Iran & Syria to form alliance

February 16, 2005 6:58 AM

Iran and Syria to form an alliance? Yeah, I know it's just been touched upon, but considering the specter of this (whether it is or is not ominous)....
posted by malaprohibita (27 comments total)

Since no one on the ground in Iran has offered an explanation outside of "we have no reason to say it's a hostile attack. There is a big possibility that it was a friendly fire by mistake", what insights would mostly-American MeFites have that aren't pure speculation?

It's an interesting development for sure, but anyone who's read the news today is probably already aware of it. Steel yourself to the NewsFilter/BBCFilter/Already-Discussed-Two-Hours-AgoFilter accusations is all I'm sayin'.....oops there went one just now...
posted by dhoyt at 7:20 AM on February 16, 2005

Yeah, I'm ready to take a beating on this one, if that's what ends up happening. Got my thick skin on today.
posted by malaprohibita at 7:36 AM on February 16, 2005

Bush is loving it, there's a two for one sale going on in the middle east.
posted by caddis at 7:47 AM on February 16, 2005

So is there a MeFi pool for when the US invades Syria?
posted by Ynoxas at 8:05 AM on February 16, 2005

That reactor is in Bushehr. In German that would (almost) mean something like 'the honour of Bush'. But of course they don't speak German in Iran but Farsi. And a little Russian in some places.
posted by kika at 8:06 AM on February 16, 2005

Dude, we are gonna kick some ass! Fuck Yeah!
posted by 2sheets at 8:18 AM on February 16, 2005

Can anyone shed some light on the recent history of Syrian-Iranian relations? What sort of political and social affinities exist... how deep do they run... is there a history of political/military cooperation? I'm interested to know the extent to which this alliance is a harbinger of new things to come, versus the mere formalization of something that has already existed.
posted by stonerose at 8:25 AM on February 16, 2005

"“Today we do not want to form a front against anybody, particularly not against the United States," Imad Moustapha said.

And yet, poor relationships with the United States, political repression and support for Hezbollah is really all that these two countries have in common. Syria's government is secular and Baathist, its people largely Sunni Arabs. The opposition -- such as it is -- is probably more fundamentalist than the government. Iran's govenment is religious and its people are Shiite and non-Arab. The opposition comes from those who want a more secular society.

Oh, and Iran is swimming in oil wealth while Syria has next to none.
posted by Slothrup at 8:35 AM on February 16, 2005

Dude, we are gonna kick some ass! Fuck Yeah!
posted by 2sheets at 8:18 AM PST on February 16

What's with the "we" shit?
You done signed up already?

That is funny kika. Saddam had the Republican Guard, Iran has "in honor of Bush" nukular (yup, I meant to spell it that way) reactor and now if only NK comes up with something like "the neocon missile" we'll "hit the trifecta!"
posted by nofundy at 8:36 AM on February 16, 2005

"Beyond the Euphrates began for us the land of mirage and danger, the sands where one helplessly sank, and the roads which ended in nothing. The slightest reversal would have resulted in a jolt to our prestige giving rise to all kinds of catastrophe; the problem was not only to conquer but to conquer again and again, perpetually; our forces would be drained off in the attempt."

Emperor Hadrian AD 117-138
posted by halekon at 9:21 AM on February 16, 2005

FYI: Nofundy if you're still reading this thread: you're being talked about over here.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 10:21 AM on February 16, 2005

MSNBC:

TEHRAN, Iran - An explosion in south Iran, initially reported as caused by a missile, was blasting work during the construction of a dam, a senior military officer confirmed to state television on Wednesday.
posted by dhoyt at 11:13 AM on February 16, 2005

If its not one dam thing its another
posted by ElvisJesus at 11:40 AM on February 16, 2005

Syria will be hit militarily within the next year. But probably not invaded for two.
posted by ParisParamus at 11:42 AM on February 16, 2005

And I'm sure you're itching to sign the papers and join up PP, being the good American that you are.

Syria won't be invaded, ever, because it doesn't have oil. Bombed, quite possibly.
posted by bardic at 12:16 PM on February 16, 2005

There you go with the "it's about the oil" thing. How astute.
posted by ParisParamus at 12:20 PM on February 16, 2005

How evasive.
posted by bardic at 12:24 PM on February 16, 2005

of interesting historical note, the more things change...
posted by trinarian at 12:35 PM on February 16, 2005

Don't we have, like, satellites and shit (near) constantly watching the whole region? You'd think rewinding the tapes after the fact would give an answer.
posted by billsaysthis at 4:20 PM on February 16, 2005

Sure billy, the same satellites we used to offer evidence of huge stockpiles against Iraq. What's the use? It really doesn't matter much at this point. Americans will go along because we're fighting "terror". Did anyone think we would go into Iraq and leave Syria and Iran alone? Seriously...did anyone think Iraq was about...Iraq?

As for Syria and Iran making this tacit pact. What the hell else can they do? I think they both see the writing on the wall and are merely attempting to create any sort of international validity to stave of ol George.
posted by j.p. Hung at 4:57 PM on February 16, 2005

Ohh, ooh, ooh. I hope they call themselves "The Coalition of the Axis of Evil."
posted by VulcanMike at 5:20 PM on February 16, 2005

Syria will be hit militarily within the next year. But probably not invaded for two.

Do you know anything about this, or are you just trolling? (honest question)
posted by gesamtkunstwerk at 7:10 PM on February 16, 2005

Are they working together on Axis of Evil related program activities?
posted by psmealey at 8:35 PM on February 16, 2005

of interesting historical note, the more things change...[links to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Arab_Republic]

Trinarian, first of all, Iranians are NOT Arabs.
posted by davy at 9:37 PM on February 16, 2005

Is it just me or does anyone else find the UK English spelling of spectre, so much more menacing and portentous than its American counterpart, specter? Probably just me.
posted by rhymer at 2:03 AM on February 17, 2005

SPECTRE
posted by ElvisJesus at 2:55 AM on February 17, 2005

Davy: I never said they were. It was a link pointing out how Syrians have tried to align with significantly more powerful neighbors before. The UAR is also far more interesting, and less known, than this recent business.
posted by trinarian at 2:33 PM on February 22, 2005