Religious Extremism in Syria:A New Launching Pad for Global Terrorism
This is a conference @ Vienna 2nd May 2014, rather late to get a place I guess, but advertised today by the e-journal 'Perspectives on Terrorism', so there must be places.
Added here as the agenda may identify new sources for those who watch Syria:http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/...yria_2_May.pdf
davidbfpo
David, this can't be true.
Years ago then the Syria 'problem' first started we were assured by a bunch of smart guys here at SWC that Syria was merely a sideshow with no potential for regional or global 'overspill'.
Were they wrong? Are they prepared to admit it?
Originally Posted by davidbfpo
Quite possibly an Indiana Jones sequel in here somewhere...
#
Tomb of Doom: how a tiny enclave could draw turkey into Syria's war
by#FRANK JACOBS
Who said that, and where? Feel free to cite specific posts.
I re-read much of the old Syria thread the other day. It's at times entertaining and at times excruciating, but I didn't see anybody saying anything even remotely resembling a claim that it was "merely a sideshow with no potential for regional or global 'overspill". A number of people pointed out that US intervention was unlikely to prevent "overspill" and could very easily provoke or accelerate it, but that's a quite different thing.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary”
H.L. Mencken
Oh, I don't expect any admission from those who continue to get it so badly wrong (on Syria and just about everywhere).
The US cultural diesease of refusing to take responsibility for one actions is clearly alive and well and has sadly spread and infected the Brits in a big way (see their shrill denials over their abysmal Iraq and Afghanistan performance).
You can sleep well with the comfort that nobody could consistently get it wrong as the US WH over the recent past. You are in 'good' company.
If I were you I would switch to decaff ... or camomile tea.
Another response after a nerve touched?
Well Said!
Accusing anyone of "getting it wrong" doesn't hold much water unless you can say what you think "getting it right" would have been.
The US has, like most nations, never been overly fond of taking responsibility for its actions, but I can't see how one could reasonably argue that the Syrian Civil War is a consequence of US or British action.
I have my share of criticism of the US approach to Syria, most notably involving the excruciating "red line" comments, but at least they have gotten one thing right: US involvement remains peripheral and limited. There is no faction that could realistically be described as a US proxy, and US forces are not engaged. That at least is something: it was always going to be a mess, but at least we haven't made it a worse mess, or made it our mess.
What do you think should have been done, and what do you think the outcome of that action would have been?
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary”
H.L. Mencken
Am I to understand it was self combustion?
Yes, I can say what is 'getting it right'.
Let nations be as they are and what they think is right and not impost on them as to what you think is right.
Understand the social and religious compulsions of the Islamic nations.
Let them stew in their own juice and not tell them to have the American apple pie!
No Islamic nation has been a problem until they were told 'what is right'!
What is sauce for the goose is not necessarily sauce for the gander.
Last edited by Ray; 06-12-2014 at 12:32 PM.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks