3 ms·
If you think the US actually acted in Syria to increase human rights and reduce bloodshed I have a few bridges to sell you. From the very beginning the "locall
by sudosysgen 4y ago
If you think the US actually acted in Syria to increase human rights and reduce bloodshed I have a few bridges to sell you.
From the very beginning the "locally led uprising" was 50% Islamists.
And by the way, Turkey is essentially annexing Syria right now. Unlike Ukrainians, the Syrians can't meaningfully fight back because Turkey is in NATO, so their forces have absolute safe harbor.
Beyond this, there is no reasonable moral argument that an annexation is any worse than installing a puppet dictator.
- maleldil 4y ago> Unlike Ukrainians, the Syrians can't meaningfully fight back because Turkey is in NATO, so their forces have absolute safe harbor. NATO won't protect Turkey if they are the aggressors. NATO is a defensive alliance.
- ajsnigrutin 4y agoWho exactly was nato defending when they bombed yugoslavia in 1999?
- reducesuffering 4y agoThe remaining Kosovar Albanians Muslims after 8000 were killed by Serbia.
- ajsnigrutin 4y agoYou also need to read this: https://web.archive.org/web/20200319062355/http://www.michaelparenti.org/yugoslavia.html https://web.archive.org/web/20200319062355/http://www.michae...
- reducesuffering 4y agoParenti is a Marxist https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08854309808428215 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0885430980842821...
- sudosysgen 4y agoA persuasive and full argument.
- reducesuffering 4y agoFor a certain person, it is. Easier to have someone who makes right wing claims and then cites a Marxist to deal with the cognitive dissonance and introspect on how their worldview has gone wrong, than to spend twenty minutes on a thorough rebuttal.
- sudosysgen 4y agoCompletely false. If tomorrow Russia defended Syria against Turkey by attacking mainland Turkey, Article 5 would certainly apply. Similarly if a Libyan faction fired a ballistic missile onto Paris tomorrow I guarantee Article 5 would be considered. Or if Iran sunk a Turkish ship off the coast of Syria in retaliation for a strike on the SAA, etc... NATO means that Turkey doesn't have to worry about any retaliation from Syria's allies. That is to say, impunity. On the other hand if Israel invaded Syria and IRGC troops fired a missile onto a base in Israeli territory, the US wouldn't invade Iran, but they would if it was into Turkey. That's a significant chilling effect. Preventing allies from retaliating