Syria and the Middle East News 2016/17: Page 6 - The Arsenal discussion community: One More in the Tolly

Syria and the Middle East News 2016/17

goon

Let’s hope war never reaches these shores, otherwise while the rest of us hide our in our Nuclear bomb shelters, Anfield will be out there with his popcorn.

Anfield1884

Qwiss! wrote:
Anfield 1884 wrote:
Who would fling missiles at sites stockpiled with chemical weapons in a densely-populated city? Lol

Thats funny to you?

The sheer silliness of it all is funny, yeah. Let's get real the chemical stockpile targeted bombing was just a proxy attack, the bigger picture is still very much cold war foes moving pieces on a chess board to antagonise onr another. Usa carried out an attack the Russians said not to and Russia did nothing.

Big Willie

Got to hand it to you, the sheer obliviousness to the irony in your first sentence astounds me. It really does.

Burnwinter

Interesting piece from Robert Fisk who has just been to Douma.

His main argument is that because he couldn't find anyone who wanted to talk about chemical attacks, they hadn't happened. That didn't quite wash with me, but the quotes from a Syrian doctor stating that all the propaganda images of people suffering from chemical weapon induced symptoms were actually images of hypoxia leaves things ever more murky.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-chemical-attack-gas-douma-robert-fisk-ghouta-damascus-a8307726.html

I can't help but feel that this particular "chemical attack", true or not, has been stage-managed into the pretext for a bombing campaign ultimately driven by other factors.

jones

Interesting yes, but if you're calling yourself a Middle East expert you probably should know the difference between a hijab and niqab

Bold Tone

Maybe the editor thought most westerners do not care enough to know the difference and decided that full-length black hijab would paint a better picture.
BTW, I realise your post is not completely serious and but Fisk seems qualified enough.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fisk
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/apr/13/middleeastthemedia.lebanon

jones

I know who Robert Fisk is, and he's certainly qualified enough to report on what he's seen with his eyes - which is already a lot more than what most other journalists do. I disagree however with the notion that you take into account the reader's ignorance on a matter especially with a topic that's not exactly presented to your average Daily Mail reader.

Not sure about the UK but at least in Germany the word Burqa is more known anyways - ironic in more than one way because it's a) closer to the niqab than the hijab and b) because barely anyone wears it compared to the common hijab.

Burnwinter

The fixation on it is interesting. There's an article out there that speculates that the total number of wearers of the full burqa in Germany is tiny, probably a few hundred, but the question of the burqa is ever present in right wing discourse.

Anyway, obviously Fisk has a very long and celebrated track record of Middle East reportage, that doesn't mean he's unbiased or infallible, but if he's casting doubt on the allegations of chemical attack the burden of proof should be that much more.

jones

Yeah I think the figure given was roughly 300. They're a minority within the Muslim minority here, and the idea of wearing a Burqa for most Muslim women here is ridiculous to most. Same in North Africa by the way.

Yeah agreed with the second point as well. Several other reporters (Arab and non-Arab) have visited the region as well and none of them have found evidence for an alleged attack. Its pretty clear by now that the "retaliatory" attacks served a completely different purpose - and even if they didn't the fact that three countries in different corners of the world can launch air strikes labelling them retaliation and no one even takes notice of how ridiculous that sounds is telling of what times we live in

Anfield1884

Big Willie wrote:
Got to hand it to you, the sheer obliviousness to the irony in your first sentence astounds me. It really does.

Do you want to comment on the second part?

Trump is doing well on foreign policy, but nobody seems to want to give him any credit.

y va marquer

Could you quantify "doing well"?
What are his policies?
Has his sabre rattling paid dividends in relation to North / South Korea?
Has he has been instrumental, a key player, in provoking South Korea to consider negotiating a formal peace treaty with North Korea?

goon

He hasn't done anything. It's the new South Korean president that's enabled progress there. At best I guess you could say Trumps eagerness to be a difference maker maybe means he's much more willing to meet with Kim and 'get on with it', but prior to that his North Korea 'policy' was being a twitter troll.

He's attempting to take Iran out of the fold again and fucking up progress made on that front, he's starting trade wars, relations with Russia are at a low. The less said about Jared's progress on the Israel/Palestine front the better.

The best thing you could probably say about it is that his impact has been pretty limited despite his best efforts.

y va marquer

goon wrote:
The less said about Jared's progress on the Israel/Palestine front the better.

I think more should be said about it :boris:
Why is not a matter of urgent concern, that this uniquely unqualified person, with connections so dubious that he cannot get security clearance to access information relevant to his job, is still in this position?

Burnwinter

Trump has been trash on foreign policy. He's achieved nothing, not even withdrawal.

jones

Not like anyone else in his position would've achieved withdrawal. But yeah, he's an idiot and he probably doesn't even realise that his people are circumventing and cutting him out of the loop

Burnwinter

No President is ending American war in the Middle East any time soon. They're not running the show.

Klaus

jones wrote:
Several other reporters (Arab and non-Arab) have visited the region as well and none of them have found evidence for an alleged attack. Its pretty clear by now that the "retaliatory" attacks served a completely different purpose - and even if they didn't the fact that three countries in different corners of the world can launch air strikes labelling them retaliation and no one even takes notice of how ridiculous that sounds is telling of what times we live in

It's deeply troubling, especially with the US and Russia vetoing eachother's proposal for an independent UN investigation of the alleged attack. People's lives are nothing but pawns on a chessboard in a match between armed superpowers.

Agree about the retaliation too. You can't on one hand deny asylum to children who are dying and on the other hand use their suffering as pretext to bomb their country as soon as it suits you politically. These Western leaders aren't any better than Assad.

Big Willie

As much as Assad was a despicable leader for many reasons, at least Syria was a functioning, relatively peaceful country before we all (as in our governments) started involving ourselves in business that doesn't concern us. Same as in Iraq, same as in Libya, same as in Egypt.

Although Egypt has sort of bounced back over the last few years, things are still pretty fucked up in the other countries. Don't think it's fair to destabilise whole countries just because it suits our government's agenda in the region.

y va marquer

Syria was realatively peaceful under Bashar Assad for how long though?

What about the violent supression of the uprising against the opression of the Assad regime in 2011?

Was that confrontation uniquely attributable to foreign meddling?

Big Willie

y va marquer wrote:
Syria was realatively peaceful under Bashar Assad for how long though?

What about the violent supression of the uprising against the opression of the Assad regime in 2011?

Was that confrontation uniquely attributable to foreign meddling?

Well Assad was in power for pretty much 11 years before the uprising happened in 2011 so a pretty long period actually. Yes incidents happened like the the imprisonment of those who took part in the Damascus Spring in 2001 and their occupation of Lebanon but given the state which the country is now, is there really any point in wondering how peaceful it really was?

Correct, you can not say the Arab Spring in general and the uprising which occurred in Syria and the violent retaliation by the Assad regime was a direct result of foreign interference in Syria. You can't. However also can't say with certainty that our governments were not involved indirectly in planting and propagating the idea that Western democracy is what those countries needed.

« Previous Page Next Page »