Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Coming War in the Middle East (2013)

hoover.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 91 posts

Re: The Coming War in the Middle East (2013)

#11

Post by pjc50 »

nickik wrote: post #9

This is a pretty good article and worth a read for people who are not already informed. They were not completely correct. They seem to underestimate the stability and staying power of Jordan. Both US and Israel help to make sure that Jordan is protected. Stability of monarchies are typically underestimated. Syria's government has not fallen, and Nusra (now Jabhat Fateh al-Sham) never managed to unify the rebel to any…

If I've got this right, in Syria, Iran is opposed to ISIS/Daesh and Saudis are funding them? While the Russians are supporting the status-quo Assad/Alawhite faction and the American backed "liberation" factions have mostly died out?

(People seem to have stopped talking about AQ in the context of Syria?)

Re: The Coming War in the Middle East (2013)

#12

Post by pjc50 »

ralmidani wrote: post #10
finid wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to predict a war long after it has started. It's like predicting WW II in 1942. The Syrian war, which we have a heavy hand in - before and after it began, started in 2011. That article was written in 2013. And did you check the bio of the author. It's easy to predict a war after it has started and when you have inside knowledge and a hand in how the war should proceed and end.

The notion that the Syrian Revolution began with foreign (especially US) meddling is absurd. In 2011, the US was in the process of normalizing relations with the assad regime. Obama had appointed a new ambassador the year before. Clinton thought assad was a 'reformer.' The war broke out for a very simple reason: assad's forces kept shooting peaceful protesters. Despite assad's violence, the Revolution remained largel…

.. and a substantial part of the Syrian population were refugees from Iraq. http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/19388

This contributed to destabilising the place and offered a supply of Sunni recruits to ISIS. That's why the furthest extent of ISIS territory was an arc across Syria, Iraq and up to "Kurdistan".

Re: The Coming War in the Middle East (2013)

#13

Post by mwfunk »

jalfresi wrote: post #4
EGreg wrote: post #3

And how do we as a civilization in the 21st century prevent foreign meddling and funding of armed groups?

Stop funding and meddling with them?

Yes, but how? As an American I can try to vote for politicians that are opposed to meddling in the region, but the most that would do is create a non-meddling America. That's not going to affect the policies of other countries. In fact, a non-meddling America would likely open the door for even more meddling by countries like Russia. So: how? I really want to know.

Re: The Coming War in the Middle East (2013)

#14

Post by pjc50 »

EGreg wrote: post #3

And how do we as a civilization in the 21st century prevent foreign meddling and funding of armed groups?

This is going to require an international commitment like nuclear disarmament and the convention against landmines. It would also require the US to stop doing it.

Re: The Coming War in the Middle East (2013)

#15

Post by ars »

America should rescue civilians and force safe corridors to stay open, but otherwise stay the hell out of there, and let them fight it out.

And yes, that includes ISIS! If the people who live there can not defeat ISIS American help will not work long term.

Re: The Coming War in the Middle East (2013)

#16

Post by finid »

ralmidani wrote: post #10
finid wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to predict a war long after it has started. It's like predicting WW II in 1942. The Syrian war, which we have a heavy hand in - before and after it began, started in 2011. That article was written in 2013. And did you check the bio of the author. It's easy to predict a war after it has started and when you have inside knowledge and a hand in how the war should proceed and end.

The notion that the Syrian Revolution began with foreign (especially US) meddling is absurd. In 2011, the US was in the process of normalizing relations with the assad regime. Obama had appointed a new ambassador the year before. Clinton thought assad was a 'reformer.' The war broke out for a very simple reason: assad's forces kept shooting peaceful protesters. Despite assad's violence, the Revolution remained largel…

That's the official (US) narrative, and it's the real absurdity here.

You should find out how those "peaceful protests" started, and the activities of the US ambassador to Syria just before the protests broke out. It's from the same playbook that was used successfully in Libya and Ukraine, and almost succeeded a few years ago in Cuba.

It's an interesting exercise if you have the time. Venezuela is in the same neighborhood too.

Re: The Coming War in the Middle East (2013)

#17

Post by hx87 »

finid wrote: post #16
ralmidani wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The notion that the Syrian Revolution began with foreign (especially US) meddling is absurd. In 2011, the US was in the process of normalizing relations with the assad regime. Obama had appointed a new ambassador the year before. Clinton thought assad was a 'reformer.' The war broke out for a very simple reason: assad's forces kept shooting peaceful protesters. Despite assad's violence, the Revolution remained largel…

That's the official (US) narrative, and it's the real absurdity here. You should find out how those "peaceful protests" started, and the activities of the US ambassador to Syria just before the protests broke out. It's from the same playbook that was used successfully in Libya and Ukraine, and almost succeeded a few years ago in Cuba. It's an interesting exercise if you have the time. Venezuela is in the same neighbo…

That's the conspiracy theory narrative, and it's the real real absurdity here. US ambassadors don't have the power to raise hell on the streets of any given country, especially in one where a significant portion of the population have long-standing and legitimate aggrievances against the current government.

Re: The Coming War in the Middle East (2013)

#18

Post by ufmace »

mwfunk wrote: post #13
jalfresi wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop funding and meddling with them?

Yes, but how? As an American I can try to vote for politicians that are opposed to meddling in the region, but the most that would do is create a non-meddling America. That's not going to affect the policies of other countries. In fact, a non-meddling America would likely open the door for even more meddling by countries like Russia. So: how? I really want to know.

True that the more America stays out of it, the freer hand Iran and Russia have to meddle to their heart's contents. Our only options are to either essentially let them take over the region, or try to meddle better than they do.

Re: The Coming War in the Middle East (2013)

#19

Post by tdkl »

hx87 wrote: post #17
finid wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the official (US) narrative, and it's the real absurdity here. You should find out how those "peaceful protests" started, and the activities of the US ambassador to Syria just before the protests broke out. It's from the same playbook that was used successfully in Libya and Ukraine, and almost succeeded a few years ago in Cuba. It's an interesting exercise if you have the time. Venezuela is in the same neighbo…

That's the conspiracy theory narrative, and it's the real real absurdity here. US ambassadors don't have the power to raise hell on the streets of any given country, especially in one where a significant portion of the population have long-standing and legitimate aggrievances against the current government.

That's why CIA exists.

Re: The Coming War in the Middle East (2013)

#20

Post by mkaziz »

pjc50 wrote: post #14
EGreg wrote: post #3

And how do we as a civilization in the 21st century prevent foreign meddling and funding of armed groups?

This is going to require an international commitment like nuclear disarmament and the convention against landmines. It would also require the US to stop doing it.

It's also real hard when a dictator pops up shooting civilian willy-nilly, and you know you have the power to stop him, but you don't.
Post reply on HN