We do have insight into the tendency to lump anti assad insurgency into the pile with isis....which seems like it might be a mistake, given how this whole thing went down.  Who are we referring to in the case of not letting anything in or out?  Pro-assad and russian forces claim to, but appear to be using the offer to fire on people who attempt to leave.  If, instead, we're talking about the rebels.....if I were in control of the area I wouldn't let anything in or out either - too risky.  These people have been gassed, and the people who came to descalate the situation, the "help", are presently bombing the fuck out of them. You have to control civvys urge to run or accept outside offers of help in a firefight...shit gets them (and you) killed.

If the whole thing turned into street by street gangland parceling and warfare I couldn't lay the blame on those trying to survive it by putting on colors. I've got alot of sympathy for the devil. I can even understand why isis appeals to some of these folks. One mans insurgent is another's freedom fighter, after all.

Quote:he needs to control are held by the remnants of the original pro democracy movement.

Were they pro-democracy in any recognizable sense, though.  Or, like the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt were they merely another bunch of nutty allah-freaks who think 'democracy' means you get to kill anyone you hate?

Things are so complicated over there.

(October 12, 2016 at 2:45 pm)Rhythm Wrote: We do have insight into the tendency to lump anti assad insurgency into the pile with isis....which seems like it might be a mistake, given how this whole thing went down.

WE DON'T KNOW WHO OR WHAT THEY ARE. That's the naked truth. The only faction we do know are the Kurds. They are also the only ones having significant success in pushing Isis back in certain regions. But they are fought by Erdogan right now. Another one not giving a shit over Isis but only over his only nationalist dick problems. But he, as opposed to Putin or Assad, is a valued Nato partner. That's why this madness doesn't make as many juicy headlines. The whole Syrian conflict is a first class excercise in cynicism and stupidity alike.

The point is, as usual, the outrage is very selective. It also doesn't cover Saudi Arabia bombing the shit out of Jemen whithout any regards to civilian structures and lives.

(October 12, 2016 at 2:36 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I think that reffing a fight like that (rather than fighting it out) is a more appropriate use of power.  The time to step in is when a penalty flag needs to be thrown in a fight that the parties involved simply insist upon having.  When the chemical weapons come out - when an attempt to exterminate civilians becomes apparent.  When one party pulls in a ringer.  Or, when all of the above apply.

Sure, but then we come to the question of having the power to enforce penalties. I don't think we should let Russia act willy-nilly without a response, either in the case of their atrocities in Syria or in the widening hacking story. I'd love to see more sanctions. It's too bad the EU can't shoulder up as well, but understanding that they get much of their gas from Russia, they don't have much leverage.

And the ugly truth is, neither do we.

(October 12, 2016 at 2:51 pm)abaris Wrote:

(October 12, 2016 at 2:45 pm)Rhythm Wrote: We do have insight into the tendency to lump anti assad insurgency into the pile with isis....which seems like it might be a mistake, given how this whole thing went down.

WE DON'T KNOW WHO OR WHAT THEY ARE. That's the naked truth. The only faction we do know are the Kurds. They are also the only ones having significant success in pushing Isis back in certain regions. But they are fought by Erdogan right now. Another one not giving a shit over Isis but only over his only nationalist dick problems. But he, as opposed to Putin or Assad, is a valued Nato partner. That's why this madness doesn't make as many juicy headlines. The whole Syrian conflict is a first class excercise in cynicism and stupidity alike.

The point is, as usual, the outrage is very selective. It also doesn't cover Saudi Arabia bombing the shit out of Jemen whithout any regards to civilian structures and lives.

We -do- know that they aren't ISIS.

(October 12, 2016 at 3:01 pm)Rhythm Wrote: We -do- know that they aren't ISIS.

In the same way we knew that the galant freedom fighters in Afghanistan weren't the Soviets. You see, that's the problem with Western policy. Takes a little bit more than the enemy of my enemy is my friend to find a lasting solution.

The Kurds aren't Isis either, by the way.

Yeah, no shit, but you aren't talking to someone who thinks that turkey is in the right in fighting them, so...?

As to your comments regarding the soviets vis a vis aleppo...even -ISIS- fights the factions -in- Aleppo. Everyone wants that town. I just don't know what to say. Imagining or implying that they're isis in disguise is breathtaking. -Even if they were-...which they aren't...I'd find myself forced to side with fucking ISIS on chlorine attacks alone. They'd have a legitimate reason to hole up and shoot at everything that moves.

https://theintercept.com/2016/09/08/what...nd-is-not/

(October 12, 2016 at 3:05 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Yeah, no shit, but you aren't talking to someone who thinks that turkey is in the right in fighting them, so...?

It may come as a surprise, but I'm not talking to you at all. In the sense that I'm attacking you point of view. I'm attacking the media coverage of makebelief that leads to selective perception. And the idiotic approach of our politicians not looking at what they actually are supporting or condemning.

I was 16 when the Afghani madness started. Only I didn't see it that way back then, since it was hammered into our heads that every Mujahedin is fighting the evil empire and is only out to free their people. Among them such august factions as the Taliban and persons like Bin Laden.

I still feel betrayed by the bullshit we were fed and I'm certainly not buying every load of media feces being thrown our way now. Truth is, there's next to no coverage on the Saudis bombing Jemen back into the stone age or Erdogan having it out with the Kurds.

The poor media coverage is -exactly- why people think aleppo is an isis stronghold.......everytime someone says "yeah, aleppo is terrible but at least theyre getting extremists/insurgents/isis" or "we don;t know whjat the situation is in aleppo"...they are emphatically and in no uncertain terms wrong. The notion originated as a mistake, which has since been acknowledged, semi-corrected, but nevertheless lives on.

Find a better media outlet, abaris...my feed is covered in stories regarding both, not that a lack of stories in either regard has or -could have- any say on the issue of aleppo.

(October 12, 2016 at 3:05 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Everyone wants that town.  I just don't know what to say. Imagining or implying that they're isis in disguise is breathtaking.  -Even if they were-...which they aren't...I'd find myself forced to side with fucking ISIS on chlorine attacks alone.  They'd have a legitimate reason to hole up and shoot at everything that moves.

https://theintercept.com/2016/09/08/what...nd-is-not/

Aleppo sits at the crossroads of the roadnet in Western Syria. That's why the Russians want it -- it secures, or threatens, the communications to their naval base.

As for siding with ISIS because Assad has committed atrocities ... it seems to me that most involved in this war have committed atrocities -- not unlike most other wars, come to think of it. You're right, if I were on the receiving end of a gas canister, I'd shoot anything that crossed my field of fire too. But in the wider view, ISIS is still more dangerous to us (for having a more expansive vision) than Assad.

Me, I say sell bombs to both sides and make a few piastres out of this mess.







































That's a joke, for those who don't know me well.