|
Xerxes17 posted:MBS must be Grouchio then. lmao, you're making me suspicious. This explains SO MUCH Brother Friendship posted:The trick is never to admit the fight against ISIS is "complete" Honestly I have a hard time imagining anything but a hard future for the The Democratic Federation of Northern Syria. I agree that helping them was the correct decision but where do they go from here? If the US ever really exits they will be exposed to the same kind of coordinated air attacks that have proved so effective in this conflict. As that someone else was saying recently, there's no reason to assume US support will be enduring, especially with our Special forces already stretched thin. If Afghanistan really heats up again next spring they may be redeployed as a matter of necessity. Economically Rojava remains deeply precarious. So far as I'm aware Arab support remains shallow and could easily turn against the PYD or at least decline to actively support future conflicts with the regime or Turkey. None of this may matter this year or next, but what about five years from now?
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 12:35 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/HadiNili/status/947132525377449984 Seems (in some places at least) the protests have skipped the "Reform please" phase and gone straight to calls for essentially revolution in the space of a day. People chanting "Death to Khamenei", tearing down posters/billboards of him, Soleimani, Basij signs, calling for the end of the Islamic Republic etc. They also seem to be pretty widespread and unorganised as of the moment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
I haven't heard any talk about it, but this part of western Iran suffered the worst of that earthquake. A lot of deaths were blamed on shoddy construction of public housing (presumably due to corruption). I wouldn't be surprised if this was a motivator to get people out on the streets.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/joshdcaplan/status/947223436786585605 Hmm? In this going to be a thing? y/n
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
Watch this actually turn out to be a proper revolution but the new government immediately repudiates the nuclear agreement and starts planning to anschluss southern Iraq a la russia-crimea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 23:32
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/947180713236934657 I feel like he could have left the middle part out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/947180713236934657  RIP Iranian protesters. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
The Iron Rose posted:Gotta be honest this is pretty funny after everyone and their mother was prepared to bitch at the United States for abandoning their Kurdish/SDF allies after the fight against ISIL is "complete." In all honesty, I'm actually fairly surprised that we're ramping up our presence and therefore support in this fashion. Brother Friendship posted:The trick is never to admit the fight against ISIS is "complete"  names like Euphrates Volcano). 2015 saw the taking of Tal Abyad and the formation of the SDF, 2016 saw a whole bunch of further advances, but the underlying assumption was always that US support was temporary, and that some time post-Raqqa when ISIS was no longer a territory-holding entity, the US would end our involvement.With the election of Trump, the calculus changed. To put it simply, "keep supporting the SDF" has now become the default assumption. The plan of temporary support has started shifting to a plan of permanent support, and there's not really any push-back on this new plan domestically. The reason is that there's nobody to push back: Trump doesn't know a goddamn thing about the Middle East except "the Kurds are the good guys", and pretty much everyone that Trump listens to is either pro-SDF (Mattis, McMaster) or neutral/ignorant of what's going on. Same thing politically, there's not really any reason for your average Democrat or Republican politician to be anti-SDF, so if asked they'll likely be supportive, neutral, or just not have a position at all. (For the purposes of this paragraph, anti-war =/= anti-SDF, and the 2018 NDAA passed by absurd margins anyway, the Senate was 89 - 8 and the House was 356-70.) The only guys with Trump's ear who would have been anti-SDF are Michael Flynn (he's busy selling himself out and trying not to get thrown in prison forever), and maybe Steve Bannon (isolationism) but lol he's loving gone too, as are a whole bunch of Trump's senior staff. So that leaves non-domestic entities to try to convince the US to leave Syria and stop supporting the SDF. Turkey's tried for a year now, and they haven't really gotten much; they're going to keep trying, of course. Russia has their port in Tartus and they seem to favor trying to charm the SDF away from the US; Russia also favors negotiations, because they want the war in Syria done now that they've successfully propped up Assad's regime. Checking Iran's power is part of why we're sticking around in North Syria, and Iran's got bigger things to worry about right now now. Assad's still got Idlib, Ghouta, South Syria, the remaining ISIS pockets, and Euphrates Shield to worry about first, and Russia's pushing him to negotiate with the SDF (because again, Russia wants to be done already). So until something majorly changes either domestically or on the foreign front, it looks like the US is sticking around in North Syria. Re-evaluation will definitely happen in 2021, but who knows what the situation on the ground will look like by then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Watch this actually turn out to be a proper revolution but the new government immediately repudiates the nuclear agreement and starts planning to anschluss southern Iraq a la russia-crimea. So what are the chances of the blowing into a revolution. I doubt it would be successful but it would be nice to see the Iranian people take their country back and hang the theocrats from cranes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 02:35
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:So what are the chances of the blowing into a revolution. I doubt it would be successful but it would be nice to see the Iranian people take their country back and hang the theocrats from cranes. Based on previous Iranian protests it's pretty loving low.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:So what are the chances of the blowing into a revolution. I doubt it would be successful but it would be nice to see the Iranian people take their country back and hang the theocrats from cranes. Probably nil
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 03:04
|
|
|
Basically I feel like at any point if the regime is feeling genuinely threatened, they would unleash the IRGC to go all SAVAK on the protesters. At that point the only way for them to win would be if the army actually sided with them against the government.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 03:19
|
|
|
I'm surprised to see major protests pop up in Iran and turn anti-government so quickly. The country seemed to be doing pretty well recently, what was the spark for this?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 03:19
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:So what are the chances of the blowing into a revolution. I doubt it would be successful but it would be nice to see the Iranian people take their country back and hang the theocrats from cranes. They'll need to get some powerful establishment force on their side to get any real momentum. Without someone to protect them, they'll just get beaten in the streets and slandered in the press. I don't know the political situation well enough to say how likely open patronage is, but I'm sure there are members of the civil service and elected government who are sympathetic or simply don't like seeing their constituents getting shot in the street. What they'll do about it is a different question If a bunch of the regular army defects or Rouhani pulls a Yeltsin things could proceed very quickly, but Iran isn't half as broken as Syria was and this isn't Khamanei's first "revolution." The Guards will prevent any sort of move toward peaceful regime change unless they can subverted or sidelined somehow and they're probably too powerful for even the civilian government to oppose directly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 03:25
|
|
|
I hope we invade Iran, I'm jeering in anticipation. and by We, I do mean you too Britain.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
I would not expect anything from these protests. They crushed the 2009 movement against the state and successfully sidelined the following attempts at reform and the Iranians are nowhere near that level of protest at the moment. And, let's say things spiraled out of control, if Iran could suppress a full blown rebellion outside its borders it would easily destroy any movement towards rebellion inside its own territory. There is no chance that the military will do anything but side with the theocrats with the current situation in the region. The protests do underline the point that it was an absolute waste that the lifting of Western sanctions and release of money that had been locked since the overthrow of the Shah was used to slaughter Syrians instead of rebuilding Iran's civil society. No matter the empire it's the civilians who suffer at home and abroad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 03:39
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Probably nil :hmm: https://twitter.com/borzou/status/947254914723602432
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 03:44
|
|
|
Saladin Rising posted:I just had a bit of a realization reading these posts: this change is a long-term consequence of Trump's election. Originally (under Obama) the plan was to temporarily support the Hillary campaigned on supporting the YPG more than Trump did. Maybe she would have pushed back against mission creep by the Pentagon, and as a former Secretary of State she might have cared more about the diplomatic issues a long term presence will worsen for us, but as a hawk it's still not terribly unlikely that she'd be all for a permanent presence. Just for fun: https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/947242657100783616 Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 03:52 on Dec 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 03:47
|
|
|
this was the case in '09 as well, and those had the added dynamic of the Moussavi/Ahmadinejad election contest but hey that was 8 years ago so it's not a huge surprise for some folks to be thinking this could be the big one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
An outright violent revolution breaking out would probably take a horrific toll on the country. The ideal is to get clerics in place willing to make the theocratic institution put a gun to its head.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
Have they begun cracking down on these yet? I remember the government coming down hard and brutal the last time around. There were even stories circulating about Iraqi militiamen being brought in to beat on people and shoot them from the rooftops IIRC.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 03:57
|
|
|
The impression I've been getting from twitter and my memory of the crackdown last time is that the difference this time is that the protests aren't concentrated in the major cities, where the regime is most prepared to crack skulls. Last time the rural/urban divide was a big thing, but if even rural Iranians are turning maybe that makes a difference. That's not to say the regime won't find a way to suppress it anyway though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
I heard bullets, chemical weapons and barrel bombs do wonders against an uppity population.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 04:08
|
|
|
Brother Friendship posted:I heard bullets, chemical weapons and barrel bombs do wonders against an uppity population. Iran doesn't have massive sectarian and ethnic cleavages to exploit to drive the conflict to that level--either they'll have the force to crush the protests, or they won't. Plus Iran isn't host to the last significant international base of a former great power seeking to reclaim its place, so the level of Russian commitment Syria got is out. Assad obviously would have lost the war without support from Iran and Hezbollah too, but Iran has about four times the population of pre-war Syria, so if the regime actually finds itself overwhelmed, it's going to be awfully hard to scrounge up enough foreign militia support to bail them out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 04:15
|
|
|
Brother Friendship posted:I heard bullets, chemical weapons and barrel bombs do wonders against an uppity population. Yeah, I mean, Iran has worked so very hard to help Assad oppress his people, it stands to reason that it's his turn to contribute his forces to Iranian stability. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 04:15
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:The impression I've been getting from twitter and my memory of the crackdown last time is that the difference this time is that the protests aren't concentrated in the major cities, where the regime is most prepared to crack skulls. Last time the rural/urban divide was a big thing, but if even rural Iranians are turning maybe that makes a difference. That's not to say the regime won't find a way to suppress it anyway though. who knows. i am sure its hosed, but it would be great to see the ayatollah and his inbred illiterate followers thrown from power. i feel like its gonna happen at some point. there are way to many young people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 04:17
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:who knows. i am sure its hosed, but it would be great to see the ayatollah and his inbred illiterate followers thrown from power. i feel like its gonna happen at some point. there are way to many young people. Not every young person in Iran is against the Islamic Republic. The thing with Iran in contrast to the Arab dictatorships is that they have actually carried out a revolution of sorts and the government actually does have significant legitimacy and ideological appeal. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 04:26 on Dec 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 04:23
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:Not every young person in Iran is against the Islamic Republic. wasnt the revolution co-opted by the islamists though?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:wasnt the revolution co-opted by the islamists though? There's a lot of controversy about that as to whether the Islamists hijacked the revolution or if most of the public were behind them the whole time. My impression is that they were at least the biggest single faction, which helped them consolidate support. There was a public referendum in support of the new constitution after that consolidation, and while there were a number of political factions opposed to it, it still passed with overwhelming support. That doesn't mean everyone was happy with what the resulting government ended up being in practice though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 04:33
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:There's a lot of controversy about that as to whether the Islamists hijacked the revolution or if most of the public were behind them the whole time. My impression is that they were at least the biggest single faction, which helped them consolidate support. There was a public referendum in support of the new constitution after that consolidation, and while there were a number of political factions opposed to it, it still passed with overwhelming support. That doesn't mean everyone was happy with what the resulting government ended up being in practice though. I wonder how similar that situation was compared to how the Muslim Brotherhood came to power in Egypt after Mubarak was overthrown. The MB's chief advantage was that they were actually organized while the rest of their opposition was fragmented and that gave them enough of a plurality to win the election. Anyone have a good book on the subject I can add to the pile?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:wasnt the revolution co-opted by the islamists though? Depends what you mean. The Islamists (or rather the clerical establishment) were a significant player in the opposition against the monarchy and the eventual revolution from the start. They outmaneuvered the other factions (like the communists) by leveraging, among other things their superior organization and broad popular support (particularly from religious students, the urban middle class of shopkeepers and rural Iranians). They have carried out a revolution of sorts in that they have been building up a new society and political system centered around themselves and their ideology. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 04:54 on Dec 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 04:39
|
|
|
2009 was largely organised and had something resembling leaders, whilst seeking realistic reforms within the existing system. This seems to be taking place all over the country, having spread in the space of one or two days seemingly spontaneously and with no leaders or stated goals - a paroxysm of anti-establishment sentiment. I mean you have crowds of people marching in the street chanting "Marg bar Khamenei" and calling for an end of the Islamic Republic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 04:45
|
|
|
what a loving retard
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 04:55
|
|
|
Well hopefully enough Basiji died in Syria/Lebanon/Yemen that they aren't around beating in the heads of their own people. Also, looks like the Protests are happening more in rural areas and religious North towns then 2009, thats uh a good thing. My parents are cautiously excited, they haven't been back in 30 years and already making somewhat plans if things actually change.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 05:11
|
|
|
Death By The Blues posted:Well hopefully enough Basiji died in Syria/Lebanon/Yemen that they aren't around beating in the heads of their own people. Also, looks like the Protests are happening more in rural areas and religious North towns then 2009, thats uh a good thing. Have they actually sent alot of Basiji rank-and-file to Syria though? I always got the impression that the Iranian involvement was more focused on officers in an an advisory role and co-ordinating the involvement, arming and deployment of Shi'ite militias out of Iraq as well as the Hezbollah.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 05:24
|
|
|
"hold my doogh" lmao that's great.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 05:42
|
|
|
Couple of notes on the Iran protests: 1. The Ben Rhodes types were trying to argue that Iranians were rallying around the regime a couple weeks ago. Don't listen to them now when they tell you this is simply hardliner-staged protests against Rouhani. These protesters are yelling death to Khamenei in cities all across Iran. 2. In election polling for the last presidential election, Ahmadinejad was polling way ahead of Rouhani in a lot of these same rural areas that are now protesting. Lately, he's been in the news because he's been going hard after Sadeq Larijani, the head of the judiciary. As far as I know, it's unprecedented. Larijani is the second most powerful man in the country. People go to military prison for drawing caricatures of him. Ahmadinejad has been attacking the whole system from the economic left as well over corruption, which is a massive problem everywhere in Iran. That doesn't mean the protesters all support Ahmadinejad, but he certainly isn't helping to keep everyone calm. I'm sure there's been others out there pushing the boundaries as well. 3. I've seen more pro-Shah Iranians over the last 3 days than I have over the last few years combined. I think that's a very small demographic in Iran, so every last one of them must be out in the streets. Combined with the immediate anti-Khamenei, fall of the regime chants, that gives me reason to believe that these protests are primarily built up from people outside the current political spectrum who are grasping at symbols of resistance to the clerical institution. 4. Nobody seems to be in control of this thing. Not Mousavi, not Rouhani. Perhaps a voice will stand out soon that they rally behind, but as of now, it's hard to get a clear picture. 5. I have not seen the MEK anywhere. There may be rallies in support of them somewhere, but from what I'm seeing, their support base in Iran is either staying home, or it is completely non-existent. It's certainly not as big as their support base in Paris. The clerics may attempt to link these protests to the MEK, but as of now I've not seen it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 06:27
|
|
|
You know, I've toyed with the idea of Trump as the Republican Carter in the past, but goddrat did I not expect any parallel to include a revolution in Iran.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 06:42
|
|
|
Hey guys, I'm taking a break away from the forum to take care of other things in my life, I'll probably be back in a couple of weeks but with the Iranian protests happening I just want to give my 2 cents:- Emotionally speaking, I'm glad the iranian govenrment is getting embarrased like this, gently caress em. However, coldly speaking, I just want to warn you guys against getting over-hyped, remember, unlike american allies, the media landscape (which absolutely includes the social media companies in the US) have a vested interest in hyping and portraying any social movement and protest in Iran as the end of the Iranian regime. What I suspect is going to happen is a coordinated media and social media hype train to make it seem like the ayatollahs are on the verge of collapse for the next few weeks, a disproportionate amount of attention and promotion is going to happen for them in a way that arab civil society protesters can only dream of. Is there going to be quite a few protests over rising food prices? absolutely. what I'm doubting for now is whether this will be the kind of absolutely massive protests like the one in 2009? maaayyybe depending on how things go over the next few days, but even with that, people genuinely thought the green movement was the end of the ayatollahs, but what it turned out was the Iranian regime was INSTITUTIONALLY much more resilient than people suspected, this isnt the first social upheaval or riots or whatever in the last 30 years the Regime had to deal with, because they have a series of vertical institutions that are 100% with the regime, the military, the religious establishment and several sectors of society are tied with it. The reason why that country isnt as prone to complete collapse the way arab countries are is because the regime has vertical institutions in multiple sectors of society that would have to either be neutral or go against the regime for the ayatollahs to come down, in other arab countries, there's only one institution or one person really that's the obstacle to change, so if that's compromised the whole thing comes crashing down. but in the cases like Iran, I think several major institutions in the country would need to be brought down before any major setbacks for the regime occurs. So I dunno what's going to happen in Iran for the next few days, however I am absolutely convinced that we're in for a really hyped up and crazy amount of media and social media noise that might make things seem like a bigger deal than they are. this isnt the first rodeo the regimes been through, so we might either see a fizzling out or a reform package handed or a stomping out that quiets things down sooner than people would like it to. Still it's good that the Ayatollahs are getting a taste of what they've been suppressing in Syria, it's a real shame though that nothing like this is on the horizon soon in other arab countries or for the palestinians, and even if it was it would absolutely not get as much attention. Al-Saqr fucked around with this message at 06:49 on Dec 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 06:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 12:35 |
|
|
LeoMarr posted:I hope we invade Iran, I'm jeering in anticipation. If pound shop Thatcher tried it we'd hang her from the tallest lamppost we could find. E: electorally, I mean in a political sense gchq
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 06:56
|
|
