7 ms·

Much though I want to view this as good news I keep finding myself steelmanning that it's actually bad news * destabilising a region already in flames * repla

by ggm 2y ago

Much though I want to view this as good news I keep finding myself steelmanning that it's actually bad news * destabilising a region already in flames * replacing a secular evil government by.. jihadists in a loose coalition. WCGW? * Russia used port and airfields to maintain a presence in the Med and for nefarious purposes in Africa. What do they do now, to replace them because I doubt "nothing" is the answer. * does Iran feel a need to do "stupid things" now to prop up regional Shia politics? * could this be bad for Ukraine? * how will Turkey negotiate with this facing the pkk and Kurdish nationalism?

yyuugg 2y ago
I don't know that I agree with this characterization. Was Assad particularly stable? Was he able to prevent rebel groups effectively? HTS of today might be different from HTS of the past, but that's very much could be just their propaganda. We'll see. Given "guaranteed evil" vs "probably evil" I'd probably prefer the lesser evil. I very much suspect Russia is fully focused on Ukraine and cannot or will not project force in the region. Iran has been remarkably restrained over the past little while, and I suspect they want to keep things cool and not hot.
- inglor_cz 2y ago
  "Was Assad particularly stable?" Looking at the speed with which the Syrian military now unraveled, the government was an empty shell of its former self. Russia was in no position to intervene. First, the development was too quick. Second, the best units are on the Ukrainian front and redeploying them would certainly inspire the Ukrainian General Staff to probe the Russian defenses. Third, the Russian general (Kisel) tasked with leading the Syrian detachment was/is an incapable commander, sent there as a punishment. Russia cannot fight two wars at once.
oldpersonintx 2y ago
[dead]
throwup238 2y ago
Assad wasn’t really a stabilizing force holding back worse players, he was a desperate despot just barely holding on to power thanks to a proxy war. Now the rest of the parties have a real chance to establishing a governing coalition. Syria has always been relatively secular and the rhetoric coming from the rebel side is in marked contrast to the usual pattern in the region. The most extremist group involved HTS has been surpsingly moderate in its stewardship of the Idlib governate. There are reasons to interpret this as very good news: Iran and Russia no longer have enough resources to project power. Even with a warm water port and strategic position in the Mediterranean at stake, they just can’t prop up the regime anymore. I can’t help but think that two fewer regional powers meddling in Syrian affairs is nothing but a stabilizing force. Almost seven million Syrian refugees might have the chance to return home and rebuild now. That’s great news.
- bbor 2y ago
  Any regime change that involves freeing many thousands of women and children from prisons notorious for torture and mass-executions seems like a decent one! The future is uncertain, but it's not like "everyone chills out and gets into their hobbies" was an option -- it's gotta be one of the most war-ravaged places to exist in human history.
  - lukan 2y ago
    Have you heard of a thing called, Islamic State? They had a thing for creative murder. Aside from the usual behadings, they came up with things like pushing homosexuals from buildings in the public and alike. They are also now free again.
    - gwervc 2y ago
      [flagged]
    - j_maffe 2y ago
      HTS has cut off ties with ALQaeda and IS since almost 10 years.
postingawayonhn 2y ago
> * could this be bad for Ukraine? Possibly, but it also shows how weak Russia is and how limited their presence in Syria was (because they sent everything to Ukraine). Russia can be defeated in Ukraine, but the west will need to step up support.
- mandelken 2y ago
  Since the 2022 Russian invasion, the West has provided 200bn in aid to Ukraine [0]. And Russia has been winning on the ground lately. It seems the West is thinking more aid will not change the outcome, but only diplomacy will. [0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303432/total-bilateral-aid-to-ukraine/?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303432/total-bilateral-...
  - emptysongglass 2y ago
    Russia has not been winning on the ground. It's two and a half years into the war and Russia is still stuck contesting edge territories. Russia has overwhelmingly larger numbers, but with as high as 7:1 casualties to Ukraine and with a significant increase in casualties over the last eight months. The frontline is stabilized and the ruble is collapsing. What exactly is being won here?
  - 9dev 2y ago
    The western aid was an important lesson on the importance of proper timing for investments: it was always too little to win, but too much to loose outright. Had Ukraine been able to strike with full force from the beginning, the world could look very different right now.
  - postingawayonhn 2y ago
    Russia has been gaining tiny amounts of ground while suffering massive losses. Latest estimates say casualties are currently averaging 1,500 a day. Total casualties since the start of the war (less than 3 years ago) are 600,000+. That's about 200,000 more than more than the US sustained in Korea, Vitnam, First Gulf War, Afghanistan, and The Second Gulf War combine.
tptacek 2y ago
I don't know that "what kind of news is it" is the right way to look at this. Things happen, without a reckoning of whether they are convenient or inconvenient to the most powerful military forces in the world. The people who just overthrew the Ba'athists are Salafists; their leader has (had?) a $10MM price on his head from the US for leading the al-Nusra front, which was (is?) al-Qaeda in Syria, and was almost a component of ISIS (HTS => IS-Ish). It's not who most people on HN would pick to overthrow Assad! But then again: why would any of us have a say in who overthrew Assad?
- hackandthink 2y ago
  I do not have a say in it. But I would prefer a democratic development to Salafist terrorism. I fear the worst, but it doesn't always have to be like this.
  - tptacek 2y ago
    It is indeed as if the Nazis were overrun by ISIS, but the ISIS people are saying they're reformed and they're not going to do all the crazy shit ISIS did. On the other hand: look what was there before. Right?
    - hackandthink 2y ago
      I just don't know. I remember ISIS beheading people. Some of these people are still around. Some of them are imprisoned in Kurdish camps. Will they be freed? The best scenario I can imagine: Erdogan controls the Islamists and guarantees the security of the people and leaves the Kurds alone. At some point, even the millions of refugees will be able to return.
- throwup238 2y ago
  > The people who just overthrew the Ba'athists are Salafists; their leader has (had?) a $10MM price on his head from the US for leading the al-Nusra front, which was (is?) al-Qaeda in Syria, and was almost a component of ISIS (HTS => IS-Ish). The Salafists (HTS) sparked this series of events with the November 27 offensive and cut off Hama but the Southern Front and US backed SFA forces were the ones to actually capture Damascus. Who overthrew Assad is debatable but the former Al Qaeda affiliate isn’t in control of the capitol. Between the SFA and SDF, they’re only one voice at the table.
baserev 2y ago
> could this be bad for Ukraine? No, this is how an overstretched (Russia) empire collapses. First the edges collapses.
somedude895 2y ago
Anything that weakens Iran and its proxies is good news. They‘ve been the main reason for instability in the region. The cutting of supply routes to Hezbollah is another nail in the coffin for a militia that‘s kept Lebanon from eventually becoming a functional state, instead keeping it in perpetual war or near-war with Israel, which only serves Iran and the people Iran supports financially. Iran has torpedoed any attempts at normalizing relationships between Arabs and Israel even though most in the region just want to move on and prosper. It also weakens Russian influence in the region, who’ve had the same aim as Iran: Sow chaos and destruction to weaken US allies and prevent anyone aligned with the US from taking the lead in the region.
- aprilthird2021 2y ago
  How do people here think an Islamist government will be also anti-Iran? They have 99% of the same goals with Assad out of the picture. There's a ton of other wrong in your comment (as if Hezbollah, alone, hindered Lebanon from being a functional state and not the decades of war and brutal massacres of their civilians), but let's focus on the main thing.
  - rwyinuse 2y ago
    Basic psychology. Iran has tried to kill these rebel forces since the Arab Spring, and now you think they will suddenly become friends of Iran once in power? Not going to happen. As far as Lebanon goes, decades of wars are mainly a result of Lebanon's dysfunctional sectarian political system. But having Hezbollah run around and exchange fire with Israel doesn't improve the already bad situation.
    - aprilthird2021 2y ago
      But basically psychology vs the core of their foundational ideology? Idk, their ultimate goals are clearly similar to Iran's. Former enemies have become allies many times in this region. Decades of wars have nothing to do with Israel invading the country and installing the extreme right wing Fascist inspired Phalange party into power after 1982? The very event which led to the founding of Hezbollah? Okay
Simon_ORourke 2y ago
> * how will Turkey negotiate with this facing the pkk and Kurdish nationalism? Hopefully Turkey does the honorable thing, recognizes an independent Kurdish state and apologizes for decades of oppression, murder and state-sanction terror? Unlikely though.
- Caius-Cosades 2y ago
  Why would they? They can just steam-roll across all freely available western Syria until they encounter Israeli forces coming from south, and then roll across eastern Syria until United States starts dropping bombs on them, at which point they will likely stop and start thinking about more permanent borders.
  - throwaway2037 2y ago
    US and Türkiye are both members of NATO and strong allies. I don't think the US will be bombing Türkiye troops in Syria.
- aprilthird2021 2y ago
  It's surprising to me that many here in HN see Turkey as the state terrorists over the Kurds, when the main party of Kurdish independence from Turkey is a literal terrorist group who committed a terrorist attack killing innocent civilians in Turkey just over one month ago! It feels to me that when HNers agree that a people should be sovereign (the Kurds), they ignore the terrorism. When they don't agree (the Palestinians), the terrorism takes center stage.
  - zdragnar 2y ago
    The difference between freedom fighters and terrorists is often a matter of whether you favor them or not.
  - postingawayonhn 2y ago
    > a literal terrorist group who committed a terrorist attack killing innocent civilians in Turkey just over one month ago! Not condoning the attack, but it's also not that black and white. It was an attack on a defense contractor.
ein0p 2y ago
[flagged]
cm2187 2y ago
> replacing a secular evil government by.. jihadists in a loose coalition. WCGW? that's what strikes me the most. All the newspapers have rebranded "ISIS" "the rebels". The headline would be otherwise "ISIS milicia takes over Syria" and somehow that's good news. I don't know who coordonates the rebranding, but clearly there is coordination, almost every newspaper in every country I checked followed it. It's a spectacular exercise in opinion manipulation.
- rwyinuse 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - cm2187 2y ago
    You are arguing between different flavours of jihadist groups, none of which I would refer simply as "rebels" or showing them taking over as a positive thing.
- postingawayonhn 2y ago
  Does this sound like ISIS to you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Psg2MYoN1FU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Psg2MYoN1FU Yes, we should be cautious and skeptical, but the views currently being expressed by HTS are fairly moderate.
  - cm2187 2y ago
    There is nothing in his wiki bio that suggests moderation.
    - postingawayonhn 2y ago
      I provided the link to hear it from the horses mouth. I'm not saying he's some wonderful person, but HTS's current agenda and recent actions are generally positive.
      - cm2187 2y ago
lukan 2y ago
"how will Turkey negotiate with this facing the pkk and Kurdish nationalism?" Aside from the coming back of ISIS, that is the major unresolved conflict potential I see. I see no compromise, the fight between the PKK and Turkey has been too long and bloody. Best case kurdish autonomy is becoming stable and established a bit away from the turkish borders, but the SDF won't give up their weapons to Islamists, if they should become the new government. And why would they? But I am open for miracles. Like turkey releasing Öcalan to become local president in the kurdish areas in Syria, to start a serious peace process. In the sense of - you get this land, but stop the fight for secession in Turkey. The PKK would likely take that deal. But turkey wouldn't. Öcalan and the PKK are terrorists and that's it.
Roark66 2y ago
It is a sign that propaganda is getting to you if you find yourself seriously considering their talking points. Is it better if a million people die "in the name of stability" quietly being tortured to death in jails behind closed doors over a span of a decade all while further tens of millions live in misery or half that number die in a let's say 3 year war, but we see it all on TV and there is real chance of freedom and democracy thereafter? Also, it is a huge win for all the depots's propaganda efforts that today in many western countries people have been convinced "democracy doesn't work" because there are issues in their countries. If "it doesn't work" it's not that much different from a dictator, right? And if that is true, why are we helping in foreign wars that prevent the spread of the autocracy (Ukraine now, possibly Taiwan tomorrow). If democracy is a lie, there is no point to risk our wellbeing for Ukraine. Wrong. There is no more important cause in the world than stopping depots. Yes, democracy is not ideal, but it is as if comparing being angry you got a different topping on your pizza order vs starving to death. That is literally the difference. So my blood boils when I hear people online talk about "stability" (and by extension) "why are we spending money on Ukraine when the infrastructure is falling apart here". Because Ukraine is about the survival of our way of life, it is order of magnitude more important than local issues. Take an example from history. When general Patton won over Germans in WW2 he wanted to continue to overthrow USSR and free countries like Poland and the rest Soviets took over when they colluded with Nazis to split Europe by half. But he was told no, Poland was sold to Stalin for "a pack of fa.s" so to speak alongside the rest of Central Europe. USSR had no nuclear weapon at the time and was a country in ruin. But with the coerced resourcefulness of all the countries like Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, Czech and so on (all modern manufacturing was based in "Soviet republics" with few notable exceptions, rocketry and aviation - Ukraine, computing/electronics Poland and Belarus, advanced machinery - East Germany and so on, later Soviet planners started moving people around to "closed cities" and other special places within Russia, but that's where most of them came from). As a result USSR developed nuclear weapons in record time and was a match for the free world militarily for a long time which few times almost ended our civilisation. If Paton was allowed to continue back then? None of it would've happened. We still live the bad consequences of this decision today.
- tibbydudeza 2y ago
  It is truly amazing - smart folks fooled by propaganda without thinking for themselves.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
kkfx 2y ago
You might like to read https://css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/center-for-securities-studies/resources/docs/ISPSW_461_Lin.pdf https://css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/c...

by ggm 2y ago

yyuugg 2y ago

I don't know that I agree with this characterization. Was Assad particularly stable? Was he able to prevent rebel groups effectively? HTS of today might be different from HTS of the past, but that's very much could be just their propaganda. We'll see. Given "guaranteed evil" vs "probably evil" I'd probably prefer the lesser evil. I very much suspect Russia is fully focused on Ukraine and cannot or will not project force in the region. Iran has been remarkably restrained over the past little while, and I suspect they want to keep things cool and not hot.

inglor_cz 2y ago
"Was Assad particularly stable?" Looking at the speed with which the Syrian military now unraveled, the government was an empty shell of its former self. Russia was in no position to intervene. First, the development was too quick. Second, the best units are on the Ukrainian front and redeploying them would certainly inspire the Ukrainian General Staff to probe the Russian defenses. Third, the Russian general (Kisel) tasked with leading the Syrian detachment was/is an incapable commander, sent there as a punishment. Russia cannot fight two wars at once.

oldpersonintx 2y ago

[dead]

throwup238 2y ago

Assad wasn’t really a stabilizing force holding back worse players, he was a desperate despot just barely holding on to power thanks to a proxy war. Now the rest of the parties have a real chance to establishing a governing coalition. Syria has always been relatively secular and the rhetoric coming from the rebel side is in marked contrast to the usual pattern in the region. The most extremist group involved HTS has been surpsingly moderate in its stewardship of the Idlib governate. There are reasons to interpret this as very good news: Iran and Russia no longer have enough resources to project power. Even with a warm water port and strategic position in the Mediterranean at stake, they just can’t prop up the regime anymore. I can’t help but think that two fewer regional powers meddling in Syrian affairs is nothing but a stabilizing force. Almost seven million Syrian refugees might have the chance to return home and rebuild now. That’s great news.

bbor 2y ago
Any regime change that involves freeing many thousands of women and children from prisons notorious for torture and mass-executions seems like a decent one! The future is uncertain, but it's not like "everyone chills out and gets into their hobbies" was an option -- it's gotta be one of the most war-ravaged places to exist in human history.
- lukan 2y ago
  Have you heard of a thing called, Islamic State? They had a thing for creative murder. Aside from the usual behadings, they came up with things like pushing homosexuals from buildings in the public and alike. They are also now free again.
  - gwervc 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - j_maffe 2y ago
    HTS has cut off ties with ALQaeda and IS since almost 10 years.

postingawayonhn 2y ago

> * could this be bad for Ukraine? Possibly, but it also shows how weak Russia is and how limited their presence in Syria was (because they sent everything to Ukraine). Russia can be defeated in Ukraine, but the west will need to step up support.

mandelken 2y ago
Since the 2022 Russian invasion, the West has provided 200bn in aid to Ukraine [0]. And Russia has been winning on the ground lately. It seems the West is thinking more aid will not change the outcome, but only diplomacy will. [0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303432/total-bilateral-aid-to-ukraine/?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303432/total-bilateral-...
- emptysongglass 2y ago
  Russia has not been winning on the ground. It's two and a half years into the war and Russia is still stuck contesting edge territories. Russia has overwhelmingly larger numbers, but with as high as 7:1 casualties to Ukraine and with a significant increase in casualties over the last eight months. The frontline is stabilized and the ruble is collapsing. What exactly is being won here?
- 9dev 2y ago
  The western aid was an important lesson on the importance of proper timing for investments: it was always too little to win, but too much to loose outright. Had Ukraine been able to strike with full force from the beginning, the world could look very different right now.
- postingawayonhn 2y ago
  Russia has been gaining tiny amounts of ground while suffering massive losses. Latest estimates say casualties are currently averaging 1,500 a day. Total casualties since the start of the war (less than 3 years ago) are 600,000+. That's about 200,000 more than more than the US sustained in Korea, Vitnam, First Gulf War, Afghanistan, and The Second Gulf War combine.

tptacek 2y ago

I don't know that "what kind of news is it" is the right way to look at this. Things happen, without a reckoning of whether they are convenient or inconvenient to the most powerful military forces in the world. The people who just overthrew the Ba'athists are Salafists; their leader has (had?) a $10MM price on his head from the US for leading the al-Nusra front, which was (is?) al-Qaeda in Syria, and was almost a component of ISIS (HTS => IS-Ish). It's not who most people on HN would pick to overthrow Assad! But then again: why would any of us have a say in who overthrew Assad?

hackandthink 2y ago
I do not have a say in it. But I would prefer a democratic development to Salafist terrorism. I fear the worst, but it doesn't always have to be like this.
- tptacek 2y ago
  It is indeed as if the Nazis were overrun by ISIS, but the ISIS people are saying they're reformed and they're not going to do all the crazy shit ISIS did. On the other hand: look what was there before. Right?
  - hackandthink 2y ago
    I just don't know. I remember ISIS beheading people. Some of these people are still around. Some of them are imprisoned in Kurdish camps. Will they be freed? The best scenario I can imagine: Erdogan controls the Islamists and guarantees the security of the people and leaves the Kurds alone. At some point, even the millions of refugees will be able to return.
throwup238 2y ago
> The people who just overthrew the Ba'athists are Salafists; their leader has (had?) a $10MM price on his head from the US for leading the al-Nusra front, which was (is?) al-Qaeda in Syria, and was almost a component of ISIS (HTS => IS-Ish). The Salafists (HTS) sparked this series of events with the November 27 offensive and cut off Hama but the Southern Front and US backed SFA forces were the ones to actually capture Damascus. Who overthrew Assad is debatable but the former Al Qaeda affiliate isn’t in control of the capitol. Between the SFA and SDF, they’re only one voice at the table.

baserev 2y ago

> could this be bad for Ukraine? No, this is how an overstretched (Russia) empire collapses. First the edges collapses.

somedude895 2y ago

Anything that weakens Iran and its proxies is good news. They‘ve been the main reason for instability in the region. The cutting of supply routes to Hezbollah is another nail in the coffin for a militia that‘s kept Lebanon from eventually becoming a functional state, instead keeping it in perpetual war or near-war with Israel, which only serves Iran and the people Iran supports financially. Iran has torpedoed any attempts at normalizing relationships between Arabs and Israel even though most in the region just want to move on and prosper. It also weakens Russian influence in the region, who’ve had the same aim as Iran: Sow chaos and destruction to weaken US allies and prevent anyone aligned with the US from taking the lead in the region.

aprilthird2021 2y ago
How do people here think an Islamist government will be also anti-Iran? They have 99% of the same goals with Assad out of the picture. There's a ton of other wrong in your comment (as if Hezbollah, alone, hindered Lebanon from being a functional state and not the decades of war and brutal massacres of their civilians), but let's focus on the main thing.
- rwyinuse 2y ago
  Basic psychology. Iran has tried to kill these rebel forces since the Arab Spring, and now you think they will suddenly become friends of Iran once in power? Not going to happen. As far as Lebanon goes, decades of wars are mainly a result of Lebanon's dysfunctional sectarian political system. But having Hezbollah run around and exchange fire with Israel doesn't improve the already bad situation.
  - aprilthird2021 2y ago
    But basically psychology vs the core of their foundational ideology? Idk, their ultimate goals are clearly similar to Iran's. Former enemies have become allies many times in this region. Decades of wars have nothing to do with Israel invading the country and installing the extreme right wing Fascist inspired Phalange party into power after 1982? The very event which led to the founding of Hezbollah? Okay

Simon_ORourke 2y ago

> * how will Turkey negotiate with this facing the pkk and Kurdish nationalism? Hopefully Turkey does the honorable thing, recognizes an independent Kurdish state and apologizes for decades of oppression, murder and state-sanction terror? Unlikely though.

Caius-Cosades 2y ago
Why would they? They can just steam-roll across all freely available western Syria until they encounter Israeli forces coming from south, and then roll across eastern Syria until United States starts dropping bombs on them, at which point they will likely stop and start thinking about more permanent borders.
- throwaway2037 2y ago
  US and Türkiye are both members of NATO and strong allies. I don't think the US will be bombing Türkiye troops in Syria.
aprilthird2021 2y ago
It's surprising to me that many here in HN see Turkey as the state terrorists over the Kurds, when the main party of Kurdish independence from Turkey is a literal terrorist group who committed a terrorist attack killing innocent civilians in Turkey just over one month ago! It feels to me that when HNers agree that a people should be sovereign (the Kurds), they ignore the terrorism. When they don't agree (the Palestinians), the terrorism takes center stage.
- zdragnar 2y ago
  The difference between freedom fighters and terrorists is often a matter of whether you favor them or not.
- postingawayonhn 2y ago
  > a literal terrorist group who committed a terrorist attack killing innocent civilians in Turkey just over one month ago! Not condoning the attack, but it's also not that black and white. It was an attack on a defense contractor.

ein0p 2y ago

[flagged]

cm2187 2y ago

> replacing a secular evil government by.. jihadists in a loose coalition. WCGW? that's what strikes me the most. All the newspapers have rebranded "ISIS" "the rebels". The headline would be otherwise "ISIS milicia takes over Syria" and somehow that's good news. I don't know who coordonates the rebranding, but clearly there is coordination, almost every newspaper in every country I checked followed it. It's a spectacular exercise in opinion manipulation.

rwyinuse 2y ago
[flagged]
- cm2187 2y ago
  You are arguing between different flavours of jihadist groups, none of which I would refer simply as "rebels" or showing them taking over as a positive thing.
postingawayonhn 2y ago
Does this sound like ISIS to you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Psg2MYoN1FU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Psg2MYoN1FU Yes, we should be cautious and skeptical, but the views currently being expressed by HTS are fairly moderate.
- cm2187 2y ago
  There is nothing in his wiki bio that suggests moderation.
  - postingawayonhn 2y ago
    I provided the link to hear it from the horses mouth. I'm not saying he's some wonderful person, but HTS's current agenda and recent actions are generally positive.
    - cm2187 2y ago

lukan 2y ago

"how will Turkey negotiate with this facing the pkk and Kurdish nationalism?" Aside from the coming back of ISIS, that is the major unresolved conflict potential I see. I see no compromise, the fight between the PKK and Turkey has been too long and bloody. Best case kurdish autonomy is becoming stable and established a bit away from the turkish borders, but the SDF won't give up their weapons to Islamists, if they should become the new government. And why would they? But I am open for miracles. Like turkey releasing Öcalan to become local president in the kurdish areas in Syria, to start a serious peace process. In the sense of - you get this land, but stop the fight for secession in Turkey. The PKK would likely take that deal. But turkey wouldn't. Öcalan and the PKK are terrorists and that's it.

Roark66 2y ago

It is a sign that propaganda is getting to you if you find yourself seriously considering their talking points. Is it better if a million people die "in the name of stability" quietly being tortured to death in jails behind closed doors over a span of a decade all while further tens of millions live in misery or half that number die in a let's say 3 year war, but we see it all on TV and there is real chance of freedom and democracy thereafter? Also, it is a huge win for all the depots's propaganda efforts that today in many western countries people have been convinced "democracy doesn't work" because there are issues in their countries. If "it doesn't work" it's not that much different from a dictator, right? And if that is true, why are we helping in foreign wars that prevent the spread of the autocracy (Ukraine now, possibly Taiwan tomorrow). If democracy is a lie, there is no point to risk our wellbeing for Ukraine. Wrong. There is no more important cause in the world than stopping depots. Yes, democracy is not ideal, but it is as if comparing being angry you got a different topping on your pizza order vs starving to death. That is literally the difference. So my blood boils when I hear people online talk about "stability" (and by extension) "why are we spending money on Ukraine when the infrastructure is falling apart here". Because Ukraine is about the survival of our way of life, it is order of magnitude more important than local issues. Take an example from history. When general Patton won over Germans in WW2 he wanted to continue to overthrow USSR and free countries like Poland and the rest Soviets took over when they colluded with Nazis to split Europe by half. But he was told no, Poland was sold to Stalin for "a pack of fa.s" so to speak alongside the rest of Central Europe. USSR had no nuclear weapon at the time and was a country in ruin. But with the coerced resourcefulness of all the countries like Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, Czech and so on (all modern manufacturing was based in "Soviet republics" with few notable exceptions, rocketry and aviation - Ukraine, computing/electronics Poland and Belarus, advanced machinery - East Germany and so on, later Soviet planners started moving people around to "closed cities" and other special places within Russia, but that's where most of them came from). As a result USSR developed nuclear weapons in record time and was a match for the free world militarily for a long time which few times almost ended our civilisation. If Paton was allowed to continue back then? None of it would've happened. We still live the bad consequences of this decision today.

tibbydudeza 2y ago
It is truly amazing - smart folks fooled by propaganda without thinking for themselves.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

kkfx 2y ago

You might like to read https://css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/center-for-securities-studies/resources/docs/ISPSW_461_Lin.pdf https://css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/c...