Viewing 10 posts - 131 through 140 (of 316 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1093345

    You get your history wrong (talking about the Balfour Doctrine!) and then, when confronted with it, revert to semantics.

    I didn’t get my history wrong at all. This is what I wrote,
    “Erm you’re about a century too late. Balfour Agreement. The middle east was sliced up a long time ago.”

    What part of that is wrong?

    Balfour Declaration 1917. That’s “about a century ago” isnt it ?
    Sykes–Picot Agreement 1916. That’s about a century ago isn’t?

    I mentioned the Balfour declaration yes. The Declaration advocates the re carving of Palestine into a state for the jewish people. That is clear re-carving and border and boundary changing, and valid to cite. The declaration was connected to the year earlier Sykes–Picot Agreement. Either, or better both, can be cited as 100 year old examples of carving up the middle east. I would have cited the Sykes–Picot Agreement had I remembered the name of it, as this is a perfect example of recarving.

    So this new re-carving of the middle east concept of yours, is hardly the Sykes–Picot Agreement / Balfour type of re-carving. It is little more than a second division power shift. Syria are not one of the middle east heavyweights, certainly not now.

    History didn’t begin 100 years ago. So how relevant is this?
    The middle east has been carved up since biblical times. It’s this “new” recarving you suggest, and what exactly Putin has “got” out of it, what it’s “costing” him, and is it worth it? we should be discussing now.

    1 member liked this post.
    #1093347

    Iran/Persia never had any influence historically in the Middle East.

    Really? Ever heard of the Persian Empire in history? The middle east was part of that.

    I asked earlier for a definition of the middle east. Iran is arguably West Asia or part of the middle east. As part of the middle east, it will have an influence.

    Iran’s influence is limited. As the home of Shia, and not Sunni, not all of the middle east are so keen on Shia.

    In modern times, Iranian Hezbollah in Lebanon is now 40 odd?  That’s nothing “new” is it.

    Iran now controls a swathe of territory through Iraq,

    Really? Where?

     

    • This reply was modified 6 years, 9 months ago by  Morgan..
    #1093349

    Ge

    Good post Sceptical.

    I would add that Syria provides Russia (and Iran) their only port access to the Mediterranean and Putin has signed a deal with Assad that now gives territorial sovereignty of the established Russian Navy base (in Tartus) to Russia. Strategically important both militarily and commercially, with plans afoot to massively increase the size, giving access to aircraft carriers etc and large commercial shipping. There is also a newly established Russian airbase in Latakia.

    The largest natural gas field in the world is shared by Iran and Qatar. With plans afoot to build a monster pipeline, including through Syria. Russia and Syria want a slice of that action and are competing with Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey to build that pipeline. Qatar is pro EU and the clash there between Russia and the EU is fairly obvious because Russia provides around a quarter of the gas Europe consumes and the EU wants to lessen Russian influence/involvement in its energy requirements. Syria obviously wants to build it to help the Syrian economy recover. Russia is also forging new energy ties with Iran.

    As has been stated, it is a highly complex situation and the “Trump” kicked Syrian arseology, makes a total mockery of it.

    1 member liked this post.
    #1093350

    Finally, thankyou.

    Good post Ge.

    Yes Tartus is what I believe is in this for Putin. Although the long term stability of Syria could jeopardise his plans. He has no guarantees of Assad’s leadership, or of the next regime, or the next regimes to be Pro-Putin. It’s a very volatile and delicate situation at the moment.

    A much safer bet is the UK Base on Cyprus just across the water. They’ve been there for over 50 years and are a very stable proposition.

    #1093351

     

    I haven’t made a comment on the politics of this whole debate, middle east etc,  I’m not  knowledgeable enough on it all …although I did know someone who was sent over to Syria about 4-5 years ago, all very hush hush, never heard a word since, I fear the worst. The British Government were certainly involved as many as 7 years ago I KNOW  that much. Its just a shame that intelligent people cant discuss things without being , smart arsed or overbearing and smug. Grown up men. Stop trying to point score. It stops an interesting debate being interesting !

    B-)

    night :bye:

     

    #1093352

    Ge

    …although I did know someone who was sent over to Syria about 4-5 years ago, all very hush hush, never heard a word since, I fear the worst. The British Government were certainly involved as many as 7 years ago I KNOW that much.

    Exactly. The civil war (initially) in Syria would NOT have happened but for British and American involvement. Both assumed it would be done and dusted quickly and Assad overthrown so they could get in plasce a puppet government and both totally underestimated and misunderstood the forces at play, tribal/religious differences, IS/ISIS etc. Obama opened the door for Russian involvement and the complex situation being played out now.

    #1093353

    Good post Sceptical. I would add that Syria provides Russia (and Iran) their only port access to the Mediterranean and Putin has signed a deal with Assad that now gives territorial sovereignty of the established Russian Navy base (in Tartus) to Russia. Strategically important both militarily and commercially, with plans afoot to massively increase the size, giving access to aircraft carriers etc and large commercial shipping. There is also a newly established Russian airbase in Latakia. The largest natural gas field in the world is shared by Iran and Qatar. With plans afoot to build a monster pipeline, including through Syria. Russia and Syria want a slice of that action and are competing with Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey to build that pipeline. Qatar is pro EU and the clash there between Russia and the EU is fairly obvious because Russia provides around a quarter of the gas Europe consumes and the EU wants to lessen Russian influence/involvement in its energy requirements. Syria obviously wants to build it to help the Syrian economy recover. Russia is also forging new energy ties with Iran. As has been stated, it is a highly complex situation and the “Trump” kicked Syrian arseology, makes a total mockery of it.

    I like this post and don’t wish to attack or detract from it.

    “Got” and “planning to get” are two different things.

    Going through your list. Putin has “got” a sea port and an airfield in Syria, which he may not be able to keep on to. The rest he is planning to get. Erm, big deal. How many ports and airfields, Oil and gas pipelines have UK got in the region? France, USA, and NATO?

    What is this costing Russia? so far for one port and one airfield. Potentially WW3. Is it worth it? If Trump or Theresa were on the brink of causing WW3 due to an expansionist plot for a port, an airfield and the possibility of a few pipes, it’d be a very different story.

    So, to recap. Putin in this new re-carving of the middle east, (admittedly perhaps not quite on a par with the Sykes-Picot / Balfour recarving) has “got” a port and an airfield, and if he’s a lucky boy, he and his mate Assad might get the tender on a few pipes, (whose gonna give those two gentlemen the job?) and, soon, Russia and Iran will be controlling the middle east. Trump and Theresa are useless warmongering pieces of shit and we’re all going to die.

    Now I understand the politics of the middle east so much better

    Thanks x

     

     

     

    • This reply was modified 6 years, 9 months ago by  Morgan..
    #1093355

    I agree , from what I do know it was something they thought could be’ contained’  and dealt with …   I miss my pal, even after all  this time. Basically, we are all in the hands  of corrupt, greedy,  power mad Men …    heard it all before ?   yes  me too….   and don’t even bother saying Theresa May….

    #1093356

    Ge

    I think you’re a charlatan, Mr Bollox, who sends out a series of McGuffins to deflect arguemnt. You get your history wrong (talking about the Balfour Doctrine!) and then, when confronted with it, revert to semantics.

    Nods in agreement.

     

    :yes:

    #1093359

    You talk about Russia like it is the Iraqi regime, or the Libyan regime, to be taken at will as and when the UK and our allies feel like it. If you poke the Russian ‘bear’ don’t be surprised when it turns round and bites you.

    I talk about Russia like it is a technological and cultural backwater with a GDP smaller than Italy.

    Drac, I think you mean Romania.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita

    IMF International Monetary Fund’s figures for Russia’s GDP. World rankings:

    7. USA

    21. France

    22. UK

    25 Italy

    39 Greece

    61 Turkey

    62 Romania

    64 Russia

    65 World Average

    95 Libya

    97 Iraq

     

    Do the math. Russia is closer to Libya and Iraq in terms of GDP than it is UK and France.

    Russia is average.

    Scep and Ge, as Corbynite socialists, it seems you should be encouraging Putin to show socialist improvements for the standards of Russian citizens. Instead you have preferred to endorse Putin’s capitalist and expansionist standards for the rich Russian elite.

    Tut tut @ the leftie hypocrites.

    Anything than to side with Trump right?

Viewing 10 posts - 131 through 140 (of 316 total)

Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!