ITS WAR!!!

[Funcrusher]

Different levels, surely.

Different levels? Of intervention? Arming and training people to fight is likely to lead to more deaths than bombing a factory. How does one define the levels here?

[Jakey Chesterton]

Really glad to hear the USA didn't intervene in 80s Nicaragua. Got a bit confused for a while there and thought they did. That would have been bad.

[buttgammon]

A question here: I'm anti-intervention, anti-Trump, anti-Putin, and also a bit scared; are there any good media sources out there? As the airstrikes unfolded on Friday night, my girlfriend and I figured out the best thing to do was to flick between Sky News and Russia Today and ignore everything both of them said, but I don't think that's a practical way to watch the news.

[Dr Syntax Head]

A question here: I'm anti-intervention, anti-Trump, anti-Putin, and also a bit scared; are there any good media sources out there? As the airstrikes unfolded on Friday night, my girlfriend and I figured out the best thing to do was to flick between Sky News and Russia Today and ignore everything both of them said, but I don't think that's a practical way to watch the news.

As well as this (I'm generally a news avoider) is there a reliable timeline source because I'm very out of the loop and have no idea how the situation got to where it has.

[Jakey Chesterton]

A question here: I'm anti-intervention, anti-Trump, anti-Putin, and also a bit scared; are there any good media sources out there? As the airstrikes unfolded on Friday night, my girlfriend and I figured out the best thing to do was to flick between Sky News and Russia Today and ignore everything both of them said, but I don't think that's a practical way to watch the news.

Everyone writing about this has a particular point of view, so all you can do is read and compare what the various sides are saying (in light of who they are and their interests) and draw your own conclusions. This is true of most subjects, but the situation here really hammers it home.

This subreddit is good for getting an overview of what the different sides are saying:

https://www.reddit.com/r/syriancivilwar/

[massive bereavement]

A question here: I'm anti-intervention, anti-Trump, anti-Putin, and also a bit scared; are there any good media sources out there? As the airstrikes unfolded on Friday night, my girlfriend and I figured out the best thing to do was to flick between Sky News and Russia Today and ignore everything both of them said, but I don't think that's a practical way to watch the news.

I have the Netherlands news channel's website NOS bookmarked. Currently they don't have anything on the crisis until near bottom of the page where it says "'Russia has no interest in Third World War - America, France and England have thrown bombs on Syria in response to the poison gas attack of a week ago. Russia reacts indignantly. "But the chance of escalation seems small."
So that's the Dutch take on it. 

[Paul Calf]

When can we start saying American Bot?

Only when Estelle and Kanye get round to the rewrite.

[idunnosomename]

When can we start saying American Bot?

Tonight, on Fox, yet another Seth Macfarlane show

[Jakey Chesterton]

When I said "intervention" I obviously meant overt, bomb dropping intervention.

Like the one Russia is doing.

Thanks for the education  in Newspeak mate.

Also, dunno why I didn't mention this at the time, but wtf do you think happened in, e.g., Raqqa!?! Or the coalition bombing of the SAA garrison of Deir Ezzor city (which was being besieged by ISIS for years), or Israel's regular bombing and missile raids, or Turkey's open invasion of the north they're not even attempting to conceal anymore etc. . That's us and our allies.

[RenegadeScrew]

A question here: I'm anti-intervention, anti-Trump, anti-Putin, and also a bit scared; are there any good media sources out there? As the airstrikes unfolded on Friday night, my girlfriend and I figured out the best thing to do was to flick between Sky News and Russia Today and ignore everything both of them said, but I don't think that's a practical way to watch the news.

It is almost impossible.  It definitely is if you intend to watch the news.  Personally I find stuff that is apolitical and amoral can be much better.  Something concerned with geopolitics or military stuff.  For example this article makes some interesting points amongst a lot of equipment talk.

https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/14/russia-claims-71-out-of-105-cruise-missiles-downed-in-yestedays-air-strikes-none-were-shot-down-according-to-the-us/

Like anything though you have to tread carefully.  I quite like looking at the war maps as they can be quite revealing too.  No idea who runs the website though - https://syriancivilwarmap.com/

[buttgammon]

Thanks for the recommendations and advice everyone. I tend not to follow rolling news on TV much unless something is immediately happening, but I do watch the news on RTÉ (the Irish state broadcaster) most evenings and find they're a little better on international stuff than British TV, but they have their own agendas with domestic stuff. Unfortunately, they don't really have the resources to provide that much in-depth coverage of stuff like the situation in Syria, so there's too much trifling local stuff and soundbites from anti-abortion fuckheads.

The closest I've found to a style that suits me is more substantial articles on websites that aren't necessarily news or politics oriented (stuff like this https://nplusonemag.com/issue-28/politics/the-syria-catastrophe-2/), but I agree that more dispassionate, amoral stuff is probably the way to go.

[BlodwynPig]

If we had intervened it needed to be decisive and overwhelming and not give Russia a chance to do anything.

The Arab Spring would have provided cover for that, but we'd also have had to fight IS afterwards.

Framing it as interventionist vs non. and trying to pin the blame is infantile. What is happening in Syria isn't the fault of people who want to intervene or people who didn't want to intervene.

What's happening is a consequence of demagoguery and dictatorships causing malcontent and a power vacuum when they can't assert their authority which is filled by extremists, many of whom were radicalised not primarily as a consequence of Iraq (though that wouldn't have helped) but as a consequence of their repression by Assad and the lack of moderate opposing voices.

This isn't a civil war we are to blame for as we aren't the world police. It isn't our responsibility to steer it to a conclusion.

the most obvious statement I've read all week.

[BlodwynPig]

American empire apologist.

He's banging the drum hard today. Guinea-Bissau Rambo respectfully objects to the "whimsy" barb.

[BlodwynPig]

History repeating itself, but this time with Marshmallow minded politicians.

[RenegadeScrew]

A good but unfortunately timed article as the US have just suggested today they'll be staying in Syria until three aims are met, one of which is "until Iran can be monitored" which essentially means "until we aren't in Syria".

https://newrepublic.com/article/147995/great-distraction-punitive-airstrikes

---

Britain fired 8 'storm shadow' missiles which appear to cost about 2m USD each.  The US must've spent well over 100m USD on their fireworks show.

[bgmnts]

Are we the baddies? I honestly dont know.

[Paul Calf]

We're allied with ISIS suicide bombers against a sovereign government in a region where we have no business.

In 2016 terms, that makes us our own enemy.

[daf]

Are we the baddies?

[Crisps?]

I love that, as we did so successfully in Libya, providing air support for ISIS is given such a mundane word, "intervening". Or us destroying the legitimate government of Syria and leaving the country in the hands of ISIS is us superheroes "ending the war".

While, of course, Russia intervening, in defence of the legitimate government of Syria against a group that regularly attacks European cities (even if you don't give a shit about Syrian cities), is just baaaaaad.

Never mind the Guardian, what the fuck is up with this place?

The war (uprising by foreign Islamist barbarians) would have been over years ago if we (US/UK/Israel/Saudi) had not intervened in support of ISIS.

are there any good media sources out there?

BBC or CNN for stuff about Russia; RT or Press TV for stuff about UK/US.

[RenegadeScrew]

There are rarely any non-baddies in war, very rarely.  If we is Britain then I'm not sure we have ever been in a war for the right reasons.  Even in cases when we are not the worst side we aren't there to do good.

In fact, it must be very rare for a country to be a non-baddy.  The closest the USA have been to non-baddy was when it fought to become the USA.

Stuff like international brigades/volunteers (or the POUM!) are the closest I can think to non-baddies in war. 

No doubt most (sane) people would consider the Syrian kurds to be the closest to non-baddies in the this war. 

I should've used the word goodies really.

[Johnny Yesno]

We're allied with ISIS suicide bombers against a sovereign government in a region where we have no business.

Hey, those are 'moderate extremists' we're allied with, sonny Jim. Don't you know anything? Plus our military don't have skulls on their uniforms, so we're definitely in the clear.

[RenegadeScrew]

The war (uprising by foreign Islamist barbarians) would have been over years ago if we (US/UK/Israel/Saudi) had not intervened in support of ISIS.

We (US/UK/Israel/Saudi) have certainly helped ISIS at the very least.  We would certainly accuse the Russians of intervening in support of ISIS if they had done what we did.

There are more than two factions though.  The war would be over years ago if we hadn't supported and trained various 'rebel' groups, the kurds, etc, etc, etc

[Danger Man]

Are we the baddies? I honestly dont know.

Being the baddies and losing recent wars is probably the reason for the relatively modern poppy worship and 'our brave boys' attitude of a lot of people.

Though I can't be bothered to google any proof of this.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Handy for all dubious major powers having IS around because any state including Russia or KSA can simply go 'terrorists' and the public will comply with the logic "well we aren't perfect but we're nowhere near as bad as those rotters!"

[garbed_attic]

Just got into a heated argument with my dad over this since he is - at best - ambivalent about the country taking in more Syrian refugees because, he says, of the risk of there being terrorists amongst them, that we could hardly host half of the country's civilians, and that British people don't like hearing people not speaking English on the streets because it makes them nervous and their cultural values may erode British cultural values. However, he is in support of the bombing because he says the West needs to take a stand to show Assad that gassing his own citizens is unacceptable.

One of the reasons the argument got heated was because I brought up historic comparisons (Vietnam; Iraq; Afghanistan; Britain's relationship with Saudi Arabia) and he said this was irrelevant (as was the issue of our not having taken in more refugees) since this is the situation we are now faced with and would you rather just sit back and do nothing?

I honestly believe (parroting Vonnegut a bit here) that one of the major geo-political failings of Western European and American foreign policy over the last half-a-century is that we brush the past under the carpet as irrelevant, while the populations (and governments) of countries in the Middle East, Africa and parts of Asia, very much remember.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

If you want fewer refugees you cannot also advocate war. British baby-boomers must be the most horrible entitled set of cunts to stalk the earth.

[Dr Syntax Head]

Adam Curtis has a fuck load of new material and cool songs to use for his next film now. Always a silver lining and all that

[Danger Man]

Adam Curtis has a fuck load of new material and cool songs to use for his next film now. Always a silver lining and all that

True, but I've heard he's run out of shots of the Twin Towers that aren't obvious until a second or third viewing.

[garbed_attic]

If you want fewer refugees you cannot also advocate war. British baby-boomers must be the most horrible entitled set of cunts to stalk the earth.

Thanks for that first sentence. I wish I'd used it rather than getting sputtery because it encapsulates what I was trying to get across.

Wouldn't have used the second sentence, mind.

[Alberon]

The Washington Post reports Assad is in a very good mood as he's taken the very limited nature of the strikes as proof the West has no real stomach for real change in Syria.

So if he is responsible for the chemical attacks he's going to see this as a green light to carry on as before (though not immediately obviously).