Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Palmyra retaken by Syrian government forces watch

Announcements
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Christ Redeems)
    That sounds like a reasonable compromise.


    It would allow Assad to stay in power over a 'whole' Syria, which means Iran and Russia could support it, would give the Kurds (some of) the increased autonomy they have sought (and reflect their de facto autonomy), and gives Sunnis the rights they are fighting for, which means Saudi etc could support it.


    I think that's a good compromise in all honesty, but I worry that Saudi and the USA have made Assad staying a 'red line', so they might object to that. The fact that Syria, and Iran's, red line is that he stays, therefore, presents a problem - someone is going to have to budge... I think a good compromise could be the solution you outline, with the promise of imminent UN-supervised, nationwide elections (leaving Assad's future to the people of Syria).
    Another good way that the federal system could work is by Assad being an honorary or ceremonial leader of Syria, with a politburo made up of Alawite, Kurd and Sunni leaders. Each canton would take turns to have political presidency over Syria in the same way that EU member states get year long presidency of the EU. Each state of course enjoying autonomy.
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ambitious1999)
    I totally agree. I do think Assad could stay if some agreement is made on a federal Syria as suggested by the Kurds. Such a Syria would consist of 3 autonomous cantons ( a bit like Switzerland or former Yugoslavia under Tito)

    Kurdistan canton in the North.
    Sunnistan canton in the East.
    Alawitistan canton in the west.

    All 3 would have their own autonomy and devolved powers. Damascus would still be the capital with Assad in power but limited control over the other 2 cantons.
    Switzerland and its canton system is not particularly ethnically divided. Titoist Yugoslavia tried to avoid drawing borders along ethnic lines, until it collapsed, and Bosnia's ethnic division has hardly worked well. It's a policy that would be impossible without mass population transfers (i.e. ethnic cleansing) and or ethnic disenfranchisement.

    And what about the Syrian Christians, Assyrians, Turkmen, Druze, etc?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Christ Redeems)
    Inshallah al-Nusra Front and the Caliphate will reign supreme over the kafir dictator.
    Hating Bashar does not mean support for x group.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    Switzerland and its canton system is not particularly ethnically divided. Titoist Yugoslavia tried to avoid drawing borders along ethnic lines, until it collapsed, and Bosnia's ethnic division has hardly worked well. It's a policy that would be impossible without mass population transfers (i.e. ethnic cleansing) and or ethnic disenfranchisement.

    And what about the Syrian Christians, Assyrians, Turkmen, Druze, etc?
    Just when we thought we had solved it... :grumble: The groups you mentioned could just stay where they are based. Also, I think the problem of mass population transfers is mitigated somewhat by how so much of the civilian population has already moved to camps/areas of safety, so they would have to move back somewhere anyway - so surely the choice of the 3 autonomous regions outlined would be preferable.


    What's your solution?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    Switzerland and its canton system is not particularly ethnically divided. Titoist Yugoslavia tried to avoid drawing borders along ethnic lines, until it collapsed, and Bosnia's ethnic division has hardly worked well. It's a policy that would be impossible without mass population transfers (i.e. ethnic cleansing) and or ethnic disenfranchisement.

    And what about the Syrian Christians, Assyrians, Turkmen, Druze, etc?

    Posted from TSR Mobile


    Syria
    Most of the Christians, Assyrians etc live in Alawite or Kurdish areas where they have been protected from Jihadists by Assads forces in Alawite areas and protected by Kurdish forces in Kurdish areas. Sadly most Christians, Assyrians etc living in the Sunni areas have been ethnically cleansed or murdered by ISIS.

    Both Kurdish and Alawite people are tolerant of mixed religions and races.

    (Btw Switzerland is made up of Germanic/aryan Swiss (Catholic and Protestant), French-Franco Swiss (Protestant) and Italian/Latino Swiss (Catholic) each having a canton. So technically they are 3 different ethnic religious groups.)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlifunArnab)
    It's strange isn't it?
    (Original post by Habibananna)
    I don't especially support the Assad regime, especially due to prosecution of the Sunni muslims (one myself). But I do want the country to finally be at peace no matter what, it's just sad it will fall back in the control of the corrupt government.P.s. I'm not Syrian but I lived there during my childhood and I had the biggest crush on Bashar al Assad when he was young. So weird.
    (Original post by Habibananna)
    Yes I agree with you, definitely, he is the only option right now for a stable society. However, I do believe that it is so wrong not to replace this brutal dictator, the barbarism he has carried out is to such a severe extent.I really do dislike the man, I remeber this one time (because I used to live in a Sunni neigbourhood) when a man was tied up in the back of a pick-up truck and he was lying down and blindfolded and I saw him because I was crossing the road and I accidently looked over the car. That was properly the scariest moment of my life, I ran home, I thought they were going to do the same to me lol.But overall, the creation of an Islamic state I do believe was to avenge the prosecuted Sunni sector in the country, but they got it all wrong.
    (Original post by intelligent con)
    So an oppressive butcher backed by another oppressive butcher wins a victory and everyone celebrates because it saves a bunch of old rocks? Don't people realise anything good for Assad is bad for the rest of the world?
    Assad has never done anything wrong. The reason people tried to push him out his rightful place was out of racist and xenophobic hatred towards the Shias. He is innocent and the west have spread lies about him. The so called "rebels" are the terrorists. Anyone who opposes him is a terrorist and must be killed. I hope Assad and Putin drink the blood of every man, woman and child who oppose him. Long live Assad
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ambitious1999)
    I totally agree. I do think Assad could stay if some agreement is made on a federal Syria as suggested by the Kurds. Such a Syria would consist of 3 autonomous cantons ( a bit like Switzerland or former Yugoslavia under Tito)

    Kurdistan canton in the North.
    Sunnistan canton in the East.
    Alawitistan canton in the west.

    All 3 would have their own autonomy and devolved powers. Damascus would still be the capital with Assad in power but limited control over the other 2 cantons.
    Sunnistan and alawitistan??? Why would arabs put stan (a persian word) at the end of those words???
    • Specialist Advisor
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Specialist Advisor
    Do you guys think this will have any effect on the ceasefire that is in place (even though it doesn't refer to ISIS)?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Christ Redeems)
    That sounds like a reasonable compromise.


    It would allow Assad to stay in power over a 'whole' Syria, which means Iran and Russia could support it, would give the Kurds (some of) the increased autonomy they have sought (and reflect their de facto autonomy), and gives Sunnis the rights they are fighting for, which means Saudi etc could support it.


    I think that's a good compromise in all honesty, but I worry that Saudi and the USA have made Assad staying a 'red line', so they might object to that. The fact that Syria, and Iran's, red line is that he stays, therefore, presents a problem - someone is going to have to budge... I think a good compromise could be the solution you outline, with the promise of imminent UN-supervised, nationwide elections (leaving Assad's future to the people of Syria).
    The problem is that the Assad family has always put down any protests violently, for example the 1982 Hama massacre. If the Assad family has always put down protests with violence, how can we be sure that in this case, the Assad family wont just do the same if back in power? If the civil war ends, we are still left with experienced fighters with weapons. Will they happily disarm themselves once Assad takes power? I am doubtful, because they will fear repercussions. Will Assad feel comfortable governing a territory of Sunni Muslims who are armed, have experience and have fought against his army in the past? Again I am doubtful.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    If the government takes Qaryatayn and Sukhna, which they probably will in time at this rate, then ISIS will have lost all of its major 2015 gains. It will be back to its summer 2014 front line, but not even that, given how much of their summer 2014 territory they've lost to the Kurdish YPG.

    (Original post by Oliver_94)
    Assad has never done anything wrong. The reason people tried to push him out his rightful place was out of racist and xenophobic hatred towards the Shias. He is innocent and the west have spread lies about him. The so called "rebels" are the terrorists. Anyone who opposes him is a terrorist and must be killed. I hope Assad and Putin drink the blood of every man, woman and child who oppose him. Long live Assad
    Absolute rubbish. The Assad regime is responsible for all sorts of atrocities and massacres, and the war started with a mostly peaceful protest movement that did not become sectarian until later. Shooting dead protesters, using indiscriminate barrel bombs, summary executions of captured people including civilians, widespread torture of people in custody among various other things. The rebels aren't much better, but Assad is certainly not innocent in all this. These "Assad did nothing wrong" conspiracy theories are just ridiculous and have no credible evidence to support them.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oliver_94)
    Assad has never done anything wrong. The reason people tried to push him out his rightful place was out of racist and xenophobic hatred towards the Shias. He is innocent and the west have spread lies about him. The so called "rebels" are the terrorists. Anyone who opposes him is a terrorist and must be killed. I hope Assad and Putin drink the blood of every man, woman and child who oppose him. Long live Assad
    Lol what? Assad has never done anything wrong? You're kidding, right?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 79deeas)
    Sunnistan and alawitistan??? Why would arabs put stan (a persian word) at the end of those words???
    They name their streets after Persian scholars
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Slutty Salafi)
    They name their streets after Persian scholars
    Yes but you'd need to have hell freeze over before Arabs put ""something"stan" as the name of a place.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Multiculturalism)
    The Rhodes Must Fall campaigners want to remove monuments that celebrate colonialism, and with it slavery, racism, and genocide.

    How is that comparable???
    Because all monuments are usually in celebration of slavery, racism, and genocide.

    I suspect you only have issues with one groups colonialism, slavery, racism, and genocide rather than have an issue with these ideas in general
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 79deeas)
    Yes but you'd need to have hell freeze over before Arabs put ""something"stan" as the name of a place.
    It's not he classiest of names I admit, especially after than Eminem song.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    Because all monuments are usually in celebration of slavery, racism, and genocide.

    I suspect you only have issues with one groups colonialism, slavery, racism, and genocide rather than have an issue with these ideas in general
    I'm against all forms of slavery, racism and genocide

    But this is a british forum, so we focus mainly on british history, which is too biased in favour of the british empire, in some cases even glorifying it. If I say something is wrong, don't counter that with, well other people do it too. I'm saying nobody should do it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Multiculturalism)
    I'm against all forms of slavery, racism and genocide

    But this is a british forum, so we focus mainly on british history, which is too biased in favour of the british empire, in some cases even glorifying it. If I say something is wrong, don't counter that with, well other people do it too. I'm saying nobody should do it.
    So you would support the destruction of let's say the Pyramids in principle (given the use of slave trade and militarily imperialism of their creators)
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    So you would support the destruction of let's say the Pyramids in principle (given the use of slave trade and militarily imperialism of their creators)
    The distinction isn't clear, and I would need to think a bit more before giving a verdict

    Anyway, destroying the pyramids would cripple tourism
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Multiculturalism)
    The distinction isn't clear, and I would need to think a bit more before giving a verdict

    Anyway, destroying the pyramids would cripple tourism
    Yes it is Its clear in the histories the tombs of the pharaohs are littered with tales of their military successes and the number of slaves they kept etc (hell they even killed their slaves to take them into the afterlife with them (Egypt 101 really))

    But OK if it could be shown they were would you support the destruction of the
    pyramids

    Yes or No
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    Yes it is Its clear in the histories the tombs of the pharaohs are littered with tales of their military successes and the number of slaves they kept etc (hell they even killed their slaves to take them into the afterlife with them (Egypt 101 really))

    But OK if it could be shown they were would you support the destruction of the
    pyramids

    Yes or No
    I can't give a yes or no answer without researching the topic more
 
 
 
Poll
Do I go to The Streets tomorrow night?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.