|
Assasinating foreign leaders is very risky in that it might push other foreign despots (Kim Jong-Un) into irrational actions. Plus you’re legitimizing attempts on your own leaders
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 17:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 19:51 |
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:Assasinating foreign leaders is very risky in that it might push other foreign despots (Kim Jong-Un) into irrational actions. Plus you’re legitimizing attempts on your own leaders Lol so if we kill assad Nk willl retaliate
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 17:35
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:Lol so if we kill assad Nk willl retaliate It's nothing so direct, it's more the idea that the number one country in charge of upholding international norms and values will have decided that pretty much the number one rule of international relations is trash because it was expedient in defending another norm and/or distracting from the president's legal troubles/making him feel like a big man. If we can do it because we're angry and nobody can really stop us (depending on how credible we view Russia's deterrent since they're actively involved in the country), that opens the door for other countries nobody can really stop to do things when they get angry that we might not like. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 18:00 on Apr 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 17:46
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Well that's a blunt take: Yeah because surely if you just take out Assad his entire regime will fall!
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 18:00
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:Lol so if we kill assad Nk willl retaliate When you start assassinating world leader's, you are putting your own leaders up as fair game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 18:01
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:When you start assassinating world leader's, you are putting your own leaders up as fair game. Probably not really ours since our retaliatory capability is as strong as it gets, but Russia and China would definitely take notice of our actions when considering how to deal with pesky leaders in places they consider to be their areas of influence. This would be particularly destabilizing since Syria isn't actually in our area of influence, though obviously Assad has invited action more than most leaders would with his own reckless and unlawful behavior.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 18:03
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:When you start assassinating world leader's, you are putting your own leaders up as fair game. If someone wants to assassinate a leader of a mid-tier US ally there's always the UK.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 18:11
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:Lol so if we kill assad Nk willl retaliate NK only really started gunning for those nukes back when it started becoming appearent that the US will invade at the drop of a hat, so kind of?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
Bohemian Nights posted:NK only really started gunning for those nukes back when it started becoming appearent that the US will invade at the drop of a hat, so kind of? It would definitely reinforce their desire to have an independent deterrence capability so Trump can't just decide to murk Kim Jong Un too, but realistically I don't think they were going to stop developing it anyway, regardless of any talks that may or may not happen. I also think it's very unlikely that we'll actively try to take out Assad, even if we bomb his palace to make a big showy display of it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
Darkman Fanpage posted:Yeah because surely if you just take out Assad his entire regime will fall! Since Syria's army at this point is just Assad's personal reserves backed up by a bunch of loosely controlled warlords and Iran's and Russia's armies that would probably destroy the regime. The only real loyalty system at the moment is that dissenters get gassed, not really a framework for a peaceful transition of leadership. Assassinating world leaders is a really bad idea though. Like cosmically bad for all the reasons everyone already mentioned.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 18:18
|
|
|
Darkman Fanpage posted:Yeah because surely if you just take out Assad his entire regime will fall! No, but it would be the right thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 18:18
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Well that's a blunt take: This Michael Rubin character seems like kind of nut considering the other stuff he's written (massive Iraq War apologia).
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
An insane neocon?! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 18:21
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Since Syria's army at this point is just Assad's personal reserves backed up by a bunch of loosely controlled warlords and Iran's and Russia's armies that would probably destroy the regime. The only real loyalty system at the moment is that dissenters get gassed, not really a framework for a peaceful transition of leadership. That's ridiculous. There's a core base of supporters that's backed everything he's done in the war, and they aren't going away just because one guy bites it. Whether it would be a relative of his, a charismatic general (the Tiger Forces guy wouldn't be a terrible choice), or just some guy Russia and Iran could agree on to manage not to gently caress everything up, someone would definitely take his place.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 18:23
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:That's ridiculous. There's a core base of supporters that's backed everything he's done in the war, and they aren't going away just because one guy bites it. Whether it would be a relative of his, a charismatic general (the Tiger Forces guy wouldn't be a terrible choice), or just some guy Russia and Iran could agree on to manage not to gently caress everything up, someone would definitely take his place. That might be true for his Alawite supporters in Damascus but all those local militias that were incorporated under the umbrella of the Syrian army back when Assad was still being clowned on by both rebels and ISIS might not accept it. They're armed, battle-hardened, control resources and above all with Assad biting the dust there is no guarantee that whomever follows him honors whatever promises they were made when they joined the conflict. There's also no guarantee that Iran will accept the successor, they might just take the opportunity to consolidate even more control over the country. EDIT: Lets not even get into what Erdogan would do. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 18:44 on Apr 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 18:37
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:That might be true for his Alawite supporters in Damascus but all those local militias that were incorporated under the umbrella of the Syrian army back when Assad was still being clowned on by both rebels and ISIS might not accept it. They're armed, battle-hardened, control resources and above all with Assad biting the dust there is no guarantee that whomever follows him honors whatever promises they were made when they joined the conflict. There's also no guarantee that Iran will accept the successor, they might just take the opportunity to consolidate even more control over the country. Sure, if his successor was a moron who arbitrarily decided to refuse to honor any agreements Assad made with the forces propping up his country, it could all collapse, but I think anyone who tried to do that would just be immediately replaced by someone who'd accept the realities of his situation. Russia and Iran may have disagreements on some issues, but they both care too much about the survival of the regime to allow their disagreements to ruin everything for both of them. Edit: The SDF issued a response to the attack, condemning it but not naming Assad or the regime as the perpetrator. Seems like they're hedging their bets, which makes sense given Trump's own unpredictable commitment to the country. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 19:03 on Apr 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
Historically uncertainty is all you need, and that's without being in the middle of civil war spearheaded by foreign actors.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 19:03
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Historically uncertainty is all you need, and that's without being in the middle of civil war spearheaded by foreign actors. I think being in the middle of the civil war spearheaded by foreign actors is exactly why the regime wouldn't be allowed to fail though. Even if the new guy started off as a puppet, someone would be in that position holding things together. Everyone has too much to lose not to go along with it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
MBS has just come out saying that they'll support a military option against assad if it comes to that. https://twitter.com/AlArabiya_Brk/status/983767344169267201 Also in the same meeting Macron concurs and he's into stifling Irans reach into syria. How MBS thinks he is in any position to offer anything useful militarily given Yemen is hilarious. but to be honest, I think now there's a 70% likelyhood that the stars are aligning towards a major bombing campaign against Assad, what good it will do given the rebels lost the ability to capitalize on any possible gains I dont know. Al-Saqr fucked around with this message at 19:09 on Apr 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:MBS has just come out saying that they'll support a military option against assad if it comes to that. loving MBS. I wonder what France gets in return for Macron sucking up like that. Its hard for me to imagine Russia not getting involved in a protracted bombing campaign, so I still don't see that coming. But I don't know what Trump and Macron and whoever are going to do. With this hype its gotta be something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 19:14
|
|
|
Hell Yeah, Lets Make Assad A Martyr. America somehow managed to wrangle up a sympathetic end for Saddam loving Hussein, lets beat that for cack-handed stupidity. We've screwed up so much, lets screw this up too. and this, too!!! https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...m=.7ba04d001475 quote:Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister says those responsible for a suspected chemical weapons attack in Syria must be “held accountable.” even then, the foreign minister can't quite screw up his courage to tempt The Curse. quote:The Saudi minister did not insist on Assad’s departure as the U.S. and allies have done in the past, saying instead that “Syrians must decide” his future. Video of the ministry statement here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVQ1Zp3B9iY MiddleOne posted:That might be true for his Alawite supporters in Damascus but all those local militias that were incorporated under the umbrella of the Syrian army back when Assad was still being clowned on by both rebels and ISIS might not accept it. They're armed, battle-hardened, control resources and above all with Assad biting the dust there is no guarantee that whomever follows him honors whatever promises they were made when they joined the conflict. There's also no guarantee that Iran will accept the successor, they might just take the opportunity to consolidate even more control over the country. What exact "promises" do you think were made? Do you think it's like, cash or a prospective promotion that've kept people fighting for the regime for all these years?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 19:14
|
|
|
What about the moral argument about Assad needing to die? Wouldn't that be just, for all the hundreds of thousands he personally murdered?Willie Tomg posted:Hell Yeah, Lets Make Assad A Martyr. A martyr to who?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 20:00
|
|
|
lollontee posted:Wouldn't that be just, for all the hundreds of thousands he personally murdered? woah woah woah woah lets not get ahead of ourselves Asma killed some of those folks, too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:What exact "promises" do you think were made? Do you think it's like, cash or a prospective promotion that've kept people fighting for the regime for all these years? Doesn't matter, the point is that it was Assad who made those promises. Whoever would seek to replace him would not automatically inherit their loyalty. And that opens up the possibility for intra-regime fighting to determine the successor. Which might very well bring down the whole regime if it gets violent.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 20:54
|
|
|
"After years of fighting, and on the verge of winning, we've decided that we'd like the jihadists we radicalized during the course of a monstrously bloody civil war to decapitate us now." -regime officials after Assad's death "We'll watch and do nothing to prevent your sudden collapse into idiocy." -Russia and Iran Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Apr 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 20:58
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:"After years of fighting, and on the verge of winning, we've decided that we'd like the jihadists we radicalized during the course of a monstrously bloody civil war to decapitate us now." -regime officials after Assad's death "I wanna be the leader" "No, me. And I'll kill you for it" Just because it's irrational doesn't mean people aren't going to do it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:10
|
|
|
Russia just vetoed the security council resolution to send in a OPCW team to investigate the chemical attack, denying that any such attack even took place, so I guess now's about the time when real poo poo can start going down
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:13
|
|
|
I just think the assassination fan fiction here is kind of mirroring the pro-Assad fanboy poo poo where the Lion Assad is a hugely important leader directing his armies to victory instead of a guy who's only still living because more competent leaders in Russia and Iran made sure they didn't lose out on their investment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DavidShuster/status/983795118581997569
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:I just think the assassination fan fiction here is kind of mirroring the pro-Assad fanboy poo poo where the Lion Assad is a hugely important leader directing his armies to victory instead of a guy who's only still living because more competent leaders in Russia and Iran made sure they didn't lose out on their investment. If he wasn't an important leader, why are Russia and Iran invested in keeping him alive? What is it exactly that he provides them? If he doesn't matter for the survival of the regime, wouldn't it make sense for them to depose him to divert criticism of the regime?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
lollontee posted:If he wasn't an important leader, why are Russia and Iran invested in keeping him alive? What is it exactly that he provides them? If he doesn't matter for the survival of the regime, wouldn't it make sense for them to depose him to divert criticism of the regime? He's still more or less the consensus leader of the community he represents (and honestly there's some reason to believe he's more popular beyond that community than a lot of people would like to imagine), and it's easier to work with the guy who's there than to have a blatantly illegitimate foreign backed coup to overthrow him and leave the next guy looking over his shoulder every minute, but that doesn't mean a mutual enemy getting rid of him makes him irreplaceable. Anyway we're not going to kill him so it doesn't matter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
Lol yeah assads gonna be a martyr for gassing his own people. Make sure to let hitler and gandi know they have a new martyr to come join them
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
lollontee posted:If he wasn't an important leader, why are Russia and Iran invested in keeping him alive? What is it exactly that he provides them? If he doesn't matter for the survival of the regime, wouldn't it make sense for them to depose him to divert criticism of the regime? Changing leaders arbitrarily does not engender support from the locals. The Russians want Syria because it gives them an influence in the middle east. If they start killing or deposing the Syrian leaders, all of a sudden they are not all that popular anymore. You don't just kill or remove leaders and not expect consequences, as all the KGB and CIA fuckery in the cold war proved.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
lollontee posted:If he wasn't an important leader, why are Russia and Iran invested in keeping him alive? What is it exactly that he provides them? If he doesn't matter for the survival of the regime, wouldn't it make sense for them to depose him to divert criticism of the regime? He's literally the only real actual remaining member of the unofficial 'warsaw pact' countries that didnt tell russia to gently caress off once communism fell. it's their only all-weather friend and ally in the region and the only military base they have there. if Assad Goes, Russia's influnce in any country there other than Iran evaporates with it. With Iran, it's the only arab country that's been friendly to them, has a government that is beholden to them and is a strategic partner and is a logistical land bridge for them, if they lose Syria, their influence is compromised permanently.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:I just think the assassination fan fiction here is kind of mirroring the pro-Assad fanboy poo poo where the Lion Assad is a hugely important leader directing his armies to victory instead of a guy who's only still living because more competent leaders in Russia and Iran made sure they didn't lose out on their investment. More like a belief that the Syrian state is more feudal than it appears. With a bureaucratic regime, the armies have enough loyalty to the regime institutions to keep going as they ever have. But if it is all about personal loyalty, then Assad's death would make everything uncertain, even if his successor was more skilled than him. The orderly succession of power is hard, and it is a triumph of western democracy that we make it look easy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
golden bubble posted:More like a belief that the Syrian state is more feudal than it appears. With a bureaucratic regime, the armies have enough loyalty to the regime institutions to keep going as they ever have. But if it is all about personal loyalty, then Assad's death would make everything uncertain, even if his successor was more skilled than him. The orderly succession of power is hard, and it is a triumph of western democracy that we make it look easy. I just feel like if a militia gets cold feet and starts wondering if they're going to get paid or whatever with Assad gone, they'll check with Iran or Hezbollah before saying oh well I guess we'll hand our weapons and necks to Al Qaeda now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:37
|
|
|
golden bubble posted:More like a belief that the Syrian state is more feudal than it appears. With a bureaucratic regime, the armies have enough loyalty to the regime institutions to keep going as they ever have. But if it is all about personal loyalty, then Assad's death would make everything uncertain, even if his successor was more skilled than him. The orderly succession of power is hard, and it is a triumph of western democracy that we make it look easy. FOH here with this
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:37
|
|
|
Aren't the loyal factions loyal to their ethnic / religious groups rather than to Assad? Assad just happens to be at the head of that coalition (formed because of an antagonism towards the rebelling groups as much as because of benefits from maintaining the pre-war power structure) , but the loyalties and interests of the groups he controls won't be altered if he gets swept under the carpet in some way, imo. That being said, the Russians and Iranians had million reasons to get rid of Assad when his government was losing everywhere, if they didn't act then, why would they act now. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Apr 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:43
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:He's still more or less the consensus leader of the community he represents Are you for real? The community he represents? What the gently caress are you talking about, the only community he represents are mass-murderers! If you think Assad represents you, then you don't get representation. Simple as that. Sinteres posted:and honestly there's some reason to believe he's more popular beyond that community than a lot of people would like to imagine Sinteres posted:and it's easier to work with the guy who's there than to have a blatantly illegitimate foreign backed coup to overthrow him and leave the next guy looking over his shoulder every minute, but that doesn't mean a mutual enemy getting rid of him makes him irreplaceable. Anyway we're not going to kill him so it doesn't matter. Easier than what? Letting Rojava take over Syria? How is that you think the west is going to "work with" Assad exactly? How you going to work with someone whose fine with nerve-gassing and dropping artillery on his own people? WoodrowSkillson posted:Changing leaders arbitrarily does not engender support from the locals. The Russians want Syria because it gives them an influence in the middle east. If they start killing or deposing the Syrian leaders, all of a sudden they are not all that popular anymore. You don't just kill or remove leaders and not expect consequences, as all the KGB and CIA fuckery in the cold war proved. Well, the consequence I'm hoping for is the collapse of his regime, so... Yeah? That is the consequence? Assad is not a leader either. He doesn't control even half the country. He isn't the president of Syria, and killing him is going to piss off people whose views should under no circumstances be respected. Or their lives.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 19:51 |
|
|
according to this guy European aviation authorities are warning that the eastern Mediterranean airspace is going to be closed due to a military strike will probably happen within 72 hours. https://twitter.com/jerrymahers/status/983806737282199552 I dont get why there's so much advance notice being given, at this point russia and assad will have already put their planes and missiles in bunkers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 21:46
|
|