Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Have you ever heard Boris Johnson?? Listen to a two minutes video of him and everything will be clear about his level of competence and political ability...
He is the designated attack dog in the cabinet. He does not have to make sense. In the US, it has usually been the ambassador to the UN. He was an interventionist on both Ukraine and Brexist, blaming EU inaction on military response for the former. Nuland had warned before the coup that E. Ukraine would try to break off as in S. Ossetia and would receive help from Russia.
They lose crediblity with mercenaries and the governments supplying them if they don't back them up, including accepting the flood of fighters of UK origin returning from Libya and Syria. The Saudis have been bankrolling a lot of the costs. The original offer was for the Saudis to foot the cost of a NATO invasion in 2011.
We've already established that the invasion was carried out under a false pretext. It was neither about WMD nor oil, but about removing Saddam who on multiple occasions threatened Israel. In the 80's the Israeli Air Force took out one of Iraq's nuclear sites. Defending the only functional democracy in the middle east is a noble goal, even if the war itself was a mistake.
Russia's invitation to Syria is questionable at best, as the regime that did so is not accepted by all the parties. In many ways, it's similar to the US intervention on behalf of the South Vietnamese government in the 60's.
You claimed it was about WMD. He couldn't threaten Iraq since they were under a sanctions program. The US had long established a no-fly zone to prevent their air force and armored divisions from being used to act against the Shia and the Kurds who might stage another rebellion. They're in no condition to attack Israel. You're short on facts.
The other parties don't matter. The US, UK, NATO, and the others are all backers of terrorist insurgent groups in Syria. They are acting outside the international legal framework to wage war and pretending that Al Qaeda, ISIS, and other related groups are non-state actors.
He's the foreign minister, its sort of his job to speak about other countries on behalf of Her Majesty's Government. And his country is more important than the one he is talking about. He was a non-interventionist but reality caught up to him since Russia is using military grade chemical weapons to attack people inside of Britain. He used to be praised on Russian TV just a couple years ago...but so was Trump
You claimed it was about WMD. He couldn't threaten Iraq since they were under a sanctions program. The US had long established a no-fly zone to prevent their air force and armored divisions from being used to act against the Shia and the Kurds who might stage another rebellion. They're in no condition to attack Israel. You're short on facts.
The other parties don't matter. The US, UK, NATO, and the others are all backers of terrorist insurgent groups in Syria. They are acting outside the international legal framework to wage war and pretending that Al Qaeda, ISIS, and other related groups are non-state actors.
The Syrian government is not considered legitimate by all parties involved, therefore inviting Russia into the country is not acceptable to them. Recognition is everything in politics, regardless of whether it matches what's on the ground. The Falkland Islands are a British Overseas Territory, but go to Argentina and they will claim that it's known as "Las Islas Malvinas" and belongs to them.
I hope you realize that Russia and Iran have been backing terrorist groups as well. There are a number of fighters who came from Russia to fight for ISIS and the Chechen leader Kadyrov, who has close ties to Putin btw, has backed ISIS in the past.
Russia is in Syria for one reason and one reason alone, which is to help Assad maintain power and keep it's base in the region. Syria is one of it's clients, just like Iran is. Russia has been selling weapons to Iran, who supply them to Hezbollah, who end up using them to pummel Israel with rockets.
Yes, I'm well aware of the fact that NATO has a cozy relationship with Saudi Arabia and that's definitely one of the problems facing the region but hardly the only one.
The way I see it, all options are bad and the ME has become a clusterfu** where a number of nations with different geopolitical goals have entered into the fray and they all tend to flip-flop around on policy to the point that the lines have become blurred.
I don't see why that's so hard to grasp given that humans have a history of being douches. We are vile creatures who come up with different ways to screw around.
The Syrian government is not considered legitimate by all parties involved, therefore inviting Russia into the country is not acceptable to them. Recognition is everything in politics, regardless of whether it matches what's on the ground. The Falkland Islands are a British Overseas Territory, but go to Argentina and they will claim that it's known as "Las Islas Malvinas" and belongs to them.
I hope you realize that Russia and Iran have been backing terrorist groups as well. There are a number of fighters who came from Russia to fight for ISIS and the Chechen leader Kadyrov, who has close ties to Putin btw, has backed ISIS in the past.
Russia is in Syria for one reason and one reason alone, which is to help Assad maintain power and keep it's base in the region. Syria is one of it's clients, just like Iran is. Russia has been selling weapons to Iran, who supply them to Hezbollah, who end up using them to pummel Israel with rockets.
Yes, I'm well aware of the fact that NATO has a cozy relationship with Saudi Arabia and that's definitely one of the problems facing the region but hardly the only one.
The way I see it, all options are bad and the ME has become a clusterfu** where a number of nations with different geopolitical goals have entered into the fray and they all tend to flip-flop around on policy to the point that the lines have become blurred.
I don't see why that's so hard to grasp given that humans have a history of being douches. We are vile creatures who come up with different ways to screw around.
Assad is the recognized leader of Syria, and he leads the recognized government of Syria. There is no other legitimate party, no other party is recognized as being the Syrian regime. Having some people in a country disagreeing with the regime does not add legitimacy to them, there are plenty of groups who disagree with Trump, but he and the current gov are in fact the rulers of the US.
Russia was invited by the Syrian government, the US was not. The US has invaded Syria and stating a "group invited them" is no different than stating some random group in the US invited foreign troops, so it is "legitimate". Turkey has now invaded Syria also.
The Chechen fighters are not sponsored by Russia, no more than the French and UK fighters are sponsored by said countries, absolutely a ridiculous and disingenuous statement.
Russia is in Syria because it does not want the country to fall to the crazy radical Islamist, as other regime changes had occurred. The border between Russia and Syria is easy to cross as Turkey and Caucasus's do not have good border security, and the last thing Russia wants is a resurgence of radical Islam in the Chechen area. This was well explained in Robert Gates book about what Putin conveyed to him during their meeting in regards to Libya, and Russia warning the US about sponsoring regime changes and allowing radical Islamist to take over and grow in power.
Assad is the recognized leader of Syria, and he leads the recognized government of Syria. There is no other legitimate party, no other party is recognized as being the Syrian regime. Having some people in a country disagreeing with the regime does not add legitimacy to them
Well it sure does. "No other legitimate party" is pretty much the justification to rebel against the rulers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus
The US has invaded Syria and stating a "group invited them" is no different than stating some random group in the US invited foreign troops, so it is "legitimate".
The US has not invaded Syria.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus
The border between Russia and Syria is easy to cross.
Assad is the recognized leader of Syria, and he leads the recognized government of Syria. There is no other legitimate party, no other party is recognized as being the Syrian regime. Having some people in a country disagreeing with the regime does not add legitimacy to them, there are plenty of groups who disagree with Trump, but he and the current gov are in fact the rulers of the US.
Russia was invited by the Syrian government, the US was not. The US has invaded Syria and stating a "group invited them" is no different than stating some random group in the US invited foreign troops, so it is "legitimate". Turkey has now invaded Syria also.
The Chechen fighters are not sponsored by Russia, no more than the French and UK fighters are sponsored by said countries, absolutely a ridiculous and disingenuous statement.
Russia is in Syria because it does not want the country to fall to the crazy radical Islamist, as other regime changes had occurred. The border between Russia and Syria is easy to cross as Turkey and Caucasus's do not have good border security, and the last thing Russia wants is a resurgence of radical Islam in the Chechen area. This was well explained in Robert Gates book about what Putin conveyed to him during their meeting in regards to Libya, and Russia warning the US about sponsoring regime changes and allowing radical Islamist to take over and grow in power.
Assad is only legitimate to those who accept his rule. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but that's what it is. Using your logic, why don't most countries accept the fact that Jerusalem is Israel's capital given that it's claimed so on a number of occasions? Why does Argentina claim the Falkland Islands? Why do some countries not recognize Kosovo, Northern Cyprus or the Western Sahara? A claim is valid only as long as it's backed up. A large number of Western powers as well as Turkey and SA deny Assad, therefore what he says is essentially null and void as his rule is contested. It may be the wrong thing, but that's what it is.
George III is the recognized leader of the British Empire, and he leads the recognized government of the British Empire. There is no other legitimate party, no other party is recognized as being the British regime. Having some people in a country disagreeing with the regime does not add legitimacy to them, there are plenty of groups who disagree with George III, but he and the current gov are in fact the rulers of the Thirteen Colonies.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
