Greetings, Cowdrey! I happen to know you're not a zombie account, unless this is a bizarre coincidence. Feel free to introduce yourself or not, and hopefully make a contribution or two. Or more. But just a non-spam, non-zombie member adding to the sense of occupancy here is well worth it. Thanks for joining, mate! Any Qs on how to do things, feel free to ask here, or elsewhere, and/or check some tips in the community portal. --Caustic Logic (talk) 22:20, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Well, thanks for the invitation, and the welcome now that I am here. I don't expect to very active (if at all) for a while because of another project. Two particular topics interest me concerning Syria. One is the involvement of Israel, because that has the potential to spread this conflict even further than its present confines (which already include parts of Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon). In this context I have been arguing since before the start of this conflict in 2011 that there should be no weapons put into Syria by anyone. With the arrival of the S300s I have now amended that position, because I approve of their deployment. This is a trump card, a game changer, that Putin has played. It is the equivalent of the veto at the UNSC. Not only does it probably rule out any further Israeli attacks on Syria (at least I sincerely hope it does) it also effectively rules out a NATO attack. It may also have other implications, such as in the occupied Syrian Golan, but I don't know enough about that at the moment. Russia may not make the conflict better by what it has done but it has probably prevented getting a great deal worse.
My other topic of interest would be the involvement of Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch in this conflict. And my impression is that neither of them has acted as an honest broker. Certainly Amnesty was out of order when it condemned the regime for the Houla massacre within hours of the news breaking. At the time their researchers were no closer than about 60 Km from the site. The UN Mission had promptly sent observers to the site of the massacre and could not decide who was responsible so how could Amnesty know when they were 60Km away? It is distressing to see what was once a great institution become just another mouthpiece for western imperialism. And HRW was never really at the races to start with. --Cowdrey (talk) 07:39, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
- I dig all that analysis. Youl have no problem here going with quality over quantity, I'm sure. There are different places and ways those can be added to valuable effect. I'm not sure how well you the wiki procedures, but you can type and sign your messages at least, so good enough at least. If you want to introduce yourself with any details, etc. you can use your main User Page (red link at the moment). And for skimming what's new, if you like, the Recent Changes link at left is helpful. --Caustic Logic (talk) 10:14, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
- "Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch ... neither of them has acted as an honest broker. " I get the same impression - Amnesty is considerably higher up the ladder than HRW, with hints even of a desire to tell the actual truth (parts of it, too late) while HRW is a straight-up propaganda machine. Well, to be fair, they get good stuff occasionally too. But on balance, both fit the pattern I singled out in the Houla report as -perhaps - fit only to be torn down, causing more harm than good by helping unleash wars like this which as we can see are the most detrimental things there are for human rights. That might be a bit hardcore, but oh well. --Caustic Logic (talk) 10:14, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
- Below: a space for any requests, etc. to help. For example, should I create a page for HR groups in Syria? Something like that sounds overdue, come to think of it. --Caustic Logic (talk) 10:14, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
- Re Israel: You might be interested in the articles Israeli Bombing of Jamraya and Hezbollah. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 12:38, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
- Welcome Cowdrey! Feel free to not only add to existing pages but also start new ones, like The Role of Human Rights Organizations. <- The link is in red because the page doesn't actually exist, just a name proposal. If you click on it you get to the edit mode immediately. Certainly not a constructive role, and what I find even more troubling (because surprising) is the UN(HRC) behaviour. We touched on that at our Houla:Investigations page and Ronda Hauben wrote a good article in the report CL put together and you may have read. Just recently Navi Pillay is putting out horror stories about Qusair that seem to have no connection to reality. Hope to CU around! --CE (talk) 13:29, 2 June 2013 (UTC)