Putin on Middle East - makes western look like idiots

Haha no I refuse to believe America are clueless on how to get rid of ISIS and the other rebel groups, they just CHOOSE to not do it as its benefiting them in some indirect way.

Original post by ckfeister

[video="youtube;jy5F5nDuXYY"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jy5F5nDuXYY[/video]

> America are clueless on how to get rid of rebel group once Syria war done
> The same countries supporting them, are fighting them in Mali
> Libya used to have the highest standard of living in middle east, now the poorest
> Outsider interference caused this

This is just 2 minutes of it, you think Russia was correct on this?

Reply 2

Rakas21

The US are not clueless on this issue, they simply lack the resolve to take substantial action. This is one of the few advantages that Russia has in Putin, he has a resolve which is missing elsewhere right now.

Yes, Syria is one battle in a wider war. The end result will be western withdraw and an eventual war against a single foe, what will essentially be a war against Islam.

Libya does not have the poorest standard of living in the Middle East, just no longer the highest. It's folly to blame the west for this given that had we not intervened there's every probability that Syria would be the result.

Reply 3

Fadel

16

One question though. Why would USA want to do anything about it? I don't them experiencing any harm from this situation so far.

Reply 4

Original post by ckfeister

[video="youtube;jy5F5nDuXYY"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jy5F5nDuXYY[/video]

> America are clueless on how to get rid of rebel group once Syria war done
> The same countries supporting them, are fighting them in Mali
> Libya used to have the highest standard of living in middle east, now the poorest
> Outsider interference caused this

This is just 2 minutes of it, you think Russia was correct on this?

Why do people still think the Russian approach is the right one? They've been barrel bombing indiscriminately since day 1 ffs.

Reply 5

lawyer3c

2

Original post by Rakas21

Yes, Syria is one battle in a wider war. The end result will be western withdraw and an eventual war against a single foe, what will essentially be a war against Islam.

You keep saying this, but there's no reason to think this will ever be the case.

No country, Islamic or otherwise, supports the IS, and Turkey/Saudi/Pakistan are all in a coalition to fight the IS.

A conflict with a militant Islamist group that has no support from any governments in the region is miles away from a "war against Islam".

Reply 6

Original post by Pinkberry_y

Haha no I refuse to believe America are clueless on how to get rid of ISIS and the other rebel groups, they just CHOOSE to not do it as its benefiting them in some indirect way.

Putin's a heartless b*****d. That's why they're making so much progress. They're dropping anything on anyone opposed to Assad. Killing scores of civilians every day.

Reply 7

Original post by lawyer3c

You keep saying this, but there's no reason to think this will ever be the case.

No country, Islamic or otherwise, supports the IS, and Turkey/Saudi/Pakistan are all in a coalition to fight the IS.

A conflict with a militant Islamist group that has no support from any governments in the region is miles away from a "war against Islam".

Some gulf states specifically Qatar and S. Arabia do have a huge problem with rich sheiks sympathetic with the IS cause. Turkey has been accused of all sorts too.

Reply 8

ckfeister

OP

Original post by cbreef

Why do people still think the Russian approach is the right one? They've been barrel bombing indiscriminately since day 1 ffs.

Who caused it.

Reply 9

Rakas21

Original post by lawyer3c

You keep saying this, but there's no reason to think this will ever be the case.

No country, Islamic or otherwise, supports the IS, and Turkey/Saudi/Pakistan are all in a coalition to fight the IS.

A conflict with a militant Islamist group that has no support from any governments in the region is miles away from a "war against Islam".

It's long term IMO.

I see a lack of resolve from the west which means that with so many of groups spread through Africa and the Middle East, we'll leave since we're unwilling to defeat them. Over time you'll get these groups allying under a single banner (like Boko Haram allying with ISIS), at that point we'll them spread and take territory from incompetent governments full of angry people (you may have faith in the Lebanese government to hold the fort, i don't). Once that occurs then we'll see more organised and frequent attacks which will eventually piss off the people of Europe sufficiently that they'll demand action. Couple that with the general negative sentiment to Muslims domestically and you end up with a quick but bloody war against essentially Islam.

The support from existing countries is somewhat relevant when half of them basket cases that are barely capable of governing themselves.

Reply 10

Original post by ckfeister

Who caused it.

The civil war? Assad mostly.

Reply 11

ckfeister

OP

Original post by cbreef

The civil war? Assad mostly.

Western countries caused it. Who made ISIS? Who made democracy in middle east? USA; who ruined Libya, who used to have the highest standard of living in Middle East? Britain and France.

Reply 12

Pinkberry_y

We need a leader like Assad in Syria, if he's removed, Syria will become an even hotter mess just like Iraq. When will westerners realise their political system is not compatible in countries like the Middle East where it will just be exploited to give opportunity to psycho extreme groups like Isis

Original post by cbreef

Putin's a heartless b*****d. That's why they're making so much progress. They're dropping anything on anyone opposed to Assad. Killing scores of civilians every day.

Reply 13

lawyer3c

2

Original post by cbreef

Some gulf states specifically Qatar and S. Arabia do have a huge problem with rich sheiks sympathetic with the IS cause. Turkey has been accused of all sorts too.

Yes true, but that is not official government policy in any case. Saudi Arabia prefer backing 'rebel' militant Islamist groups instead of IS, often these groups are just as bad, but because they're not the IS they can get away with it by just calling them 'rebels'.

Reply 14

Original post by ckfeister

Western countries caused it. Who made ISIS? Who made democracy in middle east? USA; who ruined Libya, who used to have the highest standard of living in Middle East? Britain and France.

That's an incredibly simplistic way of looking at it.
The people of Syria revolted against the Asssad government, nothing else.
IS was created by Al Baghdadi after the foreign invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan - yes, correct.
Libya was already well on its way to ruining itself after the uprising against Gaddafi.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 15

Original post by lawyer3c

Yes true, but that is not official government policy in any case. Saudi Arabia prefer backing 'rebel' militant Islamist groups instead of IS, often these groups are just as bad, but because they're not the IS they can get away with it by just calling them 'rebels'.

Which is why I propose telling them to f*ck off after all this is done. I can't stand them. But it's never gonna happen, because, money.

Reply 16

3121

Putin is showing he's a better world leader than the USA.

Reply 17

Rakas21

Original post by Pinkberry_y

We need a leader like Assad in Syria, if he's removed, Syria will become an even hotter mess just like Iraq. When will westerners realise their political system is not compatible in countries like the Middle East where it will just be exploited to give opportunity to psycho extreme groups like Isis

What we really need is to be willing to occupy the nation for 40 years such that in 30 years time you have a generation of people who have been taught our values and whom can be handed the reigns of government as we withdraw.

That will almost certainly not happen though.

Reply 18

Pinkberry_y