Aleppo now freed from the rebels!

[SunsetBengal]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/syria-to-evacuate-aleppo-in-surrender-deal/ar-AAluD70?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

Quote:"Aleppo will be declared a secure and liberated city within the coming hours," it said on its Telegram channel.

Hooray! The rest of the World will soon be free from having to accept Syrian refugees, and those already in refuge can soon make their way home!

[Vas Deferens]

There are more environmental refugees being birthed by botched policies.

And wtf is a 'telegram channel'?

[Belsnickel]

(12-13-2016, 08:26 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/syria-to-evacuate-aleppo-in-surrender-deal/ar-AAluD70?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp


Hooray! The rest of the World will soon be free from having to accept Syrian refugees, and those already in refuge can soon make their way home!

Well, except for those oppressed by Assad's regime. They may need to stay elsewhere, and those still being oppressed may have to flee. So, there is that.

[*bfine32*]

[Benton]

Great. More for Assad to give back to Isis.

[SunsetBengal]

(12-13-2016, 09:45 PM)Benton Wrote: Great. More for Assad to give back to Isis.

Wait, I thought ISIS was part of the terrorist rebellion group?

[Belsnickel]

(12-13-2016, 09:51 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Wait, I thought ISIS was part of the terrorist rebellion group?

Nope. IS was ignored by Assad and allowed to run rampant because they were also fighting against the rebellion. The war is a multi-party war, at least from my understanding.

Edit: I should say it is not that simple. There are multiple factions involved, some moderate, some extremist. It's a complicate mess, but Assad at first ignored IS because they fought the moderate rebellion group that was against him. But then when those factions split and some became more extremist as they turned their attention to him, he came to regret the decision.

[SunsetBengal]

(12-13-2016, 09:56 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Nope. IS was ignored by Assad and allowed to run rampant because they were also fighting against the rebellion. The war is a multi-party war, at least from my understanding.

Edit: I should say it is not that simple. There are multiple factions involved, some moderate, some extremist. It's a complicate mess, but Assad at first ignored IS because they fought the moderate rebellion group that was against him. But then when those factions split and some became more extremist as they turned their attention to him, he came to regret the decision.

So, then why were the Americans, under the Obama administration supplying weaponry to the rebel factions?  Seems to me that this is another example of a Nation that was undergoing turmoil, that did not need Western interference.  We all saw how things came unglued when we got into the whole Iraq deal...

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(12-13-2016, 10:35 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: So, then why were the Americans, under the Obama administration supplying weaponry to the rebel factions?  Seems to me that this is another example of a Nation that was undergoing turmoil, that did not need Western interference.  We all saw how things came unglued when we got into the whole Iraq deal...

Because the enemy of my enemy is my friend. 

[Belsnickel]

(12-13-2016, 10:35 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: So, then why were the Americans, under the Obama administration supplying weaponry to the rebel factions?  Seems to me that this is another example of a Nation that was undergoing turmoil, that did not need Western interference.  We all saw how things came unglued when we got into the whole Iraq deal...

My understanding is that we got involved because of issues with the Hezbollah/Muslim Brotherhood affiliated Assad and his violations of human rights. At least that was the excuse. You know, 'Murica being the world's police.

[Dill]

(12-13-2016, 10:35 PM)SunsetBenga Wrote: So, then why were the Americans, under the Obama administration supplying weaponry to the rebel factions?  Seems to me that this is another example of a Nation that was undergoing turmoil, that did not need Western interference.  We all saw how things came unglued when we got into the whole Iraq deal...

Obama probably felt some responsibility since the Iraq invasion is partly what destabilized Syria, along with drought.

McCain and Graham wanted to intervene on the side of the rebels. Because of the recent poor track record in the Middle East, and because you never know where weapons end up once you start handing them out in the Middle East, Obama was for a more restrained approach--vetting groups, supplying and training a few.

One of the "factions" is the Peshmerga, our Kurdish allies in Northern Iraq.

The Obama stance is that Assad, a staunch ally of Russia, has to go. No resolution to the Syrian problem is possible so long as he remains in power. Also he is Alawite, allied to Iran. Israel wants him gone too, as does Turkey. If the Syrian Army has retaken Aleppo, that strengthens Assad's position--and Russia's.

No end to refugees in sight. But on the good side, civilians will not be under artillery and air strikes.

[*bfine32*]

(12-13-2016, 10:35 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: So, then why were the Americans, under the Obama administration supplying weaponry to the rebel factions?  Seems to me that this is another example of a Nation that was undergoing turmoil, that did not need Western interference.  We all saw how things came unglued when we got into the whole Iraq deal...

We didn't like Asayd. So we backed the rebels; sorta like Iraq, but we allowed the locals to battle the leader. But in Syria a faction of the rebels wanted more than just overthrowing their country's leader; they wanted to spread their American-backed power. 

So we are in a tough spot. The folks we backed split. We like half of them and do not like the other half. Perhaps we should just let militant leaders lead these ME countries.  

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

http://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/1.692841?v=B1E9E7886C180B3D709A5AC1BF8C8C7F

[Bengalzona]

(12-13-2016, 08:26 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/syria-to-evacuate-aleppo-in-surrender-deal/ar-AAluD70?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp


Hooray!  The rest of the World will soon be free from having to accept Syrian refugees, and those already in refuge can soon make their way home!

You probably should read the last line of the article:

Quote:A government win in Aleppo would significantly strengthen Assad's hand but does not end the conflict — significant parts of Syria are still outside government control and huge swaths of the country are a devastated wasteland. More than a quarter of a million people have been killed since the conflict began in 2011 with peaceful protests against the Assad family's four-decade rule.

And this one as well:

Quote:U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the emergency meeting he had received "credible reports" of civilians killed by intense bombing and summary executions by pro-government forces.

"To the Assad regime, Russia and Iran —three member states behind the conquest of and carnage in Aleppo — you bear responsibility for these atrocities," said U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power.

[Benton]

(12-13-2016, 09:51 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Wait, I thought ISIS was part of the terrorist rebellion group?

Oh man, it will take a while to explain it. A year or so ago I spent a few days with an old friend who works for Centcom and I still felt like I needed a flow chart to understand where all the pieces fit together.

The most concise I can probably make it is:

We went into Iraq looking for terrorists more than a decade ago. We were in the wrong place attacking the wrong people. We kicked out the ruling party, which spread into a number of terrorist organizations. In the following years, some of them made their way into Syria where they allied with rebels who were speaking out (mostly peacefully) against Assad's government. It wasn't just Syria, they made their way into other countries, too, but this is the one that we're talking about now. So, anyway, the Syrian rebels (who were rebelling against Assad, who elevated to gassing civilians) started to realize the new sympathizers (ISIS) weren't any better than the regime they were fighting against. So, they started fighting against ISIS. And the government. 

And then things went to **** for Syrian rebels.

Assad got help from ISIS in killing off civilians (unarmed "rebels" wanting representation in government). And he got help from Russia in fighting off the rebels (armed civilians wanting representation in government). The only one he didn't get help from? The US. We didn't help him, but... unlike Russia... we were fighting ISIS, his indirect allies who he's let have parts of the country, which hurt Assad's effort.

Assad isn't directly allied with ISIS, but it didn't matter. He was murdering civilians the same as them. The refugees are the people who got tired of trying to fight both their own government and the terrorist factions it used against them.

Think about it this way: If the state of Ohio tomorrow started mass murdering anyone who wasn't registered with a particular political party, would you fight it? If the answer is yes, would you keep fighting after having to combat those using ISIS's tactics (burning family members alive, beheading captured soldiers, etc)? Or would you do like the refugees are trying to do and start over with your family somewhere where the government in control isn't trying to kill you?

Unfortunately, misinformation was an incredible tool as painting Syrian rebels as ISIS terrorists. Or as some angry militant mob of Muslims moving through Europe. Some are, but, mostly, Syrian refugees got tired of fighting a well funded terrorist organization and a Russian-backed government intent on killing off political opponents. 

[BmorePat87]

(12-13-2016, 08:26 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/syria-to-evacuate-aleppo-in-surrender-deal/ar-AAluD70?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp


Hooray!  The rest of the World will soon be free from having to accept Syrian refugees, and those already in refuge can soon make their way home!

Yaahooooo! The dictator Assad successfully gunned down civilians to retake parts of a rebelled held city to force a cease-fire and evacuation, only to then start shelling the city again and not send in the buses he promised would get the citizens he didn't kill out of the city. 


But at least none of these poor folks will try to move to a country that isn't killing them. 

[Griever]

so much for that ceasefire

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/14/middleeast/aleppo-syria-government-gains/index.html

[GMDino]

(12-14-2016, 09:53 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Yaahooooo! The dictator Assad successfully gunned down civilians to retake parts of a rebelled held city to force a cease-fire and evacuation, only to then start shelling the city again and not send in the buses he promised would get the citizens he didn't kill out of the city. 


But at least none of these poor folks will try to move to a country that isn't killing them. 

Bravo.

[CKwi88]

Wow.

Just wow.

[Griever]

(12-13-2016, 08:26 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/syria-to-evacuate-aleppo-in-surrender-deal/ar-AAluD70?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp


Hooray!  The rest of the World will soon be free from having to accept Syrian refugees, and those already in refuge can soon make their way home!

yeah i can just feel the love and compassion of jesus christ coming off here