• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kerry Slams Russia for 'Enabling' Assad to stay in Power.....

DaveFagan said:
Right, and if it's dark, it's hard to thread needles. You spew nonsense and the Media talking points like you're in the real World, which you are not.
Click to expand...

Read a book, Dave. Just pick one. Something about international relations or foreign policy or politics. Maybe a magazine? Would you like a subscription to FP or The Week or something? The Economist? Since I'm not a deadbeat that feels disenfranchised by the world, I can actually pay for a year for you to learn about the real world, instead of what you read on internet messageboards.

I know you like to believe in your big, bad boogeyman, but the reality is there's no force out there secretly pulling the strings on everything. And it's certainly not the US in Syria lol.

These people always seem to grant near omnipotence to those evil conspirators. Like they're never dealt with the crushing inefficiency and borderline-ineffectiveness of bureaucracy.
 
annata said:
I don't see any viable alternative to Assad that favors US/UN or regional interests. an Islamic state would be OK, but it would depend on who has the power.

The last thing we want is a radical state, or even partitioning of Syria- if the states are too small, it just invites more "civil wars"
( I put it in quotes because this is more then an internal Syrian war).

About the best we can do is try to negotiate some kind of stalemate; leaving Assad strong enough that the foreign fighter will leave - having no ability to maintain the positions.
Tamp down the internal al_Nusra and see if the place can stop it's war.

The next problem is the country is in shambles, and the refugees, but until the war stops nothing can be done
Click to expand...

I tend to agree. Perhaps the best thing we can do is help Jordan and Turkey out with the refugees and let what will happen in Syria happen. If we help keep neighboring countries stable, that is probably the best outcome when there is no good outcome.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
Read a book, Dave. Just pick one. Something about international relations or foreign policy or politics. Maybe a magazine? Would you like a subscription to FP or The Week or something? The Economist? Since I'm not a deadbeat that feels disenfranchised by the world, I can actually pay for a year for you to learn about the real world, instead of what you read on internet messageboards.

I know you like to believe in your big, bad boogeyman, but the reality is there's no force out there secretly pulling the strings on everything. And it's certainly not the US in Syria lol.

These people always seem to grant near omnipotence to those evil conspirators. Like they're never dealt with the crushing inefficiency and borderline-ineffectiveness of bureaucracy.
Click to expand...

You can spew bullcrap all day long and repeat yourself ad infinitum and some will always believe something if they hear it repeated often enough. I'd like some of those repeater magazines of yours to start my wood stove. Thanks. It's a truly crooked Corporatocracy, operated by the USA.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
It's probably best in the long run. Allowing this continue for a bit longer could hold some attraction for Western powers, though.
Click to expand...

How? I would worry about countries like Jordan and Turkey becoming destabilized, not to mentioned Iraq which is probably a lost cause in the end.
 
DaveFagan said:
You can spew bullcrap all day long and repeat yourself ad infinitum and some will always believe something if they hear it repeated often enough. I'd like some of those repeater magazines of yours to start my wood stove. Thanks. It's a truly crooked Corporatocracy, operated by the USA.
Click to expand...

Okay, so you don't want the subscription? Alright, continue to get your information from internet message boards and youtube videos. You don't vote though, right? Cool.
 
Perotista said:
How? I would worry about countries like Jordan and Turkey becoming destabilized, not to mentioned Iraq which is probably a lost cause in the end.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't particularly argue it vehemently, but there's something to be sad for war fatigue. This Salafist violence against other Muslims is- in recent years, like pre-Ibn Saud Nejd/penninsula consolidation- fairly new. Now, I don't mean Sunni-Shia, I mean particularly Salafi-Hashemite. Allowing it to act as both a focal point and as a festering wound could help in the same way Afghanistan was a festering wound for for the Soviet Union (of course in a much, much more diminished fashion).

The problem with the Middle East has always been disenfranchisement (shouts out to Dave!). A series of strongmen ruled the region, with the support of the US and USSR, as pawns in the Cold War. What you're seeing over the last few decades is a chaotic enfranchisement of the populace. It's not even close to done- maybe not even fully started- but it's going to be violent and messy for quite some time. Encouraging the one of the first full scale conflicts (not the first, at all, but one of them) in it to be experienced solely by Arabs and no one else can certainly be very attractive in the right light.

Just throwing out there the argument for it. A complex thing.
 
annata said:
I would think that would dry up the Sunnis.
But I don't know, as the battlefield is most of the country, and the weapons are there. Anyways. The goal has to be to get the regional powers to stop supporting their proxies.

One reason Iran should have been included in the talks, but Kerry had a ~snitfit~ so they were dis-invited, again because of this "transitional" nonsense
Click to expand...


Yeah, I noticed how once those foreign fighters aren't being supplied anymore buy the ones who are supplying the bulk of weapons to them. That the war will pretty much come to a stop then.

The only reason it wont.....is the Saud won't accept the End game results.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
Okay, so you don't want the subscription? Alright, continue to get your information from internet message boards and youtube videos. You don't vote though, right? Cool.
Click to expand...

You've got to type slower because I've only got a 31.2kbps link. Doesn't work for YouTube and I wouldn't know where to look for an Internet message board, but I'd be glad to refer you to the respected and true books (no bibles) to aid in your enlightenment. In the meantime, see if you can't get that old Greek to lend you a lantern.
 
DaveFagan said:
You've got to type slower because I've only got a 31.2kbps link. Doesn't work for YouTube and I wouldn't know where to look for an Internet message board, but I'd be glad to refer you to the respected and true books (no bibles) to aid in your enlightenment. In the meantime, see if you can't get that old Greek to lend you a lantern.
Click to expand...

This was an entirely pointless post. Bye Dave.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
I wouldn't particularly argue it vehemently, but there's something to be sad for war fatigue. This Salafist violence against other Muslims is- in recent years, like pre-Ibn Saud Nejd/penninsula consolidation- fairly new. Now, I don't mean Sunni-Shia, I mean particularly Salafi-Hashemite. Allowing it to act as both a focal point and as a festering wound could help in the same way Afghanistan was a festering wound for for the Soviet Union (of course in a much, much more diminished fashion).

The problem with the Middle East has always been disenfranchisement (shouts out to Dave!). A series of strongmen ruled the region, with the support of the US and USSR, as pawns in the Cold War. What you're seeing over the last few decades is a chaotic enfranchisement of the populace. It's not even close to done- maybe not even fully started- but it's going to be violent and messy for quite some time. Encouraging the one of the first full scale conflicts (not the first, at all, but one of them) in it to be experienced solely by Arabs and no one else can certainly be very attractive in the right light.

Just throwing out there the argument for it. A complex thing.
Click to expand...

That it is, complex I mean. There is no easy answers.
 
Leave it to Russians and the society will suffer in the long run. Leave it to Assad and the society suffers already as it is. Leave to the rival fractions and they are too extreme.

You cannot leave it to neither of them. Yet you cannot stay idle and not do something about it neither for Assad is butchering his own civilian people.

It seems the only issue worth engaging here is the society in Syria. If all these powers were to go away the power in the vacuum could be won with elections instead.
 
Syria's Assad looks to win on battlefield, not through talks: Kerry.....

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is still trying to win on the battlefield rather than find a solution through peace talks, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said on Monday.....snip~

Syria's Assad looks to win on battlefield, not through talks: Kerry


:doh



Facepalm_1.jpg
 
humbolt said:
Kerry figured this out all by himself?
Click to expand...

Weeeeell I wouldn't give him all the credit.....like Pelosi. He had a botox bubble pop. So he was bound to catch a thought.
 
MMC said:
Weeeeell I wouldn't give him all the credit.....like Pelosi. He had a botox bubble pop. So he was bound to catch a thought.
Click to expand...

I bet the Russians blew vodka out through their noses when they heard Kerry say that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom