The war on ISIS.

[Dotini]

My current overall impression of the war in Syria is that the government and the Russians have the rebels very much on the run. This has increased the pressure of immigration on Europe, and on Erdogan to do something - either accept the immigrants or invade Syria, or both. The Saudis are also under increased pressure, as almost nothing is going their way.

 

[Dennisch]

The Saudis are also under increased pressure, as almost nothing is going their way.

Do you hear that laughter in the background?

That's Iran.

 

[Dotini]

Do you hear that laughter in the background?

That's Iran.

True, but it's muted laughter. The Iranians stepped on their own member by allowing the Saudi embassy to be burned.

 

[TenEightyOne]

What are you trying to say? The video still claims that "precision airstrikes" reduce civilian casualties on hard targets

Which in general they do. We can agree on that?

lso, what is this "fact" you are talking about? there is no fact, they use Russian airstrikes while mentioning and referring to US coalition precision airstrikes, claiming a "fact" is just grasping at straws.

Which they don't, quite simply. They mention that the Russians are part of "the group", they compare the number of strikes per month for France, USA and Russia and they talk about casualties. They then show some of the strikes but do not explicitly say that any of them are American. There is no such reference. Nor do they compare Russian and US methods as suggested in some web commentaries for that video. Watch it again.

That the people who edited the original video have no idea how to edit is another matter, but the original Fr 2 segment still shows and claims those airstrikes were part of their coalition.

It's standard TV news fayre, not Pulitzer stuff and it doesn't make the claim that you think.

Are you that insecure? Presenting information and claim it to be true so it can benefit your biases, like really?

Facts are facts. Drawing an opinion from what is said is one thing, in this case I'm simply stating that they don't say the thing you say they say.

 

[Akira AC]

Facts are facts. Drawing an opinion from what is said is one thing, in this case I'm simply stating that they don't say the thing you say they say.

So ... the logical implication is they are saying the things you say they say? Right?

 

[TenEightyOne]

So ... the logical implication is they are saying the things you say they say? Right?

You can hear them saying it, no?

 

[Dennisch]

MUNICH (Reuters) - Major powers agreed on Friday to implement a cessation of hostilities in Syria and to expand delivery of humanitarian aid to people caught up in the conflict, officials said.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, speaking to reporters after a meeting in Munich that included Russia and more than a dozen other countries, said the target for implementing the nationwide cessation of fighting was a week's time. He said all participants had agreed that Syrian peace negotiations should resume in Geneva as soon as possible.

He said the cessation would not apply to Islamic State and other militant groups fighting in Syria.

British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said ending fighting could only succeed if Russia stopped air strikes supporting Syrian government forces' advance against the opposition.

"If implemented fully and properly ... this (deal) will be an important step toward relieving the killing and suffering in Syria," Hammond said in a statement.

Reuters.

 

[Akira AC]

You can hear them saying it, no?

I did, that changes in phrasing to achieve the implication is a complete different matter.

Take for example this:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-idUSKCN0VK22O

Compared to what is really said:
https://www.rt.com/news/332273-reuters-misquotes-medvedev-war/

There are no facts, is just political driven biases, or isn't it true? (or a fact, since you like to use that word without knowing exactly what it means).

 

[niky]

I did, that changes in phrasing to achieve the implication is a complete different matter.

Take for example this:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-idUSKCN0VK22O

Compared to what is really said:
https://www.rt.com/news/332273-reuters-misquotes-medvedev-war/

There are no facts, is just political driven biases, or isn't it true? (or a fact, since you like to use that word without knowing exactly what it means).

"All sides must be compelled to sit at the negotiating table, instead of unleashing a new world war,"

“What is necessary is to use strong measures, including those taken by Russia, by the Americans and even under certain provisions those that the Turks are trying to take, to sit at the negotiating table, instead of unleashing yet another war on Earth. We know all too well the scenarios leading to that.”

Uh... big difference? Both the "poor" translation on Reuters and the "correct" one paint Medvedev's words with the same tone: He says that it is imperative that everyone sit down and talk, or risk another war.

The difference between "War on Earth" and "World War" is semantically subtle. If a diplomat meant "limited war", he would have said "limited war". In both there is the suggestion of concern over a wider scale conflict. (If he were simply talking about a Syrian War, that would be silly, because Syria is already at war with itself.)

The Reuters link ends with this:

"You have no one power that can act alone," Medvedev said. "You have Assad and his troops on one side and some grouping, which is fighting against the government on the other side. It is all very complicated. It could last years or even decades. What's the point of this?"

Which paints Medvedev in a positive light. The article also correctly notes that Russia has submitted its proposal and called the others to the negotiations table.

The other issue attributed to "The Financial Times" seems a more reasonable protest, but this one smacks of semantic nitpicking.

 

[Dotini]

Things are looking up! Several Shi'ite militias so important to the recent successful retaking of Iraqi cities like Tikrit from IS have moved on to join Russia and Assad in the final assault on Aleppo, the biggest city in Syria. The secret? They are being well-paid.

Soon the "moderate" rebels will be all dead or dispersed to Europe. And then the potential coming to grips with IS. See? Obama was right all along in minimal intervention here in Syria. The locals are taking care of business. On to Libya.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-s-allies-now-fighting-cia-backed-rebels.html

 

[mister dog]

Obama was right all along in minimal intervention here in Syria. The locals are taking care of business. On to Libya.

Due to Russian airstrikes mostly. If it weren't for that i bet Syria was now a terrorist state.

 

[Dennisch]

The Kurds in Syria, allies of the US and friends, are now under attack by Turkey, allies of the US and friends.

Complexity +1.

 

[mister dog]

The Kurds in Syria, allies of the US and friends, are now under attack by Turkey, allies of the US and friends.

Complexity +1.

Apparently they bombed the areas that the Kurds just recently captured from Jihadist groups...

 

[Dennisch]

Turkey has now vowed that the Syrian city of Azaz will never be controlled by the Kurds. If the YPG tries to take control of the city Turkey will retaliate with any means necessary.

Since when does Turkey have any say in Syrian politics?

 

[Blitz24]

Turkey has now vowed that the Syrian city of Azaz will never be controlled by the Kurds. If the YPG tries to take control of the city Turkey will retaliate with any means necessary.

Since when does Turkey have any say in Syrian politics?

If the Kurds gain from it in anyway possible, Turkey will grab it from them.

 

[Dotini]

Since when does Turkey have any say in Syrian politics?

Perhaps Erdogan feels that might makes right and the ends justify the means? Perhaps he feels indemnified from any harmful Russian retaliation by his membership in NATO? If so, the more fool is he.

 

[mister dog]

Meanwhile the Syrian army is advancing towards Raqqa:

https://www.rt.com/news/332462-syrian-army-offensive-raqqa/

 

[mister dog]

Belgian investigators discovered a surveillance video during a search of the house of a suspected terrorist that has links to the attacks in Paris, that showed how they hide a camera in the bushes and were spying on a home.

Investigation showed that home was the home of one of the senior directors working in Belgian nuclear plants:

http://www.nieuwsblad.be/cnt/dmf20160217_02133313

12 hours of footage filming his house and tracking his movements, which means these monsters were planning some sort of breach or sabotage in one of our nuclear plants

Here's Hoping European intelligence puts every nuclear plant on high alert now, and also the people working in them...

There was already a suspected case of sabotage in our nuclear plant some years ago:

http://www.powerengineeringint.com/...irms-doel-4-nuclear-power-plant-sabotage.html

 

[Dennisch]

A possible car bomb has gone off in Ankara, Turkey. Reports are of at least 5 dead and lots of wounded.

Edit. 18 dead now. 28.

Also,

@mister dog

Belgian nuclear power stations are already under increased scrutiny due to the severe lack of maintenance and old age of the reactors. The Netherlands and Germany are already looking into plans to have some of them closed because of that.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Here's Hoping European intelligence puts every nuclear plant on high alert now, and also the people working in them...

Having worked in/around them in the past (and having literally tripped over a nuclear guard unit once) I'm pretty sure that they will already be pretty well protected against most eventualities. That's notwithstanding @Dennisch's observations about the retirable state of some of Belgium's reactors... but several Euro countries (and others) already have a vested interest in surveilling the movement of the products of such plants.

 

[Dennisch]

Turkey has stated that it will not stop bombing the Kurds in Northern Syria, after pleas of several NATO members to stop,because Turkey might be trying (abusing) to get NATO involved under the cover of article 5 of the NATO treaty.
Furthermore, Turkey has demanded that the USA has to pick a side. Turkey, or the Kurds.

 

[mister dog]

Turkey has stated that it will not stop bombing the Kurds in Northern Syria, after pleas of several NATO members to stop,because Turkey might be trying (abusing) to get NATO involved under the cover of article 5 of the NATO treaty.
Furthermore, Turkey has demanded that the USA has to pick a side. Turkey, or the Kurds.

Hope they go for the Kurds.

 

[Dennisch]

Hope they go for the Kurds.

I can see this turning into an Israel - Palestine part Deux.

 

[mustafur]

Why does everyone in that Region seem to hate the Kurds?

 

[Dotini]

Why does everyone in that Region seem to hate the Kurds?

They are not Arabs. Their skin and eyes and facial features differ. Though many are now Muslim (Shia?), their ancient Zoroastrian belief system predates even Christianity by thousands of years. I think their burial practices differ. They are clannish, with liberated females who join in the fighting. Other than that, I don't know.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Why does everyone in that Region seem to hate the Kurds?

Very very simply, Kurds (who are several 'groups' in themselves) feel that they have failed to gain recognition for the ownership of their homelands. They've been, they'd tell you, on the losing side of history many times. As such they are in various levels of conflict with much of the recognised nationalities around them. There are some similarities to the history of Jews and their diaspora.

 

[jimipitbull]

Very very simply, Kurds (who are several 'groups' in themselves) feel that they have failed to gain recognition for the ownership of their homelands. They've been, they'd tell you, on the losing side of history many times. As such they are in various levels of conflict with much of the recognised nationalities around them. There are some similarities to the history of Jews and their diaspora.

Except, you can't Polish a Kurd.

 

[Touring Mars]

Why does everyone in that Region seem to hate everyone?

FTFY

 

[dxm8975]

Why does everyone in that Region seem to hate the Kurds?

I guess those Arab people still have some kind of prejudice against them since they had been traditionally the ones on the losing side of history that failed to establish their own homeland as a nation, apart from them being ethnically "different" from the Arabs(The same goes with the Turks living in today's Turkey and Persians in today's Iran in this aspect, so to speak), though most of today's nations with majority of Arab population in Middle East were formed as a result of colonization by then European powers(British Empire and France), we can also regard them as being "unlucky" in comparison to Arabs who could found their own countries by chance.

 

[Dennisch]

The Turks have been shelling the YPG Kurds once again. Because Turkey sees them as a terrorist organisation, whereas the UN sees the YPG as one of the more trustworthy groups in the fight against IS.

You just can't take the UN serious anymore. All talk. No action.