[Morgan.]

If UK were 64 on that list, and not 22, you wouldn’t want Theresa spending your tax money on a dubious war to achieve what exactly? Maybe get to keep a port and an airfield?

[Morgan.]

draculina wrote:

Ge wrote:

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?

[Morgan.]

Ge wrote:

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 7 years, 3 months ago by  Morgan..

[Morgan.]

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.

[Morgan.]

sceptical guy wrote:

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.

sceptical guy wrote:

Iran now controls a swathe of territory through Iraq,

Really? Where?

 

• This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by  Morgan..

[Morgan.]

sceptical guy wrote:

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.

mooosey88

[Morgan.]

I agree this is a good topic, and I shall try to bring it back on track.

I’ve read back and I think where it went a bit off track was with this post.

Ge wrote:

Someone explain to Morg…. there is no nuclear war, if and buts and this and that doesn’t change that one iota, the Middle East region is being carved up and Russia took her chance to get her slice.

Can we get back on track from here?

Yes someone please explain to me. As I’ve lost it from this point. We digressed over semantics, and never picked it up again.

the key sentence is here,

Ge wrote:

Someone explain to Morg…. the Middle East region is being carved up and Russia took her chance to get her slice.

I’m aware there is a civil war in Syria, and it is being “carved up”. There’s more to the middle east region than just Syria. How are Jordan, Israel, Lebanon, Iraq, (Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, etc,) part of this carve up? geographically or otherwise? What recent shifts of power influence has or is happening in these other middle easternern countries as part of the new carve up? On the whole, it seems quite stable to me, with of course the exception of Syria and Yemen.

But even bigger questions to answer for me. I really do need it explaining, Ge can confirm this.

Russia has “got” her slice. Could someone elaborate what exactly Russia’s slice is? How concrete is this slice they have got? Will it be there in a years time? Who else has a slice? How many slices are there? Have there been any recent changes of slice owners? What would be the better slices to have?

scep contributes to try to help me understand

sceptical guy wrote:

The re-carving Gerry is referring to is the emergence of Iran and Putin moving in to get his slice of the pie again.

Iran / Persia has always been a major influence in the middle east, so nothing new emerging there, Soviet / Russia had influence in Egypt before, so nothing really new there. Who are the big shots in the Middle East ? Israel? Saudi ? Iraq? can we have a re carving of the middle east region if all the regional heavyweights remain unaffected influence or geographically speaking? I can’t see Israel, Saudi, Iraq, Kuwait or Jordan coming under either Russian or Iranian influence anytime soon. Can you?

Unfortunately sceps attempt to help clarify only confounds the issue for me.

scep, what exactly is Putin’s slice of the pie he has got, or is getting?
moreso, how much is it going to “cost him”, and is it really worth it?

Think about it. That’s why its been available for him to go and get it, because no one else wants it.

Think about it. The west (quite rightly) had kept out of Syria for years until the Russians involved themselves. We kept out, because there is fuck all there except figs and dates. Nice bit of desert. No oil in Syria. Next door in Iraq you’ll find the oil :)

So, I repeat, How is the middle east region being carved up? what’s in it for Putin? and what is this slice he has got that 2 of you mention, which I fail to see which is anything worth having, mentioning and bragging about?

In this context, ALL Putin has “got” is a very dodgy mate in the middle east no one else wants.

[Morgan.]

Why do you wish to pick fault with me? rather than pick fault with my arguments and writings?

Have I got  personal towards you?

😍

Can you not have adult debate without swipes? because I disagree with you?

grow up x

• This reply was modified 7 years, 3 months ago by  Morgan..

[Morgan.]

Ge wrote:

randomly lobbing needless distractions into the debate

Such as?

I reject that. I haven’t left the topic of bombs in Syria any more than you have.

 

[Morgan.]

Ge wrote:

so steering the car into a ditch, I have got out the car and continued my journey without you.

Well, you’ve hit a brick wall with your car in this question. Something tells me you wont be answering this one anytime soon x

Morgan. wrote:

Do explain, what is it that Putin has “got”?

[Author]

Posts