Syrian Internal Conflict

[Todjaeger]

It's hard to counter your arguements when they are irrelevant to what I am saying. By the way, I am a third-year economics major at UChicago; my knowledge of econ is fine.

Capitalism, as it is defined by Adam Smith (along with David Ricardo, John Stuart Mill, etc.), is a Western idea. I never said that it was confined there, but you will notice that any country that has a capitalist system has at one point been in the sphere of a Western country.

Yes, you are right about the Soviet economy being less that exemplary. However, the assumption that, because the Russians couldn't effectively administer a centrally-planned economy, socialism does not work is false. Other factors, such as an autarkic trade policy, authoritarian leaders, and the Cold War contributed to the Soviet decline. That does not in any way prove that socailist economies do not work well.

Cuba is not a valid example because it would have relied on foreign support one way or another, albeit from the United States had it not been for Castro.

China, as you mentioned, has adoped more capitalist practices, but they are still in combination with socialism. The suppression of the yuan is hardly a free-market practice. To claim that China could have achieved such a level of production through capitalistic practices is absurd.

Socialist economies are a new idea. I'm sure that, in the first 100 years, capitalist systems did not work very well either. In fact, as shown by the Occupy Wall Street movement, they are no that great now either.

It could be that my arguments are irrelevant. Or it could be that you are failing to grasp them, or perhaps even just ignoring them altogether. So far you have made comments like the following...

Economy: Traditionally, Syria is a socialist state. Their central economy was working relatively well. Then, Western influence intorduced capitalism, driving up unemployment and ending food/agricultural subsidies. The al-Assad regime, therefore, is not to blame for these hardships.

Which you then supported with the following...

Syria has been dominated by the Ba'ath Party, which has a socialist agenda, since 1963. No, the West doesn't not have influence over Syria in the traditional sense, but with the fall of communism in the late 20th century, socialist economies have been drying out. However, know that I think about, Syria used to trade heavily with the Turkey (and the EU to some extent), which are both capitalist-leaning countries. To my knowledge, capitalism is a Western idea.

Now, the point I was trying (and apparently failing) to get across to you is that if Syria has had a 'socialist agenda' since 1963, what sort of economic model was Syria following after independence from France, but before the Ba'ath Party rose to power in 1963? Also, what sort of economic activity was occuring within what is now Syria when it was under France (not including the war years) and even earlier?

The entire point of the brief history of capitalism and free market economics (which is actually what Adam Smith wrote about, not capitalism per se...) is that the idea of capitalism is not a new one. It has been in practice for a long time, and has occurred around most of the settled world to one degree or another. Therefore, to blame the West for introducing capitalism to Syria after Syria had a centralized economy is to completely ignore what was occurring within Syria and the rest of the world both during and before Syria adopted a centrally planned economy.

What you have also mentioned, but apparently completely ignored, is why after the fall of communism the socialist economies "have been drying out" as you put it. The reason is that such economic models lack the flexibility and efficiency that exist in other models, particularly when operating on a large scale and in real practice vs. theory.

Basically, the Syrian economy right now it not doing too good. Nothing surprising there, much of the world has been suffering the last few years economically. Part of why Syria is suffering economically though is as a result of economic system which the national leadership chose to partially adopt back in the 1960's, and then transitioned out of a generation later because the socialist model chosen could not in reality meet the needs of the nation. That is a significantly different situation than Syria's current economic woes being the fault of outside/non-Syrian actions.

At the end of your most recent post, you have suggested that the idea of 'socialist economies' are a new idea, having only been around a century and that given time, such systems might become sufficiently developed to function efficiently on a large scale. That might be true, but I suspect that either that will never occurr, or at least not for some time. Apart from Venezuela the world seems to be moving away from such an economic model because it does not (presently at least) function in practice the same as it does in theory. Also, the fact that 'socialist economic' theory is new, and that there has apparently been no large-scale long-term example which can be cited as being successful is really says more about the economic model than it does about the West.

 

[lucinator]

I'd be happy to clarify.

Syria has been dominated by the Ba'ath Party, which has a socialist agenda, since 1963. No, the West doesn't not have influence over Syria in the traditional sense, but with the fall of communism in the late 20th century, socialist economies have been drying out. However, know that I think about, Syria used to trade heavily with the Turkey (and the EU to some extent), which are both capitalist-leaning countries.
To my knowledge, capitalism is a Western idea.

I'm not saying that the al-Assad regime is perfect, but it is becoming increasing obvious that Western countries are to blame.

And that BS about Assad killing children and w/e....that happens in most countries in Africa and I'm sure Asia to some extent. I don't massive protests over their administration? Besides, you'd have to be foolish to believe everything that Western media feeds you.

One the ba'ath party is actually fascist(seriously, it was supported by and modeled on Nazi Germany)

and yes while one news source may be wrong I look at 5-10 different news sources daily, I believe Syria has one and unlike the ones I read it is government owned and controlled.

And a note to moderators, this is starting to sound like trolling or state sponsored bull$#%@ and david should be :ban

 

[ngatimozart]

Originally Posted by davidoga View Post
I'd be happy to clarify.

Syria has been dominated by the Ba'ath Party, which has a socialist agenda, since 1963. No, the West doesn't not have influence over Syria in the traditional sense, but with the fall of communism in the late 20th century, socialist economies have been drying out. However, know that I think about, Syria used to trade heavily with the Turkey (and the EU to some extent), which are both capitalist-leaning countries.
To my knowledge, capitalism is a Western idea.

I'm not saying that the al-Assad regime is perfect, but it is becoming increasing obvious that Western countries are to blame.

And that BS about Assad killing children and w/e....that happens in most countries in Africa and I'm sure Asia to some extent. I don't massive protests over their administration? Besides, you'd have to be foolish to believe everything that Western media feeds you.

One the ba'ath party is actually fascist(seriously, it was supported by and modeled on Nazi Germany)

and yes while one news source may be wrong I look at 5-10 different news sources daily, I believe Syria has one and unlike the ones I read it is government owned and controlled.

And a note to moderators, this is starting to sound like trolling or state sponsored bull$#%@ and david should be :ban

I agree with Lucinator about david being :ban He does sound like a troll or state propaganda. I have read his posts and the answers to them and I do find Tod and Swerve being very polite and patient with him, giving him the benefit of doubt. Unfortunately I think he has outstayed his welcome.

 

[Feanor]

Russian warships have entered Syrian territorial waters, I speculate they may be there either to protect or evacuate Russian personnel from Tartus, where the VMF has a base. It's unlikely they will actually interfere in the fighting, though I suppose it's possible they get dragged into it.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Ñèðèÿ ãîòîâèòñÿ ê âîéíå: áåðåãà ñòðàíû îõðàíÿþò ðîññèéñêèå âîåííûå êîðàáëè

 

[lucinator]

The french once again have stepped up to the plate. They are now pushing for "aid corridors" Which would probably mean a no flyzone to implement. Though it is still looking like a longshot.

 

[Feanor]

Thread moved and renamed. This thread is now for all discussion of the Syrian internal conflict, and related developments.

On topic, Russia has made deliveries of Bastion-P Coastal ASM units to Syria. This is within the boundaries of the 2007 contract, and two units total are to be delivered, each carrying 36 missiles.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Ðîññèÿ ïîñòàâèëà Ñèðèè, êîòîðîé ãðîçÿò ñ Çàïàäà, "ìîùíåéøåå è íåïîáåäèìîå" îðóæèå

Production of MiG-29M for Syria is continuing, but as far as we know, no deliveries have been made so far.

 

[lucinator]

UN human rights council has condemned the Syrian uprising. One more nail in Syria's coffin. I'm truly amazed this has passed given who's in charge of the council.

 

[gazzzwp]

According to RT Russia has finalised a deal to supply Yakhont anti-ship missile systems to Syria. Training yet to happen; presumably the mission of the Russian carrier group now en-route.

An extremely worrying time and could well be the beginning of a major conflict in the region. I sincerly hope not.

 

[Feanor]

According to RT Russia has finalised a deal to supply Yakhont anti-ship missile systems to Syria. Training yet to happen; presumably the mission of the Russian carrier group now en-route.

An extremely worrying time and could well be the beginning of a major conflict in the region. I sincerly hope not.

The Yakhot missiles are the ammo for the Bation-P Coastal ASM units. That is not the mission of the naval taskforce headed to the region. Such training would either be done in the form of Russian instructors flying out to Syria, or, more likely, Syrian future instructors flying out to Russia and taking classes there at a Regional Training Center.

Also what you proudly call a carrier group consists of the Kuznetsov, a single ASW destroyer (Admiral Chabanenko). There, supposedly, already is a VMF taskforce deployed there for observation purposes, so if the two link up they could form a CVBG (with a rather modest air wing). However the Kuznetsov and Chabanenko have a different mission, then the ships already there (at this point it isn't clear what those ships are, and it may turn out that the whole thing was a hoax, as of right now the MoD is refusing to comment and Russian sources talk of their presence as fact).

A retired VMF admiral voiced the following: «У Тартуса сейчас наших кораблей нет. Там находится лишь наша плавмастерская и плавсклад хранения. На месяц туда также заходил сторожевой корабль Черноморского флота «Сметливый», но уже вернулся в Севастополь. Наверное, это и есть те самые «три корабля», о которых сообщают информационные агентства. А «Кузнецов» и «Чабаненко» в декабре действительно пойдут в этот регион», - прокомментировал ситуацию бывший командующий Средиземноморской 5-й оперативной эскадры, бывший начальник Главного штаба ВМФ адмирал Валентин Селиванов.

To summarize, a month ago the Smetliviy Patrol Ship visited Tartus but it's already gone, now Kuznetsov and Chabanenko are en route there. Those are the three ships that the media is talking about.

EDIT: Project 1135 Ladniy, and project 11540 Yaroslav Mudriy, along with a fuel ship, are headed to the Mediterranean for exercises. They are likely to link up with the Kuznetsov, for joint training, but at this point it's unclear whether this will take place near Syria or not, if at all.

 

[lucinator]

Syria has announced a evening deadline tonight for the city of Homs. All rebels must put down their weapons or "else" apparently. Many are fearing there will be a large massacre. The world community really needs to start acting to protect innocent civilians.

 

[Ben Solo]

There is no need for a no-fly zone in Syria,no fighterplanes used in killing innocent people just tanks.
I think the outcome will be very sad and nothing the international community can do when Russia and China opposing all sanctions.
Assad will kill as many as possible till a UN resolution.

 

[lucinator]

There is no need for a no-fly zone in Syria,no fighterplanes used in killing innocent people just tanks.
I think the outcome will be very sad and nothing the international community can do when Russia and China opposing all sanctions.
Assad will kill as many as possible till a UN resolution.

not necessarily; CAP's over Syria could severely limit the army's ability to attack civilians and to be quite honest doesn't require UN resolutions to enact (they're only a formality, and a way of showing international support for a action)

 

[Ben Solo]

not necessarily; CAP's over Syria could severely limit the army's ability to attack civilians and to be quite honest doesn't require UN resolutions to enact (they're only a formality, and a way of showing international support for a action)

Please tell me how?
They only use tanks and light armored vehicles,did you ever hear of bombs droppings or so?
They go in to towns and kill the ones they want,all on the ground.
Troops all come bye road,they dont even use helicopters just watch the images by mobil phones.
Its not like Libia,Syria is relative small with army basis all over the country.
Only in the east they could use the Airforce but nothing happening there.

 

[NICO]

BBC News - Syria crisis: Russia circulates surprise UN resolution

With so many rumors flying around about Russia and it carrier taking a little cruise towards the Med., this is an interesting development, seems to have taken Western govts. by surprise.

Compared to Libya or Egypt, this crisis has been kind of slow moving,is it going to pick up?is Russia trying to gain time, for what purpose? will Russia try to become a even bigger player in Syria? What the heck is going on?

 

[Ben Solo]

Its just a bluf on the russian side,what can they do?
The US has also many ships there so np,i think Assad asked them to show some muscle but wont help.
If there comes a war it will be a big one,lets hope not.

 

[Feanor]

The Mediterranean cruise had been planned for months before the Syrian mess started. It's mostly unrelated.

The resolution appears toothless, and directed at preempting a more decisive resolution.

 

[Sampanviking]

More precisely, it is about setting the narrative and; by extension, setting the tone of the subsequent negotiations.
I am sure that the Asian allies have been stung by having to react negativly to US inspired resolutions and so are getting there's in first. It buys time and makes the West look like the spoilers.

 

[gf0012-aust]

More precisely, it is about setting the narrative and; by extension, setting the tone of the subsequent negotiations.
I am sure that the Asian allies have been stung by having to react negativly to US inspired resolutions and so are getting there's in first. It buys time and makes the West look like the spoilers.

actually I think the issue is more about the west not wanting to amp up the turks.

they regard themselves as the elder statesman of that region by historical right and have not been shy about mobilising their own forces on the syrian border to send a message, they've done this at least 3 times in the last 5 years.

there's some idealogical jockeying going on between the two historical giants, Egypt and Turkey and I think everyone is nervous about upsetting that apple cart.

the arab league has long been encouraged to exercise a more robust role between members, but they've consistently taken the "non interventionist" approach as its been culturally comfortable as well as strategically convenient, they're now at the point where they can't continue to sit back and be seen as endorsing the behaviour because they then give license to protestors in their own countries arguing that they're ineffectual.

so, yes, in sme ways its about pre-empting "the west", but I think the bigger game is about the local politics

the turks however are the only local game in town that actually frightens the syrians because they have actual evidence of turkish impatience in the past. the kurds have provided the turks with hot pursuit excuses regularly in the past, so the syrians know full well that the turks are not afraid to cross over

 

[Ben Solo]

The turkish gouvernment asked the military if they were ready in case a war would start,this might be an indication that there is something coming.

 

[lucinator]

Please tell me how?
They only use tanks and light armored vehicles,did you ever hear of bombs droppings or so?
They go in to towns and kill the ones they want,all on the ground.
Troops all come bye road,they dont even use helicopters just watch the images by mobil phones.
Its not like Libia,Syria is relative small with army basis all over the country.
Only in the east they could use the Airforce but nothing happening there.

1. By improving your grammar.
2. sorry I misspoke before, I meant CAP/Strike missions. With SDB's or missiles one can hit very small targets with limited collateral damage.