IDN Forums - Internationalized Domain Names  
Home | Advertise on idnforums | Premium Membership

Go Back   IDN Forums - Internationalized Domain Names > IDN Discussions > Politics, Philosophy and Economics

Politics, Philosophy and Economics Discuss world events, politics, philosophy and economics.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 4th October 2012, 04:11 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: New York
Posts: 637
iTrader: (2)
Rep Power: 1340
blackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enough
World: Syria vs. Turkey

Experts are concerned: in their view, the negligence of Ankara, preparing for the invasion of a neighboring state, may fill with blood and mustard entire Middle East, and then touch the whole world. This is the beginning of World War III.

The Middle East region is again on the verge of a large-scale military conflict. This time to find out their relations are going to Turkey and Syria. The formal pretext for the war served as a stray shell, allegedly released by Syrian military in Turkish cities. However, according to analysts, the real reason lies in the success of the Syrian army and security services, smashed carefully prepared bands of mercenaries in Aleppo and the Syrian-Jordanian border. The failure of many months of operation to offset the Syrian authorities did not leave West option other than open intervention, - states, some observers.

The role of executioner in this case assigned to the Turkish army, which is currently the strongest in Europe. However, the Middle East blitzkrieg may fail.

Casus belli

Shell, whose role in the Syrian conflict may prove fatal, exploded on October 3 in the Turkish city bordering Akchakale. The explosion killed six locals, including several children. An hour later the Turkish troops began shelling the Syrian territory, covering artillery fire, a number of military targets in the neighbor. Damascus said that would investigate the incident. But, despite this, a Turkish long-range artillery continued to "handle" the Syrians and Thursday.

Observers note that the projectile came from the Syrian border area of ​​Tal Albyad where not the first day of heavy fighting between the Syrian land forces and gangs of mercenaries, crossed the border from Turkey.

After the incident, Ankara convened an emergency meeting of the NATO Council. In addition, on Thursday morning the government Erdogan sent a request to the parliament, asking permission "to start cross-border operations" - that is, calling a spade a spade - the invasion of Syria.

By the way, this is not the first time the Turkish government to start a full scale war against Syria. June 22 Syrian air defenses shot down a Turkish fighter-reconnaissance French production. Wreckage of the plane fell in neutral waters. Ankara accuses neighbors of aggression and raised the issue of the introduction of a no-fly zone over Syria, clearly taking a course on the "Libyan scenario." But then the "casus belli", which was to run the flywheel foreign intervention played a most unexpected way. Western politicians and suddenly had irrefutable proof of the Syrian air defense combat capability. Check that the air is not expected blitzkrieg, the NATO leadership was not to force the situation, and for a time between Ankara and Damascus established shaky truce.

The current incident is fed in part by the Russian and Western media as an event of extraordinary importance, requiring the strongest possible measures, in fact, is quite commonplace occurrence in a regional conflict. Suffice it to recall North and South Korea, the troops which for years has consistently fired at each other with long-range howitzers, stoked corvettes and submarines in international waters, but do not step over the border war.

Damascus: a hard nut to crack

The likelihood that this incident will become a full-fledged war is very high - say experts. However, the possibility that Ankara and Washington again "after the situation on the brakes", also significant. The fact that the Syrian army is the tracing paper with the armed forces of the Soviet Union, and therefore is the most awkward opponent for the NATO-standard army.

First, Syria has a strong national defense. For decades, Damascus did not spare efforts and resources on its gain, and now Syrian gunners can shoot down any type of aircraft and UAVs - unmanned aerial vehicles. Second, the Syrian ground forces designed primarily for war with Israel. For this reason, the Syrian armored brigades have a large number of powerful tanks and anti-tank weapons, and little light infantry and vehicles. This feature was worth the Syrians more blood in urban combat against gangs of mercenaries, Islamists, led by Saudi and Qatari commandos. However, in a full-scale combined arms battle Syrian armored brigades will be extremely dangerous for Israel, and for the same type with Turkish divisions.

Syrian Gambit

In addition to well-trained army, the Syrian authorities are even and high skill of weaving geopolitical intrigue. In August, Bashar al-Assad and his government have made almost a genius, according to some observers, the military-political move Damascus sent over the Kurdish areas in the municipality, placed at the disposal of the new authorities a considerable number of weapons.

Of course, for the Turkish army, is considered one of the best in the world, not a huge amount of work "roll" militias. But the invasion of Kurdish protogosudarstvo blow Turkey from within: in the country for forty years a creeping terror war between government security forces and Kurdish separatists. Moreover: import civil war almost certain to create huge problems for Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who increasingly have to deal with criticism of his anti-Syrian positions in the media and on the streets.

The smell of blood and mustard

In case, if Ankara decides to military intervention in Syria, the consequences for the whole region can be sad - according to international experts. Damascus has a solid arsenal of chemical weapons and their means of delivery, allowing throw deadly cargo to almost anywhere in Turkey. In addition, the Alawite regime enjoys unconditional support and protection on the part of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Perhaps it is for this reason that "intolerable incident" at the Turkish-Syrian border has occurred simultaneously with the collapse of the Iranian rial and the beginning of the riots in the Islamic Republic. Undoubtedly, Iran would intervene in the conflict. Already with nuclear weapons.

The likelihood that Iran decides to attack the aggressor, is very high. And such a development would mean the start of a full-scale regional conflict that inevitably draws in other countries.
vseneobichnoe.livejournal.com/878676.html
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 4th October 2012, 11:51 PM
sbe18's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,334
iTrader: (10)
Rep Power: 1637
sbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enough
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Syrian and Iranian support to Turkish based Kurds is the major strategic issue ignored by Nato and Western so called 'experts'.


Turkey also wants to prevent a Sunni , muslim Brotherhood government in Syria.

Iran/ Syria have the Jordanian front to disrupt in the next 90 days....

then the scenario is 3000 miles long.....
Tunisia all the way to Pakistan.....

each government or 'so-called ' government subject to rupture....

A quick election in Israel is likely.
And the Turkish military is not going to let more planes get shot at, or more mortars to land....

s/
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 5th October 2012, 01:41 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The Golden West
Posts: 921
iTrader: (0)
Rep Power: 3237
Avtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the rough
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Sounds like another Russian analyst has been watching too much RT. In general, I'm skeptical of any analysis that's based on the assumption that all anti-government fighters in Syria are either NATO-financed mercenaries or Islamist fanatics.

However, I admit the possibility of foreign support for Kurds in Turkey is not something I had previously considered.

Anyway, here's a prediction: A full-scale regional conflict is not about to occur. Also, this is not the start of World War III.

Avtal
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 5th October 2012, 01:53 PM
Jay's Avatar
Jay Jay is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Where angels fear to tread
Posts: 1,303
iTrader: (23)
Rep Power: 1690
Jay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enough
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Well I don't agree much with the analysis, but I do agree that armed conflict involving Iran could occur in the next 12 months, maybe involving the US. There may also be some Arab league/US assistance to the rebels in Syria (particularly if Romney wins). In either case I don't think it will trouble any country other than Iran or Syria very much. The US has it covered. Israel will stay on the sidelines.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 5th October 2012, 02:13 PM
squirrel's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,940
iTrader: (11)
Rep Power: 7077
squirrel is a name known to all
squirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to all
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
The US has it covered.
No disrespect but this is funny as hell
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 5th October 2012, 02:51 PM
squirrel's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,940
iTrader: (11)
Rep Power: 7077
squirrel is a name known to all
squirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to all
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Funny that we are all conditioned to think that way, at least here in North America and I guess also in some of the commonwealth countries and elsewhere.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 5th October 2012, 03:15 PM
TrafficDomainer's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,070
iTrader: (10)
Rep Power: 814
TrafficDomainer is on a distinguished roadTrafficDomainer is on a distinguished roadTrafficDomainer is on a distinguished roadTrafficDomainer is on a distinguished roadTrafficDomainer is on a distinguished roadTrafficDomainer is on a distinguished road
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
Well I don't agree much with the analysis, but I do agree that armed conflict involving Iran could occur in the next 12 months, maybe involving the US. There may also be some Arab league/US assistance to the rebels in Syria (particularly if Romney wins). In either case I don't think it will trouble any country other than Iran or Syria very much. The US has it covered. Israel will stay on the sidelines.
I think if Obama wins, then the chance of the US getting heavily involved with the conflicts in the middle east becomes less. The recent long drawn out 2 wars have basically bankrupted the US economy, I don't think the US can afford another war and really need to get its house in order. It was strange seeing Obama so subdued 2 days ago when debating with Romney. Never seen him like that, something is not right there. Perhaps there is an influential force hard that really wants Obama to lose and Romney to win so American tax payers can pile up more debt to be in another war or two.

Last edited by TrafficDomainer; 5th October 2012 at 03:25 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 5th October 2012, 03:28 PM
Rubber Duck's Avatar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Czech Republic (For those of you from USA = Chechnya)
Posts: 15,929
iTrader: (59)
Rep Power: 4504
Rubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura about
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

My take is that the strategy is to give Romney enough rope.

Sure he looked good but analysis even his own, shows him to be an idiot.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TrafficDomainer View Post
I think if Obama wins, then the chance of the US getting heavily involved with the conflicts in the middle east becomes less. The recent long drawn out 2 wars have basically bankrupted the US economy, I don't think the US can afford another war and really need to get its house in order. It was strange seeing Obama so subdued 2 days ago when debating with Romney. Never seen him like that, something is not right there. Perhaps there is an influential force hard that really wants Obama to lose and Romney to win so American tax payers can pile up more debt to be in another war or two.
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 5th October 2012, 03:35 PM
mdw's Avatar
mdw mdw is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: upstairs
Posts: 838
iTrader: (24)
Rep Power: 566
mdw is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbe18 View Post
....And the Turkish military is not going to let more planes get shot at, or more mortars to land....
Indeed, and why should they?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
Well I don't agree much with the analysis, ...
Yeah. heard that. Although, to be fair, in many parts the translation is rough and it's not clear what was actually said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrafficDomainer View Post
...Perhaps there is an influential force hard that really wants Obama to lose and Romney to win so American tax payers can pile up more debt to be in another war or two.
Yes, roughly half of all the influential forces have lined up on either side, as they always do. That's how a 2-party system works. What *did* you mean to say?
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 5th October 2012, 04:08 PM
Jay's Avatar
Jay Jay is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Where angels fear to tread
Posts: 1,303
iTrader: (23)
Rep Power: 1690
Jay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enough
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Quote:
Originally Posted by squirrel View Post
Funny that we are all conditioned to think that way, at least here in North America and I guess also in some of the commonwealth countries and elsewhere.
I don't mean to sound gung-ho - I'm just offering an assessment based on history. Here's the outcomes and US combat casualties from the last three wars it has fought, each in the Middle East:

1. Iraq - 3,542 US killed
outcome: regime change
2. Afghanistan - 1,435
outcome: regime change
3. Libya - 0
outcome: regime change

Compare this to earlier wars:

1. WW2 - 290k
outcome: victory
2. Korea - 33k
outcome: draw
3. Vietnam - 47k
outcome: loss

I reckon from the campaign in Libya the US has learnt something really important, which is you don't need to get your ground troops involved if there is an active, internal resistance who can do that for you. You just need a massive air campaign supported by special forces to neutralise the heavy weapons. Syria and probably Iran are well set up for that kind of intervention. I'm willing to bet the US is in early preparations for such a campaign, and I don't see it as being problematic for them to implement.

If Iran keeps enriching uranium, the US will have no choice but to attack anyway (not until after the election of course).

Last edited by Jay; 5th October 2012 at 05:00 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 5th October 2012, 04:19 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: New York
Posts: 637
iTrader: (2)
Rep Power: 1340
blackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enoughblackpower will become famous soon enough
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post

If Iran keeps enriching uranium, the US will have no choice but to attack anyway (not until after the election of course).
Well, the problem with iranians nuclear weapons is blown out of proportions for continental US;
Locally, Iran really can threaten only israel and saudis (those who US is bound to protect) If given a choice between two, saudis are way much more important for US but for obvious reasons both presidential candidate avoid to even mention it.
However US eventually may have to make the hard choices

Last edited by blackpower; 5th October 2012 at 04:21 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 5th October 2012, 05:15 PM
mulligan's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,253
iTrader: (78)
Rep Power: 2023
mulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enough
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
I don't mean to sound gung-ho -

1. Iraq - 3,542 US killed
outcome: regime change
2. Afghanistan - 1,435
outcome: regime change
3. Libya - 0
outcome: regime change
Did you perhaps forget to include the number of Iraqi and Afghan civilians who were also killed?
I would hazard a guess it far outweighs the numbers above.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 5th October 2012, 08:58 PM
Rubber Duck's Avatar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Czech Republic (For those of you from USA = Chechnya)
Posts: 15,929
iTrader: (59)
Rep Power: 4504
Rubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura about
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Quote:
Originally Posted by mulligan View Post
Did you perhaps forget to include the number of Iraqi and Afghan civilians who were also killed?
I would hazard a guess it far outweighs the numbers above.
I would think in the scheme of things the damage done to th the US economy will weigh heaviest on the decision makers.

Of course most are too stupid to see it, even though the point of no return may already be behind them.

The US is Greece without benefactors.
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 5th October 2012, 09:05 PM
sbe18's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,334
iTrader: (10)
Rep Power: 1637
sbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enough
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Iran is a very complex nation to understand politically.

Only 60% or so are Persian / Farsi speaking.
Turkmens, Azeris, kurds, pushtoons, and Iranian sunni arabs make up the bulk of the other 40% .

if the syrian rebels start killing a lot of Iranian agents....wow... stand by...
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 5th October 2012, 10:26 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The Golden West
Posts: 921
iTrader: (0)
Rep Power: 3237
Avtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the rough
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackpower View Post
Well, the problem with iranians nuclear weapons is blown out of proportions for continental US;
Though this is seldom discussed, it appears that the nation potentially most threatened by an Iranian nuclear bomb is Russia. On one side of the Caspian Sea is Iran; on the other side of this poorly patrolled body of water is the unstable Russian province of Dagestan.

I don't understand why Russia is so uninterested in stopping Iran from building a bomb; Moscow seems more at risk than New York.

Avtal
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 6th October 2012, 12:23 AM
Jay's Avatar
Jay Jay is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Where angels fear to tread
Posts: 1,303
iTrader: (23)
Rep Power: 1690
Jay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enough
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Quote:
Originally Posted by mulligan View Post
Did you perhaps forget to include the number of Iraqi and Afghan civilians who were also killed?
I would hazard a guess it far outweighs the numbers above.
You need to weigh up the cost of non-intervention.

How many civilians died from Saddam Hussein's secret police, his war on the Kurds and his invasion of Kuwait prior to US intervention? (Yes, we know it was about oil, but still).

How many people died from the Taliban hosting Al-Quaida (and would have died had Al-Quaida had the chance to plan more attacks on US civilians)?

Libya - certain genocide had the Coalition not entered when they did

Syria - 34k civilian deaths and rising

Potential civilian deaths from a nuclear armed Iran?

I'm not making a case for intervention, I'm just saying.

Last edited by Jay; 6th October 2012 at 12:50 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 6th October 2012, 04:03 AM
clipper's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Office
Posts: 1,003
iTrader: (26)
Rep Power: 3106
clipper is a jewel in the roughclipper is a jewel in the roughclipper is a jewel in the roughclipper is a jewel in the roughclipper is a jewel in the roughclipper is a jewel in the roughclipper is a jewel in the roughclipper is a jewel in the roughclipper is a jewel in the roughclipper is a jewel in the roughclipper is a jewel in the rough
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubber Duck View Post
1. I would think in the scheme of things the damage done to th the US economy will weigh heaviest on the decision makers.

2. Of course most are too stupid to see it, even though the point of no return may already be behind them.

3. The US is Greece without benefactors.
1. Absolutely correct. Civilian casualties have a cost, though it is negligible when measured in dollars, and that's how those people think.

2. It is almost impossible to find a US-based economist who does not subscribe to the University of Chicago "Shock Doctrine" version of Friedman/Hayek. This University of Missouri (!!!) economist is the only one I've come across. Most economists here insinuate that the only way out of this crisis is to kick the can long enough that all of the other superpower economies (EU, Russia, China... Japan, but not so much) fall into crisis (caused, one might say, by US banks) and then mobilize for WWIII, in much the same way that they starved Iraq through a decade of UN sanctions before attacking.

3. Except that it has ninety times the land mass (infrastructure costs), thirty times the population and, depending on the source, between 26-200 times the debt... and the currently accepted reserve currency.

Oh, and NOT ONE of the islands:

__________________
;-)

Last edited by clipper; 6th October 2012 at 04:10 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 6th October 2012, 07:04 AM
mulligan's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,253
iTrader: (78)
Rep Power: 2023
mulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enough
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

You were quoting figures of the number of US killed, isn't it only fair to also include the civilian figures for the same time period?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
You need to weigh up the cost of non-intervention.

How many civilians died from Saddam Hussein's secret police, his war on the Kurds and his invasion of Kuwait prior to US intervention? (Yes, we know it was about oil, but still).

How many people died from the Taliban hosting Al-Quaida (and would have died had Al-Quaida had the chance to plan more attacks on US civilians)?

Libya - certain genocide had the Coalition not entered when they did

Syria - 34k civilian deaths and rising

Potential civilian deaths from a nuclear armed Iran?

I'm not making a case for intervention, I'm just saying.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 6th October 2012, 07:38 AM
Jay's Avatar
Jay Jay is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Where angels fear to tread
Posts: 1,303
iTrader: (23)
Rep Power: 1690
Jay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enoughJay will become famous soon enough
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Quote:
Originally Posted by mulligan View Post
You were quoting figures of the number of US killed, isn't it only fair to also include the civilian figures for the same time period?
No, they weren't relevant. The figures were just to support my earlier point that the US doesn't have much of a problem these days knocking over Middle Eastern powers when it suits them. There's the financial costs to the US that might have been relevant to include, but then the economic benefits of opening up these countries to trade (particularly oil), investment and employing Americans to work in the war industry and reconstruction probably justifies those costs (arguably).

I wasn't making a point about the total cost of war (human or economic). If we were to discuss that, then the figures of enemy dead (most of whom should probably be counted as civilians anyway), infrastructure damage, population displacement (e.g., refugees) and other factors would also need to be factored in.

War is hell, I'm not saying it's not. I hope we live in a world one day where there is no more war. But as far as dismantling a country's military and overthrowing a regime (at least in the short-term), the US and its allies has it covered. It's just a strategic assessment. It's just to say that we aren't heading towards Armageddon if war did break out in the Middle East.

Last edited by Jay; 6th October 2012 at 08:04 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 6th October 2012, 07:57 AM
mulligan's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,253
iTrader: (78)
Rep Power: 2023
mulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enough
Re: World: Syria vs. Turkey

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
No, they weren't relevant. The figures were just to support my earlier point that the US doesn't have much of a problem these days knocking over Middle Eastern powers when it suits them. There's the financial costs to the US that might have been relevant to include, but then the economic benefits of opening up these countries to trade (particularly oil), investment and employing Americans to work in the war industry and reconstruction probably justifies those costs (arguably).

I wasn't making a point about the total cost of war (human or economic). If we were to discuss that, then the figures of enemy dead (not just civilians), infrastructure damage, population displacement (e.g., refugees) and other factors would need to be factored in.

War is hell, I'm not saying it's not. I hope we live in a world one day where there is no more war. But as far as dismantling a country's military and overthrowing a regime (at least in the short-term), the US has it covered. It's just a strategic assessment.
I'm not debating anything other than this point you made:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
1. Iraq - 3,542 US killed
outcome: regime change
2. Afghanistan - 1,435
outcome: regime change
3. Libya - 0
outcome: regime change
Regardless of the merits of war or whether the US 'has it covered' or whether it's a 'strategic assessment' etc etc
It's only reasonable that civilian figures should be included, otherwise it presents a skewed view of the cost in human lives that the war(s) cost
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 09:07 PM.

Site Sponsors
Your ad here
buy t-shirt
מחיר הזהב

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0
Copyright idnforums.com 2005

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54