Internet Completely Cut in Syria, what's going down?
Straight from reddit as of 2 hours ago, Syria is completely dark - no phones, no internet, nothing. Looks like someone turned it all off about 5 hours ago.
Discussions here: http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1dvsyg/internet_traffic_from_syria_just_disappeared/ More info: http://labs.umbrella.com/2013/05/07/breaking-news-traffic-from-syria-disappears-from-internet/ The opportunity for a natural event to utterly darken the country's communications are slim to none, same for an external military threat. Looks like Assad is probably going the full Hitler on his people, we'll probably see news of awful s*** happening over the next few days :( |
09:10am 08/05/13 Permalink
what's going down? i would imagine from the videos ive seen of late, all sorts of atrocities by the government on its people and by the people on its government. |
09:13am 08/05/13 Permalink
awful s*** has been going on for months, 50 000 people leaving as refugees every week.
are you speculating that the internet has been cut in an attempt to stop atrocities being broadcast? |
09:45am 08/05/13 Permalink
awful s*** has been going on for months, 50 000 people leaving as refugees every week. Ya, someone cut the Syrianets on purpose. A communication disruption can mean only one thing. |
09:54am 08/05/13 Permalink
I agree, it's more likely an attempt to disrupt communications. I think it's clear Assad gives no f**** about what the rest of the world thinks.
|
10:11am 08/05/13 Permalink
Would be to try and hinder rebel forces and try and prevent their organised strikes(which are proving very effective against the regime)
|
10:23am 08/05/13 Permalink
armed civilians could never beat a government with tanks.
|
10:34am 08/05/13 Permalink
armed civilians could never beat a government with tanks. It's not going particularly well for the government. |
10:49am 08/05/13 Permalink
armed civilians could never beat a government with tanks. Not in the war, but a country isn't sustainable without people paying taxes, a man even for his country, won't fight for free while his family starves. If a country is against you, you can terrorize them into obedience but if they don't settle, you can't support yourself on the throne forever. |
11:59am 08/05/13 Permalink
armed civilians could never beat a government with tanks.You're adorable. |
12:00pm 08/05/13 Permalink
It's not going particularly well for the government. doesnt look like its going so well for the other guys either. |
01:15pm 08/05/13 Permalink
If Syria goes offline at least the frequency of twitter account hacking might decrease
|
01:36pm 08/05/13 Permalink
he's saying superior fire power will always win even though this has repeatedly been proven not to be the case.
|
01:44pm 08/05/13 Permalink
No, he's saying that the people who suggested that an armed populace is useless against a better equipped government are wrong because hey look at Syria.
|
01:57pm 08/05/13 Permalink
He's saying that you don't actually need guns to bring down a government.
|
02:13pm 08/05/13 Permalink
there are so many similarities between australia and syria
|
03:18pm 08/05/13 Permalink
infi is thinking in video games terms. It's ok, this is a video game forum after all.
Tanks are easily vulnerable to an armed population, especially in a place like this. RPGs, mines and explosives aren't going to disable tanks? Heh... |
04:00pm 08/05/13 Permalink
The majority of the tanks used are Cold War era antiques also. Much different to the tanks used by modern militaries.
|
04:03pm 08/05/13 Permalink
you hurt my brain by putting a strike through the letter t
|
04:07pm 08/05/13 Permalink
Tanks are easily vulnerable to an armed population, especially in a place like this. RPGs, mines and explosives aren't going to disable tanks? Heh... & if that fails the Syria could research Bronze Working and build Phalanxes. |
04:20pm 08/05/13 Permalink
How will Syria get its amusing cat video's now.
|
06:00pm 08/05/13 Permalink
Can't stay in a tank forever, when they pop open the hatch BAM!
|
06:25pm 08/05/13 Permalink
Yeh I can't figure out what infi's post is about. Are you implying that because they have guns everything is coming up Milhouse? I think its probably that infi is displaying his knowledge about military matters. Meaning..well if he were a General his soldiers would execute him. You just need to go here http://www.military.com/video/ and watch the videos of how badly the SAA is being pwned by insurgents. The golden rule of armoured warfare is never take a tank into an urban environment on its own. Though with hundreds of accompanying infantry it is fine. Just look at the wars over the last 50 years (since Vietnam and including) and count how many times the larger more conventional force with tanks has lost or not won. |
06:56pm 08/05/13 Permalink
My post was sarcastic. In previous gun control debates I have consistently said that heavy armor cannot control a thoroughly armed populace - this is how the excesses of government are properly controlled.
Either the army will refuse the directions, or soldiers will defect (as has happened with FSA) or rebels will defeat armor in urban combat. Once a government has resorted to razing cities with artillery it has already lost. The citizens will never forgive the government. Russia's hopes of talks are a fantasy. This will be a fight to the death. I just can't believe the international community has not intervened. I guess US and Israel have these niggling concerns about Russia and Iran's loyalty to Syria given they are the major backers of the regime. The UN of course cannot be expected to do anything. NATO wiped Libya out with air support but Syria has a very sophisticated anti-air defense system. This war would need to be won man on man, which gets down to funding of the rebels forces. |
07:22pm 08/05/13 Permalink
In previous gun control debates I have consistently said that heavy armor cannot control a thoroughly armed populaceYou just love retconning reality to suit whatever dumb thing pops up in your head don't you? The gun debate threads were specifically about that - guns and gun ownership in western countries like Australia. It doesn't matter how many shotguns or semi-automatic rifles people own, you could fire on even a lightly armoured vehicle all you like and it won't do anything. To go up against armour you need AT weapons, which luckily the Syrian rebels have access to. Which brings up the escalation of weapon point again that trog carefully explained to you but you just couldn't get your thick skull around. To effectively go up against the Australian military, we'd need to legalise not only AT weapons but anti-air and anti-ship weapons also. The need for an armed populace to rise up against the government just in case argument is weak as piss and the fact that you'd trot Syria out as some sort of point to strengthen it proves that it is weak as piss. |
07:31pm 08/05/13 Permalink
09:16pm 08/05/13 Permalink
