Re: Does Putin Have a Point in his Op-Ed?
In an Op-Ed in the New York Times, Putin bypassed diplomatic channels and spoke directly to the American people.
Putin is full of it.
"No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorization."
The UN doesn't work when two security council members who have permanent voting rights refuse to allow any action against states no matter how badly those states are butchering their citizens. China is HORRIBLE candidate for the security council because China has internal projection problems in interfering with the matters of others in the fear that eventually its own bad behavior will cause others to interfere in Chinese matters. Thus, China refuses to vote for any real action and thus provides cover for state sanctioned wholesale mass slaughter. Russia is using it to give the finger to the West as Russian power declines in the world. Being able to prevent others from acting is in its self the power that a weaker nation has. Russia doesn't play by any of the world's rules when it feels like it and thus has no shame in using what should be measures to prevent war crimes to gain political standing. Essentially Putin is standing on the proverbial bodies of dead Syrians. As he did with Libya. And Russia on Kosovo.
"A strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. It could undermine multilateral efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further destabilize the Middle East and North Africa."
There's a good chance that doing nothing will result in unleashing a new wave of terrorism. That's coming either way. As for the Iranian program, doing nothing gives Iran even more cover to get its nuclear program up and running. If we show our threats are meaningless, what does Iran have to fear? We become a paper tiger. Putin is 100% full of **** that this will have any impact on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. What's holding that up is the expansion of Jewish settlements and the fact that its core, Israel doesn't want peace. They get peace with the Palestinian, they have to deal with their own internal problems that could potentially rip Israel apart. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict allows Israel to brush these problems under the rug and let the parties focus on the Palestinians as the problem, not each other. Israel alone faces a welfare entitlement program that could destroy the state. And they do not even remotely have a good way of fixing it.
I think it's funny how Putin promotes Democracy put actively tries to destroy it in Russia and FSU states. This guy is more hypocritical than some users here.
"Might they not return to our countries with experience acquired in Syria?"
And the longer the fight, the more hardened they get and the bigger threat they become, so therefore do nothing and prolong the fight? What kind of crap logic is that Putin?
"From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future. We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law. "
Which is largely more bull****. There is no ZOPA between the Rebels and Assad. Assad wants to stay in power. Rebels will never allow this. There can be no peaceful dialogue because each of them has a condition that excludes a potential zone of possible agreement. And yes, you are protecting the Syrian government. If you gave a **** about international law, you'd be pushing hard to remove Assad or his weapons. The transfer of chemical weapons is a sham because it cannot happen in a war zone. Putin is buying time for Assad and nothing more. The whole chemical weapons transfer plan is doomed from the start and was deliberately designed that way.
"Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council."
Ignore the fact that Russia and China will veto any plan they don't like, even if it lets murderous rampages continue.
"ut there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with the fundamentalists. "
Is that why we have emails from Syrian officials planning, coordinating and mopping up from the planned chemical attack? Heck, we have dialogue between them that has reactions from one who was amazed at the damage it did, way more than he expected. Syrian rebels did this? Only if you're blind, deaf and dumb....or have an ulterior motive for lying.
"Reports that militants are preparing another attack — this time against Israel — cannot be ignored."
This is the stupidest thing I have read so far.
Attacking Israel would unleash the might of the Israeli Air Force who has no problems bombing the crap out of people it believes to be terrorists. The rebels are already getting pounded by Assad's subpar air force. They will get demolished by a proper air force.
I can't keep reading this. It's that bad.
Seriously, if you take that article seriously, you are extremely ignorant.