Jihadists in Syria kill 102 year old + son, grandson, granddaughter, daughter in law.

If the Saudis had any balls they would've just taken a professional Saudi army north and fought themselves. Instead they keep trying to get other people to do it for them.

Saudi Army are a bunch of coddled lazy air conditioned good for nothings who can't stomach 'getting in the trenches' so to speak. All their high tech American weaponry is of no use cause they aren't competent.

I admit I would love to see Saudi go up against Hezbollah and get their Wahabhi asses handed to them.

Yes, the Saudis have been going apeshit over the US reluctance to bomb Assad. They are really pissed we aren't doing their bidding.
 
Yeah the vast majority of funding and weapons has been through Saudi and Qatar but the US has been supplying TOW missiles.

I wonder if it is telling that Syria despite have a clear Sunni majority can't defeat Assad (even accounting for Hez) ; I did read that even many Sunnis reluctantly prefer Assad over the Jihadis.

Well, many Sunnis prefer Assad over all out civil war, which is unfortunately what is going to happen if Assad is toppled. When even the EXTREMIST groups are fighting each other, shit is really bad.

But a big problem is that Syria is being funded just as much by Russia and Iran, and has tons of battle tested Hezbollah at its disposal.
 
I can't think of a time the Shiites haven't raped the Sunnis every time they have gotten in recent military conflict. Hezbollah is nothing to fuck with, and Iran fucked over Iraq in the 1980s despite the Saudis pouring unbelievable amounts of money into the Iraqi war machine.

That was actually a very similar scenario to what we have now -- in the 1980s Iraq waged a war of aggression against Iran, funded primarily by Gulf Sunni states but also by the US and France. The later Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, and the Iraq Wars, were in large part blowback from the failed Saudi effort to use Iraq to do its dirty work. A bankrupted and failed Iraq, crushed under the repayment obligations for its war debts, desperately needed money, and Kuwait and Saudi Arabia suddenly looked like tempting military targets. Saudi Arabia, of course, called in its lapdog mercenary, the U.S., to beat the Iraqi threat down.

Actually most recent Middle-Eastern history can be explained largely as Saudi Arabia's failed attempts to control the region with money. In the West, people always remember the role that Western states played in such conflicts, but the reality is that most of the money and most of the political push comes from the Gulf.
 
Not entirely. The Middle East has long had a tradition of quasi-secular dictators who have squashed religious rivalry beneath their authoritarian feet..


That's overlooking the fact that Al Assad and his people are Shia. Hezbollah, is right in there with him because they're Shia. The other side is entirely Sunni. We have a tendency in the west to try to make this things more complex than they are because our society is complex. This isn't.

What we see over and over again is that when you remove one of these authoritarian secularist dictators, the populace goes fucking nuts because they have no decent civil society to turn to. In the collapse of strong central authority, only the religious extremists gain.

I disagree. We see an over abundance of dictators from this part of the world because total oppression is the only way to maintain order in this part of the world. That's the most important thing I took from my time in Iraq.

Assad is an Alawite, not exactly a Shiite. He is much more like Mubarak or Saddam -- a secularized dictator presiding over a volatile mix of social factions, where if you take the authoritarian control out the dominant religious faction is likely to go nuts and oppress everybody else.

The Alawite belief structure has it's fondation rooted entirely in Shia Islam. That's why the people in this conflict have divided themselves along these lines. The Alawi's aren't fundamentally Shia, but it's close enough.
 
Saudi Army are a bunch of coddled lazy air conditioned good for nothings who can't stomach 'getting in the trenches' so to speak. All their high tech American weaponry is of no use cause they aren't competent.

I admit I would love to see Saudi go up against Hezbollah and get their Wahabhi asses handed to them.

Yes, the Saudis have been going apeshit over the US reluctance to bomb Assad. They are really pissed we aren't doing their bidding.

I think it has more to do with the fact that if the Saudi Army marched off, the King would be dead inside of a day.
 
That's overlooking the fact that Al Assad and his people are Shia. Hezbollah, is right in there with him because they're Shia. The other side is entirely Sunni. We have a tendency in the west to try to make this things more complex than they are because our society is complex. This isn't.

I disagree. We see an over abundance of dictators from this part of the world because total oppression is the only way to maintain order in this part of the world. That's the most important thing I took from my time in Iraq.

The Alawite belief structure has it's fondation rooted entirely in Shia Islam. That's why the people in this conflict have divided themselves along these lines. The Alawi's aren't fundamentally Shia, but it's close enough.

Not exactly that simple though because Syria's Christians almost all support Assad too. There are nearly as many Christians in Syria as there are Shiites. And there are barely ANY Shiites in Syria compared to Sunnis -- only like 13% of Syria is Shiite. So to characterize it as pure Shiite v. Sunni is misleading ... it's more like Sunni v. coalition of non-Sunnis, of which most are Shiites and Christians. Of course Shiites outside the region support Assad, but so do Christians. Everybody knows the 'revolution' is now just an attempt to put Saudi Arabia in the regional driver's seat and break the back of the Shiite axis.

This is characteristic of the Middle East, alternating between oppressive religious fanaticism in a dominant group and shifting alliances of groups that want to resist the dominant group.
 
Not exactly that simple though because Syria's Christians almost all support Assad too. There are nearly as many Christians in Syria as there are Shiites. And there are barely ANY Shiites in Syria compared to Sunnis -- only like 13% of Syria is Shiite. So to characterize it as pure Shiite v. Sunni is misleading ... it's more like Sunni v. coalition of non-Sunnis, of which most are Shiites and Christians. Of course Shiites outside the region support Assad, but so do Christians. Everybody knows the 'revolution' is now just an attempt to put Saudi Arabia in the regional driver's seat and break the back of the Shiite axis.

This is characteristic of the Middle East, alternating between oppressive religious fanaticism in a dominant group and shifting alliances of groups that want to resist the dominant group.

I know there are barelty any Shia in Syria, that's why Idrew the comparison between Iraq under Saddam and Syria under Assad. And I'm talking about the people doing the fighting. While the Christians hope Assad wins, you won't find them in the streets fighting. And I'm guessing the side with Assad because he's better than the alternative.
 
Sure. I agree with your comparison, I've always described the Syrian war as Al Qaeda v. Saddam. I was just pointing out that the "Saddams" of the Middle East tend to have a much stronger secularist approach that facilitates the peaceful coexistence of religious minorities. Not because they themselves have tolerant ideologies so much as because their political power base often depends on placating minority groups that the ravening Sunni masses would just as soon oppress and subjugate.
 
Sure. I agree with your comparison, I've always described the Syrian war as Al Qaeda v. Saddam. I was just pointing out that the "Saddams" of the Middle East tend to have a much stronger secularist approach that facilitates the peaceful coexistence of religious minorities. Not because they themselves have tolerant ideologies so much as because their political power base often depends on placating minority groups that the ravening Sunni masses would just as soon oppress and subjugate.

I wouldn't even call it secular. It's simply an understanding that they have to be oppressive to survive and run things. It's not really a seperation of church and stateish attitude, it's a "let's keep all these crazies out of our country so we can run stuff" attitude.

Should have read a little farther. Typed that before reading this part:

Not because they themselves have tolerant ideologies so much as because their political power base often depends on placating minority groups that the ravening Sunni masses would just as soon oppress and subjugate

And I don't think it's so much a "placating" of other minority groups as it is just not having a need to deal with them. If the Christian minority of Iraq ever got out of hand, Saddam would have put the boots to them quickly as well. They weren't causing any problems, so he didn't need to mess with them. Al Assad seems to be the same way.
 
You want America to support the Russian-satalite state regime? You know the only difference is that Assad kills civilians in the name of secularism and AQ kills civilians in the name of religion, right...?
I rather have a weakened secular regime than another Wahabist state. Alawite sect is about as secular as yoou can get amongst Muslims.
 
Assad's wife Asma was born to Sunni parents ,... and she doesn't wear a headscarf.
 
Yeah the vast majority of funding and weapons has been through Saudi and Qatar but the US has been supplying TOW missiles.

I wonder if it is telling that Syria despite have a clear Sunni majority can't defeat Assad (even accounting for Hez) ; I did read that even many Sunnis reluctantly prefer Assad over the Jihadis.

remember pre war roughly over 70% of all military professionals were shia alawite and over 80% of its officers and similar numbers in the various ghestapo like intel orgs
Its not suprising hes held on when u take that into consideration and the starting massive firepower imbalance plus the uncontested air power
and add in unlimited russian and iranian supplies , quds officers helping train a large native shia milita to make up losses(even acting as an officer corps when needed) , hezbollah and shia militas (iraq and iran) , occasional gas attacks and ISIS as a 5th column among rebels.
There is some sunni support yes but hes largely stopped using sunni fighters ages ago , its too stupid to put guns in sunni conscript hands alongside valuable alawite officers
 
Last edited:
I rather have a weakened secular regime than another Wahabist state. Alawite sect is about as secular as yoou can get amongst Muslims.

Not entirely sure what is better for American interests, nor the region. Good for Russia, I guess.
 
Saudi Army are a bunch of coddled lazy air conditioned good for nothings who can't stomach 'getting in the trenches' so to speak. All their high tech American weaponry is of no use cause they aren't competent.

I admit I would love to see Saudi go up against Hezbollah and get their Wahabhi asses handed to them.

Yes, the Saudis have been going apeshit over the US reluctance to bomb Assad. They are really pissed we aren't doing their bidding.

Good post. I would add that everything you just said also applies to Israel, 100%. They also got their asses handed to them by Hezbollah despite their high tech american weaponry. They also went apeshit when we wouldn't do their bidding and bomb Iran and Syria.
 
Good post. I would add that everything you just said also applies to Israel, 100%. They also got their asses handed to them by Hezbollah despite their high tech american weaponry. They also went apeshit when we wouldn't do their bidding and bomb Iran and Syria.

judgejudy.gif
 
Good post. I would add that everything you just said also applies to Israel, 100%. They also got their asses handed to them by Hezbollah despite their high tech american weaponry. They also went apeshit when we wouldn't do their bidding and bomb Iran and Syria.

Shocker that you tried to turn this into an Israel hate thread...
 
Good post. I would add that everything you just said also applies to Israel, 100%. They also got their asses handed to them by Hezbollah despite their high tech american weaponry. They also went apeshit when we wouldn't do their bidding and bomb Iran and Syria.
Hezbollah gave Israelis army a run for their money, but they did not "whoop" them. It was both a tactical and strategic stalemate. Israel knew it wasn't going to get its objective and Hezbollah knew they couldn't sustain it for the long term.
 
When has Israel ever got whooped by Hezbollah? pretty sure that isn't the truth.

Hezbollah inflicted heavy losses on you guys on the ground, knocking out/damaging scores of tanks, collapsing buildings on top of Israeli soldiers and even kidnapping a few of them.

For the first time in modern history, your casualties almost matched the enemy. They stopped you guys in your tracks, and because you were unwilling to fight and absorb such losses, you left with your tail between your legs, and cluster bombed southern Lebanon in order to save face.

This all happened despite access to high tech American weaponry. This is why I drew the valid comparison between Israel and Saudi Arabia.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,036
Messages
55,463,086
Members
174,786
Latest member
JoyceOuthw
Back
Top