- Jul 4, 2009
....so now we have NATO incursions into The Ukraine ?.....could you perhaps expand on that a bit because a very cursory Google search didn't yield nothing...djpbaltimore said:I don't doubt that Russia has a rationale for what they are doing in the ME. Nor do I doubt that the US can do damage in a greater scope of places. However, I doubt that entangling themselves in the ME will calm Muslims within their territory. Preventing Chechnya 3.0 might be better accomplished with domestic policy, rather than what they are attempting militarily. Ymmv.....ScienceIsCool said:Why would Russia spend all the money it doesn't have to go and kill Syrians?
They wouldn't. Their biggest fear is Chechnya 3.0. Syria is only 600 km away from Chechnya. Russia has a VERY big problem with a growing militant Islamic army that may or may not decide to give their Chechen brothers a helping hand. As it is, Russia is at the absolute limit of its force projection in Syria. They're stretching themselves so that they can maintain the Syrian government and work towards a negotiated peace. The effect is that terrorists get zapped and deny the Chechens an incubator for another go at Russia.
Speaking of force projection... if 600 km is the extent of Russia's capabilities then they obviously aren't capable of moving against Europe, no matter what NATO or the US says. Not capable means no intentions.
Now let's look at the US force projection capabilities. Anywhere. Anytime.
I don't think Europe is worried about incursions from Russia. I think many Ukrainians are though. I don't see much of a conventional military threat to Russia from the ME, especially with nations like Iran as a close ally.
The article we were discussing the last few days indicates that they are killing civilians. Python says it is a neutral source.ScienceIsCool said:They aren't killing Syrians. They're killing almost exclusively foreign, invading terrorists. Very unfortunately for Syria, the terrorists are bent on occupying and destroying the civilian population. Example: Daesh has cut off all water to Aleppo and has rigged the dam with explosives if the Syrians try to restore the supply - not that the press is reporting on it. So that's two months of no water for a million or more people. Which side do you think the government is on? So when Syria and Russia and Iran work together to defeat these bastards, they necessarily have to attack populated areas. What's the alternative?djpbaltimore said:So, is anyone going to provide a reason why what happens in the Ukraine gives a country license to kill civilians in Syria? Do you think that the twin towers attacks gave the US license to kill civilians in Iraq? It seems like the same bogus argument.
I imagine you can make a case for doing the greater good by Assad and his Russian partners in some instances, but that doesn't explain things like UN convoy attack and the prison executions. And relating back to my quote above, that really has nothing to do with NATO incursions in the Ukraine.