4 ms·

> Russia didn't mean to shoot down a commercial airliner. They thought it was a Ukrainian military cargo plane. Of course, when they found out it wasn't, they t

> Russia didn't mean to shoot down a commercial airliner. They thought it was a Ukrainian military cargo plane. Of course, when they found out it wasn't, they tried to cover it up because But when they were found to have done it, it was covered up. And yes, because it would have interfered with another lie of theirs, not that it's a defense. > Russia backs the Assad regime, because they want access to Syria's port on the Mediterranian Sea. ISIS threatens the Assad regime As I said. Russia doesn't care about ISIS, Russia cares about a handy puppet state. If ISIS turned back-around into Iraq Russia would stop fighting them. If Russia kills more people than ISIS in freeing the country they won't care at all. > we should be backing the Assad regime too Hmmm, yeah. No. Shooting ISIS is awesome, helping a dictator is not. If we actually collaborate to help Assad hold the Syrians hostage, we're as bad as ISIS. > Exactly. So how do we change that? Simple: we don't, because we're not willing to Because you're far enough from the problem that blowback rarely hits you. If you actually faced even a small percentage of the problems you caused from it you wouldn't be able to lose interest so often. The truth is that ISIS isn't a big issue to the USA as long as oil flows. You're not willing to - for the cost/benefit in this case. > has there been any effort by Western powers to redraw those borders No, in fact Western powers sold Iraq poison gas to avoid the issue. But the fact of the matter is that isolationism doesn't work. Terrorists will bring the war to you, especially if you're perceived as having meddled. Commit to fixing it, or expect to paying for more over time as you continually half-fix it.

Grishnakh 11y ago
>But when they were found to have done it, it was covered up. And yes, because it would have interfered with another lie of theirs, not that it's a defense. You were trying to claim that Russia intentionally shot down a passenger plane, when it's obvious that they didn't. >As I said. Russia doesn't care about ISIS, Russia cares about a handy puppet state. If ISIS turned back-around into Iraq Russia would stop fighting them. If Russia kills more people than ISIS in freeing the country they won't care at all. So, yes, Russia DOES care about ISIS. If ISIS magically teleported to the Moon and turned into pink unicorns, then Russia would stop caring about them, but that's about as likely as ISIS turning around and staying in Iraq, so it's pointless to discuss such possibilities. >Hmmm, yeah. No. Shooting ISIS is awesome, helping a dictator is not. If we actually collaborate to help Assad hold the Syrians hostage, we're as bad as ISIS. And you're as clueless as George W Bush. How do you propose to deal with the power vacuum when you get rid of ISIS and Assad? Just let the other Islamist groups like Al Nusra take over? Great plan! Or no, I know, let's have elections and set up a democracy!! Yeah, that worked so great in Egypt, where they elected the Muslim Brotherhood! And how are the Syrians being "held hostage" anyway? A large chunk of the Syrian population wants the Assad regime, just like a large chunk of the Iraqi population was happy with the Saddam regime. You have three choices: back a dictator, help Islamists overthrow the dictator, or stay out of it. I don't see how #2, your choice, is at all morally defensible. >Commit to fixing it, or expect to paying for more over time as you continually half-fix it. You haven't actually come up with any kind of viable plan to "fix" the problem, other than putting more people like ISIS and Al Qaeda in charge.
- EdHominem 11y ago
  > You were trying I know what I'm trying. And you're wrong. I'm not claiming Putin wanted an airliner shot down. I'm saying that when Putin's forces shot down an airliner he kept supporting them. In other words, Russia doesn't care. > So, yes, Russia DOES care about ISIS. No. Because if ISIS wandered off into Iraq, they'd be done. >> If we actually collaborate > How do you propose to deal with the power vacuum You want to plug it with a dictator? Brilliant. > how are the Syrians being "held hostage" anyway? Their dictator has ordered his security forces to fire on civilians. > A large chunk of the Syrian population wants the Assad regime Got a fair vote that shows that? And see below. > just like a large chunk of the Iraqi population was happy with the Saddam regime. Yeah, those in his good books, whose power came from him. But it's irrelevant anyways because even popular support for an illegal government (ie, not recognizing human rights) doesn't legitimize it. > You haven't actually come up with any kind of viable plan to "fix" the problem Move the goalposts much? It's not the job of the guy who says "Stop throwing gas on the fire" to have the entire roadmap planned out. You're the one who proposes we take an active stance - to shift our alliances and protect a dictator we'd previously told to leave power. You want to commit military resources. The burden of proof is on you.

Grishnakh 11y ago

>But when they were found to have done it, it was covered up. And yes, because it would have interfered with another lie of theirs, not that it's a defense. You were trying to claim that Russia intentionally shot down a passenger plane, when it's obvious that they didn't. >As I said. Russia doesn't care about ISIS, Russia cares about a handy puppet state. If ISIS turned back-around into Iraq Russia would stop fighting them. If Russia kills more people than ISIS in freeing the country they won't care at all. So, yes, Russia DOES care about ISIS. If ISIS magically teleported to the Moon and turned into pink unicorns, then Russia would stop caring about them, but that's about as likely as ISIS turning around and staying in Iraq, so it's pointless to discuss such possibilities. >Hmmm, yeah. No. Shooting ISIS is awesome, helping a dictator is not. If we actually collaborate to help Assad hold the Syrians hostage, we're as bad as ISIS. And you're as clueless as George W Bush. How do you propose to deal with the power vacuum when you get rid of ISIS and Assad? Just let the other Islamist groups like Al Nusra take over? Great plan! Or no, I know, let's have elections and set up a democracy!! Yeah, that worked so great in Egypt, where they elected the Muslim Brotherhood! And how are the Syrians being "held hostage" anyway? A large chunk of the Syrian population wants the Assad regime, just like a large chunk of the Iraqi population was happy with the Saddam regime. You have three choices: back a dictator, help Islamists overthrow the dictator, or stay out of it. I don't see how #2, your choice, is at all morally defensible. >Commit to fixing it, or expect to paying for more over time as you continually half-fix it. You haven't actually come up with any kind of viable plan to "fix" the problem, other than putting more people like ISIS and Al Qaeda in charge.

EdHominem 11y ago
> You were trying I know what I'm trying. And you're wrong. I'm not claiming Putin wanted an airliner shot down. I'm saying that when Putin's forces shot down an airliner he kept supporting them. In other words, Russia doesn't care. > So, yes, Russia DOES care about ISIS. No. Because if ISIS wandered off into Iraq, they'd be done. >> If we actually collaborate > How do you propose to deal with the power vacuum You want to plug it with a dictator? Brilliant. > how are the Syrians being "held hostage" anyway? Their dictator has ordered his security forces to fire on civilians. > A large chunk of the Syrian population wants the Assad regime Got a fair vote that shows that? And see below. > just like a large chunk of the Iraqi population was happy with the Saddam regime. Yeah, those in his good books, whose power came from him. But it's irrelevant anyways because even popular support for an illegal government (ie, not recognizing human rights) doesn't legitimize it. > You haven't actually come up with any kind of viable plan to "fix" the problem Move the goalposts much? It's not the job of the guy who says "Stop throwing gas on the fire" to have the entire roadmap planned out. You're the one who proposes we take an active stance - to shift our alliances and protect a dictator we'd previously told to leave power. You want to commit military resources. The burden of proof is on you.