Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (66 users) | |
|
| Abort Retry Fail May 29 2012 21:18. Posts 2627 | Profile # |
This is quite significant international news, most importantly that the US might be once again be involved via military intervention. I'm surprised there is no topic on this yet on tl, so I'm posdting for our information and discussion.
The Houla massacre was an attack that took place on May 25, 2012 in two opposition-controlled villages in the Houla Region of Syria. The media estimate puts it at 17 civilians as having been killed. Maj. Gen. Robert Mood, head of the United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria (UNSMIS), confirmed opposition group claims that at least 90 civilians were killed, including 32 children. General Mood declared the killings "indiscriminate and unforgiveable" without explaining how they happened, but said the violence had begun Friday evening with the use of "tanks, artillery, rocket-propelled grenades, and heavy machine guns", implying involvement by government forces since the FSA do not possess heavy weaponry. General Mood, however, would not explain how the villagers died. The official news agency of the Syrian government alleged that Al-Qaeda terrorist groups were responsible for the killings, while opposition groups alleged that the Syrian military and government-linked militias known as Shabiha were the perpetrators. The Syrian National Council (SNC), Syria's main opposition bloc, put the death toll at more than 110 people, half of them children. Ban-Ki Moon and Kofi Annan blamed the Syrian government, accusing them of carrying out a “brutal” breach of international law. Residents had sent the UN a plea for help before the massacre, warning of an imminent attack by the Syrian government.
US Military Intervention
The US's top military officer has warned Syria it could face armed intervention as international outrage grows over the massacre of women and children by tanks and artillery in Houla.
General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, said that following the UN security council's condemnation of the slaughter – in which more than 100 people were killed, many of them children – there needed to be increased diplomatic pressure on Damascus. But he added that the US would be prepared to act militarily if it was "asked to do so".
"There is always a military option," he told Fox News. "You'll always find military leaders to be somewhat cautious about the use of force, because we're never entirely sure what comes out on the other side. But that said, it may come to a point with Syria because of the atrocities."
The warning comes as Barack Obama is under increasing pressure from his Republican opponent in November's presidential election, Mitt Romney, and members of Congress to take tougher action over Syria.
Romney accused Obama of weakness and disparaged his support for efforts by the former UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, to revive a failing peace plan. He said Washington should instead arm opposition groups.
Sources
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/05/20125265258397885.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18245225
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9296335/Syria-plunges-towards-civil-war-after-Houla-massacre.html
Last edit: 2012-05-29 21:19:19 |
| |
|
| JesusOurSaviour Australia. May 29 2012 21:28. Posts 1141 | Profile Blog # |
Those who live by the sword will perish by the sword.
The Syrian rebels rose up in arms - their choice. A brave one? Perhaps. Ghandi was braver. Jesus the bravest (God ridiculed by men whom He created? Now that is longsuffering)
President Obama: Brave. He recognised that lesbians and gays are humans. He recognised that church and state should be separate - meaning that the "christian lobby" should not IMPOSE Their values on the general society. So he decided correctly. Romney? I don't know enough about him. But violence to stop violence.... sigh this is hard one. What's gotta be done has to be done.
Men have learnt nothing from history. Indeed - men cannot. We are in our ways forever evil. Never will we experience peace.
Wait - what does current affair matter to anyone? I thought we were just a bunch of chemicals who were formulated by chance, who came out of nowhere for the purpose of non-purpose. You will all die within 100 years (I'm sure the 12 year old lurking might live past 112 years, who knows). So what does anything matter to you? There is no justice. None.
User was temp banned for this post.Last edit: 2012-05-29 21:28:22 |
| | Jesus: "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." Sea[Shield]: "I want to be a good father. I want to raise a family with a wife that's like a fox, kids that are like rabbits" |
|
|
 Miyoshino May 29 2012 21:29. Posts 314 | Profile Blog # |
Pretty tasteless Saviour.
It seems Assad has very little control over his militias. This means he is irrelevant. Him stepping down or being replaced may not change anything. |
|
|
| Abort Retry Fail May 29 2012 21:30. Posts 2627 | Profile # |
On May 29 2012 21:28 JesusOurSaviour wrote:
Those who live by the sword will perish by the sword.
The Syrian rebels rose up in arms - their choice. A brave one? Perhaps. Ghandi was braver. Jesus the bravest (God ridiculed by men whom He created? Now that is longsuffering)
President Obama: Brave. He recognised that lesbians and gays are humans. He recognised that church and state should be separate - meaning that the "christian lobby" should not IMPOSE Their values on the general society. So he decided correctly. Romney? I don't know enough about him. But violence to stop violence.... sigh this is hard one. What's gotta be done has to be done.
Men have learnt nothing from history. Indeed - men cannot. We are in our ways forever evil. Never will we experience peace.
Wait - what does current affair matter to anyone? I thought we were just a bunch of chemicals who were formulated by chance, who came out of nowhere for the purpose of non-purpose. You will all die within 100 years (I'm sure the 12 year old lurking might live past 112 years, who knows). So what does anything matter to you? There is no justice. None.
I love your ID!Last edit: 2012-05-29 21:31:52 |
| |
|
| Dark_Chill Canada. May 29 2012 21:36. Posts 1003 | Profile # |
Well, that comment was slightly depressing. Also, not really sure how it's brave of Obama to do that.
Why does it seem as if the US is the only one ready for military intervention? |
| | http://myanimelist.net/animelist/Chill77 |
|
|
| Derez Netherlands. May 29 2012 21:40. Posts 4469 | Profile Blog # |
On May 29 2012 21:29 Miyoshino wrote:
Pretty tasteless Saviour.
It seems Assad has very little control over his militias. This means he is irrelevant. Him stepping down or being replaced may not change anything.
If anything, Assad seems to be in full control over the troops that are still loyal to him. This doesn't seem like some random 'incident', Syrian troops have been commiting atrocities for the better part of a year now.
That said, there won't be a military intervention. The resistance isn't organized enough, any intervention requires (western) troops on the ground, and noone is willing to commit to that for obvious reasons. The US will not, especially during an election cycle, Europe will not because they're unable to carry the costs and the UN will never approve it in the first place thanks to Russia and China. Last edit: 2012-05-29 21:42:15 |
|
|
| WTFZerg United States. May 29 2012 21:52. Posts 648 | Profile # |
On May 29 2012 21:36 Dark_Chill wrote:
Well, that comment was slightly depressing. Also, not really sure how it's brave of Obama to do that.
Why does it seem as if the US is the only one ready for military intervention?
The US aren't the only ones ready to do something. As far as I know the UN has already put military intervention to vote but Russia and China vetoed it. Last edit: 2012-05-29 21:52:39 |
| |
|
| Miyoshino May 29 2012 21:59. Posts 314 | Profile Blog # |
On May 29 2012 21:40 Derez wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 21:29 Miyoshino wrote:
Pretty tasteless Saviour.
It seems Assad has very little control over his militias. This means he is irrelevant. Him stepping down or being replaced may not change anything.
If anything, Assad seems to be in full control over the troops that are still loyal to him. This doesn't seem like some random 'incident', Syrian troops have been commiting atrocities for the better part of a year now. That said, there won't be a military intervention. The resistance isn't organized enough, any intervention requires (western) troops on the ground, and noone is willing to commit to that for obvious reasons. The US will not, especially during an election cycle, Europe will not because they're unable to carry the costs and the UN will never approve it in the first place thanks to Russia and China.
This is not really in Assad's interest. Are you familiar with the phone taps Al Jazeera acquired. The Gaddafi regime tried to stop the atrocities in Misratah but they failed, which also resulted in a defeat which in the end lost the war.
I don't believe assassinating like 40 or 60 children was an order from higher up. Yes, it was their decision to use violence. Same in Libya. But once your forces start to use violence it is not a given you can also control the severity of their atrocities. You see this time and time again. Even in more disciplines militaries you have these atrocities. And here we may have rogue non-Military pro Assad militias over which Assad has no control at all. |
|
|
| Mentalizor Denmark. May 29 2012 22:25. Posts 1510 | Profile # |
| I just hope a minimum of civilians will suffer. No matter what happens |
| | (yಠ,ಠ)y - Y U NO ALL IN? - rtsAlaran: " I somehow sit inside the bus.Hot_Bit giving me a massage" |
|
|
| EngrishTeacher China. May 29 2012 22:29. Posts 428 | Profile Blog # |
The main question is, is there oil in Syria?
Brb after some wiki'ing.
Edit:
Bingo.
According to Wikipedia, paraphrasing what I glanced:
although a relatively small oil producer producing only 0.5% of the world's oil in 2010, it is the only significant oil producing country in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Despite the current relatively tiny scale of its oil industry, oil exports account for over 25% of the state's revenue.
2.5 billion barrels of oil in reserve, and 9.1 TRILLION cubic meters of natural gas in reserve.
Yah, the U.S. is most likely there for the oil.
Hasn't there been enough precedents for people to see through this bullshit? Some U.S. people might care about massacres and injustices in the world, but the U.S. military (as a whole) most certainly does not give the slightest fuck. First Iraq, then Uganda, now this.
Your (fox news) propaganda alarm should be going all out of wack right now.Last edit: 2012-05-29 22:40:12 |
|
|
| iMAniaC Norway. May 29 2012 22:35. Posts 458 | Profile # |
I think you are misinformed, Derez. Let me correct that for you.
On May 29 2012 21:40 Derez wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 21:29 Miyoshino wrote:
Pretty tasteless Saviour.
It seems Assad has very little control over his militias. This means he is irrelevant. Him stepping down or being replaced may not change anything.
If anything, Assad seems to be in full control over the troops that are still loyal to him. This doesn't seem like some random 'incident', Syrian troops have been commiting atrocities reforming for the better part of a year now.
Now you see, with the proper facts on the table, it's obvious that nothing needs to be done. They are putting reforms in place, so everything's okay.
On a serious note, I don't presonally know what we should do, but it just feels wrong to do nothing.Last edit: 2012-05-29 22:36:46 |
| |
|
| DeepElemBlues United States. May 29 2012 22:35. Posts 3571 | Profile # |
Realpolitik flies out the window again for well-meaning but short-sighted and narrow idealism, military intervention will eventually stop the scale and frequency of the bloodshed but the ultimate accomplishment will be a Syria still in civil war or openly aggressive towards Israel, and possibly a civil war in Lebanon or another Hezbollah-Israel war.
If we're going to start bombing Syria to stop Assad from slaughtering Syrians then our commitment should not be halfway; to simply remove one political player from the board like we did in Egypt (without force of course) or Libya (with force) doesn't accomplish much more than removing that player from the board. The Middle East is in a slow-motion train wreck to more civil wars or another general Muslim-Israeli war. Other than helping Israel if they need it I don't see much reason to get involved or anything that the West (the United States, but it's more polite to act like Europe will actually contribute an amount that is more than negligible) can actually accomplish. |
| |
|
| DarkPlasmaBall United States. May 29 2012 22:36. Posts 19998 | Profile Blog # |
On May 29 2012 22:25 Mentalizor wrote:
I just hope a minimum of civilians will suffer. No matter what happens
Definitely agree here.
And while it's surely noble to try and protect the weak on a global scale, I wonder if it's truly possible (let alone ethical) for us to be the world's police. There will always be some invisible unjustice in some shadowy corner of the world (but does that justify not doing as much as possible for those problems that we can do something about?).
I don't know. Once in a while, I'd like our country to kind of be "selfish" and work on its own problems though. We often spread ourselves too thin, make too many enemies, and not focus on stabilizing our own country (economy, education, etc.). And, quite frankly, it's showing. In the long run, if we're not functioning as a top nation, how can we even help others anymore? Also, surely there are other countries who could lend a helping hand?
I don't know anything about foreign policy though, and I don't know how this makes Obama look any better (threatening Syria may make him look tough, but then "omg he dragged us into another war"). Seems lose-lose. |
| | "Those who can, teach. Those who can't, whine about teachers." ~Me |
|
|
| WTFZerg United States. May 29 2012 22:39. Posts 648 | Profile # |
On May 29 2012 22:29 EngrishTeacher wrote:
The main question is, is there oil in Syria?
Brb after some wiki'ing.
Edit:
Bingo.
According to Wikipedia, paraphrasing what I glanced:
although a relatively small oil producer producing only 0.5% of the world's oil in 2010, it is the only significant oil producing country in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Despite the current relatively tiny scale of its oil industry, oil exports account for over 25% of the state's revenue.
2.5 billion barrels of oil in reserve, and 9.1 TRILLION cubic meters of natural gas in reserve.
Yah, the U.S. is most likely there for the oil.
Hasn't there been enough precedents for people to see through this bullshit? Some U.S. people might care about massacres and injustices in the world, but the U.S. military most certainly does not give the slightest fuck. First Iraq, then Uganda, now this.
Your (fox news) propaganda alarm should be going all out of wack right now.
The opinion of the United States military is irrelevant. They do not make decisions in regards to mobilization.
Last edit: 2012-05-29 22:40:11 |
| |
|
| EngrishTeacher China. May 29 2012 22:42. Posts 428 | Profile Blog # |
On May 29 2012 22:39 WTFZerg wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 22:29 EngrishTeacher wrote:
The main question is, is there oil in Syria?
Brb after some wiki'ing.
Edit:
Bingo.
According to Wikipedia, paraphrasing what I glanced:
although a relatively small oil producer producing only 0.5% of the world's oil in 2010, it is the only significant oil producing country in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Despite the current relatively tiny scale of its oil industry, oil exports account for over 25% of the state's revenue.
2.5 billion barrels of oil in reserve, and 9.1 TRILLION cubic meters of natural gas in reserve.
Yah, the U.S. is most likely there for the oil.
Hasn't there been enough precedents for people to see through this bullshit? Some U.S. people might care about massacres and injustices in the world, but the U.S. military most certainly does not give the slightest fuck. First Iraq, then Uganda, now this.
Your (fox news) propaganda alarm should be going all out of wack right now.
The opinion of the United States military is irrelevant. They do not make decisions in regards to mobilization.
Let me clarify myself then:
...but whichever body of the U.S. government responsible for implementing self-benefiting and utilitarian foreign policy most certainly does not give the slightest fuck.
I stand corrected. |
|
|
| WTFZerg United States. May 29 2012 22:44. Posts 648 | Profile # |
On May 29 2012 22:42 EngrishTeacher wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 22:39 WTFZerg wrote:
On May 29 2012 22:29 EngrishTeacher wrote:
The main question is, is there oil in Syria?
Brb after some wiki'ing.
Edit:
Bingo.
According to Wikipedia, paraphrasing what I glanced:
although a relatively small oil producer producing only 0.5% of the world's oil in 2010, it is the only significant oil producing country in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Despite the current relatively tiny scale of its oil industry, oil exports account for over 25% of the state's revenue.
2.5 billion barrels of oil in reserve, and 9.1 TRILLION cubic meters of natural gas in reserve.
Yah, the U.S. is most likely there for the oil.
Hasn't there been enough precedents for people to see through this bullshit? Some U.S. people might care about massacres and injustices in the world, but the U.S. military most certainly does not give the slightest fuck. First Iraq, then Uganda, now this.
Your (fox news) propaganda alarm should be going all out of wack right now.
The opinion of the United States military is irrelevant. They do not make decisions in regards to mobilization.
Let me clarify myself then: ...but whichever body of the U.S. government responsible for implementing self-benefiting and utilitarian foreign policy most certainly does not give the slightest fuck. I stand corrected.
Then I suppose you'll have to throw the rest of the UN security council (minus Russia and China) in with the "not giving the slightest fuck" since they voted in favor of military intervention in Syria.
edit: Apparently the resolution was only to openly call for the resignation of the Syrian president, not actually a call for military action.Last edit: 2012-05-29 22:47:21 |
| |
|
| don_kyuhote May 29 2012 22:45. Posts 1870 | Profile Blog # |
I highly doubt US will get involved militarily.
Russia has a port in Tartus that they will not abandon. |
| | Maranatha~~~~~~~// what we do in life echoes in eternity | |
|
|
| DeepElemBlues United States. May 29 2012 22:45. Posts 3571 | Profile # |
| Can you take the wars for oil bullshit somewhere else and not derail the thread with your spoon-fed propaganda. |
| |
|
| Goozen Israel. May 29 2012 22:47. Posts 619 | Profile # |
On May 29 2012 22:45 don_kyuhote wrote:
I highly doubt US will get involved militarily.
Russia has a port in Tartus that they will not abandon.
I dont see russia getting involved in the fighting if the US dose.
At the end of the day russia and china both care about money and stability so they will do all they can to prevent intervention but if it dose start they will see they have nothing to gain and will just try to be the first people there after to regain power and influence. |
|
|
| EngrishTeacher China. May 29 2012 22:48. Posts 428 | Profile Blog # |
On May 29 2012 22:44 WTFZerg wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 22:42 EngrishTeacher wrote:
On May 29 2012 22:39 WTFZerg wrote:
On May 29 2012 22:29 EngrishTeacher wrote:
The main question is, is there oil in Syria?
Brb after some wiki'ing.
Edit:
Bingo.
According to Wikipedia, paraphrasing what I glanced:
although a relatively small oil producer producing only 0.5% of the world's oil in 2010, it is the only significant oil producing country in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Despite the current relatively tiny scale of its oil industry, oil exports account for over 25% of the state's revenue.
2.5 billion barrels of oil in reserve, and 9.1 TRILLION cubic meters of natural gas in reserve.
Yah, the U.S. is most likely there for the oil.
Hasn't there been enough precedents for people to see through this bullshit? Some U.S. people might care about massacres and injustices in the world, but the U.S. military most certainly does not give the slightest fuck. First Iraq, then Uganda, now this.
Your (fox news) propaganda alarm should be going all out of wack right now.
The opinion of the United States military is irrelevant. They do not make decisions in regards to mobilization.
Let me clarify myself then: ...but whichever body of the U.S. government responsible for implementing self-benefiting and utilitarian foreign policy most certainly does not give the slightest fuck. I stand corrected.
Then I suppose you'll have to throw the rest of the UN security council (minus Russia and China) in with the "not giving the slightest fuck" since they voted in favor of military intervention in Syria.
I get the feeling that I offend you slightly with my aggressive tone of voice (I apologize for that, it's just that I'm passionate on the issue), and I wouldn't go as far as saying the U.S. IS the UN, but clearly the major (often dominating) force that strongly influences or sometimes even controls the UN is undoubtedly, none other than, the United States.
Plus, most of Western Europe and the U.S. is in bed together for a large number of things anyway.
Edit:
On May 29 2012 22:45 DeepElemBlues wrote:
Can you take the wars for oil bullshit somewhere else and not derail the thread with your spoon-fed propaganda.
I back up my relevant claims with an explanation. You do not. I feel my points are relevant, as do you as you cared to comment about them.
Careful, people get banned for baseless and highly offensive 1-liners.Last edit: 2012-05-29 22:52:46 |
|
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next All | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
