Liberal? I think this is supposed to mean “leftist”?
It is a funny knee jerking assumption.
What magic simplistic ideas are you expecting? Some badly informed ignorant magical thinking that pretends to resolve by making bad assumptions?
The history of the multi-sided civil wars indicates there is not any outside solution, it is the internal actors who eventually must come to an internally based solution. As the case of the Lebanon civil war.
But you want to pretend the civilian massacring regime Assad and its equally massacring Russian ally, which shows not one bit of care about the DAESH, it is somehow ‘solving’ something for the Syria… as they work to crush the opposition that is not DAESH… yes this is a logical framing.
But no, I have none of the simplistic fake magical solutions as they do not exist.
It is indeed funny when the aggressor is portrayed as the aggressor.
It is very shameful that Putin can not just take over a territory via badly disguised military intervention to the objections of the country that governs that territory and over the objections of a large portion of the population (the Tatars who the Russians have abused again and again)
Or the sending of the armed units into the other country’s territory or the reckless providing of the Surface to air missiles then used by the sponsored groups to shoot down an innocent foriegn airliner…
Yes, these are the acts of a Russian president only defending himself against a smaller, bankrupt country that had such the great threat to the Russia that it could not even oppose the special forces…
Why do you think if a deal can be had in Syria, that somehow all will be hunky dory with Mother Russia elsewhere.
It won’t be. Russia is a continent-spanning, resource rich, technologically advanced great power. They will demand a seat at the top table or get it themselves.
Despite trying to maintain initial plausible deniability, the entire world (and especially Ukraine) got Putin’s point. Russia takes what it wants and among the things it wants is its own sphere of influence/control. That point was underlined with an extra “fuck you” when Russian forces sunk one of their derelict ships in a Crimean port, forcing Ukraine to abandon whatever remained of their military assets, including their own ships, there.
Might makes right is hardly a new approach to international relations that Russia invented. They are just pursuing it openly among their neighbors in a series of games of chicken, daring that the neighbors won’t escalate things even further by striking back against a superior power.
Plausible deniability was clearly an important part of the strategy - vital when fringing a NATO area of operation else things could escalate in minutes way beyond where even the CIA intended.
But it was also vital to make sure it looked like what it was - a protection mission for Russian-speakers in the west of the country. And, fwiw, it’s not as if Putin had any choice in that at all, politically speaking - the Russian people and the Russian military would have accepted absolutely nothing less: you protect your own. End of.
Putin’s hands were effectively tied by both CIA aggression and the expectations of his own people.
Yes and poor Hitler, he only wanted to protect the German Volk in the east from the oppression of the slavics, responding to their calls that had not one thing to do with him…
No offense, but you have “nothing,” since Ramira has made several cogent posts about the situation, and all you’ve done is wave your hands at them, called them “nothing”, made assumptions about the poster’s politics, and then refused to engage. Which is hardly helpful in any discussion.
Utter nonsense. There weren’t any Russians living in Ukraine when Putin invaded. There were Ukrainians who spoke Russian.
There are people in Canada who speak the same language as Americans. Does that mean the United States has the right to claim these people as its own and invade British Columbia?
And the idea that the CIA and NATO somehow forced Russia to invade Ukraine is even more ridiculous.
This is a bit misleading, when talking about Europe. I am certain that there were probably Russian nationals living in Ukraina. But more importantly, many of the people who live in Ukraina and speak Russian as their first language are ethnically Russian; the term “Russian-Ukrainian” has very little meaning. The fact that they are Russians who are Ukranian nationals doesn’t change this.
Which doesn’t excuse what Putin did, of course. But it is important to keep realities in mind.
Actually, I’d say that’s a gray area, but the oppression of the people they are trying to protect is certainly not up to that level. BAsically, Russian speakers are oppressed in Putin’s view simply because they are not living in Russia.
et alors? The ethnic language argument is not a basis for this
Of course, the Austrian fellow with the funny moustache was only saving his fellow language speakers from the horrible oppression, and similar logics all around. Always for the good, I am sure someone living in the middle east will always agree…
Simple old imperial irredentism with the old blood and language excuse…
So, what? The US reverses course and joins Russia and the Syrian regime to attack the rebels?? :eek:
How do you ‘just get over ourselves’ about Assad?? Seriously, do you have any conception of the stuff that’s been happening in Syria?? And what a reversal such as the one you seem to be proposing would do to the US and our relationships to pretty much the rest of the world?
We never supported Saddam like the Russians are supporting Assad. And Saddam at his worst was never in Assad’s league. Again, do you have any concept of the things Assad et al have done in this civil war? They aren’t comparable…and the US role in ‘support’ isn’t the same either, not unless you want to try and make a comparison to Vietnam. :dubious:
However, let’s pretend it is exactly the same. How does the fact that the US supported those regimes in the past make it a good idea for the US to reverse course and join the Russian’s and Assad in fighting the rebels?? In your mind (and hopefully in more than a drive by sentence) can you explain how you think this would be a good move by the US??
Have they? Then ‘the world’ is as ignorant as you as to the sorts of things the Chinese CCP has and continues to do. There is no comparison wrt human rights between the CCP and the US…at least not to anyone who isn’t so anti-US they can’t even be bothered to look into the issue. Like…oh, say you.
