|
Nevermind. WAR CRIME GIGOLO fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Jun 7, 2018 |
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 18:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 18:13 |
|
|
LeoMarr posted:A pro assad sdf party wait till theres a civil war on who is the most loyal to assad They aren't pro-Assad. Did you read what he linked?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 19:09
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:They aren't pro-Assad. Did you read what he linked? Quickreading of the artivce beforehand and i rerread it, my mistake was not fully reading the q&A. I thought they said "we do not oppose the syrian regime led by assad", in reality they stated the opposite of this. I was pretty bothered by this and litererally thoight it was a silent coup before you said something. Thank you
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2018 21:45
|
|
|
Sadr and Hikma brought in Allawi which puts them at 94. If they get Abadi, they're at 136, with 165 necessary for a majority. Going to be a while yet before everything sorts out tho given the reports of electoral fraud. Parliament approved a manual recount in some northern provinces the other day and nullified the results of the special elections in Kurdistan for the peshmerga. They also delegated some of the electoral commissions responsibilities to a judiciary panel. The allegations of electoral fraud seem to center around the KRG parties. The KDP and PUK both had really strong performances in the election, which is kinda surprising given what happened in Kirkuk and the dissatisfaction in Kurdistan for the establishment. Gorran and some other opposition parties have supported the recount, but they stand to gain so of course they would. As far as what's going on with the electoral commission, I don't know yet. Too early to tell if there's going to be any fuckery.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 00:07
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 02:31
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Ali_Kourani/status/1004850086084579328 https://twitter.com/uwu70/status/1004648431607009280
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 13:24
|
|
|
Qatar wants to join NATO, is thwarted by the "White People Only" sign on the clubhouse. https://www.politico.eu/article/qatar-nato-dashes-membership-hopes/
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/vvanwilgenburg/status/1004664842417065984quote:Coalition visits Manbij, reportedly promises Turkish-backed rebel factions will not enter #Manbij h/t @IdrisAl_oso
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 02:30
|
|
|
Good to see that threatening to sack a city is still an effective move
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 02:52
|
|
|
Saladin Rising posted:https://twitter.com/vvanwilgenburg/status/1004664842417065984 Eh, they wanted it because it was important to hold for any push toward the Western Kurdish holdings. But yeah, those are very favorable terms. Divest themselves of the pocket and get a buffer between themselves and the hostile militias.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 03:03
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Qatar wants to join NATO, is thwarted by the "White People Only" sign on the clubhouse. They're also a dictatorship, and not even close to being geographically connected to the alliance, and they're on bad terms with neighboring countries who are generally considered more important allies by some key NATO members (and who are in between Turkey and Qatar), and every member country gets a veto on new members, so it's not like they'd get in on the merits even if the 'Europeans only' part hadn't been codified in the founding document of the alliance (which made a lot more sense in the context of a 1949 alliance against the Soviet Union than whatever the gently caress it is now). Qatar knew it wasn't a serious proposal. The US is the only NATO country that can meaningfully project power outside of Europe anyway (except for Turkey on its border), so bilateral relationships make more sense than pretending other areas fall under NATO's purview. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 03:30 on Jun 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 03:23
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:They're also a dictatorship, Salazar's Portugal was one of the founding members of NATO dude.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 03:34
|
|
|
Grape posted:Salazar's Portugal was one of the founding members of NATO dude. Europe's different now, a bad example or two in the east notwithstanding. I don't think they could find unanimity on bringing in a new dictatorship even if it made strategic sense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 03:35
|
|
|
quote:A US special forces soldier has been killed in an attack by suspected al-Shabab militants in south-western Somalia, officials say. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-44421488
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 03:42
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Europe's different now, a bad example or two in the east notwithstanding. I don't think they could find unanimity on bringing in a new dictatorship even if it made strategic sense. NATO isn't the EU, you're acting like they operate under similar values systems.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 04:15
|
|
|
Grape posted:NATO isn't the EU, you're acting like they operate under similar values systems. I mean most of the European NATO members are also in the EU, and I don't think a country like Turkey would be admitted to NATO today if they weren't already in. There are plenty of other reasons not to admit Qatar anyway though, so it's not like it would be a tough decision in which anyone would have to agonize over whether abandoning principles concerning political systems and human rights would be worth it in this case. It was a laughable proposal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 04:45
|
|
|
Given the increasing US footprint in Somalia casualties like this are inevitable. al Shabaab has been more-or-less contained for the past decade by the African Union Mission to Somalia (AMISOM) peacekeeping force, which is supported by western special forces and American airstrikes. Peacekeeping is a bit of a misnomer for what they do: https://africacenter.org/spotlight/amisom-hard-earned-lessons-somalia/ quote:Although AMISOM is often called a peacekeeping or peace enforcement mission, in fact, AMISOM is a combat mission fighting a terrorist insurgency in Somalia. When it first deployed to Somalia in 2007, Islamist militants controlled most of Somalia and large swaths of the capital, Mogadishu. AMISOM’s first task was to push al Shabaab out of the capital and create conditions in which the Transitional Federal Government could operate. It initially used a traditional peacekeeping approach: staying encamped, conducting limited patrols, and returning fire only when fired upon. This model was quickly abandoned when al Shabaab began launching attacks on the AMISOM encampments. In 2011, AMISOM began an operation that dislodged al Shabaab from Mogadishu’s central business district and flushed them out of the country’s main supply routes and regional centers. By 2017, al Shabaab had been expelled from most of its strongholds in southern Somalia. Along the way, AMISOM troops took significant casualties. Though bloody, this model was somewhat successful at controlling Somalia. There were even parliamentary elections last year that most observers lauded as free and fair. However for reasons I don't fully understand it seems like the AMISOM mission is coming to an end. The UN has mandated a drawdown of the mission with a goal of complete withdrawal by 2020. They've couched the withdrawal so as to be contingent on security, but the current insecurity doesn't seem to be slowing the process down. The plan is to replace the AMISOM with the Somali National Army (SNA), however by AMISOM's estimations that seems impossible. According to Simon Mulongo, deputy to the AU Commission in Mogadishu, Somalia will need about 50,000 army personal to replace the 22,000 strong AMISOM force. While the SNA is so corrupt reliable statistics for it are impossible to collect, the UN's best estimate for 2017 was only 19,000, including the navy and airforce. Mulongo estimates foreign training programs are only capable of training aproximately 800 additional personal a year, meaning it is almost impossible for it to reach its strength targets. Compounding its problems, the SNA is riven by clan rivalries and poorly equipped. Mulongo estimates 30% of soldiers on base do not even have weapons! Hard to see how its going to fulfill the role now filled by AMISOM. That BBC article uses an unusual map of the Somali conflict, it's pretty generous to Al Shabaab.  edit: ah looks like it hasn't been updated since 2016. Well, honestly not much has changed anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 05:13
|
|
|
good article on the revolution in rojava http://www.abstraktdergi.net/the-basic-principle-of-the-economy-in-rojava-involve-everyone-in-production/ quote:What does the constitution say?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 05:30
|
|
|
Kanine posted:good article on the revolution in rojava ah, yes, statism and state capitalism, that's worked wonderfully before
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 05:44
|
|
Cat Army 
|
The Iron Rose posted:ah, yes, statism and state capitalism, that's worked wonderfully before Provide some examples of your system working.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 05:48
|
|
|
Kanine posted:good article on the revolution in rojava That likes like a nicely practical approach to socialism. Workers cooperatives, being clear on where they're compromising their ideal, banning non-state monopolies. It'd be great if they got a chance to really try that system.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 06:33
|
|
|
The Iron Rose posted:ah, yes, statism and state capitalism, that's worked wonderfully before rojava along with the ezln are pretty much our first real chances for achieving actual societies centered around actual anarchist ideals for a really long time so im not willing to lose hope yet honestly. Kanine fucked around with this message at 07:09 on Jun 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 06:44
|
|
|
mllaneza posted:That likes like a nicely practical approach to socialism. Workers cooperatives, being clear on where they're compromising their ideal, banning non-state monopolies. It'd be great if they got a chance to really try that system. It's why I'm fine with the USA staying until all wahabist forces, including the Erdogan backed ones are eliminated. It allows Rojava to continue to see it's plans to fruition. Also might rub off on service members.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 06:48
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Qatar wants to join NATO, is thwarted by the "White People Only" sign on the clubhouse. Yes, definitely the reason NATO doesn't want Qatar is because they're not white and not because it's a tiny state that's in a cold war with America's far more important regional allies. Not to mention the 50 other reasons. I hope you're joking, because to say it's because of racism!!!!1one is like the dumbest possible conclusion one could make.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 07:12
|
|
|
Australia and New Zealand are also not NATO members, and I doubt anybody can accuse them of not being white enough.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 11:30
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Given the increasing US footprint in Somalia casualties like this are inevitable. Apparently al-Shabab has enough sway to halt football tournaments in Mogadishu. Doesn't say much for the US/AU security operations there. https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/somalia-al-shabab-shuts-football-pitches-mogadishu-180607045144830.html
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 12:50
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/FazelHawramy/status/1005318340758458368?s=19
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 14:07
|
|
|
Saladman posted:I hope you're joking, because to say it's because of racism!!!!1one is like the dumbest possible conclusion one could make. It was just a sardonic way of summarizing how the "must be European" argument was used to avoid having to say the much bigger reasons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 14:12
|
|
|
Kanine posted:rojava along with the ezln are pretty much our first real chances for achieving actual societies centered around actual anarchist ideals for a really long time so im not willing to lose hope yet honestly. It was bad enough watching one wave of detached marxoteens projecting their ideals on the PYD before they understood anything about them. Now that wave has learned poo poo and we get more know nothing college freshmen to take their place.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 14:55
|
|
|
Lol https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/1005302713985400833?s=20
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 15:07
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:It was bad enough watching one wave of detached marxoteens projecting their ideals on the PYD before they understood anything about them. Now that wave has learned poo poo and we get more know nothing college freshmen to take their place. i mean i know a few people in the dc/baltimore anarchist scene who've actually been/served in rojava and they're all like "yeah this poo poo's the real deal." and im a lot more willing to trust them than some random poster on a dead gay comedy forum
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 16:42
|
|
|
The westerners who went to Rojava were a laughing stock. There were some with military experience that went to fight ISIS that got on well but all the people who showed up to set up vegan communes and poo poo were a joke. All the soldiers mocked them in interviews. They don't know poo poo.
Volkerball fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Jun 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 16:55
|
|
|
I will destruy anyone who disrespects our posting comrade @pisspiggranddad
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
PPG was unironically probably the most valuable western volunteer they had.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 17:44
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:It's why I'm fine with the USA staying until all wahabist forces, including the Erdogan backed ones are eliminated. It allows Rojava to continue to see it's plans to fruition. Also might rub off on service members. ah Crowsbeak since you're back I'd still like to hear your opinion on Libya. As a supporter of Ghaddafism, do you think western governments should be backing General Haftar? He is also the most Libyan party most aggressively opposed to political Islam, and is generally considered closest to remnants of Ghadaffis government. So I finished reading the newly released book The Burning Shores: Inside the Battle for the New Libya, and I strongly recommend it to anyone interested in Libya. It somehow manages to combine rigorous academic detail with a journalistic style. It's author Frederic Wehrey provides reports from on the ground in Benghazi and Sirte shortly after or even during the conflicts that ripped through those cities. Wehrey first begain working in Libya while in the US air force, during training missions with Ghaddafi's military. Recalling the work, Wehrey describes how Ghadaffi's soldiers would sneak out of the barracks immediately after roll call so they could go back to their second jobs, a necessity for many as their paychecks often went missing. Later after studying international relations he continued to do research in the country while working for the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and continues to return periodically, giving him close access to events on the ground as they transpired, as well as access to American political and military decision makers back in Washington. Wehrey tries hard to present a serious history, letting his interview subjects tell their own stories. For this reason even if you are skeptical about Think tank based American army vets, you will still probably find it interesting. For example Wehrey explicitly shoots down the claim that Ghaddaffi attacked peaceful protestors from the air, and offers evidence Ghadaffi was not planning a slaughter in reconquered territory. Still he is upfront about his opinions. He thinks western nations neglected the revolutionary government, and sees its collapse as a failure in diplomacy and western planning. He fears if Haftar or someone like him can seize power it will mean a return of exactly the kind of repressive dictatorship that led to this chaos in the first place. Interestedly, Wehrey states that American military leaders sought to actively support Haftar's rise under Obama. This means Haftar is in the unusual position of being backed by the Wahabist UAE, Arab Nationalist Egypt, Russia, and the United States. While Obama pushed back on this plan, under Trump Libya has become even more politically neglected by the US. I disagree with some of Wehrey takes. It's fairly easy to just say America or the West should have just done more, but much harder to say what specifically, and Wehrey doesn't suggest much. From an absolute standpoint the United States had a massive political, military, and economic engagement with Libya after the revolution. For example the US and western states committed to a large scale assistance program building up the Libyan military. When the Petroleum Facilities Guard tried to sell oil on the black market it was the US navy that shut them down, and when the IS came to Libya it was American (with other western states contributing) intelligence and firepower that destroyed them. Even the present government in Tripoli is primarily a product of American diplomatic wrangling. Wehrey's criticism is that instead of just spending one or two orders of magnitude more resources on assisting Libya than anyone else in the world, the US should have spent three or four. By Wehrey's own account the extent of western influence was severely checked by Libyans own fears and mistrust of their influence. Wehrey suggests that a Bosnia style peacekeeping force could have secured the revolutionary government and given it space to work in the early days of the revolution. However he also admits Libyan leaders were totally opposed to anything of the sort, fearing it would turn their country into a second Iraq. In fact the spectre of the Iraq war looms large above all events, sowing fear and distrust among Libyans against every American action. There's one surreal account of a visit by Diplomat Christopher Stevens to a local militia in Benghazi, in which the militia first accuses America of backing their Islamist opponents in upcoming elections, demanding they stop interfering, and then immediately turn around and plead for money and arms to support their own efforts. Libyan politicians knew western assistance was vital to realizing their vision of a new Libya, but was so politically toxic none were ever willing to request it publicly. The result was constant political and diplomatic confusion. tl;dr: In all the confusion of the Libyan war Wehry doesn't find much in the way of prescriptions for policymakers. he offers a clear history of what has happened, and is cynical about where it is now going in the age of Trump. He combines a readable journalistic tone with personal accounts from the front with serious academic analysis. Recommended for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 17:46
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:It was just a sardonic way of summarizing how the "must be European" argument was used to avoid having to say the much bigger reasons. Yeah, that was a good cop out argument for NATO since obviously they could bend or change the rules if they wanted to. Sometimes it's hard to tell when people are dead serious or not here, since we have adult posters in D&D who unironically think that Stalinism and anarchism are somehow viable forms of government.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 17:47
|
|
|
Squalid posted:ah Crowsbeak since you're back I'd still like to hear your opinion on Libya. As a supporter of Ghaddafism, do you think western governments should be backing General Haftar? He is also the most Libyan party most aggressively opposed to political Islam, and is generally considered closest to remnants of Ghadaffis government. Better a dictator then chaos. Frankly I would prefer an actual Gadaffist seize power rather then a opportunist like him. But, if he brings order to the Chaos Hillary and Obama caused, good oin him. Really good if he eliminates the Wahabist cancer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Provide some examples of your system working. Turkish GDP grows like 5-6% most years. Islamic neoliberalism for all!
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 18:49
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Better a dictator then chaos. Frankly I would prefer an actual Gadaffist seize power rather then a opportunist like him. But, if he brings order to the Chaos Hillary and Obama caused, good oin him. Really good if he eliminates the Wahabist cancer. I'm still not sure what you mean by Gadaffist but fair enough. However he's probably not going to eliminate "Wahabism," as he has incorporated several Salafist militias into his army who even go so far as to enforce Sharia in places where they are strong. He'll probably take the same tack as Egyptian leaders who despite being secular offer many political concessions to religious conservatives. Notably his current strength is definitely due to the support of not just secular Egypt, but also the definitely not secular UAE, notable supporter of Salafi jihadist in Syria, as well as Russia, the US, French, and etc. Wahabism really isn't an accurate term for Libyan proponents of political Islam anyway so I'm not sure why you keep using it. Like the rest of the Islamic world Saudi clerics have had significant influence on Islam in modern Libya, but Libyan Islamists are also heavily influenced by the Egytian ideas from the Hanbali and Shafi'i schools via the Muslim Brotherhood. Besides their own Libyan traditions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 18:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 18:13 |
|
|
Fat Lowtax posted:Turkish GDP grows like 5-6% most years. Islamic neoliberalism for all! Oh lol. Squalid posted:I'm still not sure what you mean by Gadaffist but fair enough. However he's probably not going to eliminate "Wahabism," as he has incorporated several Salafist militias into his army who even go so far as to enforce Sharia in places where they are strong. He'll probably take the same tack as Egyptian leaders who despite being secular offer many political concessions to religious conservatives. Notably his current strength is definitely due to the support of not just secular Egypt, but also the definitely not secular UAE, notable supporter of Salafi jihadist in Syria, as well as Russia, the US, French, and etc. MB owes alot to Wahabism, and so must be eliminated for Arab countries to have prosperity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 18:58
|
|