Syria Civil War Spreads

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Aug 08, 2014 6:59 pm UTC

It also falls flat considering that we backed the Muslims in Bosnia over the Christian Serbs...

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:54 pm UTC

EMTP wrote:
morriswalters wrote:Okay, I thought since you gave us a script you had a point. My mistake.


Of course that wasn't the part you quoted, you quoted something else and said "What's the point of this?" . . . by which I guess we were supposed to understand that you meant "What's the point of this other passage, not the other I quoted but directly above, but the one later on that I didn't quote?"

Now it's all clear, or clear-ish. What's the point of making fun of our rapid response to this humanitarian crisis (which in and of itself is a good thing, BTW) when so many other acts of murderous cruelty do not even get lip service? You think there's a point but you don't understand what it might be? Perhaps the problem is that regarding Arabs and Muslims as subhuman is less of a joke to you and more of a life philosophy?

Explaining humor in detail is never wise. If you don't see the point . . . well, I can't say I'm surprised.
I never find death and mayhem funny. I responded to your sarcasm. As a humor writer, practice more, but then again, drivel will always be drivel. You evidently think we should do something more. Ok. What? Tell me something that won't involve Americans killing hundreds of thousands of Muslims. Wait, we already have done that. Not once but twice. To little or no effect. Continuing to do the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is, might I say, stupid. I would tell you that I don't hate Muslims. But why should I? You will assume the worst and I am quite sure that nothing I say will break through that wall. I'm sorry that Muslims are dying in one conflict or another all over the Middle East. What I am most concerned with is making sure that whenever possible that we aren't the ones killing them.

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby Vahir » Fri Aug 08, 2014 9:08 pm UTC

You guys are being too hard on EMTP. I also don't agree that we only act when non-muslims are endangered, but just because you don't agree with the politics behind a joke doesn't mean that you can't find it funny.

Zcorp
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:14 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby Zcorp » Fri Aug 08, 2014 9:16 pm UTC

I do find people who have misinformed and under-informed opinions and beliefs about something funny. So you're right there is humor to be found, but for many related reasons it is quite sad that such people exist.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby Diadem » Fri Aug 08, 2014 9:17 pm UTC

Vahir wrote:You guys are being too hard on EMTP. I also don't agree that we only act when non-muslims are endangered, but just because you don't agree with the politics behind a joke doesn't mean that you can't find it funny.

The problem is that it isn't a joke. EMTP is, I am very much afraid, dead serious. This ain't the first thread he has expressed this sentiment, and I imagine most people are getting a bit tired of it. I know I am.

The reason the US started bombing ISIS now is because it is looking like the Pesh Merga aren't able to defeat ISIS on their own. I think up until now the US figured that direct military aid wouldn't be needed. I doubt it has anything to do with any humanitarian crisis. Perhaps indirectly, in that it makes public opinion more favorable towards the idea.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Aug 08, 2014 10:04 pm UTC

I'm not sure that I find anything in the Middle East amusing on any level.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10331
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby addams » Fri Aug 08, 2014 11:33 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:I'm not sure that I find anything in the Middle East amusing on any level.

oh, Morris; People need to laugh.
There are loads of funny things in the Middle East.

I know a funny war story or two.
From the Middle East.

From the 2000's.
From Civilians.

ok. You are correct Morris.
It is not nice for people to laugh at the suffering of others.
It is ok for the suffering to laugh.

Did I ever tell you about the guy that could make the Bomb Siren sound?
He was a funny guy.

We were far away from the Middle East, at the time.
Many of us had been there.

We were in a room of 75 people.
Most were seated.

He made that sound, I stood up and looked.
It was so funny the way people responded.

We could tell instantly who had experience with that sound and do did not have experience with that sound.
We laughed.

Morris; It was funny.
Maybe a person has to Be There to find the humor.

One friend found himself hiding behind little newly planted rose bushes.
From what?

The building next door was hit and it exploded.
The rose bush lived because it was protected by him.

That was funny, to me.
He lived to tell the story.

He was all banged up and dirty.
He was thirteen years old.

He said, the tears made mud.
Then we both stopped laughing.

People are weird that way.

Edit: Morris?
Do you know why we quit laughing?
Loads of reasons.

The big one was the tears.
When is a Man too old to cry.

When did you stop crying, Morris?
Last edited by addams on Sat Aug 09, 2014 3:26 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6813
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby sardia » Sat Aug 09, 2014 2:09 am UTC

morriswalters wrote:
EMTP wrote:
morriswalters wrote:Okay, I thought since you gave us a script you had a point. My mistake.


Of course that wasn't the part you quoted, you quoted something else and said "What's the point of this?" . . . by which I guess we were supposed to understand that you meant "What's the point of this other passage, not the other I quoted but directly above, but the one later on that I didn't quote?"

Now it's all clear, or clear-ish. What's the point of making fun of our rapid response to this humanitarian crisis (which in and of itself is a good thing, BTW) when so many other acts of murderous cruelty do not even get lip service? You think there's a point but you don't understand what it might be? Perhaps the problem is that regarding Arabs and Muslims as subhuman is less of a joke to you and more of a life philosophy?

Explaining humor in detail is never wise. If you don't see the point . . . well, I can't say I'm surprised.
I never find death and mayhem funny. I responded to your sarcasm. As a humor writer, practice more, but then again, drivel will always be drivel. You evidently think we should do something more. Ok. What? Tell me something that won't involve Americans killing hundreds of thousands of Muslims. Wait, we already have done that. Not once but twice. To little or no effect. Continuing to do the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is, might I say, stupid. I would tell you that I don't hate Muslims. But why should I? You will assume the worst and I am quite sure that nothing I say will break through that wall. I'm sorry that Muslims are dying in one conflict or another all over the Middle East. What I am most concerned with is making sure that whenever possible that we aren't the ones killing them.

All you're doing is throwing smoke & mirrors so you can ignore the those people are getting killed because nobody did anything earlier. So then the disaster gets worse. We got this stupid shit because of the Syrian war, which spread into Iraq. Which of course, you were against intervening. Anyone can say I'm sorry x group died. It's far harder to say, "yes I'm against the Syrian war intervention, and I'm aware that the genocide in Iraq is a direct result of the Syrian war, but fuck'em."

Edit: Yea, I don't know where EMPT got the idea that the US intervened cuz nonmuslims! Most of the reports varied between a tipping point in the administration and because we are showing we have the Kurd's back because of how much they have supported the US interests in the area. This show of support has limits of course, since Turkey is very keenly against anything that results in a Kurdish nation.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Aug 09, 2014 3:13 am UTC

Never understood the Turkish opposition to Kurdistan; all the Kurdish insurgents would end up leaving Turkey if Northern Iraq were to break off into Kurdistan.

User avatar
EMTP
Posts: 1556
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:39 pm UTC
Location: Elbow deep in (mostly) other people's blood.

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby EMTP » Sat Aug 09, 2014 5:23 am UTC

Vahir wrote:You guys are being too hard on EMTP. I also don't agree that we only act when non-muslims are endangered, but just because you don't agree with the politics behind a joke doesn't mean that you can't find it funny.


Thank you. It's true we don't only act when non-Muslims are endangered, but if you look at say, our intervention in Libya, over which we agonized for months, finally pitching in only after painstakingly assembling an international coalition for political cover, or the aborted action in Syria, in which Obama deferred to Congress and ended up with an extremely limited, albeit valuable diplomatic concession by Assad, whose regime remained in place, the swift decisive action here to stop the killing kinda stands out. A couple of days ago, virtually no one in the United States had heard of "Yazidis," and now, boom, airstrikes and food, water, and medicine airdropped. Because, obviously, we're not going to stand by and let innocent people get slaughtered by bloodthirsty nuts claiming to be the reincarnation of a long-extinct religious empire, killing civilians with American weapons. Because that would obviously be evil.
“Earlier this week, one Iraqi cried that there is no one coming to help,” Mr. Obama said in a somber statement delivered from the State Dining Room. “Well, today America is coming to help.”


It's a nice sentiment and I agree with the action that it seeks to justify. I hope the Yazidis and the Kurds are comforted tonight, knowing that the world is not going to stand by and watch them be overrun.

As for those I haven't responded to directly, I apologize, I overestimated my appetite for telling people they were wrong on the internet today. Well, OK, maybe just once more: Morris, you can't complain you don't understand the joke, and then claim it isn't funny. It's not funny to you because it completely went over your head. That's really not something you benefit from calling attention to over and over. 'Gnight!
"Reasonable – that is, human – men will always be capable of compromise, but men who have dehumanized themselves by becoming the blind worshipers of an idea or an ideal are fanatics whose devotion to abstractions makes them the enemies of life."
-- Alan Watts, "The Way of Zen"

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby KnightExemplar » Sat Aug 09, 2014 5:25 am UTC

Vahir wrote:You guys are being too hard on EMTP. I also don't agree that we only act when non-muslims are endangered, but just because you don't agree with the politics behind a joke doesn't mean that you can't find it funny.


Making a joke when people are dying in the streets is in bad taste, especially when EMTP is trying to claim the moral high ground. As has been stated before, Christians are known to have been dying in Iraq and Syria. Obama's decision to stay out of it is clearly not related to any humanitarian crisis. Every other crisis prior to this (especially the ones that share a major religion with the US) is proof of that.

sardia wrote:All you're doing is throwing smoke & mirrors so you can ignore the those people are getting killed because nobody did anything earlier. So then the disaster gets worse. We got this stupid shit because of the Syrian war, which spread into Iraq. Which of course, you were against intervening. Anyone can say I'm sorry x group died. It's far harder to say, "yes I'm against the Syrian war intervention, and I'm aware that the genocide in Iraq is a direct result of the Syrian war, but fuck'em."


Based on our track record, I think we were more likely to have helped ISIS take down the Assad government than to have helped Assad take down the ISIS rebellion. Staying out of Syria was probably the right thing, because the US undoubtedly would have made the wrong choice in haste back then.

Remember, just a few months ago, we were calling for Airstrikes against Assad in support of the rebels due to those chemical weapons: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/s ... air-strike. Ultimately, we took weapons away from Assad, weakening his position. They were terrible chemical weapons of course, but it is still an anti-Assad move in the great scheme of things.

Today, we have more information now and can make a better decision. We can evaluate whether or not ISIS is a larger threat than Assad right now.

EMTP wrote:A couple of days ago, virtually no one in the United States had heard of "Yazidis," and now, boom, airstrikes and food, water, and medicine airdropped. Because, obviously, we're not going to stand by and let innocent people get slaughtered by bloodthirsty nuts claiming to be the reincarnation of a long-extinct religious empire, killing civilians with American weapons. Because that would obviously be evil.


Non-sequitur. I suggest you learn the fallacy and try not to repeat it.

EDIT: Let me give you an example of what you're doing.

Two days ago, I pissed in the toilet and watched TV. Then the US made an Airstrike. Therefore, my pissing into the toilet caused the airstrikes. Oh me yarm Oh, I'm good at logic.

Two events that happen next to each other is neither an argument nor a proof. They are simply two facts. Trying to draw connections between them without a real argument is a logical fallacy at best.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6813
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby sardia » Sat Aug 09, 2014 6:20 am UTC

Based on our track record, I think we were more likely to have helped ISIS take down the Assad government than to have helped Assad take down the ISIS rebellion. Staying out of Syria was probably the right thing, because the US undoubtedly would have made the wrong choice in haste back then.

Remember, just a few months ago, we were calling for Airstrikes against Assad in support of the rebels due to those chemical weapons: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/s ... air-strike. Ultimately, we took weapons away from Assad, weakening his position. They were terrible chemical weapons of course, but it is still an anti-Assad move in the great scheme of things.

Today, we have more information now and can make a better decision. We can evaluate whether or not ISIS is a larger threat than Assad right now.

It depends on the model you apply to the civil war in Syria. Would the US have found "moderate" groups if it had acted earlier and gave appropriate aid? How good is the US intelligence in Syria? Did we recruit a sufficient number of locals who have knowledge of the events on the ground AND are reliable? For one thing, you didn't note how ISIS even grew in power. While the rebels were stalemated in Syria, ISIS spent their time in the safer areas rounding up "support". Once you get a power base going, then weapons and money starts snowballing towards the strongest groups. But I digress, I have to be careful not to fall into the neverending rabbit hole of what-ifs.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby morriswalters » Sat Aug 09, 2014 12:15 pm UTC

EMTP wrote:Well, OK, maybe just once more: Morris, you can't complain you don't understand the joke, and then claim it isn't funny. It's not funny to you because it completely went over your head.
If it makes you feel better to think it went over my head then I guess that is what it is.

sardia wrote:All you're doing is throwing smoke & mirrors so you can ignore the those people are getting killed because nobody did anything earlier. So then the disaster gets worse. We got this stupid shit because of the Syrian war, which spread into Iraq. Which of course, you were against intervening. Anyone can say I'm sorry x group died. It's far harder to say, "yes I'm against the Syrian war intervention, and I'm aware that the genocide in Iraq is a direct result of the Syrian war, but fuck'em."
And I'm still against intervening. We armed the Iraqi's, now explain why ISIS is riding around in Humvee's and may have tanks. Where did the artillery pieces come from? The first airstrike was on an artillery position. So now you suggest that we should have sent in more weapons. No thanks. If Obama wants to try and protect those people on the hill then more power to him. But in the end if the people in the region don't pick up the slack we are just Christian faces come to kill Muslims. Current events in Afghanistan spotlight the problem. The Taliban got in close enough to kill a General officer. It happens because the people you need to kill look exactly like those people you are trying to save.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby KnightExemplar » Sat Aug 09, 2014 12:29 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
Based on our track record, I think we were more likely to have helped ISIS take down the Assad government than to have helped Assad take down the ISIS rebellion. Staying out of Syria was probably the right thing, because the US undoubtedly would have made the wrong choice in haste back then.

Remember, just a few months ago, we were calling for Airstrikes against Assad in support of the rebels due to those chemical weapons: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/s ... air-strike. Ultimately, we took weapons away from Assad, weakening his position. They were terrible chemical weapons of course, but it is still an anti-Assad move in the great scheme of things.

Today, we have more information now and can make a better decision. We can evaluate whether or not ISIS is a larger threat than Assad right now.

It depends on the model you apply to the civil war in Syria. Would the US have found "moderate" groups if it had acted earlier and gave appropriate aid? How good is the US intelligence in Syria? Did we recruit a sufficient number of locals who have knowledge of the events on the ground AND are reliable? For one thing, you didn't note how ISIS even grew in power. While the rebels were stalemated in Syria, ISIS spent their time in the safer areas rounding up "support". Once you get a power base going, then weapons and money starts snowballing towards the strongest groups. But I digress, I have to be careful not to fall into the neverending rabbit hole of what-ifs.


True that. So I do want to emphasize that my point is strictly a hypothetical. I have no proof and its all a giant what-if. The main problem however with hindsight, is that we always assume that we make the correct decision. Just remember, Syria was a very complicated mess a few months ago, and we just as easily could have made a bad decision as well as a good decision. Especially when the goal in Syria would have been to overthrow Assad... Saddam or Gaddafi style. I honestly don't recall any goals being set to discover rebel groups and fund the "better" ones.

Now, the risk in attacking ISIS today seems to shrink and shrink with each passing day. With massacre after massacre, it appears that ISIS has garnered the favor of no major nation-state. Their external sources of funding is running dry. However... they still seem popular in Northern Iraq. There were some interviews with children who were praising ISIS on CNN last night.

As has been pointed out in this thread earlier: the risk of US intervention is whether or not US Airstrikes will be seen as an anti-Muslim move or not.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Aug 09, 2014 1:38 pm UTC

They are apparently selling a million dollars of oil a day, plus all the money from the Jizra (extortion from the non-muslism). That's more than enough funding.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby Zamfir » Sat Aug 09, 2014 2:25 pm UTC

I honestly don't recall any goals being set to discover rebel groups and fund the "better" ones.

There are, quite strongly. US weapons and support only ever went to members of the secular Free Syrian Army, and only to specific commanders within that coalition. The Syrian opposition is an ever changing patchwork of groups and coalitions, which makes it hard to say who is currently in favour with whom. The Saudis clear have their own favourites distinct from the US, but I don't know if other western countries have their own list or if they all mostly back the same people.

Rumours appear to say that something called Harakat Hazzm is the current US favourite. If you go back a few months, other groups mentioned. Who might or might not be the same people in different constellations... I don't have a clue whether the US (and everyone else) is succeeding in selecting appropriate groups to support, but they are clearly trying to.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby Djehutynakht » Sat Aug 09, 2014 3:10 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote: plus all the money from the Jizra (extortion from the non-muslism). That's more than enough funding.


A good part of me wants to think that this is not a significant source of their income, especially if one considers the number of non-Muslims who have fled, converted (still a higher tax bracket, but lower than non-Muslim) or been killed.

If I recall correctly they also captured significant cash upon capturing things such as the Bank of Mosul. However, due to the way modern banking works, I'm not sure if that means they captured anything tangible, or the assets within became useless once it was ISIS holding them.

CorruptUser wrote:Never understood the Turkish opposition to Kurdistan; all the Kurdish insurgents would end up leaving Turkey if Northern Iraq were to break off into Kurdistan.


I don't completely understand myself, but I think the fear has something to do with a fear of Kurdish Turkish areas also trying to break off into Kurdistan. And it's easier for them to claim wanting to be annexed into an existing Kurdish country than to set one up entirely.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Aug 09, 2014 4:45 pm UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:
CorruptUser wrote: plus all the money from the Jizra (extortion from the non-muslism). That's more than enough funding.


A good part of me wants to think that this is not a significant source of their income, especially if one considers the number of non-Muslims who have fled, converted (still a higher tax bracket, but lower than non-Muslim) or been killed.


And the ones that flee, do they take everything with them? They may take their money and jewels, but unless they have horse drawn carts (doubt they have fuel) and time to pack they leave behind virtually everything else. And not all of them have fled.

Oddly, ISIS hates the Shia far more than all other groups. Except maybe Jews, but those were ethnically cleansed from that region decades ago. The Shia are the ones that you see/hear about converting and being beheaded anyway.

johnny_7713
Posts: 555
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:31 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby johnny_7713 » Sat Aug 09, 2014 5:23 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Never understood the Turkish opposition to Kurdistan; all the Kurdish insurgents would end up leaving Turkey if Northern Iraq were to break off into Kurdistan.


My understanding is that the area claimed by the Kurds as Kurdistan extends from southern Turkey, through northern Iraq and into Iran. The Turkish fear is that if an independent Kurdistan were to arise it would attempt to add all those areas to its territories, rather than just invite the Kurds living there to migrate.

Compare the situation in Ireland: the creation of an independent Republic or Ireland didn't cause all the pro-independence Irish to move out of Northern Ireland. (Not a perfect analogy of course, but I hope it illustrates the situation).

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10331
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby addams » Sat Aug 09, 2014 10:55 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
Djehutynakht wrote:
CorruptUser wrote: plus all the money from the Jizra (extortion from the non-muslism). That's more than enough funding.


A good part of me wants to think that this is not a significant source of their income, especially if one considers the number of non-Muslims who have fled, converted (still a higher tax bracket, but lower than non-Muslim) or been killed.


And the ones that flee, do they take everything with them? They may take their money and jewels, but unless they have horse drawn carts (doubt they have fuel) and time to pack they leave behind virtually everything else. And not all of them have fled.

Oddly, ISIS hates the Shia far more than all other groups. Except maybe Jews, but those were ethnically cleansed from that region decades ago. The Shia are the ones that you see/hear about converting and being beheaded anyway.

What the Hell??
They are still beheading people?

Good Grief.
They want to be like the Europeans?

The Europeans stopped that years ago.
Maybe a European can explain Why it is a Bad Idea.

oops. The Europeans that know have all died of old age.

What to do?
What to do?

Their Knowledge and Wisdom died with them?
That is so sad for Humanity.

That is an attention getter of a sentence, CorruptUser.
We are trained to be repulsed by beheadings.
But; To be ok with multiple gunshot wounds.

Did TV and Movies condition us?
What is True?

As long as they don't torture,
Beheading can not be so bad, really.

Everyone dies.
If the blow is sudden and sure,
well....I know a little about the subject.

Europeans commonly live with that kind of Knowledge.
As an American, I learned it during University Training and Education in Medical Science.

(shrug) Not everyone has to take that class.
Did you?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Aug 10, 2014 1:01 am UTC

Addams, War is full of all sorts of hypocrisy. It's OK to kill men, but not women. It's OK to kill with bullets, but not with fire, and most certainly not with gas. Landmines are OK, but radiation is not.

The Geneva Conventions are a bunch of bullshit to begin with; unlike marijuana, war should be banned, not legalized and regulated.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby KnightExemplar » Sun Aug 10, 2014 6:46 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:They are apparently selling a million dollars of oil a day, plus all the money from the Jizra (extortion from the non-muslism). That's more than enough funding.


Indeed. I probably should have emphasized "external" a bit more. ISIS was bootstrapped with external funding.

The problem with ISIS is that they have discovered "internal" funding: taxes, extortion, and oil sales. So they don't need external funding anymore.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Jolnanis
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2014 4:08 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby Jolnanis » Sun Aug 10, 2014 7:49 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:war should be banned, not legalized and regulated.

Even if it was a good policy, how would it be enforced ?

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby Djehutynakht » Sun Aug 10, 2014 8:14 am UTC

Well that's another advantage of fanaticism; if you have true fanatics on your side, the work tends to be its own pay, as opposed to non-fanatics, who generally care about their monetary salaries a bit more.

I suppose the promise of brides also helps.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Aug 10, 2014 1:02 pm UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:I suppose the promise of brides also helps.


Great, now they are kidnapping and raping women too?

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10331
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby addams » Sun Aug 10, 2014 1:45 pm UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:Well that's another advantage of fanaticism; if you have true fanatics on your side, the work tends to be its own pay, as opposed to non-fanatics, who generally care about their monetary salaries a bit more.

I suppose the promise of brides also helps.

(hey. wait a moment.)
What?

There is nothing wrong with liking your job.
I was told that there is a Vinn Diagram for that.

What needs to be done is the First Circle. (that is a big circle)
What you Love to do is the Second Circle.
What you get paid to do is the Third Circle.

The larger the overlap, the better.
Does that make all people that would do their jobs wheather paid or not Fanatics?

I suppose it does.
xkcd is a Fandom.

We don't blow shit up.
We don't even discuss it much, anymore.

Carrion.

(wait. wait.)
What?
Brides?

Spoiler:
Brides?
What Brides?

Special Virgins?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiEOB2O8eMs


Who are you?
Who am I?

You don't know you don't know anything about those people.
I know I don't know anything about those people.

Gee. Do I take offense too easily?
I am mildy offended by the Fanatics remark.

Because! I may be a Fanatic!
It's not all SunShine and BlowJobs! ya' know.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby BattleMoose » Sun Aug 10, 2014 3:04 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Addams, War is full of all sorts of hypocrisy. It's OK to kill men, but not women. It's OK to kill with bullets, but not with fire, and most certainly not with gas. Landmines are OK, but radiation is not.

The Geneva Conventions are a bunch of bullshit to begin with; unlike marijuana, war should be banned, not legalized and regulated.


Every soldier who has fought in a war is better off when the Geneva Conventions are observed. They have gone a long way for making war less beastly. And I am always for less suffering.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Aug 10, 2014 3:44 pm UTC

BattleMoose wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Addams, War is full of all sorts of hypocrisy. It's OK to kill men, but not women. It's OK to kill with bullets, but not with fire, and most certainly not with gas. Landmines are OK, but radiation is not.

The Geneva Conventions are a bunch of bullshit to begin with; unlike marijuana, war should be banned, not legalized and regulated.


Every soldier who has fought in a war is better off when the Geneva Conventions are observed. They have gone a long way for making war less beastly. And I am always for less suffering.


And when was the last time two armies that observed the Geneva Conventions fought?

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby BattleMoose » Sun Aug 10, 2014 4:31 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
BattleMoose wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Addams, War is full of all sorts of hypocrisy. It's OK to kill men, but not women. It's OK to kill with bullets, but not with fire, and most certainly not with gas. Landmines are OK, but radiation is not.

The Geneva Conventions are a bunch of bullshit to begin with; unlike marijuana, war should be banned, not legalized and regulated.


Every soldier who has fought in a war is better off when the Geneva Conventions are observed. They have gone a long way for making war less beastly. And I am always for less suffering.


And when was the last time two armies that observed the Geneva Conventions fought?


Your question is wrong. Violations always exist. But where there is good adherence, suffering is reduced. I like it when suffering is reduced.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Aug 10, 2014 5:57 pm UTC

As do I. But if you remove some of the suffering from War, that makes it less abhorrent, and thus increases the chance of War. If in battle, I'd really like it if my opponent adhered to the conventions, but I'd like it even more if there wasn't a battle at all. Unless you can get a Geneva Convention to replace all the bullets with Nerf darts or something...


So I'll ask again. Barring the occasional violations, when was the last time two armies that vaguely upheld the Geneva Conventions fought?

yedidyak
Posts: 954
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:24 pm UTC
Location: Israel

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby yedidyak » Sun Aug 10, 2014 6:47 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:As do I. But if you remove some of the suffering from War, that makes it less abhorrent, and thus increases the chance of War. If in battle, I'd really like it if my opponent adhered to the conventions, but I'd like it even more if there wasn't a battle at all. Unless you can get a Geneva Convention to replace all the bullets with Nerf darts or something...


So I'll ask again. Barring the occasional violations, when was the last time two armies that vaguely upheld the Geneva Conventions fought?


Georgia - Russia maybe?

EDIT - maybe not.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10331
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby addams » Sun Aug 10, 2014 9:50 pm UTC

BattleMoose wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:
BattleMoose wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Addams, War is full of all sorts of hypocrisy. It's OK to kill men, but not women. It's OK to kill with bullets, but not with fire, and most certainly not with gas. Landmines are OK, but radiation is not.

The Geneva Conventions are a bunch of bullshit to begin with; unlike marijuana, war should be banned, not legalized and regulated.


Every soldier who has fought in a war is better off when the Geneva Conventions are observed. They have gone a long way for making war less beastly. And I am always for less suffering.


And when was the last time two armies that observed the Geneva Conventions fought?


Your question is wrong. Violations always exist. But where there is good adherence, suffering is reduced. I like it when suffering is reduced.

Me, too.
I like it a Ton when it is My suffering that is reduced.

The Geneva Conventions were not BullShit.
No. I did not read them all.

I'd read some more of it.
Do you remember Why we wanted and many of us still want Rules of Engagement?

Because, even some Military People do not like Anarchy and leaving The Bottom up to the Imaginations of Humans.
Spoiler:
During most of my life that sentence would have been written, 'Imaginations of Man'.
But; No.

To include woman, and we must include women, the only way to say it is to name our Species.
Human: The Wise, Wise Man.

By The Bottom, I mean How Low will the behavior go, before SomeThing Sane kicks in?

All that Natzi stuff happened after Geneva Convention protections were in place.
If some AssHole breaks a Law, that does not always mean the Law is Stupid.

Spoiler:
OK! OK!
I used Natzi.
I lose and have to look up Godwin's Law, again.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby Djehutynakht » Sun Aug 10, 2014 9:59 pm UTC

addams wrote:(hey. wait a moment.)
What?


Oh, I wasn't bashing fanaticism. There's good fanatics too.

I was just saying that in this particular instance, if you're fighting a holy war, and all of your soldiers are deeply committed to the idea of holy war, they don't often ask of much pay; as opposed to, say, mercenaries, who with no particular attachment to their cause, are much more concerned of pay.

With regards to money-saving, this is a plus.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Aug 10, 2014 10:06 pm UTC

There are reasons to adhere to the Conventions even if they are BS. It's better for morale, it's better ethics, it prevents an enemy from always being backed into a corner, it provides some basic guidelines on how to surrender and how you can expect to be treated, it makes keeping the peace after the war easier, plus it kind of lets everyone on the sidelines know which side to root for.

That last one is really a big point; just because the people at Abu Graib and Guantanamo Bay mostly deserve to be treated the way they were treated doesn't mean they should be treated that way. He Who Hunts Monsters and all that. Every picture of an injured prisoner is a justification of the insurgencies. "We are fighting the US who is kidnapping and torturing people, you should join us because we are fighting THAT". And more importantly, it's all too easy to see your enemy as subhuman, even if they are terrorists. And they see you the same way. If you show some basic humanity, when the war is over, there is less bad blood and resentment between the previously warring sides, and hopefully that results in less war in the future.

I think my biggest problem with the Geneva Conventions is all the cognitive dissonance. A person being shredded to pieces by projectiles doesn't bother people, but being incinerated with napalm does? You can plunge a dagger into someone's stomach, but you can't use poison gas? You hear about people killed, but emphasis is given to women and children killed; what, killing an innocent woman is worse than killing an innocent man?

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby BattleMoose » Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:16 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:But if you remove some of the suffering from War, that makes it less abhorrent, and thus increases the chance of War.


That's such a huge leap of faith, I really cannot take it with you. I am very much more interested in the proper treatment of prisoners and medical staff. And do not believe for a moment that the proper and good treatment of prisoners and protection of medical staff, leads to more war. Such a huge assumption.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Aug 11, 2014 1:56 am UTC

Just because I think the Geneva Conventions are bunk doesn't mean I don't think we should follow any of it. I already explained why we should treat POW humanely and so forth. My biggest beef are the conventions against what weapons you can use in War. To me, landmines are far worse than nerve gas or napalm, yet landmines are legal. The critical difference being that landmines stay long after the war is over. Seriously, why haven't we banned those things?

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby BattleMoose » Mon Aug 11, 2014 2:19 am UTC

Just because I think the Geneva Conventions are bunk doesn't mean I don't think we should follow any of it. I already explained why we should treat POW humanely and so forth.


I don't understand your thinking at all. I value the Geneva Conventions primarily because of their protocols relating to POW and non-combatants. You don't value the Geneva Conventions but value the thing that they do? Doesn't make sense to me at all. I value the conventions because of what they do.

My biggest beef are the conventions against what weapons you can use in War.


Which would you rather, die from phosegene gas or by a bullet? Or napalm or a bullet? Your answer to that question is the reason why some weapons are banned. If a weapon has limited military value and is overly cruel, it gets banned, that's generally how it works. Few things I think are worse than a death by napalm.

To me, landmines are far worse than nerve gas or napalm, yet landmines are legal. The critical difference being that landmines stay long after the war is over. Seriously, why haven't we banned those things?


Um.
The Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices is a United Nations treaty that restricts the use of land mines, remotely delivered mines, and booby traps. It is Protocol II to the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.

Protocol II on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices was amended on May 3, 1996 to strengthen its provisions. It extends the scope of application to cover both international and internal armed conflicts; prohibits the use of non-detectable anti-personnel mines and their transfer; prohibits the use of non-self-destructing and non-self-deactivating mines outside fenced, monitored and marked areas; broadens obligations of protection in favour of peacekeeping and other missions of the United Nations and its agencies; requires States to enforce compliance with its provisions within their jurisdiction; and calls for penal sanctions in case of violation.


An agreed total ban on land mines isn't going to happen any time soon. They are just too effective.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10331
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby addams » Mon Aug 11, 2014 4:25 am UTC

We were so close to a ban on LandMines.
Did the work die with Princess Di died?

CorruptUser wrote:There are reasons to adhere to the Conventions even if they are BS. It's better for morale, it's better ethics, it prevents an enemy from always being backed into a corner, it provides some basic guidelines on how to surrender and how you can expect to be treated, it makes keeping the peace after the war easier, plus it kind of lets everyone on the sidelines know which side to root for.

That last one is really a big point; just because the people at Abu Graib and Guantanamo Bay mostly deserve to be treated the way they were treated doesn't mean they should be treated that way. He Who Hunts Monsters and all that. Every picture of an injured prisoner is a justification of the insurgencies. "We are fighting the US who is kidnapping and torturing people, you should join us because we are fighting THAT". And more importantly, it's all too easy to see your enemy as subhuman, even if they are terrorists. And they see you the same way. If you show some basic humanity, when the war is over, there is less bad blood and resentment between the previously warring sides, and hopefully that results in less war in the future.

I think my biggest problem with the Geneva Conventions is all the cognitive dissonance. A person being shredded to pieces by projectiles doesn't bother people, but being incinerated with napalm does? You can plunge a dagger into someone's stomach, but you can't use poison gas? You hear about people killed, but emphasis is given to women and children killed; what, killing an innocent woman is worse than killing an innocent man?

There is so much in that post.
Much of it I agree with.

It breaks my heart.
The people of the world can use those words and from what I understand, those words are true.
"We are fighting the US who is kidnapping and torturing people, you should join us because we are fighting THAT"


Even as an American, I agree to fight THAT.

We used to be The Good Guys.
We were the ones that Stopped that shit.
Now we do it? We suck.

You hear about people killed, but emphasis is given to women and children killed; what, killing an innocent woman is worse than killing an innocent man?

You are singing to the choir.

The answer to why no incendiaries, potentially slow chemicals and biologicals has been answered.
There are essays written about why we have a visceral responds to losing women and children.

It is written deep within.
I still don't like it.

I have meet such delightful men.
I have met women the world would be better off without.

Photos and stories of Women and Children being harmed are a weapon in themselves.
Who could love a people that cause such suffering?

Some folks are pointing at the US.
Can you blame them?

I hate the word Terrorist being thrown around the way the Common US Dimwit throws around Billions and Trillions.
It is worse then the way the word Jap was used at one time.

Why worse?
Because! It requires even less Thinking.

All the fucking Thinking has been done by the Media.
All we have to do is memorize a new word for The Bad Guys.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
rat4000
r/ratsgonewild
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 7:51 pm UTC

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby rat4000 » Mon Aug 11, 2014 11:11 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:[J]ust because the people at Abu Graib and Guantanamo Bay mostly deserve to be treated the way they were treated doesn't mean they should be treated that way.
Wait, what. You're serious?

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Syria Civil War Threatens to Spread

Postby Diadem » Mon Aug 11, 2014 11:36 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:There are reasons to adhere to the Conventions even if they are BS. It's better for morale, it's better ethics, it prevents an enemy from always being backed into a corner, it provides some basic guidelines on how to surrender and how you can expect to be treated, it makes keeping the peace after the war easier, plus it kind of lets everyone on the sidelines know which side to root for.

So you're against the conventions, but you think they are a good idea and everybody should follow them. Eh? Huh?

CorruptUser wrote:That last one is really a big point; just because the people at Abu Graib and Guantanamo Bay mostly deserve to be treated the way they were treated doesn't mean they should be treated that way.

Ehm, I think you may need to check your ethics subroutines, if you think they deserve to be tortured.

CorruptUser wrote:And more importantly, it's all too easy to see your enemy as subhuman, even if they are terrorists.

I know what you meant, but what you are saying here is that it's easier to see people as subhuman if they are not terrorists.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DaBigCheez, Dauric and 15 guests