Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Iran's role in the Syrian war,

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Iran's role in the Syrian war,

    Question, how will history judge Obama in regards to the Middle Eastern situation?

    Bush did too much, Obama did nothing, well, he did everything possible to help Iran, and create the perfect opportunity for a nuclear arms race in the region. Bravo, well done…



    Iran’s role in Syria has significantly impacted the direction, magnitude and longevity of the conflict. Its role has evolved over the five years since the uprising began. With experience of cracking down on its own popular uprising in 2009-2010, Iran provided the Syrian government with technical support, social-media monitoring systems, surveillance, intelligence and advisory support to quell protests.

    Tehran also needed to create a narrative for the conflict that would suit its interests. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and state-controlled media depicted other uprisings in the Arab world as an “Islamic awakening” emulating the 1979 Islamic revolution. However, when it came to Syria the narrative changed.

    http://english.alarabiya.net/en/pers...conflict-.html
    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
    Question, how will history judge Obama in regards to the Middle Eastern situation?

    Bush did too much, Obama did nothing, well, he did everything possible to help Iran, and create the perfect opportunity for a nuclear arms race in the region. Bravo, well done…



    Iran’s role in Syria has significantly impacted the direction, magnitude and longevity of the conflict. Its role has evolved over the five years since the uprising began. With experience of cracking down on its own popular uprising in 2009-2010, Iran provided the Syrian government with technical support, social-media monitoring systems, surveillance, intelligence and advisory support to quell protests.

    Tehran also needed to create a narrative for the conflict that would suit its interests. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and state-controlled media depicted other uprisings in the Arab world as an “Islamic awakening” emulating the 1979 Islamic revolution. However, when it came to Syria the narrative changed.

    http://english.alarabiya.net/en/pers...conflict-.html
    He'll be known as a failure. Bush may have killed more American soldiers and lit the fire, but Obama was impotent and incompetent in his handling of the mess he was handed.

    True judgement will have to wait for posterity, of course, but Iran has seen a big boon from the 16 years of Bush-Obama failures, from removing their biggest threat in Iraq to backing off in Syria and showing the US isn't willing to get involved.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
      ...judgement will have to wait for posterity...
      I agree.

      Comment


      • #4
        The ME was afraid of Bush. Cities burned, dictators were hanged, and the blood of the muslim faithful was poured out with great abandon. They didn't love us (they never have and never will), and they knew we made mistakes, but they feared us.

        Bobo restarted the war in Afghan as it was on the cusp of ending, then pulled out. He has shown weakness at every turn. The ME still hates us, but under Bobo they have ceased to fear us.

        They will test us again because of this, and we will have to wreak havoc again to put their view of us to rights.
        Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
          They didn't love us (they never have and never will), and they knew we made mistakes, but they feared us.
          Bobo has shown weakness at every turn. The ME still hates us, but under Bobo they have ceased to fear us.
          Sad, but very true.
          Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

          Comment


          • #6
            He will be cursed by most everyone of his pathetic deal with Iran.
            The Iranian leadership must be pinching themselves everyday can't believing that this wimp is the US President.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
              Question, how will history judge Obama in regards to the Middle Eastern situation?
              History will not remember Obama.
              Wisdom is personal

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                The ME was afraid of Bush. Cities burned, dictators were hanged, and the blood of the muslim faithful was poured out with great abandon. They didn't love us (they never have and never will), and they knew we made mistakes, but they feared us.
                I don't think fear is the good word, i wonder if Iran feared USA in 1979, nor Irak in 1992 and also the Viets in the 60's.

                What about "respect of the power" or something like that, linked with "big modern state"
                Then i would say that today some don't still respect the "power of USA" and it has something to do with BUSH in Irak.

                If i remember Syrians were happy when the US ambassador came to meet them during the first days of the revolution.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by grosnain View Post
                  I don't think fear is the good word, i wonder if Iran feared USA in 1979, nor Irak in 1992 and also the Viets in the 60's.

                  What about "respect of the power" or something like that, linked with "big modern state"
                  Then i would say that today some don't still respect the "power of USA" and it has something to do with BUSH in Irak.

                  If i remember Syrians were happy when the US ambassador came to meet them during the first days of the revolution.

                  They respect the power of an unleashed US military. They do not respect our leadership.
                  ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

                  BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

                  BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It can be argued that Bush went too far, it could also be argued that Obama did too little.
                    Many political pundits in the ME who IMO know the situation and the background much better than any western observers could have nothing but discuss for Obama and his "Doctrine" which they believe paved the way for a much worse situation than at any time.
                    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Iran's involvement was miniscule compared to both NATO countries (Friends of Syria) and Happy Sunni Friends' involvement. It increased over time, but never reaching the same scale. Transport planes have been busy transporting newly made Bulgarian, Romanian, Serbian ammo and weapons. Previously, warehouses of former socialist NATO countries were thoroughly cleaned from anything useful which could be sent over to totally moderate democratic secularists. Croatia either sold or "gifted the US Marine Corps for the purpose of OppForce training" (exact quoting) thousands of small arms, M79 Osa, RAK-12 etc, only for them to appear in the ranks of Al-Nusra and IS, among others, in the following years.

                      My personal opinion is that you are giving the US administration too little credit. They are playing the long game, for sure. After all, with allies such as KSA, Qatar and Erdogan's Turkey, what exactly worse can your enemies be? Let the rabble "play" regional politics, keep them preocuppied and spending their money, and attract all those potential terrorists to a totally real and great proclaimed Caliphate, to be killed. In the recent decades, the Sunni extremists of all sorts and their backers were left unchecked. Giving them Iran, Iraq, Yemen and Syria as battlefields and counter might be the beneficial decision. No amount of Western meddling, interventions and investment short of a century-long total occupation and reeducation of the region will change that part of the world.

                      After all, if the general public is asked, Kennedy was apparently a great president, easily among top 5 in the history of the USA. Who knows what future generations will think of the present.
                      Last edited by Epigon; 10 Apr 16, 18:24.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Epigon View Post
                        Iran's involvement was miniscule compared to both NATO countries (Friends of Syria) and Happy Sunni Friends' involvement. It increased over time, but never reaching the same scale. Transport planes have been busy transporting newly made Bulgarian, Romanian, Serbian ammo and weapons. Previously, warehouses of former socialist NATO countries were thoroughly cleaned from anything useful which could be sent over to totally moderate democratic secularists. Croatia either sold or "gifted the US Marine Corps for the purpose of OppForce training" (exact quoting) thousands of small arms, M79 Osa, RAK-12 etc, only for them to appear in the ranks of Al-Nusra and IS, among others, in the following years.

                        My personal opinion is that you are giving the US administration too little credit. They are playing the long game, for sure. After all, with allies such as KSA, Qatar and Erdogan's Turkey, what exactly worse can your enemies be? Let the rabble "play" regional politics, keep them preocuppied and spending their money, and attract all those potential terrorists to a totally real and great proclaimed Caliphate, to be killed. In the recent decades, the Sunni extremists of all sorts and their backers were left unchecked. Giving them Iran, Iraq, Yemen and Syria as battlefields and counter might be the beneficial decision. No amount of Western meddling, interventions and investment short of a century-long total occupation and reeducation of the region will change that part of the world.

                        After all, if the general public is asked, Kennedy was apparently a great president, easily among top 5 in the history of the USA. Who knows what future generations will think of the present.
                        The opinion piece was written by Dr. Majid Rafizadeh
                        Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is an Iranian-American scholar, author and U.S. foreign policy specialist. Rafizadeh is the president of the International American Council. He serves on the board of Harvard International Review at Harvard University and Harvard International Relations Council. He is a member of the Gulf 2000 Project at Columbia University, School of International and Public Affairs. Previously he served as ambassador to the National Iranian-American Council based in Washington DC.
                        I think he und rest ands the difference between funding terrorism and fighting against it.
                        Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I fail to see the relevance of your reply. Are you trying to disprove facts by hiding behind the argument of some authority? The guy is a textbook example of a turncoat and traitor.

                          Islamists would never have gotten in power in Iran, the same way Saddam and his clique in Iraq wouldn't have, had there been no foreign, ehem, "meddling", a lot of it, and domestic traitors.

                          Can you for a second comprehend that patriots exist around the world, and protecting their own and their countries' interests involves opposing yours?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Epigon View Post
                            Iran's involvement was miniscule compared to both NATO countries (Friends of Syria) and Happy Sunni Friends' involvement. It increased over time, but never reaching the same scale. Transport planes have been busy transporting newly made Bulgarian, Romanian, Serbian ammo and weapons. Previously, warehouses of former socialist NATO countries were thoroughly cleaned from anything useful which could be sent over to totally moderate democratic secularists. Croatia either sold or "gifted the US Marine Corps for the purpose of OppForce training" (exact quoting) thousands of small arms, M79 Osa, RAK-12 etc, only for them to appear in the ranks of Al-Nusra and IS, among others, in the following years.

                            My personal opinion is that you are giving the US administration too little credit. They are playing the long game, for sure. After all, with allies such as KSA, Qatar and Erdogan's Turkey, what exactly worse can your enemies be? Let the rabble "play" regional politics, keep them preocuppied and spending their money, and attract all those potential terrorists to a totally real and great proclaimed Caliphate, to be killed. In the recent decades, the Sunni extremists of all sorts and their backers were left unchecked. Giving them Iran, Iraq, Yemen and Syria as battlefields and counter might be the beneficial decision. No amount of Western meddling, interventions and investment short of a century-long total occupation and reeducation of the region will change that part of the world.

                            After all, if the general public is asked, Kennedy was apparently a great president, easily among top 5 in the history of the USA. Who knows what future generations will think of the present.
                            Iran's involment had a great impact in the defence of the wertern part Damascus region along the Libanon border with Hezbollah fighters, they took lot of casualties but saved the regime at that time.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Epigon View Post
                              I fail to see the relevance of your reply. Are you trying to disprove facts by hiding behind the argument of some authority? The guy is a textbook example of a turncoat and traitor.

                              Islamists would never have gotten in power in Iran, the same way Saddam and his clique in Iraq wouldn't have, had there been no foreign, ehem, "meddling", a lot of it, and domestic traitors.

                              Can you for a second comprehend that patriots exist around the world, and protecting their own and their countries' interests involves opposing yours?
                              Comprehend this, I will not waist time arguing with someone who considers those who stand against terror to be terrorist.
                              Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X