So, can we talk about the fiasco in Iraq / Syria ?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-06-2014, 10:52 AM
RE: So, can we talk about the fiasco in Iraq / Syria ?
(15-06-2014 10:51 AM)Can_of_Beans Wrote:  
(14-06-2014 04:18 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You smart old farts, what think you about the developing mess in the Mideast ?

"Developing mess?"

When has the Mideast not been a mess? Drinking Beverage

During the Ottoman empire? Then all you had to worry about was banging you shin on unnecessary furniture.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Revenant77x's post
15-06-2014, 02:58 PM
RE: So, can we talk about the fiasco in Iraq / Syria ?
(15-06-2014 06:35 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(15-06-2014 06:29 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  Meh.

First thing that needs to happen though is Iraq need a new President, the current one is fucking useless. But this 'Isis' wont be that big of a deal. Iran will send troops to Baghdad (because they'd rather Sunni Iraq than Shite Isis because Isis will eventually pose a threat to Iran as well). The US will send air support (ground troops will never happen at this point, politically not viable). Isis will be beaten back and wont be a direct threat on Baghdad. Iran and Iraq and US air support will retake the Isis captured cities. Isis will flee to Syria and the mountains and shit and remain a terrorist group. Iran will gain political leverage over Iraq. US will fuck off again. Isis will remain and continue to do suicide attacks and all that shit. Iran will help Syrian government win the civil war and Isis will be defeated to the point of unable to gain any real power like they have now (because they wont have anywhere to hide).

And what we will learn from this is Iran came along and solved the whole Al Qaeda/ISIS (Al Qaeda = Isis now btw) situation in both Syria and Iraq where the US couldn't.

'Murica!!

Than, after the Syrian civil war and the defeat of Isis the region will be far more stable (though far from perfect) and each countries governments (Iraq and Syria) can focus on security and stability. Than you'll have a stable Iraq, Syria, Iran (though Iran is already stable), Jordon, Lebanon and than you just need to work on the whole Israeli issue and you're done. (which will likely only happen when Muslims in Israeli have been either forced out, breed out or killed off which is horrible but a reality. And which is inevitable in time).

Easy.

That's my predictions/opinions anyway.

What about the Saudi's? Do you really think they would allow a new persian empire to form with no resistance? Giving Iran control of that much territory would dramatically shift the balance of power away from SA and it's allies. There is no way it would work out that cut a dry.

Do I think they'd allow it to happen? Yes.
Why? Because they don't want a war between them and Iran because they'd lose.
And America don't want a war between themselves and Iran because they'd lose that too (going on the history of the US losing Iraq, Korea and Vietnam. You guys sure do love losing your wars.). America couldn't politically sustain a war with Iran, especially for the sole sake of helping out more Muslims, Saudi's of all people.

It's better all round to form a sort of mini-cold war in the region between Iran, Iraq and Syria v Israeli, US and friends. Especially better for America which is a big factor. With a cold war you can still grow your economy, if you're in power you can still get filthy rich off the backs of your citizens and it leaves some room for diplomacy to sort the issue peacefully.

Iran will than gain nuclear weapons, gaining the advantage and so the US will give Israeli WOD's and maybe Saudi Arabia (but unlikely) and because both sides will be able to wipe each other out there will be long last peace in the middle east.

Done and dusted.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2014, 03:09 PM
RE: So, can we talk about the fiasco in Iraq / Syria ?
(15-06-2014 02:58 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(15-06-2014 06:35 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  What about the Saudi's? Do you really think they would allow a new persian empire to form with no resistance? Giving Iran control of that much territory would dramatically shift the balance of power away from SA and it's allies. There is no way it would work out that cut a dry.

Do I think they'd allow it to happen? Yes.
Why? Because they don't want a war between them and Iran because they'd lose.
And America don't want a war between themselves and Iran because they'd lose that too (going on the history of the US losing Iraq, Korea and Vietnam. You guys sure do love losing your wars.). America couldn't politically sustain a war with Iran, especially for the sole sake of helping out more Muslims, Saudi's of all people.

It's better all round to form a sort of mini-cold war in the region between Iran, Iraq and Syria v Israeli, US and friends. Especially better for America which is a big factor. With a cold war you can still grow your economy, if you're in power you can still get filthy rich off the backs of your citizens and it leaves some room for diplomacy to sort the issue peacefully.

Iran will than gain nuclear weapons, gaining the advantage and so the US will give Israeli WOD's and maybe Saudi Arabia (but unlikely) and because both sides will be able to wipe each other out there will be long last peace in the middle east.

Done and dusted.

In what way was Korea a lose and for the record that was a UN operation headed by America. As to the Saudis they would do what they did during the Desert Storm and buy a coalition to defend them. You are grossly overestimating the competence of the Iranian armed forces as well remember Iraq fought them to a standstill in the 80's.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2014, 06:29 PM
RE: So, can we talk about the fiasco in Iraq / Syria ?
(15-06-2014 03:09 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(15-06-2014 02:58 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Do I think they'd allow it to happen? Yes.
Why? Because they don't want a war between them and Iran because they'd lose.
And America don't want a war between themselves and Iran because they'd lose that too (going on the history of the US losing Iraq, Korea and Vietnam. You guys sure do love losing your wars.). America couldn't politically sustain a war with Iran, especially for the sole sake of helping out more Muslims, Saudi's of all people.

It's better all round to form a sort of mini-cold war in the region between Iran, Iraq and Syria v Israeli, US and friends. Especially better for America which is a big factor. With a cold war you can still grow your economy, if you're in power you can still get filthy rich off the backs of your citizens and it leaves some room for diplomacy to sort the issue peacefully.

Iran will than gain nuclear weapons, gaining the advantage and so the US will give Israeli WOD's and maybe Saudi Arabia (but unlikely) and because both sides will be able to wipe each other out there will be long last peace in the middle east.

Done and dusted.

In what way was Korea a lose and for the record that was a UN operation headed by America. As to the Saudis they would do what they did during the Desert Storm and buy a coalition to defend them. You are grossly overestimating the competence of the Iranian armed forces as well remember Iraq fought them to a standstill in the 80's.

How was Korea in any way a win?
The country has been cut in half with the top half being the most extreme authoritarian country ever (well maybe not ever but it's fucking close) filled with a brainwashed, abused population. It's still "technically" going... (the war).

The Saudi's wont invade Iran because it costs money. Regional dominate power projection is not worth waging a massive war over. It would be political suicide. Yes nobody but China, Russia and NK like Iran very much. BUT nobody in the west wants to see Saudi Arabia start what will be a very long drawn out war. They would rather Saudi Arabia remain stable so they can do business with them.
AND the Saudi's want the west to do business with them because it benefits them too.

You have to follow the money. With stability, the west gains countries with which it can do business. Very resource rich countries. Countries between two major markets (EU and Asia). Those countries get foreign investors/money. Both sides become financially better off. It doesn't matter if Iran are militarily the dominate regional power. If there's stability, all benefit.
If the Saudi's start a war, nobody does business with them, the international community is pissed off (sanctions will likely result) and the whole region is thrown once again into a long drawn out war that profits nobody but weapon manufacturers.

Oil is drying up, or at least it will soon. Saudi Arabia will be looking to the future and the future points toward globalization and international trade. That is how they will become richer. They wont become richer by waging war with Iran over stupid shit that means nothing like power projection.

War between the Saudi's and Iran will not happen after the Syrian civil war I guarantee it. I was right about Ukraine, I'm right about this.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2014, 06:45 PM
RE: So, can we talk about the fiasco in Iraq / Syria ?
(15-06-2014 06:29 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(15-06-2014 03:09 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  In what way was Korea a lose and for the record that was a UN operation headed by America. As to the Saudis they would do what they did during the Desert Storm and buy a coalition to defend them. You are grossly overestimating the competence of the Iranian armed forces as well remember Iraq fought them to a standstill in the 80's.

How was Korea in any way a win?
The country has been cut in half with the top half being the most extreme authoritarian country ever (well maybe not ever but it's fucking close) filled with a brainwashed, abused population. It's still "technically" going... (the war).

Well someone needs to brush up on the Korean War and it's objectives. It was the North that invaded South Korea and the goal of the UN mission was to repel the invading army not conquer the north. Though had McArthur not pushed into China against orders it might have happened anyway.


(15-06-2014 06:29 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  The Saudi's wont invade Iran because it costs money. Regional dominate power projection is not worth waging a massive war over. It would be political suicide. Yes nobody but China, Russia and NK like Iran very much. BUT nobody in the west wants to see Saudi Arabia start what will be a very long drawn out war. They would rather Saudi Arabia remain stable so they can do business with them.
AND the Saudi's want the west to do business with them because it benefits them too.

Have you met the saudis? They dropped billions just a couple years ago to avoid any chance that the arab spring would spread to their country. The funded the entire Gulf war to prevent Iraq from being on their doorstep and now you think they are going to get cheap? Sorry but your math is wrong here.

(15-06-2014 06:29 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  You have to follow the money. With stability, the west gains countries with which it can do business. Very resource rich countries. Countries between two major markets (EU and Asia). Those countries get foreign investors/money. Both sides become financially better off. It doesn't matter if Iran are militarily the dominate regional power. If there's stability, all benefit.
If the Saudi's start a war, nobody does business with them, the international community is pissed off (sanctions will likely result) and the whole region is thrown once again into a long drawn out war that profits nobody but weapon manufacturers.

Except the Saudis will not be fighting it alone they will call in markers from all their Nato friends to do the fighting for them if your projections even look to be happening. Right now they are in a shadow war with Iran in Iraq.

(15-06-2014 06:29 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Oil is drying up, or at least it will soon. Saudi Arabia will be looking to the future and the future points toward globalization and international trade. That is how they will become richer. They wont become richer by waging war with Iran over stupid shit that means nothing like power projection.

Yes which is why SA is actually the world leader in Green Energy Tech. Oh and Peak Oil is going to hit in our lifetime but SA still has massive amounts of it to back their finances with.

(15-06-2014 06:29 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  War between the Saudi's and Iran will not happen after the Syrian civil war I guarantee it. I was right about Ukraine, I'm right about this.

If by right you mean you agreed with the majority of people here that said NATO would never go to war over the Ukraine then yes but that was not really a bold prediction.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2014, 06:59 PM
RE: So, can we talk about the fiasco in Iraq / Syria ?
(15-06-2014 06:45 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(15-06-2014 06:29 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  How was Korea in any way a win?
The country has been cut in half with the top half being the most extreme authoritarian country ever (well maybe not ever but it's fucking close) filled with a brainwashed, abused population. It's still "technically" going... (the war).

Well someone needs to brush up on the Korean War and it's objectives. It was the North that invaded South Korea and the goal of the UN mission was to repel the invading army not conquer the north. Though had McArthur not pushed into China against orders it might have happened anyway.

MacArthur didn't get permission to invade China. Hell, on a bad day he wanted to nuke the place!

Although, if he'd been given permission to destroy the Yalu bridges, the Chinese counterattack would have had no logistical support and would have fizzled out, to the probable end state of a united Korean state under Rhee...

But yeah, defeating an invader (the UN mission - which they accomplished!) is kind of the exact opposite of losing a war.

(15-06-2014 06:45 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(15-06-2014 06:29 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  The Saudi's wont invade Iran because it costs money. Regional dominate power projection is not worth waging a massive war over. It would be political suicide. Yes nobody but China, Russia and NK like Iran very much. BUT nobody in the west wants to see Saudi Arabia start what will be a very long drawn out war. They would rather Saudi Arabia remain stable so they can do business with them.
AND the Saudi's want the west to do business with them because it benefits them too.

Have you met the saudis? They dropped billions just a couple years ago to avoid any chance that the arab spring would spread to their country. The funded the entire Gulf war to prevent Iraq from being on their doorstep and now you think they are going to get cheap? Sorry but your math is wrong here.

The Saudis are happy to fund shit that only affects other people. They're paranoid about anything actually affecting them.

Which is why they viciously repressed any expression of identity from the predominantly Shiite groups living on the Saudi side of the Persian gulf.

I wouldn't be surprised if they encourage their own domestic crazies to head for foreign countries (Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, Chechnya, etc) precisely in order to either get them killed or at least get them farther away.

(15-06-2014 06:45 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(15-06-2014 06:29 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  You have to follow the money. With stability, the west gains countries with which it can do business. Very resource rich countries. Countries between two major markets (EU and Asia). Those countries get foreign investors/money. Both sides become financially better off. It doesn't matter if Iran are militarily the dominate regional power. If there's stability, all benefit.
If the Saudi's start a war, nobody does business with them, the international community is pissed off (sanctions will likely result) and the whole region is thrown once again into a long drawn out war that profits nobody but weapon manufacturers.

Except the Saudis will not be fighting it alone they will call in markers from all their Nato friends to do the fighting for them if your projections even look to be happening. Right now they are in a shadow war with Iran in Iraq.

True. It's the crazier gulf tyrants who are funding the real genocidal lunatics in the levant and upper mesopotamia these days. Qatar, Dubai, Abu Dhabi (the other UAE states are too poor to do anything)... the assholes running those places deserve to be first against the wall come the revolution, and if they're not careful that's exactly what's going to happen to them, what with the disenfranchisement and oppression of a majority of their residents. To which I'd say good riddance.

(15-06-2014 06:45 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(15-06-2014 06:29 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Oil is drying up, or at least it will soon. Saudi Arabia will be looking to the future and the future points toward globalization and international trade. That is how they will become richer. They wont become richer by waging war with Iran over stupid shit that means nothing like power projection.

Yes which is why SA is actually the world leader in Green Energy Tech. Oh and Peak Oil is going to hit in our lifetime but SA still has massive amounts of it to back their finances with.

Yep. Peak oil doesn't mean no oil, and even though the Saudis (and Iran/Nigeria/Russia/anyone who's nervous, to be fair) massively overstate their reserves, they'll still be able to demand a king's ransom for the last dregs. The less there is, the more their last scraps are worth.

(15-06-2014 06:45 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(15-06-2014 06:29 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  War between the Saudi's and Iran will not happen after the Syrian civil war I guarantee it. I was right about Ukraine, I'm right about this.

If by right you mean you agreed with the majority of people here that said NATO would never go to war over the Ukraine then yes but that was not really a bold prediction.

Man, if only we had the brilliant insights of I and I on these matters. Or frankksj, whose pathetic ass is still lurking the place.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2014, 09:36 PM
RE: So, can we talk about the fiasco in Iraq / Syria ?
(15-06-2014 08:47 AM)TheBear Wrote:  
(15-06-2014 03:58 AM)DLJ Wrote:  I was with you up to a point but why such a sweeping generalisation at the end?

From everything I've read on this site over the years about the US, I'd say that "ignorant", "distrusting" and "hateful" are adjectives that could equally be applied to Fox News devotees, a bible-beltful of pastors and half the Republican party.

Drinking Beverage

I'm not sure if I agree. Maybe it's because of all the images and news reports over the last 20 years which makes it difficult for me to generalize them as a peaceful, happy, carefree and well adjusted people. They kill each other, en mass, over tribal and religious differences. They teach their children at a very young age to hate the Jews. The jihad mentality is prevalent throughout the land, to the point where they'll kill themselves in order to kill their enemies. All your gripes against the US news and pastors are milk toast compared to the hatred displayed in the Middle East. It's a false equivocation, big time.

Something like this. There is a growing movement amongst young, progressive muslims towards things like education, basic human rights, and a more equitable participation in the global community. Unfortunately these people are not in power, and it would not seem they are in the majority.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Michael_Tadlock's post
16-06-2014, 05:52 AM
RE: So, can we talk about the fiasco in Iraq / Syria ?
So... what you're saying, Rev and cjlr, is that when your imaginary war of Saudi Arabia invading Iran for the sole purpose of power projection doesn't happen, I get to say 'I told you so'?

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-06-2014, 07:26 AM
RE: So, can we talk about the fiasco in Iraq / Syria ?
(15-06-2014 09:36 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  Something like this. There is a growing movement amongst young, progressive muslims towards things like education, basic human rights, and a more equitable participation in the global community. Unfortunately these people are not in power, and it would not seem they are in the majority.

It's a start. These young need to grow up and become the generation in power, then we may see changes come along slowly. You can't force change on the old, never has worked and never will work. The young have to change the world...so change takes generations. In the scope of evolution, that's nothing. In the scope of individual lives, it's horrible but has always held true throughout social evolution.

Expecting a society to fundamentally change everything it has believed in for centuries is just silly. It will happen one step at a time, just as it did in the west. Hopefully the first step is education, that will hurry things along a bit.

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-06-2014, 07:41 AM
RE: So, can we talk about the fiasco in Iraq / Syria ?
(16-06-2014 05:52 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  So... what you're saying, Rev and cjlr, is that when your imaginary war of Saudi Arabia invading Iran for the sole purpose of power projection doesn't happen, I get to say 'I told you so'?

So if this new Iranian caliphate does not emerge we can say I told you so to you?

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: