Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Breaking Up Syria
#1
It looks like Syria is about to become more than one state, before all this violence is over and done. The reason for this is because nations are downsizing, and Syria has different ethnic groups, which are currently led by a distinct minority: the Alawites. And even if the Alawites win this time around, its a losing battle, because they are not only outnumbered, but the Sunnis have far more money at their disposal.

If you look at this map, you can see that the Alawites make up an easily defensive portion of Syria. Its mountainous, and connects the sea, so they have access to supplies and trade. And it is easy to defend.

[Image: syrias-religious-demography1.jpg]

Just a quick glance at the map shows why there are so many players in this revolt, making it far more complicated than the Media is telling anyone. Its entirely possible for there to be four parts from all this, but more likely two or three. I see two different parts as pretty much a given, with the Alawite portion(West Syria), and the Sunni portion(East Syria).

But Turkey has real interest here, because they are worried over the Kurdish question, and the small southern 'tag' which is overwhelming Alawite, but still Turkey. If a West Syria becomes a given, then that 'tag' may be up for contention.

And naturally the Kurds will be looking on with all this, because like it or not, eventually the Kurds are going to get their own state.

More maps and points can be found right here.

And if you link here to Pajamas Media, Spengler discusses what is actually going on here. You will definitely learn more from him in just a few minutes than you will ever get from the Media.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#2
John,

The Spengler link is to a Romney article.

I agree the potential is here for a breakup. The Turks are worried about the Kurds, Assad made a deal with them recently to allow autonomy.

The Alawites and Christians are in this together, if this revolt prevails, both have to flee to the mountains. With the jihadi element ascending, neither can live safely among Sunnis in power.

It's really going to be determined by who wins this fight, the Gulf States and America or the current Syrian state. I for one hope the state holds.

http://www.cfr.org/syria/al-qaedas-specter-syria/p28782
Reply
#3
I don't believe in any break up.
Even Iraq didn't break up.

And there is a reason for that: it doesn't solve the problem of violence and cultural regress.
Reply
#4
Patrick, somehow, they added another article, "Reassuring Romney", and then removed the video, since posting this thread. I don't know what they did to the site, because I can't get it back again.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#5
(08-09-2012, 05:13 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: I don't believe in any break up.
Even Iraq didn't break up.

And there is a reason for that: it doesn't solve the problem of violence and cultural regress.

The fact that tha Alawites have a very definite territorial boundry makes it easy to establish another state. Believe it, or not, as you wish. Its the only way Alawites, and the Christians in that area, will get to maintain their autonomy in the long run.

Iraq didn't break up,........yet, because Junior and company made certain of it.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#6
The video is back up again, and located right here. I now see what the problem was. The original video was about half the current video's size. They must have taken the old one down, and redone it with a larger one, and then posted the new one.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#7
I'll have to find the source, but I read something the other day that said the Kurds are creating a kingdom for themselves in an area that puts them almost in the middle of some very important trade routes. I think it's a good move on their part. All these countries should be broken up or at least given a chance to kill themselves.
Reply
#8
A chance to kill themselves is more likely.

I don't think they have the intellectual resource to do anything else, let alone build a new state.

Existing countries remains within their boundaries because no clan is able to seriousely start an administration of their own.

It's not like Syria or Iraq are breaking up and other states are being created.

It's more like total chaos everywhere with no law, no boundaries and no official authority anymore.

Boundaries remain at the outskirt of the lawless region, kept by the still stable countries: Turkey, Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia... but even their boundaries are porous and barely under control.
Reply
#9
John, I ripped off your map and link above for use on another site. It seems interesting that that thought on the "World Shia Forum" (presumably aligned or at least sympathetic to Iran) would have written off an 'intact' Syria ... at least one where they have influence. A tightly compressed 'Western' Syria and a mostly Sunni "Eastern" Syria with a Rocky Road like intersperse of Kurd and Druse seems like a net loss for Hezbollah and Iran ... and a much less reliable transit/jumping off point for doing mischief in the region. ... it strikes me odd that they'd appear to write it off so easily. I'll argue elsewhere and I'll argue it here that it's much too neat and clean a solution. Does anyone think that a newly birthed (Sunni Islamist) state will settle for being land locked for very long? From Palladin's link above and other sources, al Qaeda seems to be supplying the support that the West is withholding. From the sound of it, the locals aren't really happy about relying on the 'kindness' of these 'strangers' ... but without them they'd likely be slaughter in short order. It seem like we are offering them a pretty miserable choice ... or in this case, no choice at all.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#10
I also found that interesting, but didn't mention it because I had enough on my plate at the time.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#11
(08-11-2012, 06:49 PM)John L Wrote: I also found that interesting, but didn't mention it because I had enough on my plate at the time.

If I'd had to pull something out of my butt, it would be something like this ...

Assad & Co. is starting to look pretty freakin weak about now ...

A diverse harmonious Syrian state ... maybe be not outright friendly, but perhaps maybe 'amenable' to the West and without Assad would be would be a loser for them.

A Sunni bastion encompassing the entire state would be a loser as well ...

The little dark grey beach side chunk of real estate would at least be a foothold. Landlocked "Eastern Syria" would become "Palestine North" ... sucking in and consuming Arab muscle flung against a dinky Alawite/Christian/Russian version of Israel ... drying up resources in Iraq ... giving Iran a potential opening ...

... not sure it's a theory worthy of prime time ... like I said, it's straight from my arse ... but there it is anyway ...

Not sure that I'm married to the notion, but it seems pretty clear if the West doesn't offer something more substantial than a wink and a nod to the rebels, that may be the way things are headed. I don't really like the idea of additional "foreign involvements" but "asleep at the wheel" doesn't really work that well either.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#12
I don't think they would like to forgo Damascus, and the other Syrians access to the sea. While there might been a point in splitting Lebanon from Syria, the Muslim Alawites are not that distinctly different from Sunnis than Christians. Assad quite sunnized them, and his power doesn't rest on them alone, but on every single elite of his country. There are large numbers of Alawites in Turkey and Lebanon as well, and I reckon the Turks neither want a Kurdish, nor Alawite republic.
"You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Dick Cheney
Reply
#13
I for one think we are helping arm the opposition in consonance with Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Mainly terrorists. We're repeating our 1982 Afghan campaign.

It's too difficult for citizens of a security state like Syria to see the populace suddenly well armed and half ass organized like this w/o some external support. Add to this the kurds are not in this fight.

Where did all those AKs and RPGs come from? John the Baptist's tomb?

It just makes me physically sick. We've wasted about 10,000 dead soldiers and created a couple of hundred thousand mental cases fighting these guys and here we are again, in bed with them.
Reply
#14
Patrick, Stalin said something about a couple of thousand deaths and that was a tragety, while a couple million were just a statistic. Or something like that? Well, in the US, where numbers don't quite reach those heights, your "about 10,000 dead" are a statistic. They can be set aside easily, any time it becomes politically expedient.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#15
(08-12-2012, 04:16 PM)Palladin Wrote: I for one think we are helping arm the opposition in consonance with Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Mainly terrorists. We're repeating our 1982 Afghan campaign.

If we were arming them would they be running out of ammunition and withdrawing from Aleppo? If they had resources to repel and take the fight to Assad's forces would they be relying so much suicide bombers and IED guys re-imported from Iraq? Re-read the article you linked above. Do you really believe that Obama is providing the 'secret' support that he 'publicly' announced?? Everybody else, the Islamic suicide extremists, the local opposition, Iran, Russia, Assad is committed there ... we're too busy wringing our hands, implementing 'sanctions' and discussing what to do AFTER Assad is toppled to take part in the actual process of influencing it.

Quote:“The way Assad is brought down,” ... “will shape the way the country evolves afterwards.”


Obama & HRC & Co. are preparing to 'react' AFTER the fact. Which means we'll deal with an outcome that is dictated by somebody else's interests ... not our own. Which is pretty much a guarantee of being on the sh*t end of the stick. If "the plan" is non-involvement we should get the hell out of there and not do stupid crap like calling press conferences to announce our 'covert' activities. If "the plan" is involvement we should pretend to get the hell out of there, commit to the fight and keep our mouths shut to everyone but the folks that we are assisting (and make awful damn sure that THEY are the right folks). In other words, sh*t or get off the pot, do it quick ... and shut up about it either way.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#16
Yak,

They're openly challenging the Syrian state, so they are expending ammo like mad. This isn't a guerilla war. They occupied Aleppo, 3 million population, this is major war effort here.

I'm about positive we're arming them myself. I don't think anyone other than Russia could get that many arms that fast into a foreign state like that.

This isn't a case like Iraq or Libya where the state's armory was robbed, someone outside Syria is supplying these people in a big way and I don't think SA or Qatar has the capability to get it in there this fast and this much.

We do. Russia could. We have access to every state Syria borders. No one else does.

Not only that, I've been researching, the jihadi factions are flooding into Syria and we're arming them by all accounts. AsiaTimes has lots sources in that region.

I just see no other group that could achieve this logistical job except us or Russia.
Reply
#17
If nothing else, the Alowites are going to be able to control their territory, and have a 'de facto' state, even though it may not be a 'de jure' one. Numbers, resources, and time, are against them on maintaining the entire country. But they will be able to quite easily control the area north of Lebanon.

I'm still sticking with the 'break-up' concept, no matter what Fred says. And this is a lose-lose proposition to Iran.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#18
(08-12-2012, 10:35 PM)John L Wrote: I'm still sticking with the 'break-up' concept, no matter what Fred says. And this is a lose-lose proposition to Iran.

If it becomes a long term slaughter that slurps up a bunch of suicide TNT mules from elsewhere, it might look for like making the best of a bad situation for them. Who's going to keep Iraqi Shia in check if the Sunni nut jobs are all up north flinging themselves against the remnants of Assad's assorted tribe and buddies and patrons?

Palladin,

I don't think it's changed much since this was written in Feb ... ... other than the fact that they are expending more than they can bring in via hap hazard means. Nobody's doing anything to prevent them from getting arms from various nefarious sources ... but deliberate state policies to provide arms? I'm thinking that continues to be resisted. I really doubt that Clinton would stick her neck out to promote that approach ...and who else is there to really champion it? ... Samantha Frigging Powers??. It's one thing to push some sterile NATO air support ... but that isn't going to happen in this case and it's doubtful that anybody else in this Administration has the stones to try to sell the arms risk for the very fears and concerns you cite. I'm also thinking the wink and nod method is no longer cutting it and they are relying more and more on the foreign 'strangers' that we would prefer NOT to have a lasting influence. I don't see any bold U.S. strategies in the mix ... I see us dealing with whatever outcome is handed out. Clinton is probably getting an earful from the Turks. It would be very interesting to hear what they had to say wouldn't it?
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#19
Palladin I'm positive that no governement in the West is selling or giving weapons to the Syrian opposition.
Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states do, however.

Some source (see bottom of the article) are saying that all the al-Qaidists and other globe-trotter militants are converging to Syria as we speak.

I don't think anyone of us is crazy enough to support these poeple.
But we support them siplomaticaly because some day there will be a new governement there. As Yak said, we will act after the fact. Let's hae a maximum of radical islamic fighters died while fighting Assad.
Two of our ennemies killing each others. It's better than having your own soldiers killed for half the effect. Brilliant strategy IMO.
We even let the Russians rearm Assad to make sure the job get well done.
When Assad will fall (preferably not too quickely) we will think of the next place where to lure islamic suicide fighters in.
Reply
#20
Again, that sounds a lot more like an Iranian "Plan B" ... I honestly don't think the west has much of a 'strategy' other than hoping for the best outcome ... but I seriously doubt that creating a nation beholden to foreign suicide bombers and IED specialists will yield much of a "best outcome". ... and other than Iran, I really don't see much benefit to anyone else if the thing is drawn out into an extended blood bath.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)