Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 37 of 37

Thread: Turkey seizes Syrian ship with weapons

  1. #31
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,582

    Re: Turkey seizes Syrian ship with weapons

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    I would agree that Turkey and Iran both want to be a regional leader, I wouldn't use the term dominate with Turkey perhaps with Iran. Besides that you're saying Iran wants to both dominate Syria, it being part of the region, and for Syria to have more weapons, weapons much I would assume could be used to check such domination.

    Also you're being too simplistic with your assessment of these other countries, China and Russia for example have nothing to personally gain from Syria having more weapons, do we even know what kind of weapons these are? Are they just small arms? Either way, I don't see what they have to gain. Same with North Korea, although they cooperate for mutual gain every so often I see it as a completely mutual arrangement, neither really cares about the other they just both can help each other in regards to things like WMD development.
    The Syrians have been booty-buddies with the Commies for decades, now; if they're toppled, the new regime may not be so friendly. I would say that the Chi-Coms and the Bolshevics have alot to gain by keeping Syria's government in place.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  2. #32
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,445

    Re: Turkey seizes Syrian ship with weapons

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Invisible View Post
    Oh snap! Democracy loving rebels under attack! Who shall save them?

    *superhero theme music*

    It's NATO to the rescue to bomb your country and kill civilians!!!! Oh yeah!!!!

    What do you think happened in Libya. The civilians there are quite happy with NATO's actions. Do you think it would have been better to let Gaddafi bomb his own civilians with their airforce until his 4 decade iron-fisted rule was once again secure?

    Bah, what am I asking. Some people will support genocidal dictators over democracy as long as it is the Mideast. They don't care how many civilians tyrants kill. They just hate the US.

  3. #33
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Turkey seizes Syrian ship with weapons

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    I would agree that Turkey and Iran both want to be a regional leader, I wouldn't use the term dominate with Turkey perhaps with Iran. Besides that you're saying Iran wants to both dominate Syria, it being part of the region, and for Syria to have more weapons, weapons much I would assume could be used to check such domination.
    Iran has historically dominated Syria as the senior partner in that relationship - with the enforcement mechanism of Hezbollah. Syrian weapons right now will be put to use putting down their internal rebellion, which will preserve an Iranian lackey in the region. As Turkey under Erdogan has become more friendly to Iran (and hostile to Israel), she has moved towards greater interaction with the Assad regime. That's what's positive about this scenario - perhaps Syria is making itself untenable to all but Iran.

    Also you're being too simplistic with your assessment of these other countries, China and Russia for example have nothing to personally gain from Syria having more weapons
    Except, of course, for chaos and instability in a region that is next door to Europe and which can only create massive headaches for the United States? China and Russia both benefit from keeping Europe scared, and the United States exhausting itself rushing around, beating out brush fires - both benefit as well from people they don't care about (read, Syrians) making trouble for people they compete with (read, the West).

    do we even know what kind of weapons these are? Are they just small arms?
    given that that is what the Syrian regime has been using lately, that would be my bet, along with ammunition.

    Either way, I don't see what they have to gain. Same with North Korea, although they cooperate for mutual gain every so often I see it as a completely mutual arrangement, neither really cares about the other they just both can help each other in regards to things like WMD development.
    NKorea's main objectives are 1. scarce resources and 2. take international pressure off by ensuring it isn't the only rogue nuclear regime.

  4. #34
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Turkey seizes Syrian ship with weapons

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Invisible View Post
    Oh snap! Democracy loving rebels under attack! Who shall save them?

    *superhero theme music*

    It's NATO to the rescue to bomb your country and kill civilians!!!! Oh yeah!!!!
    I don't know if I'd call them Democracy Loving, but I would bet their victory would be a step up for the nation in particular and the region in general.

  5. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: Turkey seizes Syrian ship with weapons

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The Syrians have been booty-buddies with the Commies for decades, now; if they're toppled, the new regime may not be so friendly. I would say that the Chi-Coms and the Bolshevics have alot to gain by keeping Syria's government in place.
    Well thats a poor assessment its all opinion and conclusion, not even argument, sorry but declaring someone "booty buddies" isn't going to convince anyone.

    [QUOTE=cpwill;1059826167]Iran has historically dominated Syria as the senior partner in that relationship - with the enforcement mechanism of Hezbollah. Syrian weapons right now will be put to use putting down their internal rebellion, which will preserve an Iranian lackey in the region. As Turkey under Erdogan has become more friendly to Iran (and hostile to Israel), she has moved towards greater interaction with the Assad regime. That's what's positive about this scenario - perhaps Syria is making itself untenable to all but Iran.[quote]

    I think you're thinking of Lebanon, I'm not personally aware of any major influence by Iran through Hezzbollah in Syria. I think Syria also has enough small arms weapons in its current stockpiles, I can't imagine a regime so authoritarian to not be prepared for a crack down. Also the original news story says the exact opposite of what you are saying, how is Turkey moving closer to Syria when it seizes their weapons, calls for an end to dictators, and is no longer officially talking to that government? I'm curious what do you think Turkey's goal is? Both regarding the political unrest in Syria and the Middle East as a whole?

    Except, of course, for chaos and instability in a region that is next door to Europe and which can only create massive headaches for the United States? China and Russia both benefit from keeping Europe scared, and the United States exhausting itself rushing around, beating out brush fires - both benefit as well from people they don't care about (read, Syrians) making trouble for people they compete with (read, the West).
    Don't forget that China and Russia are both effected by changes in the oil market, especially China since its not an oil producer like Russia. Also remember the still ongoing Libyan conflict, China has thus far not been a player whatsoever, it has not supported Ghaddaffi or Libya nor has it supported the West. If we are making the argument that China is interested in starting brush fires, why didn't it fuel the one that was burning for months?
    NKorea's main objectives are 1. scarce resources and 2. take international pressure off by ensuring it isn't the only rogue nuclear regime.
    This I could actually go along with, it would be a long shot for NK betting, but NK is known for that kind of thing. They'd be betting Syria would both win its conflict and go back to nuclear cooperation, which probably existed in the recent past with unknown benefit.

  6. #36
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Turkey seizes Syrian ship with weapons

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    Well thats a poor assessment its all opinion and conclusion, not even argument, sorry but declaring someone "booty buddies" isn't going to convince anyone.


    there's a reason all their weaponry is Soviet Bloc. hint: they didn't pay for it.

    I think you're thinking of Lebanon,
    nope. Them too, mind you.

    I'm not personally aware of any major influence by Iran through Hezzbollah in Syria.
    well.... i hope you'll understand if i say that sitting here on my home computer I don't really want to get too deeply into it. but as I recall you are a "sir"; if you have a SIPR account and a free 30 minutes, I would urge you to look into it yourself.

    I think Syria also has enough small arms weapons in its current stockpiles,
    fascinating. I had no idea you were the SME on Syrian logistics

    it just seems rather logical that if they are in need of a particular weapon type, that is the most likely one. the only other alternative I can think of is that this is simply a very poorly-timed IADS upgrade after Israel humiliated them a couple of years back.

    I can't imagine a regime so authoritarian to not be prepared for a crack down.
    I can - firstly, the fighting has gone on longer than they probably originally anticipated. secondly, much of their weaponry and ammunition have been traveling in the last few years to their south-east. thirdly, after daddy crushed Hama, it would be entirely reasonable of this regime to assume that no one would be stupid enough to try that again.

    Also the original news story says the exact opposite of what you are saying, how is Turkey moving closer to Syria when it seizes their weapons, calls for an end to dictators, and is no longer officially talking to that government?
    that's the point I was making; this was a reversal of recent Turkish policy. It would be like if the US were to seize an Arms shipment meant for the IDF.

    I'm curious what do you think Turkey's goal is? Both regarding the political unrest in Syria and the Middle East as a whole?
    Erdogan see's himself as reIslamicizing Turkey and overturning significant portions of the Kemalist Revolution at home. Abroad, this means a reestablishment of the Ottoman Empire, though less formally and more in terms of protectorates and influence, similar to that empires' relationship with Egypt under the Mamlukes.

    Don't forget that China and Russia are both effected by changes in the oil market, especially China since its not an oil producer like Russia.
    Bingo. so, as the West puts an embargo on Syrian Oil, well, gosh, who do you think could be a buyer, and therefore has a vested interest in that regimes holding on to power? Hint: the same country buying up huge chunks of East Africa.

    Also remember the still ongoing Libyan conflict, China has thus far not been a player whatsoever, it has not supported Ghaddaffi or Libya nor has it supported the West.
    which didn't stop it from using the conflict to demonstrate it's long-lift NEO capability. that was a bit surprising to a few analysts.

    If we are making the argument that China is interested in starting brush fires, why didn't it fuel the one that was burning for months?
    my bet would be: 1. the active presence of NATO and 2. the implausibility of the logistics of Ghaddaffi selling to China.

    This I could actually go along with, it would be a long shot for NK betting, but NK is known for that kind of thing
    what? that sort of thing is precisely what NKorea is known for.

  7. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: Turkey seizes Syrian ship with weapons

    Its really hard to respond when you break up the text that much, here's my biggest problem with your argument its not that its not plausible its just that I don't see any evidence of it going on and you haven't provided any as a source. I'm not about to go digging around in a secret network for personal gain, plus I'm a Logistician I don't exactly have a bunch of SIPR computers sitting around.

    I think I see what you are getting at, and I think I could agree with some of it, but I need to see some sources and a better constructed argument. Right now a few sentences per subject is more confusing than anything when I try to understand your point.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •