T Nation

Tehran Vs. Damascus?

This is how I see it, guys…

At its very core, the War in Iraq is a proxy War between Syria and Iran.

Al Qaeda is there, killing people and trying to push their own Agenda.

Our guys and gals are there, doing their best, but are caught in the middle of Centuries long hates and animosities.

My questions for the Group:

  1. Proxy War? (Agree? Disagree? Why?)

  2. How in the WORLD is Assad eliminated from the debate, yet Iran is spoke of on a daily basis?

  3. When the U.S. pulls out (which is inevitable); who do you think will prevail; Tehran or Damascus?

Why?

Thanks, guys!

Mufasa

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
At its very core, the War in Iraq is a proxy War between Syria and Iran.

Al Qaeda is there, killing people and trying to push their own Agenda.

Our guys and gals are there, doing their best, but are caught in the middle of Centuries long hates and animosities.

My questions for the Group:

  1. Proxy War? (Agree? Disagree? Why?)

  2. How in the WORLD is Assad eliminated from the debate, yet Iran is spoke of on a daily basis?

  3. When the U.S. pulls out (which is inevitable); who do you think will prevail; Tehran or Damascus?
    [/quote]

Very pertinent questions.

I disagree that the Iraq war is a proxy war between Syria and Iran. The Iraq war is a conflict between the pro-US Iraqi crowd and the ones too proud (to confront the superpower requires a humongous ego!) to sit idly by when foreign troops are on their ground. Those are the two main factions. Then comes the religious freaks who see it as yet-another desecration of Muslim land by the West. Their ranks are filled with foreigners from all across the Arab world and they come to Iraq wishing to die, and to make that sacrifice carry more weight than what their pathetic lives are worth, they usually try to take as many others to the afterlife with them.

In short: Power vacuum and assumed illegitimacy of a government/election under occupation. Not proxy war. That was for 1).

The second question can be summed up in three words: Oil, defiance and threat.

Iran’s got lots of natural resources, was successfully defiant and has a capable military. Syria’s got squat in comparison. Assad is content with the status quo and is not aspiring to more. He tries to avoid drawing attention to his regime to avoid confrontation. Tehran on the other hand, is much more ambitious, and wants to reclaim the role of a regional power. The Iraq war was a godsend for them. Syrians want to flee Syria because they know the system only works for the elite. The Iranians are actually interested in serving their country and, despite all the freedoms abuse, are willing to take their country towards a better tomorrow. Iran has democratic institutions. Syria’s got an absolutist in power.

The last question is the easiest. I don’t believe the US will pull out of Iraq in our lifetimes. Call me wacko, but I believe Bush knew exactly what he was getting into, foresaw the inevitable chaos, then started the never-ending war. Not a far-fetched scenario when you read the PNAC’s charter. Everything they could ever hope for is guaranteed by the conflict.

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
This is how I see it, guys…

At its very core, the War in Iraq is a proxy War between Syria and Iran.
[/quote]

I thought they were on the same side. But I guess when they aren’t busy killing westerners or jews, they keep in practice by killing each other, so I guess it kind of makes sense.

Thanks to Bush’s “I am going to change the Middle East works” policy. Dumb ass.

Agree. It’s clear Iran is supplying and participating in the insurgency.

'Cause Pelosi went over there and gave him a good snog on his knob. Besides he doesn’t say as much dumb shit as Ahmena-thingy, so he isn’t drawing as much attention even though he may doing as much crap.

Once we’re gone I don’t give a shit what they do to each other. They can suck each other’s dicks or blow each other up. As long as they don’t bother me, I won’t bother them.

VERY interesting insights, lixy:

Are you talking permanent U.S. bases in Iraq?

Or more of a Special Forces type of presence?

Mufasa

pat36:

As I understand it, the “insurgency” consist of:

  1. (As lixy said) a mixed bag of extremist,“Holy Warriors” , “guns-for-hire” and losers AND

  2. Sunni Arabs supplied by Syria.

Mufasa

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
This is how I see it, guys…

At its very core, the War in Iraq is a proxy War between Syria and Iran.

Al Qaeda is there, killing people and trying to push their own Agenda.

Our guys and gals are there, doing their best, but are caught in the middle of Centuries long hates and animosities.

My questions for the Group:

  1. Proxy War? (Agree? Disagree? Why?)

  2. How in the WORLD is Assad eliminated from the debate, yet Iran is spoke of on a daily basis?

  3. When the U.S. pulls out (which is inevitable); who do you think will prevail; Tehran or Damascus?

Why?

Thanks, guys!

Mufasa[/quote]

Absolutely it is a proxy war. The American public doesn’t want to face up to that fact yet because they are getting weary. It simply can’t be ignored anymore.

Assad isn’t as religously fanatical as A-Jab. If he was he would be in the forefront. Iran is also a lot more ambition on a regional basis and seeks more regional power to further the fanatical aims of the Theocrats.

A pullout isn’t inevitable or likely in the short term. Syria doesn’t present much of an opposition and can be dealt with militarily in short order. Iran is a little more difficult but it’s military capacity can be eliminated in weeks. (Air Force, Navy and large ground formations) The US isn’t ready to do that yet but we are certainly preparing to do so. The Iranians need something like this to shore up support so it will happen. I don’t know who will prevail, perhaps the Saudi’s or Turks will run Iraq as a protectorate, maybe even the US.

Here’s a wildcard for you. Syria provokes Israel and get’s pounded. Iran launches a few missles to guage Israeli response. Israel doesn’t wait to see what they are carrying and unleashes the “David” response which is a nuclear strike of at least 15 cities on an attacker threatening Israel with WMD’s.
If the Arabs don’t tone it down this or something like it is bound to happen one day.

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
pat36:

As I understand it, the “insurgency” consist of:

  1. (As lixy said) a mixed bag of extremist,“Holy Warriors” , “guns-for-hire” and losers AND

  2. Sunni Arabs supplied by Syria.

Mufasa[/quote]

This link suggests Iran’s involvement by way of hezbollah, call it a double proxy if you will.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/07/02/iraq.hezbollah/index.html

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Are you talking permanent U.S. bases in Iraq?
[/quote]

Affirmative.

Plenty of reasons the American leadership can invoke to justify that: Securing the oil, fighting Al-Qaeda, protecting the minorities, pressure on Iran…

This is one of those instances where I’d really like to be proven wrong for the sake of peace and understanding. Sadly, everything is pointing out towards a long-term presence.

[quote]hedo wrote:
Absolutely it is a proxy war. The American public doesn’t want to face up to that fact yet because they are getting weary. It simply can’t be ignored anymore. [/quote]

No, it’s not a proxy war. If Tehran and Damascus had unsettled scores, they would have taken them out in the occupied territories.

Repeat after me: Assad’s regime is se-cu-lar!

And if you wanna be taken seriously, the least you can do is to learn spelling the name of the Iranian president.

Yes. Iran’s got everything to become a regional power.

Agreed.

Nah. Syria simply don’t matter.

This line of thinking is scary. You actually believe Iran want to clash mano-a-mano with the US? That’s insane. Your lack of knowledge may lead you to associate them with the suicidal wackos at Al-Qaeda or the (arguably legitimate?) Palestinian resistance just because they happen to share the same religious beliefs. The fact of the matter is that the Iranian leaders are rational and pragmatic. Going to war with the world’s sole superpower is suicidal and they know it. They won’t provoke you. But then again, you never needed much of a cassus belli to go to war.

[quote]Here’s a wildcard for you. Syria provokes Israel and get’s pounded. Iran launches a few missles to guage Israeli response. Israel doesn’t wait to see what they are carrying and unleashes the “David” response which is a nuclear strike of at least 15 cities on an attacker threatening Israel with WMD’s.
If the Arabs don’t tone it down this or something like it is bound to happen one day.
[/quote]

Wishful thinking. Never gonna happen.

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
This is how I see it, guys…

At its very core, the War in Iraq is a proxy War between Syria and Iran.

Al Qaeda is there, killing people and trying to push their own Agenda.

Our guys and gals are there, doing their best, but are caught in the middle of Centuries long hates and animosities.

My questions for the Group:

  1. Proxy War? (Agree? Disagree? Why?)

  2. How in the WORLD is Assad eliminated from the debate, yet Iran is spoke of on a daily basis?

  3. When the U.S. pulls out (which is inevitable); who do you think will prevail; Tehran or Damascus?

Why?

Thanks, guys!

Mufasa[/quote]

Huh? You seem to be seriously misinformed. Iran and Syria are on the same side. See Hezbollah: Iranian arms are shipped through Syria to make it into Hezbollah’s hands to fight the Israelis (and potentially other Lebanese). I don’t know who told you Iran and Syria were fighting each other via Iraq. They are supporting different sides in the sectarian conflict, but for different reasons. Syria is just making trouble, Sunni fundamentalism scares them (wikipedia “Hama”).

In fact, if the Israelis were smart, they would be doing their utmost to conclude a peace treaty with Syria (Golan Heights being returned), thus breaking off Iran’s one ally, hurting Hezbollah, and removing Iran’s easiest way to attack Israel. We stopped them from talking a few months ago, because our foreign policy is run by idiots. Now Olmert says he wants to talk to Syria. That’s good news for everybody.

My questions for the Group:

  1. Proxy War? (Agree? Disagree? Why?)

Agree, but not with Syria and Iran, with Saudi Arabia and Iran. The Saudis back the wahabbi sect. The Iranians back the Shia sect. They are mortal enemies.

  1. How in the WORLD is Assad eliminated from the debate, yet Iran is spoke of on a daily basis?

Because Assad is smart enough to see that Iranian influence and al-qaeda terrorism are a threat to the status quo in Syria. Wahabbis are not good for business in Syria.

  1. When the U.S. pulls out (which is inevitable); who do you think will prevail; Tehran or Damascus?

Tehran.

Why?

Because shia are a majority in Iraq.

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
pat36:

As I understand it, the “insurgency” consist of:

  1. (As lixy said) a mixed bag of extremist,“Holy Warriors” , “guns-for-hire” and losers AND

  2. Sunni Arabs supplied by Syria.

Mufasa[/quote]

  1. is tiny in comparison to 1), and most foreign jihadis are not Syrian. They’re Saudi, Egyptian, Jordanian, Yemeni, a mixed bag. Either way, they make up around 5% of the insurgency according to U.S. estimates. The vast majority of the Sunni insurgency in Iraq is made up of former Baathists and other Sunnis who don’t want to live in a country dominated by the Shiites.

GDollar:

The “huh?” needs to go your way!

(And I welcome lixy correcting me…)

Syria and Iran are NOT on “the same side”.

Iran is composed of mostly SHIA Muslims in both the Theocracy and in the population.

Syria houses, bank-rolls and supplies Iraqi SUNNI expatriates; and it is the SUNNI lead insurgency that is blowing you Shia Holy Sites and Mosques.

These are Centuries Old hatreds that have come to the surface FOR THE REST OF THE WORLD (Iraqis know the hatreds) to see when Saddam was toppled.

Saddam was Sunni; Khomeni was Shia; they fought an EXTREMELY destructive and bloddy War to a stalemate in the 80’s. (Read of the Battle of Khorramshar if you want to read of the brutality and destruction of War).

The list goes on and on.

Again…Syria and Iran are FAR from being “on the same side…”

Mufasa

I’m NOT saying that most jihadist are Syrian!

That’s why I deem it a “Proxy” War because of Syrian support of Sunni Muslims against the Iranian supported Shia in Iraq.

Mufasa

“…Because Shia are a majority in Iraq…”

They were in the majority when Saddam seized power…

Mufasa

"…The vast majority of the Sunni insurgency in Iraq is made up of former Baathists and other Sunnis who don’t want to live in a country dominated by the Shiites…

Who is supplying them?

Mufasa

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
…[/quote]

Agreed 100%.

Just an aside, guys…

I do tend to “compartmentalize” and put things in “simple” terms…

Maybe the mess in Iraq and the Middle East as a whole doesn’t lend itself to simplistic thinking…

Mufasa

“…Because Assad is smart enough to see that Iranian influence and al-qaeda terrorism are a threat to the status quo in Syria. Wahabbis are not good for business in Syria…”

Gkahn:

Can you expound on this a little more?

Thanks!

Mufasa

[quote]lixy wrote:
hedo wrote:
Absolutely it is a proxy war. The American public doesn’t want to face up to that fact yet because they are getting weary. It simply can’t be ignored anymore.

No, it’s not a proxy war. If Tehran and Damascus had unsettled scores, they would have taken them out in the occupied territories.

Assad isn’t as religously fanatical as A-Jab.

Repeat after me: Assad’s regime is se-cu-lar!

And if you wanna be taken seriously, the least you can do is to learn spelling the name of the Iranian president.

If he was he would be in the forefront. Iran is also a lot more ambition on a regional basis and seeks more regional power to further the fanatical aims of the Theocrats.

Yes. Iran’s got everything to become a regional power.

A pullout isn’t inevitable or likely in the short term.

Agreed.

Syria doesn’t present much of an opposition and can be dealt with militarily in short order.

Nah. Syria simply don’t matter.

Iran is a little more difficult but it’s military capacity can be eliminated in weeks. (Air Force, Navy and large ground formations) The US isn’t ready to do that yet but we are certainly preparing to do so. The Iranians need something like this to shore up support so it will happen. I don’t know who will prevail, perhaps the Saudi’s or Turks will run Iraq as a protectorate, maybe even the US.

This line of thinking is scary. You actually believe Iran want to clash mano-a-mano with the US? That’s insane. Your lack of knowledge may lead you to associate them with the suicidal wackos at Al-Qaeda or the (arguably legitimate?) Palestinian resistance just because they happen to share the same religious beliefs. The fact of the matter is that the Iranian leaders are rational and pragmatic. Going to war with the world’s sole superpower is suicidal and they know it. They won’t provoke you. But then again, you never needed much of a cassus belli to go to war.

Here’s a wildcard for you. Syria provokes Israel and get’s pounded. Iran launches a few missles to guage Israeli response. Israel doesn’t wait to see what they are carrying and unleashes the “David” response which is a nuclear strike of at least 15 cities on an attacker threatening Israel with WMD’s.
If the Arabs don’t tone it down this or something like it is bound to happen one day.

Wishful thinking. Never gonna happen.[/quote]

Lixy

You are a radical Islamic college kid. Your opinion is not fact stop trying to pretend it is. The original OP asked for opinion. As usual your opinion is shallow and not well thought out. Why don’t you try something really radical and stick to the point instead of arguing with the infidels. I know it goes against your group’s SOP but it’s time for a change.

As to my spelling, I choose not to spell it out. I spelled the name of your leader the way I did as an insult, you fucking idiot. I’m not the one who isn’t taken seriously by the way. Your lack of humor makes you dull.

The Iranians ARE stupid. Rational are you kidding. They want and need to go to war. Syria is run like a criminal gang and will do what they are told by Iran. You know this but your bigotry and idealogy will not allow you even consider it.

Israel will wipe out any Arab state that even hints it is going to use a WMD on them. It will also do the same to Iran. It’s not exactly a secret in the ME. For someone who claims to be so plugged in to the ME you should know that. Take the blinders off. Do you think they will let 300 nukes sit in bunkers when threatened by radical sworn enemies.