Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Duuvian]

I was hoping the other guy would become president to be honest.

Yeah it sucked pretty bad that all the candidates I would have voted for were I a citizen there are apparently unelectable due to the organizational skills of the pre-existing Muslim Brotherhood and the Military's popular support due to supporting the revolution as far as replacing the figurehead. However I suppose we're to that point there that at least barring destablizing things happening there, a democracy is in place at least as long as it takes them to dismantle it if not longer. That said; just because they are Islamist does not mean they didn't win the election fairly and they still deserve advice on how to run a government. That includes opening their eyes to the struggles of voter's rights that established democracies have faced and defeated over the years.

Guardian, I don't agree with you. Supporting Assad will also make clear that Russia is on the bad guys' side. (Right now, they get around it by saying that they don't believe in military intervention and that it should be resolved through diplomacy, which at least save their face). It might have some short-terms benefits but on the longer terms it's bound to be a losing position: as more and more middle-eastern become democratic, Russia will loose influence.

Seriously, the staunchest allies of the US in Europe (Poland, Georgia, the Baltics countries...) were created by Russia. The idea that Russia got a zone of influence that it need to protect by rattling sabers against the US is a myth. What Russia's doing is turning off all those neighbors and sending them beg for US protection against Russian interventionism.

I agree 100% with Sheb's quote

[Sheb]

What more worrying is the fact that SCAF has been taking control of the country. The parliament has been disbanded, and I don't think the new president will have much power...

[Duuvian]

Found this: http://blogs.aljazeera.net/liveblog/SCAF

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Syria 2012-06-24T17:21:07+03:00

Members of disparate Syrian groups opposed to the rule of President Bashar Assad tried in Brussels on Sunday to hash out their differences and plan for a democratic transition.

The different opposition groups are riven by divisions over whether outside military intervention would help or hurt the country - and whether to engage in dialogue with Assad's regime.

In addition, some Islamists opposed to Assad's rule are not viewed by other opposition members as true democrats.

While much of the focus of the conference, which runs through Monday and had about 50 participants, was on planning for a post-Assad transition to democracy, participants held different opinions on how to reach that point.

If the violence continues, outside military intervention is "essential", Georges Chacan, a member of the Syrian National Council, told The Associated Press news agency.

"We agree with any intervention to put an end to this regime and to stop the bloodshed," Chacan said. "But we need to keep the civilian infrastructure working. Because you cannot build a new state, a democratic state on rubble."

A representative of a different opposition group - Mikail Morhaf, of the National Coordination Body for Democratic Change - said rubble was precisely what outside intervention would create.

[Sheb]

Yup. Exactly. The SNC is mostly useless.

[Duuvian]

Yup. Exactly. The SNC is mostly useless.

To this point.

[Sheb]

Interesting opinion piece.

The point he's making is that the military lost all the legitimacy that it after Mubarak's fall, and that the Brotherhood, by winning the elections, basically will be held responsible for everything that goes wrong (And stuff will go wrong a lot), leaving a clear path for the liberals activists.

I only think he's missing one point. The Brotherhood may find itself caught in a trap, but the most likely winner will be the Salafists. And I really don't want a Salafists government in Egypt.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Syria has brought down a second Turkish jet.

They are simultaneously provoking the EU and NATO with this. I can't think of anything more stupid to do while in a state of civil war!

[Aqizzar]

Syria has brought down a second Turkish jet.

They are simultaneously provoking the EU and NATO with this. I can't think of anything more stupid to do while in a state of civil war!

Okay, you only get to accidentally shoot down a neutral country's planes once before shit gets real.  What the Hell is happening over there?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The Turks are not exactly known for letting people bully them, either, so it's an even worse move.

[sneakey pete]

How on earth did you get "Syria shoots down second jet" from that article? Nowhere in it does it state such a thing.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Turkey says Syria has fired on a second Turkish plane in what is now an escalating situation. The second plane was a search and rescue plane searching for the military jet downed earlier last week.

Alright, so it might not have been shot down, but it was at least shot at. While looking for the first plane, no less.

[Sheb]

Well, things sound fishy.

I mean, even the Turks says that their first jet went into Syrian national airspace. They claim that it's somehow routine for jets to cross international border is S. It may be true in time of peace, but when you're hosting groups attempting to overthrow the government next door, your neighbor isn't going to give you the benefit of the doubt.

Secondly, they claim that it was shot 13 miles away from Syrian shores (National waters extend 12 nautical miles (14 miles) from the shores). What's a miles for a cruising jet? 5, 10 seconds? To me it sounds like it was shot in Syrian airspace the the Turks are desperately trying to convince the world it wasn't.

It's not really surprising: we cannot get the Russians or the Chinese on board, so we look at other ways to legitimate an intervention. In this case by prodding the Syrian (violating their airspace) until they overreact and "attack" us. It's a time-honored tactic.

So that's why I'm skeptic of that second shooting. I don't believe the Syrian are actually that stupid, and it's just too convenient. If you don't show me the wreckage, I won't believe it.

[olemars]

The plane that was shot down (the first incident) was an RF-4 ELINT aircraft. It was obviously checking out the state of the Syrian radar grid. I guess they found out that it works.

[Duuvian]

Well, there ya go. The information required says that it was a probing attempt by the Turks. I hate to say it but the Syrian government have a valid reason in the explanation that the individual commander of a flak battery (or more likely infrared tracking missile from recent news, as I doubt they had some kind of flak boat out there and the Turks are saying there was no radar ping and say that it is either laser guided or infrared; if it's radar it's some kind of secret Russian AA tech) had to decide whether or not to follow what he deemed his orders to be. What those orders are and whether they are reasonable is what the debate will be about I'd guess. I'd say that the Syrian government have the right to decide whether or not to shoot down the first plane that crosses a border in such a questionable manner.

I do think however that the Syrian government should not have fired so quickly and instead allow the aircraft to penetrate further before firing to kill upon it. That would have shown a certain amount of respect towards any of the neighboring countries they should be trying to appease in any way possible. That is what will be what decisions will hang on, as, are these people really fit to be in power after taking such an inflexible position and should the Turk's want these particular neighbors in power if they can't allow a minor penetration? If the plane was indeed downed on the way out which is reasonable to consider since pilots are told never to fly over the same spot twice due to people being alert to their presence. With modern communication that advice (from Vietnam) is obsolete and nowadays once you cross the perimeter everyone knows. I postulate the Turkish plane strayed into Syrian airspace, everyone was alerted of this on both sides, the Turkish plane turned to resume it's course, and the nearest commander made a snap decision to shoot at the plane on the way out.

That said I could be wrong and we'll either find out shortly or the two sides will conflict and we'll have to assume one or both are lieing.

[Guardian G.I.]

So far, the Article 5 of the NATO Charter (an attack on one member of the alliance is treated as an attack on all its members) was not raised at the meeting of the North Atlantic Council discussing the incident.