facebook Twitter RSS Feed YouTube StumbleUpon

Home | Forum | Chat | Tours | Articles | Pictures | News | Tools | History | Tourism | Search

 
 


Go Back   BanglaCricket Forum > Miscellaneous > Forget Cricket

Forget Cricket Talk about anything [within Board Rules, of course :) ]

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 30, 2013, 11:48 AM
Zeeshan's Avatar
Zeeshan Zeeshan is offline
BC Staff
BC Editorial Team
 
Join Date: March 9, 2008
Posts: 25,814
Default Syria crisis

Syrian Civil War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_civil_war

John Kerry speech

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2...a-assad-regime
http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nbcnews.com/52883678
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old August 31, 2013, 11:50 PM
zman's Avatar
zman zman is offline
Test Cricketer
 
Join Date: January 20, 2005
Posts: 1,749

I hope congress doesn't pass Obama's plan to attack Syria for no reason and proves MLK wrong for once --
"The greatest purveyor of violence in the world : My own Government, I can not be Silent.”
__________________
MOTIVATION - Few things inspire us to soar quite like being really f***ed if we don't (Avatar caption)
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old September 1, 2013, 12:33 AM
Zunaid Zunaid is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: January 22, 2004
Posts: 21,739

Quote:
Originally Posted by zman
I hope congress doesn't pass Obama's plan to attack Syria for no reason and proves MLK wrong for once --
"The greatest purveyor of violence in the world : My own Government, I can not be Silent.”
I'm not sure I agree with 'for no reason". Gas attack killing thousands is reason enough to do something. Now what you need to do is more complicated and almost as complicated as the ground realities in Syria. Obama may have blocked himself into a corner with his red-line comments earlier and I do not see what a few token cruise missiles is going to have any effect other than to escalate an already chaotic situation. Bashar tried to play hard-ball like his dad but screwed it and his country royally. Now Syria is fast approaching Iraq II and the artificially constructed nation is seeing the chaos from sectarian and religious divisions - each party is being played by both external and internal players with an axe to grind (Russia, Iran, the US, Iraq, Israel et al ad infinitum ad nauseum).

The Washington Post had an interesting article on Syria - while the article was directed towards the American readership who may not be totally cognizant of the nuances of the Syrian crises, it is a fairly accurate and balanced account of it:

Quote:
9 questions about Syria you were too embarrassed to ask

By Max Fisher, Published: August 29 at 12:50

The United States and allies are preparing for a possibly imminent series of limited military strikes against Syria, the first direct U.S. intervention in the two-year civil war, in retaliation for President Bashar al-Assad’s suspected use of chemical weapons against civilians.

If you found the above sentence kind of confusing, or aren’t exactly sure why Syria is fighting a civil war, or even where Syria is located, then this is the article for you. What’s happening in Syria is really important, but it can also be confusing and difficult to follow even for those of us glued to it.

Here, then, are the most basic answers to your most basic questions. First, a disclaimer: Syria and its history are really complicated; this is not an exhaustive or definitive account of that entire story, just some background, written so that anyone can understand it.

read
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old September 1, 2013, 01:59 AM
zman's Avatar
zman zman is offline
Test Cricketer
 
Join Date: January 20, 2005
Posts: 1,749

I personally don't think there's much difference between the likes of Bashar, Saddam, and Gaddafi. They're all filthy creatures - ruthless, tyrranical rulers who would go to any extremes to satisfy their lust for unlimited power and wealth. But from what I've been reading there's no concrete evidence that the chemical weapons assault was carried out by Assad. Many are suspecting the rebels might be behind it...and it doesn't really make much sense for Bashar to invite UN inspectors, put them up in hotels and launch an attack just 10 miles from where they're staying. That's the reason why so many including the belligerent Rumsfeld isn't convinced there's enough evidence to implicate Assad for this particular action.

Now if there's a way to send a few drones to take Assad out, I have no problem with that, but I do worry a bit when so many more innocent civiliians become casualties of war than the number of those being avenged.

I feel the leaders of this country need to level with the people and let them know the real situation instead of tampering with evidence and manufacturing stories like WMD's before the Iraq war and now this. We've seen what happened in Iraq. The country is in far worse state than it was during Saddam's regime. I just find it ironic that in a country where most people are such decent, compassionate human beings, most of the leaders end up becoming worse than ruthless dictators when it comes to foreign policy.
__________________
MOTIVATION - Few things inspire us to soar quite like being really f***ed if we don't (Avatar caption)
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old September 1, 2013, 02:02 AM
Zeeshan's Avatar
Zeeshan Zeeshan is offline
BC Staff
BC Editorial Team
 
Join Date: March 9, 2008
Posts: 25,814

My question is why US? Why us? Who are WE to act? What gives us the authority to exert power like mafiosi style and act?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old September 1, 2013, 02:24 AM
Zunaid Zunaid is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: January 22, 2004
Posts: 21,739

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeeshan
My question is why US? Why us? Who are WE to act? What gives us the authority to exert power like mafiosi style and act?
Because we can and we do have a moral obligation to protect the weak and the oppressed. But what we do has to be seen to be fair and just and unequivocal.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old September 1, 2013, 02:50 AM
Zeeshan's Avatar
Zeeshan Zeeshan is offline
BC Staff
BC Editorial Team
 
Join Date: March 9, 2008
Posts: 25,814

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zunaid
Because we can and we do have a moral obligation to protect the weak and the oppressed. But what we do has to be seen to be fair and just and unequivocal.
But so does other countries. If any other country - even the likes Bangladesh or Kuwait or Russia , for e.g. - were to act, it would be deemed as an act of war and an invasion. But why us? We are no different than any other country.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old September 1, 2013, 03:33 AM
Zunaid Zunaid is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: January 22, 2004
Posts: 21,739

It would be an act of war (invasion, unlikely as their are no talks of boots in the ground). Much like Libya or Kosovo. And (fortunately or unfortunately) there are just wars and just invasions. Hearken back to Bamgladesh's own liberation war. That was a just war. That was a just invasion. Military action should always be the last recourse but often turns out to be the only recourse.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old September 1, 2013, 06:43 AM
Naimul_Hd's Avatar
Naimul_Hd Naimul_Hd is offline
Cricket Guru
 
Join Date: October 18, 2008
Location: Global City of Australia
Favorite Player: Shakib, Mashrafe
Posts: 13,383

Quote:
Originally Posted by zman
I hope congress doesn't pass Obama's plan to attack Syria for no reason and proves MLK wrong for once --
"The greatest purveyor of violence in the world : My own Government, I can not be Silent.”


The best user comment:


Quote:
What an insult to the animals
Source: 9gag
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old September 1, 2013, 11:57 AM
zman's Avatar
zman zman is offline
Test Cricketer
 
Join Date: January 20, 2005
Posts: 1,749

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zunaid
Because we can and we do have a moral obligation to protect the weak and the oppressed. But what we do has to be seen to be fair and just and unequivocal.
I can understand where you're coming from and I know your heart is in the right place, but I think US intervention in these crises have very little to do with justice and more to do with protecting national interests and interests of close allies. It's one thing to protect our own direct interests, but by going out of the way to protect the interests of some ruthless warmonger allies, the govt often crosses the line and find themselves serving the forces on the wrong side of justice. As you mentioned, our liberation war was a just cause and yet the US govt was directly supporting and supplying ammo to their Pakistani allies. This impending Syrian war one cannot help but suspect has more to do with securing Israeli interests than actually helping the oppressed or attempting to stabilize the region.
__________________
MOTIVATION - Few things inspire us to soar quite like being really f***ed if we don't (Avatar caption)
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old September 3, 2013, 04:24 AM
FaHiMa's Avatar
FaHiMa FaHiMa is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: April 28, 2007
Location: like.citytv-everywhere!
Favorite Player: YOURFACE
Posts: 3,348

Well if this is true...... :S

http://on.rt.com/q000to
__________________
Go get `em TigerZ!
*War is organized murder, and nothing else*
-Harry Patch
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old September 4, 2013, 09:39 AM
Equinox Equinox is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: May 25, 2009
Posts: 7,839

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zunaid
It would be an act of war (invasion, unlikely as their are no talks of boots in the ground). Much like Libya or Kosovo. And (fortunately or unfortunately) there are just wars and just invasions. Hearken back to Bamgladesh's own liberation war. That was a just war. That was a just invasion. Military action should always be the last recourse but often turns out to be the only recourse.
Quote:
Because we can and we do have a moral obligation to protect the weak and the oppressed. But what we do has to be seen to be fair and just and unequivocal.
Interesting that you bring up 1971. Where was the American moral obligation towards the weak and the oppressed then?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old September 4, 2013, 10:30 AM
Naimul_Hd's Avatar
Naimul_Hd Naimul_Hd is offline
Cricket Guru
 
Join Date: October 18, 2008
Location: Global City of Australia
Favorite Player: Shakib, Mashrafe
Posts: 13,383

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zunaid
Because we can and we do have a moral obligation to protect the weak and the oppressed. But what we do has to be seen to be fair and just and unequivocal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Equinox
Interesting that you bring up 1971. Where was the American moral obligation towards the weak and the oppressed then?
I think you did not get him. In 1971, West Pakistan was weaker than East Pakistan and America rightfully played their moral obligation towards the weak team.

Lets consider few points:

  • The population of West Pakistan was 55 Million and East Pakistan was 75 Million. The majority of the population (55 %) lived in East Pakistan.
  • West Pakistanis were afraid that East Pakistanis would take over them if they declare 'Bangla' as a state language.
  • During 1960s, 70% of total export earnings was originated from East Pakistan, mainly exporting Jute and Tea.
  • In 1970s election, AL got absolute majority by winning 297 seats out of 300 seats.
So, now you decide who was the weak and poor party in 1971 ?

Anyway, back to topic:

I personally don't support America's plan to attack Syria. For me, their main intention is to attack Iran. Syria is just an excuse, nothing else !
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old September 4, 2013, 11:09 AM
mufi_02's Avatar
mufi_02 mufi_02 is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: August 2, 2011
Location: NY
Favorite Player: Lara, Shakib
Posts: 4,624

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naimul_Hd
I think you did not get him. In 1971, West Pakistan was weaker than East Pakistan and America rightfully played their moral obligation towards the weak team.

Lets consider few points:

  • The population of West Pakistan was 55 Million and East Pakistan was 75 Million. The majority of the population (55 %) lived in East Pakistan.
  • West Pakistanis were afraid that East Pakistanis would take over them if they declare 'Bangla' as a state language.
  • During 1960s, 70% of total export earnings was originated from East Pakistan, mainly exporting Jute and Tea.
  • In 1970s election, AL got absolute majority by winning 297 seats out of 300 seats.
So, now you decide who was the weak and poor party in 1971 ?

Anyway, back to topic:

I personally don't support America's plan to attack Syria. For me, their main intention is to attack Iran. Syria is just an excuse, nothing else !
I don't think America helped West Pakistan because they were the weaker team. In fact, it was us who were the weaker ones. Yes, we produced majority of the export goods but all the revenues would go to West Pakistan. All the developments would happen there. And then the 1970s Bhola cyclone, with half a million death toll, the economy was extremely bad and that was one of the reasons for famine. So we were the oppressed party, and speaking of moral obligations, it was us who should have received the help and not the west Pakistanis.

AL was the absolute majority only in Bengal. But in the overall 1970 general action, AL won 39.2% of the votes 160 seats out of 300.

But I agree on Syria part and that it's only an excuse to get to Iran. USA should stay out of it. There are enough problems at home and without the broad support of UK and NATO, the majority of the cost/burden will fall into USA.
__________________
Bangladesh
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old September 4, 2013, 11:47 AM
Jadukor's Avatar
Jadukor Jadukor is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: October 17, 2010
Location: Bangkok
Favorite Player: Shakib, Brian Lara
Posts: 7,153

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naimul_Hd
I think you did not get him. In 1971, West Pakistan was weaker than East Pakistan and America rightfully played their moral obligation towards the weak team.

Lets consider few points:

  • The population of West Pakistan was 55 Million and East Pakistan was 75 Million. The majority of the population (55 %) lived in East Pakistan.
  • West Pakistanis were afraid that East Pakistanis would take over them if they declare 'Bangla' as a state language.
  • During 1960s, 70% of total export earnings was originated from East Pakistan, mainly exporting Jute and Tea.
  • In 1970s election, AL got absolute majority by winning 297 seats out of 300 seats.
So, now you decide who was the weak and poor party in 1971 ?

Anyway, back to topic:

I personally don't support America's plan to attack Syria. For me, their main intention is to attack Iran. Syria is just an excuse, nothing else !
High level sarcasm
__________________
রিয়াদ ফ্যান রা মানুষ হিসেবে উত্তম কারণ তারা অল্পতেই খুশি থাকে - জাদুকর ২০১৪
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old September 4, 2013, 02:59 PM
Zeeshan's Avatar
Zeeshan Zeeshan is offline
BC Staff
BC Editorial Team
 
Join Date: March 9, 2008
Posts: 25,814

If there is any country whose people are weak and oppressed, that country is Bangladesh due to sheer nature of classism where people with education, status, and money gets to trample over the ones who are less privileged.

Where is the outrage for that?

Then again, that is a different topic under different roof.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old September 4, 2013, 06:58 PM
Naimul_Hd's Avatar
Naimul_Hd Naimul_Hd is offline
Cricket Guru
 
Join Date: October 18, 2008
Location: Global City of Australia
Favorite Player: Shakib, Mashrafe
Posts: 13,383

Quote:
Originally Posted by mufi_02
I don't think America helped West Pakistan because they were the weaker team. In fact, it was us who were the weaker ones. Yes, we produced majority of the export goods but all the revenues would go to West Pakistan. All the developments would happen there. And then the 1970s Bhola cyclone, with half a million death toll, the economy was extremely bad and that was one of the reasons for famine. So we were the oppressed party, and speaking of moral obligations, it was us who should have received the help and not the west Pakistanis.

AL was the absolute majority only in Bengal. But in the overall 1970 general action, AL won 39.2% of the votes 160 seats out of 300.

But I agree on Syria part and that it's only an excuse to get to Iran. USA should stay out of it. There are enough problems at home and without the broad support of UK and NATO, the majority of the cost/burden will fall into USA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jadukor
High level sarcasm


Jaak, amar ar explain kora laglo na
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old September 4, 2013, 10:57 PM
Zunaid Zunaid is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: January 22, 2004
Posts: 21,739

I was referring to India helping us. That invasion was just wasn't it?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old September 4, 2013, 11:02 PM
Zunaid Zunaid is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: January 22, 2004
Posts: 21,739

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equinox
Interesting that you bring up 1971. Where was the American moral obligation towards the weak and the oppressed then?
It still existed. It is incumbent upon each of us to act morally. But then, we had Nixon and Kissinger holding the reigns. Quite the moral couple there.

The bigger moral quandary is this: why should one kind of atrocity (chemical weapons) be any more immoral than any other kind (carpet bombing, artillery into civilian areas, etc)?

And which despot should we act against? The list is long.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old September 4, 2013, 11:05 PM
Banglatiger84 Banglatiger84 is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: March 1, 2003
Posts: 2,703

The biggest villain in the Syria crisis are the Saudis.

In fact they are responsible for most of the Fitna in the Muslim world

Their policy of late is to fund and encourage death and destruction in other countries while shouting for peace in their own.

Their nationals commited 9-11, yet it was the Afghans and Iraqis that got destroyed because of it.
They are confident they will never face any problem because the US is their ally, but Allah swt has his plans as well, and when an oppressor's time comes no one will be able to save
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old September 5, 2013, 12:43 AM
Naimul_Hd's Avatar
Naimul_Hd Naimul_Hd is offline
Cricket Guru
 
Join Date: October 18, 2008
Location: Global City of Australia
Favorite Player: Shakib, Mashrafe
Posts: 13,383

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zunaid
I was referring to India helping us. That invasion was just wasn't it?
India did not invade us, rather WE who seek for their help. And when we managed India to help us, Pakistanis threatened India to attack them too.

Moreover, when 71 liberation war was done, Our govt (Bangladesh) asked Indian soldiers to leave which they easily could have denied and stayed in Bangladesh for 3-4 years. But we don't see that happening with American govt.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old September 5, 2013, 06:08 PM
zman's Avatar
zman zman is offline
Test Cricketer
 
Join Date: January 20, 2005
Posts: 1,749

^I guess technically speaking India's initial move to send their military could be considered invasion from an overall Pakistan perspective, just like if some part of Bangladesh today were to seek independence from the rest of the country (say Sylhet for instance) and sought help from India and India reciprocated, it could be considered invasion.

But even then the current situation in Syria would be drastically different because of at least two reasons-
a) We Bangladeshis were one people united for one cause and that was to separate from West Pakistan and their oppression.
b) Geographically we're separated.

But neither of these hold true for Syria. Infact Syria has so many groups with each group having different demands that it's hard to keep track of who wants what. Heck even Al Qaeda has strong presence there in the form of Nusra Front who are also fighting against Bashar. Things are so messed up even the US or Israel doesn't want to topple Assad's regime, rather they just want to weaken his military so he can't attack others. Being bordered by Turkey, Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan and Israel, geographically Syria's location is even more sensitive and critical than Iraq's. So if US doesn't get it right, things will get much worse for sure and there's no guarantee things will get better even after hitting rock bottom. Question is - is it a risk worth taking?
__________________
MOTIVATION - Few things inspire us to soar quite like being really f***ed if we don't (Avatar caption)
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old September 5, 2013, 07:39 PM
Ajfar's Avatar
Ajfar Ajfar is offline
Cricket Sage
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: Connecticut
Favorite Player: Nirala
Posts: 17,347

Did you guys see that McCain got busted playing Video Poker during Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing regarding possible attack on Syria? Later on Wolf from CNN asked him regarding getting caught playing video poker, and McCain's response was the worse part of that is I lost thousands of dollars. What an idiot, trying to be funny after he got caught. How we do keep putting clowns like him in such powerful position.
__________________
"I was the happiest man in the world, happier than Bill Gates"- Tamim Iqbal
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old September 5, 2013, 07:40 PM
NoName's Avatar
NoName NoName is offline
Cricket Legend
 
Join Date: April 9, 2011
Location: Sauga
Posts: 3,107

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naimul_Hd

Moreover, when 71 liberation war was done, Our govt (Bangladesh) asked Indian soldiers to leave which they easily could have denied and stayed in Bangladesh for 3-4 years. But we don't see that happening with American govt.
India didn't need to 'introduce' democrazy to us
__________________
"Life is a dream from which we all must wake."
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old September 6, 2013, 08:34 PM
Naimul_Hd's Avatar
Naimul_Hd Naimul_Hd is offline
Cricket Guru
 
Join Date: October 18, 2008
Location: Global City of Australia
Favorite Player: Shakib, Mashrafe
Posts: 13,383

Just watched this video on facebook. OMG...I can't believe my eyes.

Warning: Disturbing footage.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
BanglaCricket.com
 

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Partner Sites | Useful Links | Banners |

© BanglaCricket