I just realized I have to finish a report on the Syrian/Iraqi proxy war in two days and have to explain
>The situation/problem
>The consequences/symptoms
>The causes/motives
>Measures that could fix shit
This shit is a clusterfuck. Could a certified expert please help?
>>56695028
The motives are the worst clusterfuck.
Russian, US, Israeli, Turkish, Saudi/gulf state, and EU motives are the most difficult to comprehend... I Guess I shouldn't expect /int/ to do my homework but still...
I guess no one wanna help?
>>56695775
I do but I don't know how.
>Maybe you could ask your professor that you identify as a Somalian refugee and need a few more extra days because of the oppressive white Swedish culture?
>>56696643
I could postpone it or pick another topic but I'll just wait until the last two days then anyway if I know myself.
>>56695028
First there was hatred.
Then this hatred was set ablaze. Now the hatred, still alive, is very very angry and also on fire. It is plotting to carve out an area for itself so it can conduct further experiments in various forms of hating things, perhaps earning an honorary doctorate in hateology in the process.
>>56697016
Well, I know the Swedish explanation of Daesh. What confuses me the most is what the US, Israeli, Turkish and Russian motives for their involvement are.
>>56697098
> US
Preventing anyone else from controlling the region. Humanistic intervention.
> Russia
Preventing anyone else from controlling the region. Secure future Gazprom customers, Turkey for example. Demonstrate their military might - to their own populace, mostly. Assisting Assad and thus show they are dependable towards their allies.
> Turkey
They don't want to be involved but dude the war is right there next to them?
> Israeli
Remove kebab. All of the kebab.
>>56695028
I couldn't tell you the motives, but heres my best guess
>US
Assad was a Russian ally, an opportunity arose to depose him after we destabilized the area around the time of the Arab Spring, and our support of the rebels has fucked everything up. Now it's damage control.
>Russia
Russia had ports in Syria iirc and it's in their interests to keeps assad in power. This puts them in conflict with US backed rebels
>Turkey
Oil, probably. Though it's in their interests to have a weak Syria. Not too sure
>Israel
They didn't like Assad because of the whole Golan heights thing as well as the fact that Hezbollah(an Iranian ally) supports Assad. The islamic militants are bad for them, ISIS is bad for them. I don't know too much about Israel's involvement
>consequences
Shits getting fucked. Schengen is probably at the greatest risk of collapse since it started, US is(finally, thank God) becoming more xenophobic thus enabling the rise of Trump, native Europoors are more Islamophobic enabling the rise of far right groups, the demographics of Europe are changing quickly, and the Refugee Crisis is a giant clusterfuck
>causes
Obama broke a security agreement with Iraq and the insurgency after we left overwhelmed the Iraqi Army. Muslims in Iraq were pissed because the US supported government was oppressing the Sunnis and they joined proto-ISIS which then spread to a Syria that had been destabilized by Obama/Hillary Clinton's State Department.
>solution
Coalition, preferably with Russian involvement, wipes out ISIS and the islamic rebels that are currently supported by Obama and(maybe) tries Assad for war crimes. The coalition stabilizes the region, installs a democratic government that isnt just a sham and starts rebuilding the infrastructure. There will probably still be an insurgency, but if it's done right(unlike in Iraq), it should be minimal.
It's probably wrong on some things, but whatever
>>56697402
U.S.
>Preventing anyone else from controlling the region.
Seems fairly reasonable the U.S. would like to get more comfy with Israel and Turkey I suppose, but at the same time the U.S. intervention isn't giving the U.S. new friends or a foothold, it's mostly just destabilizing things, fucks over Assad, and creates an awkward situation with Turkey regarding the kurds. Also the U.S. has never been big on humanitarian intervention. And since Assad threw away his big guns he's not a threat to Israel right?
Russkies
>Preventing anyone else from controlling the region.
Not financially viable at all imo. The most reasonable explanation I could find is at first Putin wanted that when he was expanding and to get revenge for the Ukraine to show the EU/NATO you shouldn't fuck with Putin. Further the stream of migrants to the EU cracks up the union and makes more and more countries more and more Russia-friendly. The dependable to allies part makes sense, especially with Russian expansion of influence in the south but still financially it's all a big suicide. And Turkey surely won't jump on gazprom any time soon.
Turkey
They back ISIS and smuggle oil and all that. I get they wanna fuck the kurds and Iran up the butt but still...
Israel
I'd assume they might want an excuse to expand further, maybe flirt with the druze, get the golans more secure?
Anyway thanks for helping me think, but imo all of these countries are doing shit that financially makes 0 sense.
>>56697402
>>56697716
You guys have indeed been most helpful, and although to me none of the motives make sense relative to costs, I assume everyone thought shit would cost less and now it's mostly damage control/saving face and opportunism.
I tip my fedora to thee.
>>56697928
Good luck on the report f.am
>>56698085
I will do my best. The knowledge of /int/ is with me.
>>56695346
>Russian, US, Israeli, Turkish, Saudi/gulf state, and EU motives are the most difficult to comprehend
Their motives are all pretty straight forward.
Russia is the only participant in the conflict that doesn't have to deal with the fact that all of their allies are working at cross purposes.
>>56697774
Actually Turkey and Russia had a deal going before the plane was shot down.
>>56695028
No need to thank me, family.
Enjoy being blacklisted.
>>56699290
>>56698815
But the U.S. acts as if they WANT to destabilize? Why is that helpful? It just feeds the pro-russian side that wants stability.
What I've written down:
SAA/shia/christians: Stabilization, protecting alawi/shia/christian interests, maintaining assad clan power.
Russkies: Increase power/influence in the region vs. the U.S. & co for increased global influence and trade (pipelines for instance). Keeping troops in Tartus, protecting black sea fleet, revenge for Ukraine, threaten Turkey from two directions, sell image of trustworthy/powerful ally to EEU, CIS, CSTO, SCO etc, increase euro migration to damage EU/schengen n get more neutral/pro-russian european states
Iran: Increase power vs. USA, Israel, sunnis, open up for expansionism/trade.
Israel: Prevent post-ba'ath unity n Assad offensive/first strike capacity, weaken Assad support to hezbollah/PLO, secure golans, fuck over Iran, better relations with Saudis (n US), increased influence on druzes north of Golan
USA: Cheap aid to allies, fuck over Russia/Iran, McRevolution, saving face, preventing mega-alliance Russia-Iran-China.
Turkey: Back turkmen rebels, fuck over kurds, avoid Russian sphere, cheap black market oil, back sunnis, cut off support to alawis in Turkey
Gulf states/saudi: Dominate oil, expand before oil runs out, spread sunni islam, and fuck over Iran
>>56699290
>>56699512
Saved and saved.
The more I dig into this the more fucked up it gets and the more it makes sense.
Especially my own regions actions are blatantly morally bankrupt. Which only highlights that politics aren't about doing what's right, they're about doing what the uninformed general public that votes for you think is right.
All those sand negroes, all that european culture and civilization, and all because people like me won't google things properly.
