cooperate seems to be only diminishing at the moment. I think Russia's strength at the moment is very situational, but the Kremlin seems to be getting better at predicting where developments are occurring and getting on the "better side of them." In addition, it is clear that Russia had initiate substantive overseas deployments, maybe not nearly on the scale of the US, but enough to turn a situation when they want it. It is true that Russia's economy is smaller, but they are essentially filling in a power vacuum that may be around a while depending on how the course of history goes. Anyway, as far as definitions go, I think everyone can agree the term "hyperpower" is now obsolete, and the US really can't just do whatever it wants. That said, I do think the US and China are in a different tier, with most of China's overseas power coming from its economic diplomacy. I do think there are also declining returns on a conventional military, you can't use it on a nuclear-armed state, and while a massive conventional military can launch a very impressive intervention this arguably could able be done with far fewer resources. This is a lot of "geopolitical" chit-chat, but it perhaps is useful when dicussing the Middle East at this point since it has become the battleground of powers. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 09:52 on Dec 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 09:34
|
|
|
Squalid posted:I have a hard time seeing this mean much in the long term, just as I see little of consequence changing in the relationship between the US and Turkey. Ultimately Russia just can't offer Egypt or Turkey the kinds of things the United States can. I think the Arab Spring really shifted the state of international relations because of what was learned during it. Ben Ali, Mubarak, and Gaddafi all had little or no international support, and all of them succumbed to domestic uprisings against them. Assad and Maliki both had alliances with other tyrannical governments that provided cover for them diplomatically and militarily, and both of them remained in power, as a Vice President in Maliki's case. The message seems obvious. If you have some modern military support and a coalition that is willing to back you no matter how transparently brutal you become, you can put down a legitimate revolt and your government can survive in the current international climate. So I do think we will begin to see more dictatorships that feel vulnerable to overthrow seeking to line up with Putin rather than with the US government. Sisi taking that deal would not surprise me a bit, although there's obviously reasons not to, or he would've done it long ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 11:15
|
|
|
Granted, in the case of Turkey, they are developing their own arms industry that very likely could make access to NATO equipment relatively moot especially if they supplement it with high-end Russian equipment. Admittedly, there isn't a reason for Turkey to leave NATO (and NATO really can't kick them out), but simply push the situation to its limits especially since Erdogan himself has a personal vendetta and there is the ongoing issue of the Kurds. Likewise, Egypt can get access to some Western equipment, but it often older equipment (they are using F16 A/Bs and M1A1 tanks) and there is the obvious issue of selling equipment to Egypt that could, in turn, be used against Israel. By buying some Russian equipment, they sidestep the issue. Also, I actually have to agree that the Arab Spring/Color Revolutions/interventionist American policy spooked a lot of authoritarian governments, and have now forced them to work together. Russia, China, Iran and now possibly Turkey may see they have a more common cause in working with each other than against one another. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 12:12 on Dec 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 12:09
|
|
|
It seems like people get hung up on the setbacks and successes of the moment and have this picture of power diplomacy that waxes and wanes year by year and there's truth there, but I think the long term material circumstances are also telling. The US may or may not be a "superpower," but it's also clearly in a league all its own. China and Russia don't have a globe spanning navy, a massive air force, an innovative space program, a large highly educated professional class, military outposts all over the planet, or a preeminent role in global finance and culture. They're big and powerful and some day might "overtake" the US, but we're far from being their yet. China's foreign investments aren't the sort of global realignment they're often characterized as, but rather a way for them to outsource their excess industrial capacity and make the best of a bad situation, generally at their clients' expense. Such products include "the world's emptiest airport" in Sri Lanka and an overpriced rail project that has almost bankrupted Kenya. Once people start figuring out that accepting Chinese infrastructure loans is more dangerous than the IMF, they'll have to find a new way to wield their soft power. Besides that, China has massive problems that make it unlikely that we'll find ourselves living in the "Chinese Century" any time soon. Their environment and public health are catastrophic -- rivers like oil slicks, scant arable land getting depleted faster and faster, and skies dark as a Rembrandt painting over every major city. Plus, everyone smokes, their diets are dubious at best, there's a chronic shortage of doctors, and the population is aging rapidly. Education, inequality, and corruption are still at typical third world levels of dysfunction and don't seem to be getting better. I genuinely hope China gets its act together and its people get the future they deserve, but it has a much longer way to go that than the Forbes set would have you believe. As for Russia, they like to flex their muscles and took over some territory that was part of the Soviet Union thirty years ago, but so much of their recent success on the world stage has been the result of a deliberate US disengagement. That can change quickly though. Just because the US never set up a no fly zone in Syria, doesn't mean it couldn't have enforced one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 12:19
|
|
|
Thats the thing, I have heard all of those measures of American power before but then there is the counter-argument. How much do a massive air force and navy buy you want you can't use them against another nuclear-armed state? That includes even state like North Korea? The First and Second Gulf wars were extremely impressive (in the beginning at least), but clearly an adaptation to conventional military strength has happened. (Also, a no-fly zone in Syria couldn't have happened without the Russians and it is why it was just a poor talking point.) How great is a space program when it still has to rely on the Russians themselves to send humans into space and the other alternative (maybe) is private contractors? How persuasive is Hollywood when China can essentially issue a veto over the material and you have Americans films that actively try to make China look good (the Martian/Looper among others)? How important is a financial industry when it is often as much as a threat to your economic stability as a benefit? How long is that "highly educated" professional class going to exist as higher education gets decimated (look at the House tax bill)? Hell, you could already say that in the context of area studies that we really DON'T have that many educated experts left. The state department is decimated, and the intelligence community is understaffed, and American academia especially when it comes to the social sciences (which you need btw) is in very rough shape. The US needs more than doctors, lawyers, and accountants. I guess I had to get that off my chest, but I think some Americans are still living in a dream. The US still has a massive amount of its influence, but Coke-Cola and Jeans aren't going to make people love America (at least not anymore). In many ways we are flying blind, our of broader foreign policy if not geopolitical strategy seems to just be coasting on its own momentum. Also, I don't think just hoping China and Russia just collapse on themselves, and we win by default is a smooth move. (Btw, this is not to say Russia and China have massive issues, but we got to be fair here.) Ardennes fucked around with this message at 12:51 on Dec 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 12:36
|
|
|
The Martian made China look good in the original book, not at Hollywood.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 12:53
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:The Martian made China look good in the original book, not at Hollywood. It still filtered its way through for a reason, and it is far from the only example of it happening. Hell, the Red Dawn remake had to change the enemy to North Korea for a similar reason (it is also why North Korea was probably the enemy in the first Crysis (from a German developer) among other games).
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
I think at this point there are 4 or perhaps 5 grades of great power - The first grade is of course the US, which still at this point has a singular amount of power, wether measured economically, militarily or soft power. The second grade is China, which has at this point outstripped the rest of the pack and is busy buying influence across the Third world. It will be able to directly rival the US at some point soon, but isn't there yet. The third grade is also filled by a single country, Russia, which maintains this level for now by size, swagger and ambition. The fourth grade contains the UK, France, Germany and Japan. Their economic, military and soft power varies, but taken together they are all really on a par. Any of these could overtake Russia if they really were willing to make the effort and put in the money, but true superpower status is lost. The fifth grade is powerful and ambitious regional powers, particularly India (which will probably leapfrog the others soonish), but perhaps contains Iran, Turkey etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 13:20
|
|
|
mediadave posted:
you have to be straight up insane to include the UK, a country with an aircraft carrier and literally no planes or weapons on it, on par with France or Germany. Not sure about Japan's military capabilities but the UK are completely unable to enter any sort of military engagement without multiple nations supporting them; they have no working logistics and no projection at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 14:08
|
|
|
UK has far greater expeditionary capabilities than Germany, gimped carrier or not. Still have overseas military bases in a bunch of places (in fact that's a reason why aircraft carriers were neglected: planners figured that an island is like a carrier that doesn't sink; read up on the "island strategy"). Since this is the ME thread, I'll just mention Bahrain, Cyprus, and Qatar. Plus, nuke, UNSC permanent seat, etc. This kind of things help punching a bit above your weight. Germany on the other hand has a larger economy but their military is a joke, basically nothing more than a scheme to subsidize their weapon industry so that they can export their crap. Typically, they order a lot more than they need (which gives them that must more weight to get the lion's share of the workshare in international projects) and then they just sell off all the surplus directly as brand-new second-hand stuff. Then they don't bother funding maintenance of the stuff they've kept, so the German military ends up training with broomsticks instead of guns. This has been largely encouraged because after two world wars, nobody wanted Germany to have a strong military anymore; not even the Germans themselves.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 14:53
|
|
|
Looks like we’re seeing Russia vs Saudi Arabia as the opener match in Russia 2018. Most potentially politicized football game of recent times? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:I think the Arab Spring really shifted the state of international relations because of what was learned during it. Ben Ali, Mubarak, and Gaddafi all had little or no international support, and all of them succumbed to domestic uprisings against them. Assad and Maliki both had alliances with other tyrannical governments that provided cover for them diplomatically and militarily, and both of them remained in power, as a Vice President in Maliki's case. The message seems obvious. If you have some modern military support and a coalition that is willing to back you no matter how transparently brutal you become, you can put down a legitimate revolt and your government can survive in the current international climate. So I do think we will begin to see more dictatorships that feel vulnerable to overthrow seeking to line up with Putin rather than with the US government. Sisi taking that deal would not surprise me a bit, although there's obviously reasons not to, or he would've done it long ago.  Ardennes posted:This is a lot of "geopolitical" chit-chat, but it perhaps is useful when discussing the Middle East at this point since it has become the battleground of powers. Some good news, people are starting to return to the Raqqa area: https://twitter.com/ClaudiaAlMina/status/936222591752327169 quote:SDF allowed people to return to their homes in the Al Tayyar neighborhood, west of Raqqa, after remove all the mines. It's the 2d neighborhood of Raqqa where residents are allowed to return home. Residents appealed to organizations to open a medical center and a school ANHA https://twitter.com/DefenseUnits/status/936251724674797568 quote:[quote]Locals begin returning to #Raqqa's eastern al-Tayar neighbourhood of more than 10 thousand residents after #YPG-led #SDF's mine-clearing operations are over. (Source: @hawarnews)
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 19:29 |
|
|
Tardigrade posted:Looks like we’re seeing Russia vs Saudi Arabia as the opener match in Russia 2018. Most potentially politicized football game of recent times? saudi arabia will lose to russia because much like our country it's a spectacularly poo poo team run by complete loving incompetent morons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 17:47
|
|