Cold war 2.0

[Virtual ghost]

 

[Virtual ghost]

 

[Virtual ghost]

South Korean president dodges impeachment

 

[Virtual ghost]

Romania: Police raid houses after presidential poll annulled

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Never know which side to take in these Islamic state revolutions. Assad is probably the worst option, but will these ISIS/ISIL, Al Queda religious fanatics (not quite sure whose involved, maybe all of them) rule any better? Seems like it's lose/lose regardless of who comes out on top.

Well, with ISIS, you're going to get a lot of destruction of historical/archaeological sites and that kind of thing. The more secular autocrats in the region have left that stuff alone because it's important to their nationalistic propaganda. The Islamists want to create a state centered around religion, so it's not important to the national identity they are trying to establish. The pagan sites are instead seen as antithetical to the "godly" regime they are trying to create; destroying them is probably seen as smashing idols.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Well, with ISIS, you're going to get a lot of destruction of historical/archaeological sites and that kind of thing. The more secular autocrats in the region have left that stuff alone because it's important to their nationalistic propaganda. The Islamists want to create a state centered around religion, so it's not important to the national identity they are trying to establish. The pagan sites are instead seen as antithetical to the "godly" regime they are trying to create; destroying them is probably seen as smashing idols.

You honestly think that the country is in ruins simply because of religious militants ? (historical sites included).

How do you explain long term alliance between Syria and theoratic Iran ? (that are sending them help in the current situation)

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

You honestly think that the country is in ruins simply because of religious militants ? (historical sites included).

How do you explain long term alliance between Syria and theoratic Iran ? (that are sending them help in the current situation)

It's in ruins because of a civil war. It happens that some religious groups believe they have a duty to destroy sites like that.

Iran doesn't seem to blow up its historic sites despite their use as propaganda by the regime of the Shah. I was surprised, but I didn't see any cases of them doing it. (The only thing that approaches it is a mosque being demolished to make way for a bigger, better mosque. It's not great, but it's not in the same category.) These places and people aren't actually interchangeable; that's just the facts.

Most of the search results end up referring to the Islamic State, which is a Sunni group, and therefore probably not associated with Iran at all.

 

[Virtual ghost]

It's in ruins because of a civil war. It happens that some religious groups believe they have a duty to destroy sites like that.

Iran doesn't seem to blow up its historic sites despite their use as propaganda by the regime of the Shah. I was surprised, but I didn't see any cases of them doing it. (The only thing that approaches it is a mosque being demolished to make way for a bigger, better mosque. It's not great, but it's not in the same category.) These places and people aren't actually interchangeable; that's just the facts.

Most of the search results end up referring to the Islamic State, which is a Sunni group, and therefore probably not associated with Iran at all.

Yes, it is in ruins because of civil war. The war would not be possible that the forces you see as secular aren't bombing any positions they see as a threat to their beloved leader. After it is Assad who tolerates Putin's bombing of the country wherever he sees a problem. What evidently includes the historical centers of the Syrian cities.

No militants would have the enough ammo to destroy the country to the degree that it is destroyed. For this you simply need state actors, the people you see as secular and that you are defending in this story. The militants can perhaps be the ones that will actually push the button/trigger but that is about it.

You have evidently never been to the war zone and thus you don't understand the logistics of destruction on this scale. Which can only come from state actors in the end. What means that they are the main people to blame for all this.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Yes, it is in ruins because of civil war. The war would not be possible that the forces you see as secular aren't bombing any positions they see as a threat to their beloved leader. After it is Assad who tolerates Putin's bombing of the country wherever he sees a problem. What evidently includes the historical centers of the Syrian cities.

No militants would have the enough ammo to destroy the country to the degree that it is destroyed. For this you simply need state actors, the people you see as secular and that you are defending in this story. The militants can perhaps be the ones that will actually push the button/trigger but that is about it.

You have evidently never been to the war zone and thus you don't understand the logistics of destruction on this scale. Which can only come from state actors in the end. What means that they are the main people to blame for all this.

Are they blowing up archaeological and historical sites? Otherwise, this is irrelevant to the discussion I was having.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Are they blowing up archaeological and historical sites? Otherwise, this is irrelevant to the discussion I was having.

As I said, in my book city centers that are centuries old qualify as archeological/historic sights and plenty of that got quite damaged during the war that last for 13 years at this point. However I am not under impression that someone had sleepless night over that.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

As I said, in my book city centers that are centuries old qualify as archeological/historic sights and plenty of that got quite damaged during the war that last for 13 years at this point. However I am not under impression that someone had sleepless night over that.

20 years ago we were directly fighting people like the good guys here, engaged in a war against them (and, well, 20 years before that....) , not using proxies or anything. I don't think a victory by the rebels would result in a nice sunny shiny democracy. It should be OK to acknowledge that.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

We were told Islamic terrorism was the ultimate evil we had to oppose at any cost, even if that meant fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here.

Did we just suddenly decide Islamic terrorists are good now? Lol.

 

[Red Herring]

As I said, in my book city centers that are centuries old qualify as archeological/historic sights and plenty of that got quite damaged during the war that last for 13 years at this point. However I am not under impression that someone had sleepless night over that.

I don't think he was talking about historical city centers at all. Syria has several very old cities with Damascus being a candidate for the oldest continually inhabited city in the world. But that cities get bombed to the ground in any war, that is sadly normal. Just as murdering civilians including children, rape, torture and plundering are. I think most of us here are aware of that even if we haven't experienced it first-hand.

I assume that he was referring to the deliberate destruction of Mesopotamien archeological sites. The plundering of museums, etc. During the war some twenty years ago historical sites were deliberately attacked that were not centuries old (that would be cute by comparison) but millenia. We are talking some three thousand years in the case of Assyria, if it is remains of Uruk we are talking about stuff that is over five thousand years old. Irreplaceable world heritage found nowhere else.

My boyfriend back then at university was studying assyriology (the study of ancient Sumer and Assyria, Babylonia, etc) and I remember some experts coming to hold a talk at the Institute of Assyriology. They had just returned from Syria to assess the damages and the mood was very sombre.
There also was quite a bit of reporting about it at the time in the media.

Similarly I remember a global outcry when the Taliban blew up the Buddha statues of Bamiyan.

Yes, human lives have to matter more than historical relics. But these things are invaluable and destroying them in purpose is a sign of the kind of ignorance that is overlapping with pure evil.

 

[Virtual ghost]

20 years ago we were directly fighting people like the good guys here, engaged in a war against them (and, well, 20 years before that....) , not using proxies or anything. I don't think a victory by the rebels would result in a nice sunny shiny democracy. It should be OK to acknowledge that.

I never said that this will result in a nice shiny day. I simply claim that without removing Assad you don't really have a chance to calm things down. His family destroyed too many lives over the decades that you can make a stable compromise with him in the mix. As one of my links says people are switching sides because they realize that the tides are turning. What is the key element that western logic generally tends to skip. Assad's troops are on average equally uneducated as the rebels.

Plus it is worth saying that Assad and the rebels aren't the only two sides in this multi side war. My hope is exactly that they may "cancel each other".

But as I said a few posts back: this is the problem that wouldn't have simple solutions.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I don't think he was talking about historical city centers at all. Syria has several very old cities with Damascus being a candidate for the oldest continually inhabited city in the world. But that cities get bombed to the ground in any war, that is sadly normal. Just as murdering civilians including children, rape, torture and plundering are. I think most of us here are aware of that even if we haven't experienced it first-hand.

I assume that he was referring to the deliberate destruction of Mesopotamien archeological sites. The plundering of museums, etc. During the war some twenty years ago historical sites were deliberately attacked that were not centuries old (that would be cute by comparison) but millenia. We are talking some three thousand years in the case of Assyria, if it is remains of Uruk we are talking about stuff that is over five thousand years old. Irreplaceable world heritage found nowhere else.

My boyfriend back then at university was studying assyriology (the study of ancient Sumer and Assyria, Babylonia, etc) and I remember some experts coming to hold a talk at the Institute of Assyriology. They had just returned from Syria to assess the damages and the mood was very sombre.
There also was quite a bit of reporting about it at the time in the media.

Similarly I remember a global outcry when the Taliban blew up the Buddha statues of Bamiyan.

Yes, human lives have to matter more than historical relics. But these things are invaluable and destroying them in purpose is a sign of the kind of ignorance that is overlapping with pure evil.

I know that he didn't talk about that but in my book there is no point in making the fundamental difference between ruins in the deep desert and historic city center that is 1000+ years old. In a sense city center is worth more since it is still functional while ruins are just ruins and most of their cultural value is already lost to erosion and the elements. Of course that destroying both is bad but destroying better preserved city centers with museums and similar infrastructure is still bigger crime in my book. Even if it is just collateral damage.


My point is simply that I don't see fundamental difference between the rebels and the regime. The fact that the regime is secular is basically irrelevant detail when you take a look at the results.

 

[SensEye]

Well, as I said. It's lose/lose for the Syrian people either way I figure. I agree Assad probably should go, mainly because Putin likes him, and I am pretty sure Putin is a psycho. So anything that weakens him should help Ukraine which is good in my eyes.

I can never figure out what is going on with Islamic cultures. I've said before they seem stuck in the middle ages with their religious extremism and harsh gender apartheid. I don't really care though, as long as they keep their mess confined to their own house. Unfortunately, with unchecked immigration they do not.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Well, as I said. It's lose/lose for the Syrian people either way I figure. I agree Assad probably should go, mainly because Putin likes him, and I am pretty sure Putin is a psycho. So anything that weakens him should help Ukraine which is good in my eyes.

I can never figure out what is going on with Islamic cultures. I've said before they seem stuck in the middle ages with their religious extremism and harsh gender apartheid.

We have lots of people in this country who think the same way (they're even boasting about how they think that), and they now have lots of political power. What would you say is the answer for people like that? In this case, deportation is not an option, since they've often been here for generations.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Rebellion is popping out pretty much everywhere, therefore this probably wouldn't last too long (regardless of what we think about the issue).

 

[Virtual ghost]

In a sense the real question is can we admit to ourselves that we have walked right into WW3. Just because it doesn't look or feel as pop culture was imagining it for decades that doesn't mean that we aren't there.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

In a sense the real question is can we admit to ourselves that we have walked right into WW3. Just because it doesn't look or feel as pop culture was imagining it for decades that doesn't mean that we aren't there.

I was there two Octobers ago.