Politics Thread: Edge of Seventeen

[Pidesco]

[majestic]

 

 

 

How would "the world" have stopped a civil war?

By intervening openly and forcefully.

Obviously it would be a political suicide for some but it could have been done when the war was just beginning.

 

 

Yeah, sort of like Libya. What a paradise that place became right after the moment

. 

 

Remember: if brute force doesn't solve the problem, you aren't applying enough.

 

 

You know you're right when Michael Ironside agrees:

 

 

[Drowsy Emperor]

'How to survive Russian military grade chemical weapons', coming soon, to a bookstore near you.

 

Edited April 11, 2018 by Drowsy Emperor

[Zoraptor]

If they allow either of them to ever communicate with anyone again, and I'm not exactly holding my breath after the mess Yulia made when talking to her cousin for a minute.

 

 

How would "the world" have stopped a civil war?

By intervening openly and forcefully.
Obviously it would be a political suicide for some but it could have been done when the war was just beginning.

 

 

Yeah, that wouldn't have worked at all. You might have got rid of Assad, but he's at most the symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. If you look at the situation as was in East Ghouta that shows why intervention simply could not have worked. Surrounded by the government for 5 years and the rebels there... spent as much time fighting each other as the government. They also had a decent sized crypto Al Qaeda presence (HTS) allied to a supposed 'moderate' faction to fight another 'moderate' faction that literally called for the genocide of 2 million Syrians, took 4000 hostages* and literally paraded them as human shields in cages. There's an active war between rebels in Idlib, and even the Turkish rebels in Afrin have been fighting each other despite the Turkish Army being there. The same things that were in play in Iraq and the same things at play in Libya would have all been at play in Syria to make things worse than either, and given how bad Iraq was... You have the sectarian divide and the ethnic divides of Iraq, plus the competing local factions (Saudi/ Qatar/ Turkey) of LIbya; plus Israel looking to take even more land and the watermelon seller in Ankara dreaming he's Mehmed II Osmanli.

 

The west has shown neither any clues about 'nation building' post intervention nor any ability to learn from mistakes so much so that you have to suspect it's a deliberate strategy to asterisk things up. There was never any prospect of the mythical moderate democratic opposition being real, even just a brief examination of the laughable goons put up as alternative governments by democratic luminaries like Erdogollum and Incompetence bin Salman give the lie to that, and make the merely massively flawed Ahmed Chalabi look like enlightenment personified.

 

Assad's a crap leader by any objective measure and his best trait, by far, has been his unexpected persistence. Despite that he's still immeasurably better than any of the realistic alternatives, especially now when the only result from him losing would be another wave of refugees as all his supporters flee. Or look positive, maybe they'll all be moderately beheaded and the Euro taxpayer saves some cash.

 

*footage of whom's release was used on US TV to show how relieved people were to escape... the depraved government siege. Technically true, I guess, but darkly funny if you knew what the footage actually was since nowhere near 4000 of those prisoners were alive at end.

[HoonDing]

Oboma killed millons, of course Dotard now has to kill billions.

[Malcador]

Forcefully is pretty open ended. If you killed everyone, there'd be no violence

Edited April 12, 2018 by Malcador

[Zoraptor]

Forcefully is pretty open ended. If you killed evrryone, there'd be no violence

 

roll_safe.jpg always applies. Though I'd prefer stalin.jpg for this, especially since the relevant quote* is misattributed. You do have to assume that isn't what was actually meant though, and the idea was to get a better result than now.

 

*..no man no problem"; Rybakov

Edited April 11, 2018 by Zoraptor

[Malcador]

 

Forcefully is pretty open ended. If you killed evrryone, there'd be no violence

 

roll_safe.jpg always applies. Though I'd prefer stalin.jpg for this, especially since the relevant quote* is misattributed. You do have to assume that isn't what was actually meant though, and the idea was to get a better result than now.

 

*..no man no problem"; Rybakov

 

True, but was trying to help salvage the position.

[Agiel]

 

 

(4) I'd take the rferl article more seriously if it wasn't literally the propaganda arm of the US government and

 

 

It's quoting from a Russian source, the former deputy-CINC of the RuAF. You might object to this particular source, but DW used the same roughly the same quote (with slightly different wording, so in all likelihood it was a differing translation of a Russian-language source).

 

And if the 50%+ Tomahawk failure rate story is only treated as gospel by RT which is Russia's own propaganda arm? Errr... well...

 

 

 

(5) while s400 is capable of being used against cm it's ludicrous overkill and you'd use pantsir or similar against tomahawks, so that article is mostly strawmanning.

 

Or, you know, Occam's Razor works too. Per a post from Sean O'Connor* on the matter a year ago:

 

 

 

 

"Why didn't Russia just shoot down the cruise missiles?"

 

Pretty simple, really. Russian air defences, concentrated along the Syrian coastline, likely were out of position to deal with the TLAM strike.

 

The below image shows Shayrat AB, the target, and Russia's S-400 battery at Humaymim AB. The red circle represents a range of approximately 70 kilometres (km), the effective range of the S-400 in this scenario.

 

While the deployed S-400 has an maximum range of 250 km, that range is not effective at all altitudes due to the radar horizon. Due to the Earth's curvature, targets at a given altitude are invisible beyond a certain point, as they are hidden behind the curve.

 

Tomahawks approach the coastline at a typical altitude of about 100 metres or lower, depending on the threat environment. The S-400's 92N6 GRAVE STONE engagement radar sits at about 50 metres (m) of elevation. Run some figures and you get a radar horizon for a 100 m target, with an emitter at 50 m, of roughly 70 km. Beyond that point, the target is not visible to the radar system, and therefore cannot be engaged. Approaching the coastline at the minimum altitude of 15 metres drops the radar horizon even further, to roughly 45 km.

 

Other Russian and Syrian air defence systems in the area will be affected by the same restrictions. Furthermore, if the cruise missiles made landfall over Lebanon, and proceeded inland to a point in Syria someplace between Al Nabk and Homs before turning towards Shayrat, they'd have remained outside the engagement zones of any known Syrian air defences.

 

https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/17800490_1807710422882215_3369870964813815779_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=318f871c00eb2b5be06c32d0a596dbe6&oe=5B677C64

 

This is seriously the reason Tomahawk was invented.

 

the GPS signal is so weak you can potentially block it from- literally- 100s of kms away

 

By its very nature GPS is a _LINE OF SIGHT_-based system. Receivers look at the position of satellites in geo-stationary orbit, compute the time it takes for them to be transmitted from the origin points to the receiver, then determines its location from that information, so to jam the missiles effectively the Russians would need continuous LOS on the missiles up until the moment of impact, which requires full knowledge of the flight path, assuming the platform doesn't have the kind of processing power to discern the jamming signal from the false ones (or any number of other means of defeating it), as no matter how powerful it is compared to GPS signals it does not magically destroy them. As I've banged on this before this is the main reason Russia's own jamming measures are on cell-phone towers: it maximises the range the jammers can "see" over the horizon. In fact the goal is not to cause the missiles to fall harmlessly out of the sky but to cause them to incur enough mistakes to miss by only a few meters:

 

 

If indeed an aerial platform was used to overcome the horizon problem, then surely the Russian MoD would also release the radar track data it had on them so they knew where to place those aircraft.

 

Also...

 

 

 

There'd also be no evidence of crashes in water since, well, they'd sink.

 

I'm going to let you think for a moment on just how well that goes with this:

 

 

 

A good analogy would be if your expert coroner says someone was shot 5 times but only shows 2 bullet wounds. Asking for the other 3 and why they weren't shown is not just fine, it should be expected.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Agiel

[Katphood]

Okay, this thing is starting to scare me:

 

 

I wanted to take care of my cats and play Death Stranding before I actually die of radiation/starvation/disease.

[Agiel]

Maybe this will allow you to rest a little easier tonight:

 

 

Granted by this measurement we have about 5 more hours from time of this post when this might change.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Agiel

[Drowsy Emperor]

It makes sense, how could we possibly survive without a war?

- Theresa May, famous last words

[Katphood]

Saudi Arabia intercepts three MISSILES over Riyadh as EXPLOSIONS rock capital Express.co.uk

 

So much for common sense...

[Zoraptor]

The Express is as tabloid as The Fail or The Scum and possibly even more hysterical. Houthis said they'd fire a missile a day at Riyadh, that's what they're doing.
 

Granted by this measurement we have about 5 more hours from time of this post when this might change.

 
Somewhere between midnight and 0200 GMT would be the likely time for a strike, so that's when the journo car park being full would be a worry.
 

Okay, this thing is starting to scare me:

 
If anything that's relatively good news. A lack of British participation would be due to Trump wanting to do something really stupid, or May letting parliament vote and losing which she won't do, since she might lose.
 

And if the 50%+ Tomahawk failure rate story is only treated as gospel by RT which is Russia's own propaganda arm? Errr... well...

 
The story comes from the Russian Ministry of Defence, RT is just quoting it. If RT quotes the Russian Government or RFE/RL/VOA quotes the US one their status as propaganda arms reinforces it being the government's position. If they do it as an opinion piece or similar using disposable sources- alphabet soup think tanks, typically- then it's deniable and low value. That's true for both propaganda arms.
 

 

(5) while s400 is capable of being used against cm it's ludicrous overkill and you'd use pantsir or similar against tomahawks, so that article is mostly strawmanning.

 
Or, you know, Occam's Razor works too. Per a post from Sean O'Connor* on the matter a year ago:

 

 
And you're still not going to use an S400 to shoot down tomahawks except under very specific circumstances, none of which were in evidence.
 

 

the GPS signal is so weak you can potentially block it from- literally- 100s of kms away

If indeed an aerial platform was used to overcome the horizon problem, then surely the Russian MoD would also release the radar track data it had on them so they knew where to place those aircraft.

 

Why would they though. It's operationally sensitive; and Trump is a sensitive snowflake who'd probably insist on throwing more tomahawks out there if made to look weak. This way both sides made their point and could make their claims without escalating; the US could claim to have struck a blow and obliterated the base, Russia can say it did minimal damage and was back in service the next day.

 

You're still treating GPS like it's a terrestrial system where you can just __ to counter jamming when you can't, because the basic physics that gives GPS its advantages are the same basic physics that gives it its disadvantages. Countermeasures are designed for level playing fields not 1000000000000000 fold power differences. If you have something the size of a truck vs something the size of a truck having an 'EM battle' over frequencies some dozens of km apart from either you have a range of anti jamming options available; if you have one a few km away and the other 20,000km away it's nowhere near a fair fight.

 

Also...
 

There'd also be no evidence of crashes in water since, well, they'd sink.

I'm going to let you think for a moment on just how well that goes with this:
 

A good analogy would be if your expert coroner says someone was shot 5 times but only shows 2 bullet wounds. Asking for the other 3 and why they weren't shown is not just fine, it should be expected.

 

 
They go fine. Difference being; in one case you wouldn't expect evidence, in the other you would. You can't reasonably prove they crashed into water, but can prove that they hit where they said, if they showed the pictures. Which they did for some, but nowhere near enough to disprove the Russian scenario.

[Drowsy Emperor]

I guess the million dollar question is if the impending attack will be so brazen as to openly, well 'accidentally', hit Russian assets. The Russians have shown that they will, up to a point, not interfere with an attack on Assad or Iranian proxies, but it seems like circles in London and Washington really want to make an 'example' out of the Russians.

 

Should Russian assets be hit, then the Kremlin will have to respond, and God only knows where we go from there. In my view, targets of possible retaliation are more likely to be British than the U.S., because that is the less confrontational response. 

Edited April 12, 2018 by Drowsy Emperor

[Katphood]

 but it seems like circles in London and Washington really want to make an 'example' out of the Russians.

 

 

I thought the Russians

but the current confrontation seems to be different.

[Chilloutman]

are we there yet?

 

[Malcador]

I guess the million dollar question is if the impending attack will be so brazen as to openly, well 'accidentally', hit Russian assets. The Russians have shown that they will, up to a point, not interfere with an attack on Assad or Iranian proxies, but it seems like circles in London and Washington really want to make an 'example' out of the Russians.

 

Should Russian assets be hit, then the Kremlin will have to respond, and God only knows where we go from there. In my view, targets of possible retaliation are more likely to be British than the U.S., because that is the less confrontational response. 

 

If the reports of Russians using mercs are true, they could play it smart and just shake their fists at those strikes. Trump gets to show how hard he is, Russia gets to have a wage bill decrease. 

 

I am thinking that cooler heads will prevail here.

[Guard Dog]

are we there yet?

 

War never changes

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

 but it seems like circles in London and Washington really want to make an 'example' out of the Russians.

 

 

I thought the Russians

but the current confrontation seems to be different.

 

 

 

 

I guess the million dollar question is if the impending attack will be so brazen as to openly, well 'accidentally', hit Russian assets. The Russians have shown that they will, up to a point, not interfere with an attack on Assad or Iranian proxies, but it seems like circles in London and Washington really want to make an 'example' out of the Russians.

 

Should Russian assets be hit, then the Kremlin will have to respond, and God only knows where we go from there. In my view, targets of possible retaliation are more likely to be British than the U.S., because that is the less confrontational response. 

 

If the reports of Russians using mercs are true, they could play it smart and just shake their fists at those strikes. Trump gets to show how hard he is, Russia gets to have a wage bill decrease. 

 

I am thinking that cooler heads will prevail here.

 

 

 

 

 but it seems like circles in London and Washington really want to make an 'example' out of the Russians.

 

 

I thought the Russians

but the current confrontation seems to be different.

 

 

It was not entirely clear on whose volition the Wagner mercs were acting and how they envisioned to carry out the attack without giving the U.S. an excuse to retaliate. 

 

That situation seems to have been a side issue, perhaps for local reasons and not specifically a matter of the Russia vs U.S. angle.

[Elerond]

Tunisia was the first and most successful arab spring revolution, and the only one which stuck. They also have a secular (well, secularish) elected government now.

 

They were only nation that did their revolution right way, as they first wrote constitution to give people rights and after that they elected new government, which had work in confines of new constitution.

[Bartimaeus]

Business Insider reports that Trump will warn Russia of where it plans to strike in advance. I believe Obama did the same thing - probably the right call, even if it sounds like it plays into Trump's Russia infatuation. Although Trump did criticize Obama for it on Twitter at the time, which is what makes it funny.

 

BBC also reports that the OPCW agreed with the UK in its findings regarding the nerve agent assassination attempt.

[Drowsy Emperor]

What they have confirmed is that the samples they have, are nerve gas samples. 

 

I'm not sure people understand how potent nerve gas is, it's not made for 'light poisoning' but for mass murder - chances of survival fall well below statistical significance.  

 

The fact that no one died, ****s on the entire premise of the story.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Drowsy Emperor

[HoonDing]

if Putin would tweet "where are the rockets u cuck" what would happen

[Malcador]

Or they hired a really crappy assassin.