ISIS takes Palmyra

[Honorius]

As for me personally, ISIS completely wiped out my research proposal for the next two years and I am just one of many scholars who had that happen to them.

....
....

Assad is gassing people, blowing cities to rubble with people living in them, there is a massive humanitarian crisis with half of Syria's population displaced, and you are crying over the fact you can't research stone ruins of a bygone civilization???

Seriously STFU, unless you personally want to go to Syria and personally risk your life to save artifacts, the majority of which have been destroyed by Assad's artillery strikes and his father's dam projects. If curators in Syria are risking their lives for Artifacts they hold more precious than Syrian lives, why don't you instead of crying about it here. At least those folks earned the right to cry about the destruction as they put their lives at stake to save as much as they can.

Otherwise how about backing the FSA with a no fly zone and the support they need to conquer the coastal areas of Syria so they can finish off Assad before going after IS and PKK to throw both those goons out prior to rebuilding the nation and allowing the displaced to return home and heal.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Assad is gassing people, blowing cities to rubble with people living in them, there is a massive humanitarian crisis with half of Syria's population displaced, and you are crying over the fact you can't research stone ruins of a bygone civilization???

Why do you consider these things mutually exclusive? Why can't we rue the senseless loss of an important chapter of human culture and history IN ADDITION to the humanitarian tragedy? What is it about lamenting the loss of Palmyra, among other things, that you consider to be in complete opposition to, rather than augmenting, the general opposition to ISIS?

Otherwise how about backing the FSA with a no fly zone and the support they need to conquer the coastal areas of Syria so they can finish off Assad before going after IS and PKK to throw both those goons out prior to rebuilding the nation and allowing the displaced to return home and heal.

Wait ... do you honestly think that Thanas has the authority to do this and has just been holding back? If not, then what the fuck does this have to do with anything?

[Thanas]

Assad is gassing people, blowing cities to rubble with people living in them, there is a massive humanitarian crisis with half of Syria's population displaced, and you are crying over the fact you can't research stone ruins of a bygone civilization???

Seriously STFU, unless you personally want to go to Syria and personally risk your life to save artifacts, the majority of which have been destroyed by Assad's artillery strikes and his father's dam projects.

I was asked a question "Importance of Syria for archaeology, go" by a respected member, I responded to it. The fact that you continue to dishonour your screenname by every post you make has not escaped me in previous threads, but thank you for putting your idiocy on display for everybody else to remind us that we probably should tighten up entry requirements again.

The mere fact that you claim that the dam projects destroyed the majority of artefacts shows you got no clue of the scale of the problem and I question your general education and knowledge if you think it is anything compared to the loss of Hatra, Palmyra, Niniveh and Dura Europos. Likewise, while it is true that Assad's artillery has struck historical sites (and that the black market may even be regime-directed in some cases), the destruction of ISIS is on a vastly different scale. See, Assad doesn't go out of his way to brag about destroying artefacts, nor has he detonated entire ancient cities of no strategic value and then claimed it to be a good thing.

Likewise, the existence of thriving Syrian archaeology before the war proves that Assad is not out to destroy artefacts per se, again, unlike ISIS. I know this from personal experience.

Otherwise how about backing the FSA with a no fly zone and the support they need to conquer the coastal areas of Syria so they can finish off Assad before going after IS and PKK to throw both those goons out prior to rebuilding the nation and allowing the displaced to return home and heal.

Again you go with:
a) equivocating PKK and ISIS. This is not the first thread you were warned not to do so for the two are not comparable. Any further dishonesty on that part will count as strike 1 and may result in actions like a warning, temp ban or even permanent ban if you continue to piss off enough mods.
b) thinking the FSA is in any position to mount an offensive, much less win the war

Having said that, I wish you a very pleasant day and may you quickly move to visit your local school for an additional course in manners, or learn how to shut up when adults are talking. Both will carry you much further in live than your present conduct, which hardly can be described as being worthy of a great ape.

[Broomstick]

Assad is gassing people, blowing cities to rubble with people living in them, there is a massive humanitarian crisis with half of Syria's population displaced, and you are crying over the fact you can't research stone ruins of a bygone civilization???

The fact that a person sitting next to me in the ER has a broken leg does not make the splinter in my finger hurt any less. I can still feel my own pain while acknowledging that the guy next to me is in a much worse situation.

Likewise, Thanas has been hit personally by this, even if his own loss here is less that that of someone losing their head or being gassed. The fact that far worse things have happened to other people does not make everything all better for Thanas.

[Thanas]

Its a bit funny that I get accused of whining when I was responding to a specific question.

[Channel72]

Speaking of which - let me ask you another.

It was my understanding that Nineveh was mostly excavated by British/German archaeologists prior to WW1, when most of that region was under direct British control - at least, those were the projects that gave us Gilgamesh, and many other cuneiform tablets/monuments that shed light on ancient Assyria, and probably ended up filling out many wings of the British museum. It's a devastating tragedy regardless, but how much (estimated) of ancient Nineveh or other Mosul-area sites would you say has been lost due to recent events, that wasn't already excavated by British or Iraqi archaeologists?

[Metahive]

The fact that you continue to dishonour your screenname by every post you make has not escaped me in previous threads, but thank you for putting your idiocy on display for everybody else to remind us that we probably should tighten up entry requirements again.

Well, Flavius Honorius Augustus was the emperor under whose watch Rome was pillaged by the Visigoths, which might explain this Honorius' here disinterest in ancient artifacts.

This is also a display of that darn' "Appeal to Greater Problems" fallacy, the attempt to silence those who are victims of or suffer from a certain issue by pointing out that others have it worse. "What, you think Wal-Mart is paying you a slave's wage? People in Bangladesh make a fraction of that and have and sleep on the ground, so STFU!"

[Thanas]

Speaking of which - let me ask you another.

It was my understanding that Nineveh was mostly excavated by British/German archaeologists prior to WW1, when most of that region was under direct British control - at least, those were the projects that gave us Gilgamesh, and many other cuneiform tablets/monuments that shed light on ancient Assyria, and probably ended up filling out many wings of the British museum. It's a devastating tragedy regardless, but how much (estimated) of ancient Nineveh or other Mosul-area sites would you say has been lost due to recent events, that wasn't already excavated by British or Iraqi archaeologists?

I really can't say, for I am not an expert on ancient Niniveh. But a lot of those depots were lost anyway - some were misplaced (happens more often than you would think), others were taken by the Russians from German museums etc.

In a more abstract view, the main problem is that there is much less potential for follow-up digs or confirmation of evidence now.

[loomer]

It's also very difficult to say with sites that remain partially unexplored how much was lost in general.

[Themightytom]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/28/europe/mi ... index.html

(CNN)Dozens of refugees -- most likely fleeing war-ravaged Syria -- probably suffocated inside a truck abandoned on an Austrian highway, authorities said Friday.

Sixty of the 71 victims were men. Eight women died, as did three children, ages 2, 3 and 8.

"We are talking about human trafficking, homicide, even murder," said Johann Fuchs, state prosecutor of Eisenstadt.

News of the deaths comes as Europe is struggling to deal with a record swell of migrants and refugees traveling by land and sea to find a better life or escape conflict at home in the Middle East and Africa.

United Nations officials have called on European officials to improve their efforts to resolve the growing humanitarian crisis, including dealing with human traffickers preying on refugees of the sort thought to be responsible for the deaths in Austria.

The truck was found Thursday, abandoned on the side of the A4 highway, which links Budapest in Hungary to the Austrian capital, Vienna. When police opened it, they found the bodies decomposing in the heat.

They found a Syrian travel document inside the truck.

"We must assume now that these are refugees," said Hans Peter Doskozil, police director of Austria's Burgenland region. "In concrete terms, it is possible this is a Syrian refugee group."

Hungarian police said Friday they had arrested three Bulgarian citizens and an Afghan citizen in connection with the truck.

"We are likely looking at a Bulgarian-Hungarian people smuggling ring," Fuchs said.

About 3,000 trucks pass through that area of the highway daily, and checking each one of them is almost impossible, authorities said. Most human smugglers use smaller cars, making the use of trucks unusual.

On Friday, Hungarian police said they arrested a Romanian man who flipped a van carrying 18 refugees. In Surrey, England, authorities said they arrested 27 people suspected of illegally entering the country found in a suspicious truck at a gas station. The driver was also arrested.

In addition to the deaths of refugees trying to cross into Europe by road, thousands are making the perilous journey by sea.

Some 300,000 people have crossed the Mediterranean Sea into Greece and Italy this year alone, according to the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. More refugees and migrants arrived in Greece in July alone than did in all of 2014, the agency said.

So far this year, 2,373 people have died trying to reach Europe by sea, according to the International Organization for Migration. In all of 2014, 3,281 people died.

In just one incident this week, 54 people died trying to cross the Mediterranean, the Italian coast guard said.

Comprehensive response urged
On Tuesday, a spokeswoman for the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights said the agency was calling on European leaders to organize a collective response to the needs of migrants and refugees flooding the continent.

"All European countries and the EU must act together and help those countries whose capacities are already overstretched such as Greece, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Serbia," spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said. "This includes capacity support, and support for equitable redistribution of refugees and asylum seekers across" the European Union.

The deaths in Austria highlight the need for a better strategy, Austrian Interior Minister Johanna Mikl-Leitner said at a news conference Thursday.

"This horrible crime shows that we must get even tougher in the battle against people smuggling," she said. "People smugglers are criminals and not well-minded helpers. They do not care about the well-being of the refugees, they care about profit."

Why migrants head to the Mediterranean

CNN's Laura Perez Maestro and Lindsay Isaac contributed to this report.

[Broomstick]

As long as ISIS rapes and kills at will the refugees will not stop coming. If the choice is certain death vs. possible death people will leap at the chance to survive.

The greater the pressure of fleeing people the larger the groups will be coming across.

Also reminds me of a cases in the US when deceased foreign nationals were found in a railroad cars normally used to transport grain.

[Channel72]

Sorry to harp on this - but really, this is yet another reason the US is responsible for fixing this ASAP via immediate ground troop deployment. Europe is basically taking the burden for most of the refugees, and Iraq is taking the misery, the Kurds are doing most of the actual work and taking on the most risk. Meanwhile, the US - who created this nightmare, is dithering around pressuring the useless Dawa government to do things, and bothering Turkey about more air strikes.

[Broomstick]

So... you are expecting the country that fucked things up in the first place to fix things? Are you sure that wouldn't just make things even worse?

What, exactly, do you want/expect the US to do?

[K. A. Pital]

Redeploying to Iraq might actually make history repeat in the dumbest possible way: US deploys to Iraq, steamrolls over IS who go into hiding until the US leaves (at some point it will leave). By that time, Saudi and Qatari sponsors of the thing transfer more cash, IS "reactivates" and keeps fighting. Kind of like the Taliban in modern Afghanistan, another well-known failed state.

Solving a failed state problem would require a commitment that just isn't there.

[Channel72]

So... you are expecting the country that fucked things up in the first place to fix things? Are you sure that wouldn't just make things even worse?

The Administration that fucked everything up is out of power, and their ideas were insane. Obama voted against the war, and would not have caused this situation in the first place, so at least saner minds are in control.

Regardless, it's difficult to conceive of many hypothetical scenarios at this point which are in any way worse than what is actually occurring. Really, the only way things could possibly get worse is for ISIS to successfully defeat Syrian forces, take control of Syrian government resources, and then proceed to ethnically cleanse Damascus and everyone in West Syria. I don't consider that outcome particularly likely, but I also don't see how things can really get worse than the current status quo. We have already reached peek clusterfuck.

What, exactly, do you want/expect the US to do?

Allocate ground troops to help the Kurds and Iraqi army retake Mosul and drive the remnants of ISIS out of Iraq. Then establish a permanent military base in South Kurdistan to prevent elements of the Syrian civil war from spilling over again into Iraq. That way we deprive IS of their major revenue source, and wind the clock back to 2011 at least - which still leaves us with a shit situation, but one that is at least more tolerable for now.

Redeploying to Iraq might actually make history repeat in the dumbest possible way: US deploys to Iraq, steamrolls over IS who go into hiding until the US leaves (at some point it will leave). By that time, Saudi and Qatari sponsors of the thing transfer more cash, IS "reactivates" and keeps fighting. Kind of like the Taliban in modern Afghanistan, another well-known failed state.

The US just needs to help finish pushing IS out of Iraq so they lose a major source of revenue (oil). If they are pushed out of Iraq and discredited, they will likely be confined to Syria. That kind of major setback may also disillusion many of their GCC financiers, who will decide to spend their money elsewhere.

[Broomstick]

So... you are expecting the country that fucked things up in the first place to fix things? Are you sure that wouldn't just make things even worse?

The Administration that fucked everything up is out of power, and their ideas were insane. Obama voted against the war, and would not have caused this situation in the first place, so at least saner minds are in control.

Obama is lame duck and will be leaving office very soon. His replacement might be another Bush (literally!), or Donald (You're Fired!) Trump or something of that ilk. Are you sure you want to risk that?

Regardless, it's difficult to conceive of many hypothetical scenarios at this point which are in any way worse than what is actually occurring. Really, the only way things could possibly get worse is for ISIS to successfully defeat Syrian forces, take control of Syrian government resources, and then proceed to ethnically cleanse Damascus and everyone in West Syria. I don't consider that outcome particularly likely, but I also don't see how things can really get worse than the current status quo. We have already reached peek clusterfuck.

I doubt that very much. I could list off a number of ways things could get even worse, but I've had a good day so far and don't want to depress myself. But to throw you a bone - they take Damascus and keep going, taking over more territory. Or they use even more gas weapons than they have. Or they make a dirty bomb.

What, exactly, do you want/expect the US to do?

Allocate ground troops to help the Kurds and Iraqi army retake Mosul and drive the remnants of ISIS out of Iraq.

Ah, I see - you want to send other people to fight and die in a war. How very nice of you. Easy enough when they're not your neighbors or family I suppose.

Then establish a permanent military base in South Kurdistan to prevent elements of the Syrian civil war from spilling over again into Iraq.

What in the hell makes you think that the US wants to be there permanently? There's a decades-long history of the US pulling out too soon, and you expect a permanent presence? What are you smoking?

There is zero political will in the US for that. It will not happen regardless of who wins the next election.

That way we deprive IS of their major revenue source, and wind the clock back to 2011 at least - which still leaves us with a shit situation, but one that is at least more tolerable for now.

So... you going to help foot the bill for all that? Or is the US just supposed to pull another trillion out of its collective ass for your pleasure?

Redeploying to Iraq might actually make history repeat in the dumbest possible way: US deploys to Iraq, steamrolls over IS who go into hiding until the US leaves (at some point it will leave). By that time, Saudi and Qatari sponsors of the thing transfer more cash, IS "reactivates" and keeps fighting. Kind of like the Taliban in modern Afghanistan, another well-known failed state.

The US just needs to help finish pushing IS out of Iraq so they lose a major source of revenue (oil). If they are pushed out of Iraq and discredited, they will likely be confined to Syria. That kind of major setback may also disillusion many of their GCC financiers, who will decide to spend their money elsewhere.

Oh, please - getting beat up by the US is not going to "discredit" these guys, it will just feed their persecution fantasies. And "just" confining them to Syria leaves Syria a fucked up shitty hellhole only marginally better, if at all, than North Korea - except in a more unstable part of the world. Pital is right - that would only drive ISIS underground for awhile, after which it will resurge.

[Channel72]

Ah, I see - you want to send other people to fight and die in a war. How very nice of you. Easy enough when they're not your neighbors or family I suppose.

Oh my god, what a cliche.

People are already fighting and dying. People who didn't even cause this situation. The Kurdish Peshmerga is actively engaging ISIS right now, and people are dying everyday. Do I really fucking need to insert some boring smarmy joke implying that you value American lives over the Iraqi and Kurdish lives America has utterly ruined?

What in the hell makes you think that the US wants to be there permanently? There's a decades-long history of the US pulling out too soon, and you expect a permanent presence? What are you smoking?

The US is already establishing a permanent airbase in Erbil and has permanent bases all over the world.

So... you going to help foot the bill for all that? Or is the US just supposed to pull another trillion out of its collective ass for your pleasure?

Fuck yes, I am going to help foot the bill ... I pay taxes, you know.

Oh, please - getting beat up by the US is not going to "discredit" these guys, it will just feed their persecution fantasies. And "just" confining them to Syria leaves Syria a fucked up shitty hellhole only marginally better, if at all, than North Korea - except in a more unstable part of the world. Pital is right - that would only drive ISIS underground for awhile, after which it will resurge.

Confining them to Syria deprives them of valuable oil revenue, thus severely diminishing their effectiveness.

[Broomstick]

Ah, I see - you want to send other people to fight and die in a war. How very nice of you. Easy enough when they're not your neighbors or family I suppose.

People are already fighting and dying. People who didn't even cause this situation. The Kurdish Peshmerga is actively engaging ISIS right now, and people are dying everyday. Do I really fucking need to insert some boring smarmy joke implying that you value American lives over the Iraqi and Kurdish lives America has utterly ruined?

Do you value America lives less?

I don't want to see any more blood spilled unless it will actually make things better. Sending in US troops - like has been done before - isn't going to do that unless there are some fundamental changes. Like it or not, the American public does value US lives over those in the Middle East. Which is no different than anyone else, a nation always values its own citizens lives over those of another nation.

Sending a few tens of thousands of Americans over there to kill thousands more is going to do... what, exactly? What plan other than "march some guys in there"?

Are YOU planning to put your money where you mouth is? Volunteering to go over there and fight for strangers? Or do you want your neighbor to do it?

Oh, please - getting beat up by the US is not going to "discredit" these guys, it will just feed their persecution fantasies. And "just" confining them to Syria leaves Syria a fucked up shitty hellhole only marginally better, if at all, than North Korea - except in a more unstable part of the world. Pital is right - that would only drive ISIS underground for awhile, after which it will resurge.

Confining them to Syria deprives them of valuable oil revenue, thus severely diminishing their effectiveness.

They'll just sell the antiquities they've stolen, when they aren't selling women as living fuck-toys. You think losing oil revenue will stop these guys? They'll find something else to sell.

[Grumman]

That kind of major setback may also disillusion many of their GCC financiers, who will decide to spend their money elsewhere.

Is that a solution? We do have a problem here, and that's that there are a whole lot of people in the world who think that an organisation that stands for nothing but rape, ethnic cleansing, murderous theocratic dictatorship and vandalism is a cause they can get behind. The US did not create these assholes, and Iraq is not unique as a place where they could hurt a lot of innocent people.

[The Xeelee]

Holy fuck Broomstick how many more strawmen are you able to come up with? "Do you value American lives" yes, but that is irrelevant because I also care about the other countries people that are dying NOW as a result of American foreign policy. "Money where your mouth is" no, because other people leave that to PROFESSIONAL SOLDIERS you don't have to be in the fucking army in order to support action. Finally, you know what would help stop ISIS bouncing back? If the U.S. Stops overlooking Saudi Arabia funding them and press for sanctions.

[Broomstick]

Holy fuck Broomstick how many more strawmen are you able to come up with? "Do you value American lives" yes, but that is irrelevant because I also care about the other countries people that are dying NOW as a result of American foreign policy.

So why doesn't the rest of the world step up and show America how to do it properly? Don't they value Middle Eastern lives? To me, it looks like another another round of "America, do something!" followed by "You American assholes, you fucked it up - why did you get involved in the first place?"

Don't like how America has handled the situation these past 10 or 20 years? Then why the fuck are you asking the Americans to get involved AGAIN? What possible reason do you have for thinking it will turn out any better this time around?

"Money where your mouth is" no, because other people leave that to PROFESSIONAL SOLDIERS you don't have to be in the fucking army in order to support action.

If you want to vote for war you should be willing to put your own self on the line. When you advocate "intervention" you're saying the situation is dire enough to warrant killing other people. What kind of a tool advocates other people be maimed and killed without any risk to said tool?

The pro-ISIS jackasses ARE trying to go there and shed their own blood for the cause. Among the anti-ISIS crowd I see a lot of folks that seem eager to put someone else at risk of death for the cause.

Finally, you know what would help stop ISIS bouncing back? If the U.S. Stops overlooking Saudi Arabia funding them and press for sanctions.

The rest of the world can't press for sanctions? Over and over in this thread we've heard how the US has totally screwed up the Middle East, yet now there are calls for the US go in again. How does that make sense?

If you insist on the US taking the lead the US - surprise! - will act in what the US perceives is its own interests. Which are probably not the same thing as Europe's interest. Or anyone else's interests. Don't like what US leadership has given you? Then someone else needs to step forward. Otherwise, expect the same results when you do the same thing over and over.

[Thanas]

It is almost as if the US has no responsibility for this mess, or as if it has no obligation to clean that shit up.

[Broomstick]

Oh, sure there's responsibility - but if a group has fucked up that often do you want them in control of the clean up?

If Europe gets together and comes up with a plan I'm sure you can get the Americans to help out, it's putting them in charge that I think is nuts.

And Europe is still going to have to deal with the refugee crisis on its own.

[The Xeelee]

Okay so you are an idiot. Apparently now when military action is warranted we all have to leave our jobs to go fight. Why do we want America to do something? Maybe it is dues to the fact that your military budget is larger that most of the worlds budgets. Maybe it would be easier to press sanctions if America wouldn't veto them.

As to your final point, I wish we had a better world superpower but we don't, we have you. Step up.

[Broomstick]

Yes, step up so when things go to shit once again you can shit on the people you asked to help in the first place.

Again - don't like the job America is doing? Then step up. Because, frankly, I'm not convinced the US is going to continue as a superpower much longer.

Europe as a whole has the resources to have as large and well supplied a military (presumably, joint forces) as the US, Europe has chosen not to devote those resources to the military. As a result, Europe doesn't have the firepower.

Or maybe you should ask China to intervene if the US is so fucked up, don't they have a booming economy and a military?

If doing the same thing over and over and over is not yielding the results you want maybe other actions should be considered.