Syria got bombed quicker than you got your $2,000 checks
(twitter.com)
Comments (11)
sorted by:
Edit: I'm not learning this formatting, pretend I understand it
If Assad survives being ousted maybe he should run for President in the US. He has a far better understanding of the opposition than any mainstream "conservative" in the US and would probably get more votes than Nikki Haley.
I always thought if we had really wanted out of the whole ISIS mess we'd have just gotten on the same page as Russia and it would have been over in half an hour.
The only difference I could ever find is they wanted Assad out and Russia didn't, and Democrats hate Russia anyway. Is Assad a perfect saint? Definitely not. But I haven't seen anything about him that convinces me it's worth my own country going half way across the world to run out. But the establishment clearly wants these wars, since it's taken them about a month to be right back in them. If they were running against an administration that was pro-war, they'd be right there condemning wars in the Middle East though.
Assad is literally a hero.
He was a doctor who was called in to lead the country by his family and overwhelmingly won the position in a democratic election.
Then, suddenly, foreign mercenaries flood into the state and start false flagging to gain international backing to be able to hold cities. At the same time ISIS floods in and begins claiming land.
During this clusterfuck he rallies the military, evacuates cities and creates a stable domestic zone with almost no terrorism and is able to continue the rule of law and government while providing for his people.
By all metrics a hero. Not just not a bad person, a literal hero of legend for his people.
Yeah I don't give a shit about Assad one way or another because I'm not Syrian. I'm sure he's not a saint, but then again I doubt saints last very long as national leaders in that part of the world.
Putin's view on Assad in this interview seems perfectly reasonable: they are the legitimate government, let Syrians decide who's in charge of the Syrian government, and if you get rid of Assad you're just going to make the situation worse by creating a power vacuum. The only part of that stated position is that I wouldn't "support" Syria (nor would I antagonize Syria) but rather I'd just leave them to their own devices.
But creating power vacuums seems to be a perennial foreign policy objective for the US military industrial complex, so it's unlikely you'll get them on the same page with any foreign leader who prefers to not do that.
And if he's ousted, the only thing the Syrians'll get (and what many areas out of Assad's control have gotten to my understanding) is religious fundamentalists and all sorts of people that put the tyranny and authority of Assad's rule to shame.
And okay, maybe that won't happen but I think it will if he is ousted. We have plenty of examples in the destructive wake of the Arab Spring to point to. This is maybe going off on a tangent but I don't think any of those countries' cultures have developed to the point where they can have something like a republic without it collapsing into infighting. It's awful to say but better they have a strongman that keeps order instead of all manner of warlords and extremists fighting and leaving the people to suffer more than they would otherwise.
Reminds me of Apokolypse after Darkseid's death. Everyone and their mom was trying to grab a piece of the pie.
All the Syrians I've met in America speak fondly of Assad. They don't call America racist either though, so I suspect my sample is biased.
Same thing has always happened right back to the Israel-Palestine split, which was caused by the US, not liking the then leader, intervening on the behalf of the "then rebels" to instil a puppet leader. Problem is when it went wrong when the state split.
The US has since then done this to Every middle Eastern leader they didn't like ("legitimate" cause or not).
Saddam came about because of the power vacuum the US created, as did Gadaffi, Isis, right back to Arafat and the PLO on the palenstinian side of it all.
Like you said its the perennial tactic of the Dems.
If they can't find a war on terror, they'll make one.
The republicans seem to favor the war on drugs/oil but they also don't have the need to start ACTUAL wars on false pretences to do it. But I digress.
Moar wars for israel and bankers. Any country without a rothschild controlled central bank must goooooo.....
He's just following Trump's actions unfortunately...