Sirija

[Prospero]

bilo, i to bez cenzure.edit:

[Yoda]

to je konsekvento onome sto on prica mada ne verujem da je on svestan toga.ljudi razlicitih nacija mogu ziveti zajedno samo kao deo kolonijalne imperije. sve ostalo nema da bude. za razliku od manca ja mislim da je ferguson uzasno plitak feljtonisticki istoricar po meri murdochove imperije. jedno je biti konzervativac (nolte) a drugo je napustiti sve profesionalne obzire u ime senzacionalizma kao sto on ovde to cini.

Vidis, ja mislim da je svestan i to vrlo, ali je to oko BiH elegantno preskocio, jer mu se ne uklapa u osnovni koncept koji si pomenuo. Inace zivimo u vremenu gde molbe™ iz elitistickih kruzoka i(ili) jagma za kintom, drustvenim statusom diktiraju struci da bude sluzavka. To je opsti trend. Edited September 8, 2013 by Yoda

[bergasa19]

Otkad je to novi trend?

[Yoda]

Kazem da je opsti - i kod nas i u svetu. Ne znam koliko je novi, ranije su se te stvari radile sofisticiranije i pametnije.

[Budja]

Jos malo nobelovaca. Ovog puta Geri Beker, nobelovac iz ekonomije, Cikago, pionir ekonomije obraovanja i porodice.

Bombing Syria? BeckerA major issue splitting America and world opinion is whether the US should bomb Syria because of the apparent use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government. My answer is “no”, despite the colossal blunder by President Obama in promising retaliation if Syria crossed the “red line” by using chemical weapons.I say blunder for two reasons. The president clearly is not enthusiastic about ordering a cruise missile or other strikes on Syria. If he were, he would already have ordered the attack since he admits he has the power to do this without getting congressional approval. By seeking their approval before he goes ahead, the president is demonstrating a reluctance to do this on his own.It would also be unwise to get involved in the civil war raging in Syria (I am indebted to very informative discussions with Guity Nashat Becker). Although the Assad government is clearly authoritarian and has not allowed any opposition to speak openly, it is no more repressive than American allies like Saudi Arabia. Moreover, Syria has not caused much trouble in the explosive Middle East or elsewhere. In addition, the rebels are split between radical Sunni Islamists, and other groups that appear to be pro democracy. The Islamists seem to be the better-organized and stronger fighters, with many of them coming from other countries. US intervention would increase the likelihood that they would come to power if the Assad government fell.Of course, chemical weapons are awful and kill civilians. But without chemical weapons, 100,000 or so deaths have occurred during the civil war in Syria, many of them in cruel and painful ways. Although chemical weapons are a violation of international law, the US and other countries stood by while Iraq apparently used chemical weapons on a large scale in its protracted war against Iran in the 1980s. Indeed, the US supplied arms to and remained an ally of Iraq throughout this war.There was some limited support within the United States for intervention in Syria on the side of the non-Islamic rebels even before the apparent use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government. However, our experience in Iraq and Afghanistan should caution against doing this. Vast uncertainty about how the future unfolds, and the “law of unintended consequences”, make it is extremely difficult to predict the eventual outcome of any intervention in another country’s battles, especially in as confused and volatile a region as the Middle East. One can hardly argue that the intervention in Afghanistan has been successful, and it is also dubious whether the Iraq intervention has been worth the cost to both the Iraqi and American people.I originally supported the 2^nd Iraqi invasion as necessary to bring down a cruel and dangerous dictator. Cruel and dangerous Saddam Hussein was, but he was also in retrospect a self-inflated rather minor figure. More importantly, one should have appreciated that the longer-term outcomes of such a disorganized and destructive activity as war are disturbingly uncertain.My conclusion is that except under extreme circumstances, it is not worth intervening in another country’s squabbles, even when the government is undemocratic and cruel. The extreme circumstances would include that American interests are very seriously threatened by the outcome, or that killing of non-fighters is on such a large scale that humanitarian reasons justify intervention to put an end to these killings.Neither of these criteria applies to the Syrian civil war. Many deaths have occurred, but the rebels presumably are responsible for many of these. Further, even an Islamists win probably would not seriously threaten American interests. The president’s red line is very worrisome because the US does not want to appear like a paper tiger. Obama could launch a few missiles to combat this perception, but overall I think it best if we punt on military action, and blame our inaction on a divided Congress.

http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2013/09/bombing-syria-becker.html

[Muwan]

Reportaža o Alevitima iz Alepa koji su iz izbegličkih kampova na istoku Turske pobegli u Istanbul.

[dillinger]

Vidis, ja mislim da je svestan i to vrlo, ali je to oko BiH elegantno preskocio, jer mu se ne uklapa u osnovni koncept koji si pomenuo. Inace zivimo u vremenu gde molbe™ iz elitistickih kruzoka i(ili) jagma za kintom, drustvenim statusom diktiraju struci da bude sluzavka. To je opsti trend.

Ferguson se uvek može vaditi na to da je mislio na podelu SFRJ po republičkim granicama. Problem nastaje u njegovom zalaganju za etničku podelu u Siriji i u prilično rasprostranjenom verovanju na zapadu da su NATO intervencije direktno uklonile Miloševića, iako su zapravo i u Bosni i na Kosovu sa njim potpisali mirovni sporazum. Lako bi bilo da je to samo stav Fergusona ali taj mitski balkanski recept za Siriju se može čuti iz usta mnogih zvaničnika.

[savindan]

ne znam da li je bilo :D

Oф скроз, са све презименом и поштанским бројем...http://www.parapsihopatologija.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14246&st=8715#entry2276236

[Gandalf]

New claim that order for chemical attacks did not come from Assad

The Guardian reports: President Bashar al-Assad did not personally order last month’s chemical weapons attack near Damascus that has triggered calls for US military intervention, and blocked numerous requests from his military commanders to use chemical weapons against regime opponents in recent months, a German newspaper has reported, citing unidentified, high-level national security sources.The intelligence findings were based on phone calls intercepted by a German surveillance ship operated by the BND, the German intelligence service, and deployed off the Syrian coast, Bild am Sonntag said. The intercepted communications suggested Assad, who is accused of war crimes by the west, including foreign secretary William Hague, was not himself involved in last month’s attack or in other instances when government forces have allegedly used chemical weapons.Assad sought to exonerate himself from the August attack in which hundreds died. “There has been no evidence that I used chemical weapons against my own people,” he said in an interview with CBS.But the intercepts tended to add weight to the claims of the Obama administration and Britain and France that elements of the Assad regime, and not renegade rebel groups, were responsible for the attack in the suburb of Ghouta, Bild said.

This report lends weight to the implications in a report published on August 27 which raised questions about culpability for the chemical massacre:

Last Monday, in the hours after a horrific chemical attack east of Damascus, an official at the Syrian Ministry of Defense exchanged panicked phone calls with leader of a chemical weapons unit, demanding answers for a nerve agent strike that killed more than 1,000 people. Those conversations were overheard by U.S. intelligence services, The Cable has learned. And that is the major reason why American officials now say they’re certain that the attacks were the work of the Bashar al-Assad regime — and why the U.S. military is likely to attack that regime in a matter of days.But the intercept raises questions about culpability for the chemical massacre, even as it answers others: Was the attack on August 21 the work of a Syrian officer overstepping his bounds? Or was the strike explicitly directed by senior members of the Assad regime? “It’s unclear where control lies,” one U.S. intelligence official told The Cable. “Is there just some sort of general blessing to use these things? Or are there explicit orders for each attack?”

Edited September 9, 2013 by Gandalf

[Zaz_pi]

Najnovije:Kerry: Syrian surrender of chemical arms could stop U.S. attack

• RUSSIA SAYS WILL URGE SYRIA TO PUT CHEMICAL WEAPONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL CONTROL IF THAT WILL AVERT MILITARY STRIKES
• SYRIA SHOULD GIVE UP WEAPONS IF IT WILL AVOID STRIKE: RUSSIA
• LAVROV SAYS SYRIA’S CHEMICAL WEAPONS COULD BE DESTROYED

MOSCOW- SYRIA WELCOMES RUSSIA'S PROPOSAL FOR DAMASCUS TO PUT ITS CHEMICAL WEAPONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL CONTROL

[Zaz_pi]

BRITAIN'S CAMERON SAYS SYRIA SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED TO PUT ITS CHEMICAL WEAPONS BEYOND USE UNDER INTERNATIONAL SUPERVISION

[Prospero]

ili su se keri i lavrov dogovorili da iskombinuju izlaz iz nužno ratne opcije ili se keri malo zaleteo pa je lavrov skočio na priliku da kako-tako sačuva asada od lupanja.

[Utvara]

Najnovije:Kerry: Syrian surrender of chemical arms could stop U.S. attack

Interesantno. Ovo bi trebalo da rešava Obami problem "red line"-a. Ali ne rešava problem Asada na vlasti, i dalje može nesmetano da radi šta hoće, što odgovara Rusima.

[Max Morlock]

Freedom fucking fighters... <_<

[porucnik vasic]

to je konsekvento onome sto on prica mada ne verujem da je on svestan toga.ljudi razlicitih nacija mogu ziveti zajedno samo kao deo kolonijalne imperije. sve ostalo nema da bude. za razliku od manca ja mislim da je ferguson uzasno plitak feljtonisticki istoricar po meri murdochove imperije. jedno je biti konzervativac (nolte) a drugo je napustiti sve profesionalne obzire u ime senzacionalizma kao sto on ovde to cini.

+45045У сриду.Иначе ово са Сиријом је на нивоу оног циркуса око Данцинга ономад. Како би неки форумаши подржали Молера да заведе ред међу тим дивљим Пољацима.