Syria and UN Security Council Decision

[Childlike Empress]

There had been again rumours that ISIS head al-Baghdadi was killed, by a Russian air strike, and the Russians said they are looking into it. Almost a week later, today the foreign ministry has stated that they now have verification and think it's "highly likely" that the Daeshbagdaddy is indeed dead. Which fits with the fact that yesterday, ISIS blew up the Al-Nuri mosque with its famous leaning minaret in the old town of Mosul, with the Iraqi army less than 100 meters away. That's the mosque where in 2014 he declared the "caliphate".

So for all practical purposes, ISIS is defeated. Will be interesting how much cheering we'll see by the pre$$titutes or if they are angry that the evil Russians dared to take away a boogeyman justification for continued meddling in the region.

 

[crescent]

Female Kurdish sniper cheats death at hands of IS

The young woman is filmed laughing and exclaiming after her brush with death.
She then tells the men with her to stop filming, saying: "Enough, enough filming."

We don't need any further evidence that the Kurdish forces are a clear threat to world society, but the video provides it anyway: She is wearing sandals WITH SOCKS!

Argghhh! The humanity!

 

[Mycroft]

There had been again rumours that ISIS head al-Baghdadi was killed, by a Russian air strike, and the Russians said they are looking into it. Almost a week later, today the foreign ministry has stated that they now have verification and think it's "highly likely" that the Daeshbagdaddy is indeed dead. Which fits with the fact that yesterday, ISIS blew up the Al-Nuri mosque with its famous leaning minaret in the old town of Mosul, with the Iraqi army less than 100 meters away. That's the mosque where in 2014 he declared the "caliphate".

So for all practical purposes, ISIS is defeated. Will be interesting how much cheering we'll see by the pre$$titutes or if they are angry that the evil Russians dared to take away a boogeyman justification for continued meddling in the region.

I hope you're right about ISIS being defeated, but unfortunately I don't see any reason you would be more correct about that than you are about anything else.

Do you think that would also remove Russias excuse to meddle in the region? Or does Russia not need a reason?

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

 

[Henri McPhee]

The Russians are involved in Syria at the invitation of the legitimate Syrian government, unlike the Americans who are invading Syria with aggressive war, which contravenes international law, which doesn't seem to bother them.

Boris Johnson is on again about that sarin chemical attack in April in Idlib which he says he is convinced was done by the Syrian government, or the Russians, though there has been no inquiry. There are grave doubts that the previous poison gas attacks were done by the Syrians. Porton Down says that the gas was not used by the Syrian army and it was made in Turkey. I agree both sides could use chlorine gas, but Isis and Al Nusra and Al Qaeda have been known to use poison gas to try to drag Britain and America into the war against Assad.

 

[Mycroft]

The Russians are involved in Syria at the invitation of the legitimate Syrian government...

What makes it legitimate?


Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

 

[theprestige]

What makes it legitimate?


Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

"International law"

 

[magellan]

What makes it legitimate?


Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

Why should other people do your work for you if you don't know what legitimate means? Look it up!

And if you want to say that "killing your own people"^tm or practicing enhanced interrogation is something that makes you lose legitimacy I can give you 2 examples off the top of my head (there are many more)
The US is "killing your own people"^tm (via deathpenalty) and practices enhanced interrogation and so does the ukraine.

 

[LSSBB]

Why should other people do your work for you if you don't know what legitimate means? Look it up!

And if you want to say that "killing your own people"^tm or practicing enhanced interrogation is something that makes you lose legitimacy I can give you 2 examples off the top of my head (there are many more)
The US is "killing your own people"^tm (via deathpenalty) and practices enhanced interrogation and so does the ukraine.

Can you define legitimacy? Please provide examples. Test case: is the government of Ukraine legitimate? Please provide references to international law and agreements to make your point.

 

[magellan]

Can you define legitimacy? Please provide examples. Test case: is the government of Ukraine legitimate? Please provide references to international law and agreements to make your point.

If you want to say that the syrian government isn't legitimate, then *you* need to come up with reasons and arguments. Not I.

Again: If you don't understand any of the words, look them up. Nobody is obliged to explain them to you.

 

[LSSBB]

If you want to say that the syrian government isn't legitimate, then *you* need to come up with reasons and arguments. Not I.

Again: If you don't understand any of the words, look them up. Nobody is obliged to explain them to you.

I'm not making a claim. I'm curious about the definition.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[magellan]

I'm not making a claim. I'm curious about the definition.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

If you are curious about a definition I suggest looking it up.

 

[Childlike Empress]

I hope you're right about ISIS being defeated, but unfortunately I don't see any reason you would be more correct about that than you are about anything else.

Don't be unfair, it obviously isn't possible for me to be more correct about this than I am about everything else.

btw, Iraq has declared the end of the "caliphate" yesterday.

 

[Childlike Empress]

Oh, and just in, Iran confirms that the Daeshbagdaddy is dead.

As predicted I haven't heard much jubilation about this, unlike when the ten-year-old Osama corpse was symbolically dropped into the sea in a "ritual" 100% opposed to what real muslims do with their dead, and later that "special forces" crew kind of didn't make it to tell the tale. How dare Putin kill him?

 

[theprestige]

If you are curious about a definition I suggest looking it up.

Since you're the one invoking it, it's probably best if you supply the definition you are using. That way we can avoid all the arguing and appeals to dictionary, and skip straight to understanding exactly what you mean by the word.

 

[Childlike Empress]

Since you're the one invoking it, it's probably best if you supply the definition you are using. That way we can avoid all the arguing and appeals to dictionary, and skip straight to understanding exactly what you mean by the word.

I can do without a lenghty derail about legalities. Let's just say that Syria has a seat at the UN which is there with that "international law" thing to prevent something like the Nazis happening again, doing a pretty poor job at it as its main creators are also the main offenders today.

 

[theprestige]

I can do without a lenghty derail about legalities. Let's just say that Syria has a seat at the UN which is there with that "international law" thing to prevent something like the Nazis happening again, doing a pretty poor job at it as its main creators are also the main offenders today.

Right?

I'd say that in practical terms, the closest thing we have to "International Law" is actions by UNSC members, arising from UNSC resolutions.

 

[Childlike Empress]

Right?

I'd say that in practical terms, the closest thing we have to "International Law" is actions by UNSC members, arising from UNSC resolutions.

Again, because the main offenders are among the most powerful nations.

Civilized nations like Syria have enshrined international law aka the UN Charter into their constitutions and of course on paper the US has as well. It's just that its word means nothing because of its might makes right attitude (which stays the same with feelgood Obama and feelbad Trump).

 

[Childlike Empress]

Here's a good read about the recent US shenanigans at the Syrian-Iraqi border.

[...] “In the history of the last half century, it was always prevented for Syria and Iraq to get close, to coordinate. When (former Syrian president) Hafez al-Assad and (former Iraqi president) Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr almost reached a comprehensive agreement, Saddam Hussein made a coup d’etat and hung all the officers who wanted rapprochement with Syria,”says Shaaban, who has just published a book on Hafez Assad’s dealings with former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

Saddam then launched an eight-year war against the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the latter lost road access through Iraq for more than two decades. In early 2003, U.S. troops invaded Iraq, deposed Saddam, and occupied the country for the next nine years. During that era, Iranian airplanes were often ordered down for inspections, instigated by U.S. occupation forces interested in thwarting Iran’s transfer of weapons and supplies to the Lebanese resistance group Hezbollah and other allies.

By the time U.S. troops exited Iraq in late 2011, the Syrian conflict was already under way, fully armed, financed, and supported by several NATO states and their Persian Gulf allies.

“When those borders are re-opened,” says Asadollahi, “this will be the first time Iran will have a land route to Syria and Palestine” – though others point out that the Iranians have always found ways to transport goods undetected.

“Our army is now almost at the border and Iraqis are at their border – and we are not going to stop,” insists Shaaban. [...]

 

[Mycroft]

Right?

I'd say that in practical terms, the closest thing we have to "International Law" is actions by UNSC members, arising from UNSC resolutions.

International law is the sum of treaties between nations and is only binding where the individual nations agree to be bound.

The United Nations is not a law making body. It is not a legislature, it's resolutions amount to statements that are sometimes useful to guide diplomatic relations, but often not.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

 

[Mycroft]

Why should other people do your work for you if you don't know what legitimate means? Look it up!

It's because I do know what it means that I question its use here.

And if you want to say that "killing your own people"^tm or practicing enhanced interrogation is something that makes you lose legitimacy I can give you 2 examples off the top of my head (there are many more)
The US is "killing your own people"^tm (via deathpenalty) and practices enhanced interrogation and so does the ukraine.

I think if you want to make an argument for Asad's legitimacy you should look at how he came to power, how he stays in power, and how that corresponds to the laws of Syria.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk