Talk:Syrian civil war

Archives
Topical archives
Israel in the infobox DRN Kurds in the infobox Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Syrian civil war

NDF number should be 100,000 not 80,000

http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21647367-shia-militias-are-proliferating-middle-east-shia-crescendo

204.197.185.78 (talk) 21:21, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Hard to know reliable numbers. While I agree with your numbers, the question is - who publishes these numbers? 2A02:8388:1600:6900:D9FD:1933:A841:5320 (talk) 13:06, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Syrian Civil War: Title

The title of the page is not good. It insinuates as if there is a civil war, as in - syrians versus syrians. While this is surely partially correct, it also is correct without a doubt that foreign fighters participate. It does not matter who, it does not matter where, but this means that OUTSIDERS fight in a "civil war", which makes the term inconsistent and not logical.

I suggest a more neutral term. As it stands, the article is extremely one sided in favour of what certain other non-syrian governments describe or wish to convey, and while I can understand that wikipedia does not want to adopt the position of the syrian government, wikipedia should also be NEUTRAL and not use terms which are technically not correct. Who decided on the term "Syrian Civil War" anyway, corporate media? 2A02:8388:1600:6900:D9FD:1933:A841:5320 (talk) 13:05, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, the Spanish Civil War, Finnish Civil War, and Greek Civil War all had outside participants, but got stuck with those names. Plus, per WP:COMMONNAME, the article's title should be the most common name, and most sources refer to the conflict as the Syrian Civil War. Compassionate727 (talk) 14:56, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Also prominent are the Russian Civil War and, more recently, the Iraqi Kurdish Civil War, the Somali Civil War, the first Libyan Civil War (2011), and the Yemeni Civil War (2015). In fact, most modern civil wars feature foreign volunteers or even state aid of some sort for one or both sides, in part because of the proxy wars of the Cold War. ansh666 22:32, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't know how to edit these pages, but I know that the chemical weapons statements are false. The only record of chemical weapons has been debunked as a hoax by bbc. As in bbc staged the entire thing. Do a quick search on the net, there is plenty of evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.158.41.51 (talk) 18:03, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

A civil war is a war between organized groups within the same state or country. Clearly this is what is happening in Syria (there is no fight between two different countries in any traditional sense. No country has invaded Syria and Syria has invaded no one. Outside assistance means nothing as it is common. Legacypac (talk) 09:37, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

How about the term "revolution" or "revolutionary war"?? I am a Syrian, and I know for a fact that millions of Syrians from all parties of the conflict know that the main goal of the conflict was and still is to remove the government of Bashar Al-Assad, which is the definition of Revolution. Please refer to this page"difference between revolution and civil war for more info on difference between civil war and revolution. I quote from the cited source: "The most important difference between a revolution and a civil war is that civilians directly revolt against the government in a revolution whereas factions wage a war against each other in a civil war"Majd alshoufi (talk) 20:35, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

There are clearly factions waging war against each other, if you haven't noticed. ansh666 20:40, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

To a point, every revolution is a civil war, but I would like to redraw attention to the most important factor in naming a revolution, namely, the GOALS of the conflict. There is a consensus that the millions of demonstrators, who later carried arms, have in their main goal to remove the government of Bashar Al-Assad, and that the loyalists are resisting that same goal.Majd alshoufi (talk) 21:17, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

And the Kurds and ISIL each want to form their own governments. Also, not every revolution is a civil war - see Egypt, or for a more classic example the Glorious Revolution which featured a bloodless invasion of sorts. ansh666 21:29, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

It is not a "revolutionary war" since there has been no revolution. Assad still controls the parts of Syria that contain 65% of the population. ISIL and friends mostly control desert. FunkMonk (talk) 01:19, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

again, I'd like to redraw attention to the main deciding factor on naming a revolution, namely, the DECLARED GOALS of the fighting parties, the main opposition forces all agree that their goal is to REMOVE the government of Bashar Al-Assad, and Assad's loyalists all agree that their goal is to DEFEND that same government. Furthermore, if you want to take the international respected media into account, IT IS BEING CALLED A REVOLUTION by several prominent media agencies. .Majd alshoufi (talk) 10:09, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Most sources just call it he "Syrian war" or "war in Syria". Civil war is less biased than "revolutionary war". FunkMonk (talk) 10:49, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Infobox columns

Since infoboxes can now apparently have 5 columns (see Wars of the Three Kingdoms), should the columns be revised to 1.) The Syrian govt., 2.) The Free Syrian Army & allies, 3.) ISIS, 4.) The other Islamists & 5.) The Kurds, w/the foreign allies of each faction placed in the relevant columns? Unsigned comment by Blaylockjam10 at 10:13, 11 July 2015

• Why should the FSA be separate from the non-IS Islamist groups that it clearly works with? FunkMonk (talk) 17:08, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree with FunkMonk. This was previously discussed and rejected. The FSA and the likes of Nusra may not be best friends, and there have been incidents of infighting, but they've cooperated more often than not, and there's a significant "grey area" of overlap between the Islamist rebels and the more secular/pro-Western rebels. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:24, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
• I can't see a reason to separate groups that cooperate. Its hard enough to keep updated. Legacypac (talk) 09:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

On the infobox, now foreign support is called "non.-combat aid", so Israel should definitely be included under FSA and friends. FunkMonk (talk) 21:05, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

• Israel has now been added, with this source.[1] FunkMonk (talk) 09:45, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
• As long as we're talking about the non-combat column, it really should only be under the opposition column. The sources featured for them only cite non-combat aid being given to the Syrian opposition. The Kurds are getting support from the US-led coalition which consists of many of the same countries, so it's redundant. As for ISIS, they should have their own column for "alleged" backers. Charles Essie (talk) 17:43, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Neutrality of the article

The article is not neutrally worded.

For instance, take this statement here:

"Rebel advances led to government and Hezbollah morale plunging dramatically."

The link goes to stratfor. There is no mention at all of the linked-in statement. So why is this in an article like that? That is pure propaganda. 2A02:8388:1600:6900:BE5F:F4FF:FECD:7CB2 (talk) 18:48, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Whenever you see such discrepancy between source and text, you can remove it on sight. FunkMonk (talk) 02:26, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Houthis

Hello, I've been fact-checking the claim that the Yemeni Houthis are fighting in Syria. All the web sources claiming that the fight or fought in Syria, including the one given, seem to be based on this 2013 article, where the information is credited to "a (Yemeni) official source, speaking on condition of anonymity". I think this is not a reliable enough encyclopedic source and that, until better sources show up, we should delete the claim in the infobox as well as the "See also : Yemeni civil war" because the two are not directly related. Yet, personally I know nothing about the Houthis, does anyone here know more ? (you can talk with me on wp:fr)--GrandEscogriffe (talk) 20:35, 23 July 2015 (UTC) Also, when this point is settled would someone kindly explain me how to edit the infobox ? Thank you

Number of besieged people

SAMS estimates that that there are more than 640,200 people living under long-term siege in Syria, more than three times the current UN OCHA estimate of 212,000.

Syrian American Medical Society (March 2015), Slow Death: Life and Death in Syrian Communities Under Siege, p. 5.

--YeOldeGentleman (talk) 00:54, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done Added it myself! --YeOldeGentleman (talk) 01:01, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Turkey in the same column as Kurds

It seems strange to have Turkey in the same column as Kurds, because Turkey is also bombing some Kurd positions. Although, on the other hand, they are also fighting IS, which is currently the main enemy of Kurds. --46.234.78.146 (talk) 19:42, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

That's what the line is for. Nusra has also fought with the FSA. Anyhow, the way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised if we end up moving the Kurds to the government column... FunkMonk (talk) 19:50, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

the map is not correct

there is no rebel presence in Latakia governorate, as shown on the map

207.35.219.34 (talk) 20:33, 5 August 2015 (UTC)