tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post507821445768081315..comments2023-10-31T03:18:26.963-07:00Comments on Great Guys Weblog: Bug or Feature?Brethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15063508651955739056noreply@blogger.comBlogger192125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-11990535775791439692017-04-04T16:56:55.816-07:002017-04-04T16:56:55.816-07:00Harry, is there a different history book you are r...Harry, is there a different history book you are reading where South Vietnam invaded North Vietnam? Perhaps it is the same one where South Korea invaded the North.<br /><br />Cause. Effect.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-47083612890351446272017-04-03T14:02:48.482-07:002017-04-03T14:02:48.482-07:00'that doesn't mean the US is to blame for ...'that doesn't mean the US is to blame for what happened to, say, south Vietnam'<br /><br />Wow. It is hard to imagine, by that standard, how the US could deserve blame -- or credit -- for anything.Harry Eagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04196202758858876402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-1574548524446938072017-03-02T00:53:17.890-08:002017-03-02T00:53:17.890-08:00I would certainly learn something. Whether, takin...I would certainly learn something. Whether, taking into account the costs of the road not taken, that would entail repentance remains to be seen.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-47904407337716103082017-03-01T22:25:50.980-08:002017-03-01T22:25:50.980-08:00Skipper,
Suppose, if only for a minute, I can de...Skipper,<br /><br /><br />Suppose, if only for a minute, I can demonstrate my point to you, up to your complete satisfaction - that you could be convinced of a far wider share of blame on Syria due to US actions.<br /><br />What difference would it make for you? Would it change any of your positions regarding the role of the US in the ME? Would it make you repent and cry?<br /><br />You answer that, and I may give it a try. Or not. It is up to you.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-40166076179207256152017-03-01T10:34:22.797-08:002017-03-01T10:34:22.797-08:00[Clovis:] Skipper, I was honest with you from the ...<i>[Clovis:] Skipper, I was honest with you from the begin: I told you I had no hope to convince you, for you have cognitive bias on this matter. Which is further composed by a lack of basic information of many facts on the ground. </i><br /><br />When I recounted your contributions to this subject so far in this thread (or any other, for that matter) there is a striking fact void where your comments are. Please, by all means, list the facts I have gotten wrong, and why they are wrong -- that is what you haven't done, and why it is so easy to find your opinions worthless.<br /><br />Your assertion is that US actions in the middle east are a <i>necessary</i> precondition to the refugee crisis. In order for this to be true, the US had to have done some indispensable thing to start that war, or make it worse. The US's invasion of Iraq had to have produced conditions worse than if Saddam had left power by some other means, <b>and</b> that the invasion and the aftermath had to have been indispensable to the Syrian civil war, or was an essential element to it becoming as bad as it has. You also have to demonstrate how US actions were a necessary precondition to the significant portion of the "refugees" who are really economic migrants.<br /><br />Yet you have done none of these things, not even close.<br /><br /> <br /><i>You are free to ignore it, as you are bound to do.</i><br /><br />You completely ignored three different sources, none of them inclined to starry-eyed views of the US, explaining the history of the Syrian refugee crisis with scarcely a mention of the US among them.<br /><br />Your response? crickets.<br /><br />If you have verifiable facts that lead to a well substantiated conclusion demonstrating how <i>US actions were necessary</i> for the existence and severity of the Syrian civil war, then by all means bring them on.<br /><br />Until then, you will continue to be completely unconvincing.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-8275036701029182782017-02-28T19:12:12.956-08:002017-02-28T19:12:12.956-08:00Skipper,
---
What I do not find amusing is ad hom...Skipper,<br /><br />---<br />What I do not find amusing is ad hominem attack. Stop playing the man, start playing the ball.<br />[...]<br />And by all means, stop it with the stupid snark.<br />---<br />Skipper, I was honest with you from the begin: I told you I had no hope to convince you, for you have cognitive bias on this matter. Which is further composed by a lack of basic information of many facts on the ground. <br /><br />So why am I in a discussion I have no hope to resolve? Well, trolling you. That's all that is in there for me. <br /><br />Otherwise, I would need to dedicate my time and energy to collect and review many dozens of links, books and articles that belie the opinions I formed on this topic, throughout 15 years of reading, just to have them wasted on someone who is invested on seeing the whole thing in the wrong light. <br /><br />Sorry, it is way easier to give you my opinion without any further justification. You are free to ignore it, as you are bound to do.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-32523437609809270712017-02-28T18:43:49.129-08:002017-02-28T18:43:49.129-08:00Bret,
---
Clovis, what DO you mean by "direc...Bret,<br /><br />---<br />Clovis, what DO you mean by "direct" in "direct function." Doesn't a "direct function" in mathematics have a very specific definition which would indicate in this context that the tsunami is only due to US choices and doings?<br />---<br /><br />A direct function is the same as an explicit function F(x), that takes values in 'x' and gives back values F(x). As opposed to an implicit function F(x(z)), that depends on 'z' only by the values it first induces on 'x'.<br /><br />Yet I am not saying the tsunami is "only due to US choices and doings" (other actors also had first order importance, and their actions were also necessary for the outcome). Nor am I attributing intent for every outcome obtained from 'US choices and doings'.<br /><br />A fair analogy: I could equally say that poor economic growth is a direct function of excess of regulations. <br /><br />Does it mean most regulations were enacted with the intent to kill growth? More often not. Does it mean they necessarily lead to poor economic growth? No, not necessarily. But it does mean that such excess of regulation often correlates with other aspects of human behavior and economics such that poor growth is the final outcome. <br /><br /><br />Which goes back to Skipper's criticism of my point as post-hoc. In the same way many economists could foresee that excess of regulations - if not done very carefully, which is often too much to ask from politicians - will lead to poor economic growth, there were no end of analysts predicting US intervention in Iraq could not end well - both for Iraq and the Middle East. <br /><br />It didn't. <br /><br />Could it end well? Maybe yes, with very slim chances - depending on the US staying time enough, investing money and blood enough, and the Iraqi culture changing fast enough, and so on -- just like very well crafted regulation can work too, even when 'excessive', if society response to it is harmonic. <br /><br />All in all, I believe US external policy in the Bush years were bad, followed by US policy in Obama years that were either antagonistic to previous policy (rendering the final result a 'worst of all worlds' scenario - yeah, Iraq), or misguided (Egypt, Turkey, Israel), or simply stupid tending to evil (Libya and Syria). So I feel my pointing fingers is justified.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-75223886724048048842017-02-27T15:23:02.531-08:002017-02-27T15:23:02.531-08:00Skipper, I believe that had we not "meddled&...Skipper, I believe that had we not "meddled" in LA, the situations would have been far worse than they are now, especially Chile, arguably the only viable economy in the Southern Hemisphere. At least, we learned our lesson from the Soviets in Cuba and ousted them.<br /><br /><i>Interesting aside: I just met our new neighbors, a young couple with two adorable little tots. They are refugees from Venezuela who came here to visit family and can't go back. They've been living with family, but now have some kind of legal status.</i> <br /><br />Lots said by the left about banana and sugar companies ... I don't know what's true and what's not. The lefty media certainly beat that drum hard. <br /><br />We did make things worse by not enforcing the Monroe Doctrine and let the Soviets take over Cuba -- we made that much worse and we were very lucky they backed down. Don't forget at the time, we had been sold a bill of goods that the Soviets were ultra powerful. We know better now.<br /><br />Philippines? It was a different world then. Don't want to second guess what happened. The truth is we unloaded them and all the other "prizes" we "conquered" except those like Puerto Rico that refuse to be freed from under our yoke.<br /><br />Saddam? The world including the UN was either lied to about his WMD or he got tipped off and sent them all to Jordan or they're still buried there somewhere.<br /><br />None of it affected what happened after Obama was elected and left Iraq to its own devices. Funny how when a lefty gets elected, those fighting for their freedom get left at the altar like the sainted martyr left Cubans to fend for themselves at the Bay of Pigs.<br /><br />I would agree with Clovis that those actions by the US were unconscionable.<br /><br />erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09826044412670324694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-1271837408303128052017-02-27T14:32:02.867-08:002017-02-27T14:32:02.867-08:00[erp:] Blaming the US, no matter that there have b...<i>[erp:] Blaming the US, no matter that there have been numerous administrations with differing political points of view over just the past 100 years, belies reason and credulity.</i><br /><br />I can't go along with that anything like 100%. The US did plenty of completely unwarranted meddling in central and south America at the behest of certain companies. And I'm not the least bit certain we belonged in the Philippines at the turn of the 19th century. <br /><br />Fine. But that doesn't mean the US is to blame for what happened to, say, south Vietnam. Or that because we deposed Saddam, that deposition created would inevitably create a worse outcome than if we had just stood by and watched. <br /><br />The opposite of something isn't nothing, it is something else.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-3026812082260923522017-02-27T13:23:00.295-08:002017-02-27T13:23:00.295-08:00Ok. I missed that particular statement. Not sure h...Ok. I missed that particular statement. Not sure how since I see it was repeated like ten times. I guess my reading comprehension is dismal. :-)<br /><br />Clovis, what DO you mean by "direct" in "direct function." Doesn't a "direct function" in mathematics have a very specific definition which would indicate in this context that the tsunami is only due to US choices and doings?Brethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15063508651955739056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-34944706526060854582017-02-27T13:08:40.743-08:002017-02-27T13:08:40.743-08:00Bret, that's not the way it started out: The l...Bret, that's not the way it started out: <i>The last tsunami of refugees over Europe is a direct function of the US geopolitical choices and doings.</i> <br /><br />Otherwise, it is a purely trivial observation.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-41508270786592445052017-02-27T13:05:30.086-08:002017-02-27T13:05:30.086-08:00Hey Skipper,
From the way I'm reading it, Clo...Hey Skipper,<br /><br />From the way I'm reading it, Clovis is simply claiming that the sum total of all actions on the planet earth caused there to be refugees and the United States and its citizens and inhabitants are certainly part of the sum total of all actions. Therefore, the actions of the United States and citizens and inhabitants are partially the cause of the refugees. And then he's pointing out specific things that we did that are more directly linked.<br /><br />His statements don't seem particularly contentious to me. And whether or not he's right about any specific detail doesn't seem like a big deal to me. It's interesting to contemplate.<br /><br />Both Russia and the middle-east have been trouble spots for millennia. It's easy to do things that make things even worse.Brethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15063508651955739056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-43369815566547060602017-02-27T08:26:07.998-08:002017-02-27T08:26:07.998-08:00A National Review article on another drive-by slim...A <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/445264/washington-post-sebastian-gorka-liberal-paper-smears-trump-adviser?utm_source=jolt&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Jolt%202/27/2017&utm_term=Jolt" rel="nofollow">National Review article</a> on another drive-by sliming of Gorka included a link to his book, which reminded me of this:<br /><br /><i>[Clovis:] Apart from the 3 people who read [Gorka's] book (counting himself already), I am pretty sure the rest of the world was bound to interpret a Horthy's medal as, well, a Horthy's medal. </i><br /><br /><br /><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Defeating-Jihad-Winnable-Sebastian-Gorka/dp/1621574571?tag=nationalreviewon" rel="nofollow">488 reviews; 85% 5 star, 9% four star.</a>Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-32064991251713171282017-02-27T06:24:02.672-08:002017-02-27T06:24:02.672-08:00Russia is still fighting the age old battle for ac...Russia is still fighting the age old battle for access to the Mediterranean and Moslems are still fighting for control of Islam -- the battle of Shiite and Sunni continues with modern touches.<br /><br />Blaming the US, no matter that there have been numerous administrations with differing political points of view over just the past 100 years, belies reason and credulity.<br /><br />I find it amusing that there's been no mention of Soros surrogate and Obama's brain, Valerie Jarrett's, role in all of the above. The end result of all these machinations is that Iran will be/is the power in ME. The gazillions of our tax dollars and technology Obama bestowed on Iran will no doubt come back to them all to ease their old age. <br /><br />It must be comforting for the non-Anglo world to blame first the British Empire and then American Imperialism for the ills of the world. The new slogan among placard carrying trespassers from south of our border is, (don't remember the exact wording) America belongs to them. Which is doubly amusing because previously we were told by our betters it belongs to the aborigines, who in turn took from the earlier peoples ... back the Garden of Eden.<br /><br />Nobody in the US stopped Mexico or Brazil for that matter, from doing what our early settlers did -- work themselves to death to tame to wilderness and take up the FF's road map to freedom and prosperity.<br /><br />They can still do it.erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09826044412670324694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-58192369112808469402017-02-27T05:51:33.892-08:002017-02-27T05:51:33.892-08:00P.S.
February 23, 2017 at 11:05 AM: So you feel le...P.S.<br />February 23, 2017 at 11:05 AM: <i>So you feel less pressure to defend your country's mistakes when they are done by a President you didn't like?</i><br /><br />If I recall correctly, and I do, I merely cited the US withdrawal from Iraq as the sole, possible, meaningful action that had any significant impact on the Syrian refugee crisis. I neither attacked it, nor defended it.<br /><br />But now that you have brought it up… Pres Bush left office without having concluded a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the Iraqi government. I don't know why. Maybe the Iraqis were asking too much, maybe Bush didn't want to handcuff the incoming Obama administration. I guess the latter, but it doesn't matter. <br /><br />Obama campaigned on ending our presence in Iraq. I have no doubt that is part of the reason he won. He fulfilled his campaign promise. While I happen to think much of Obama's foreign policy was feckless, or worse, in this case I can't criticize him. No one saw ISIS coming. The Iraqis had been given nearly a decade to build a civil society, and failed. Had I been in his shoes, I might very well have done the same thing. Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-62125299250527503672017-02-27T05:51:11.978-08:002017-02-27T05:51:11.978-08:00February 26, 2017 at 6:31 PM: Empty response. Pa...February 26, 2017 at 6:31 PM: Empty response. Particularly this: <i>I wonder if you will only concede the US having influence in a country's woes when it invades and overthrows its rulers. Take a step back and think about that.</i> Well, of course it does. Certainly for the better in Japan and Germany, and the former Yugoslavia. Probably so for Panama. Other places, worse. But this has nothing to do with whatever of your main points is your main point. You haven't yet demonstrated any connection between Operation Iraqi Freedom and the Syrian refugee crisis — to do so, it requires that the former was necessary, even if not sufficient, for the latter. Facts you have marshaled so far in that direction: zero.<br /><br />February 26, 2017 at 7:02 PM: Off topic, save for the post hoc reasoning. You assert — without evidence — that the Syrian civil war was made worse by the Iraqi implosion, then reverse ground. The implosion was at least plausibly due to US withdrawal, which means continued US presence would have made the Syrian civil war less awful. Sounds like you should want more of what you don't want, while simultaneously failing to consider what things might have looked like had Saddam either remained in power, or lost it (think about <i>that</i> implosion). Oh, yeah, more stupid snark, too.<br /><br />—<br /><br />So far, Clovis, you have provided perhaps the most empty sustained argument I have ever seen. I gave you the best lever you could hope for: showing how three different sources completely missed the direct function (or had something to do with) US involvement had in the refugee crisis. As I said before, start there: show where they got it wrong, or what they missed.<br /><br />And by all means, stop it with the stupid snark.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-83296147065203246152017-02-27T05:50:55.221-08:002017-02-27T05:50:55.221-08:00[Clovis:] I find it amusing how you invoke the Med...<i>[Clovis:] I find it amusing how you invoke the Media for authority, after you spent the last years I've been in this blog ranting about them.<br /><br />Did you read my link on the gas economy behind the war? Did you notice the first country they cite is Qatar for its outsized role? Do you know who controls Al Jazeera?<br /><br />Of course, you don't. </i><br /><br />What I do not find amusing is ad hominem attack. Stop playing the man, start playing the ball.<br /><br />That goes the same for Al Jazeera — the article stands on its own, regardless of the fact that Qatar owns Al Jazeera. Just as the fact that my knowledge of Al Jazeera's ownership doesn't invalidate everything else you've said simply because "Of course, you don't" is Harry level stupid.<br /><br />After all, if Qatar's ownership of Al Jazeera significantly tilted the article, then it should be a doddle for you to discern that, since you know so much, and especially so since I provided two other sources. Since, so far as I know, neither of them are Qatari owned, then there will be significant disconnects between them, and Al Jazeera.<br /><br />Provided, of course, your objection carries any water.<br /><br /><i>I could include all the other relevant actors you cite in my analysis, but to what end? Restricted as it is, you look to already miss the main points by a hundred miles.</i><br /><br />Clovis, February 15, 2017 at 5:18 AM: <i>The last tsunami of refugees over Europe is a <b>direct function</b> of the US geopolitical choices and doings.</i><br /><br />Emphasis added.<br /><br />February 18, 2017 at 7:11 PM: Stupid snark.<br /><br />February 22, 2017 at 5:29 AM: Stupid snark.<br /><br />February 22, 2017 at 3:44 PM: Post hoc reasoning, along with the implicit assumption that the geographic distribution of refugees could not exist absent the US, even though the cite doesn't mention the US. <br /><br />February 22, 2017 at 6:51 PM: More stupid snark, along with the assertion that my mistakes have no end. Count of specific mistakes you assert at this point: none. But wait, there's more. <i>My initial claim is that the last wave - "wave" as in yuuuge numbers - of refugees had something to do with America past actions.</i> Compare against yourself on Feb 15, and behold the power of direct quotation. Having noted the bait and switch, I can't help but also notice this: your new main point is practically empty; for contradiction, it demands proving the null. Oh, and more stupid snark.<br /><br />February 23, 2017 at 11:05 AM: Snark, empty response, snark, empty response. <br /><br />February 26, 2017 at 4:18 PM: Again with the stupid snark, some more.<br /><br />February 26, 2017 at 5:06 PM: Again with the stupid snark, even some more more.<br /><br />February 26, 2017 at 5:22 PM: Off topic.<br /><br />February 26, 2017 at 5:59 PM: More off topic. Introduces a theory about Russian involvement that is woefully incomplete, and, in any event, has nothing to do with the US.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-18212144625979463192017-02-27T03:46:16.352-08:002017-02-27T03:46:16.352-08:00Skipper,
I find it amusing how you invoke the Med...Skipper,<br /><br />I find it amusing how you invoke the Media for authority, after you spent the last years I've been in this blog ranting about them.<br /><br />Did you read my link on the gas economy behind the war? Did you notice the first country they cite is Qatar for its outsized role? Do you know who controls Al Jazeera?<br /><br />Of course, you don't. <br /><br />I could include all the other relevant actors you cite in my analysis, but to what end? Restricted as it is, you look to already miss the main points by a hundred miles.<br /><br /><br />To be clear, I am not arguing the USA caused alone all the evils in the ME (do you remember what a "function" means?). But to someone who is often fond of that 'Pax Americana', you are quite a wimp in refusing to attribute a share of blame where it is due. It is too easy to play the Empire when you don't need to clean up after it.<br /><br />And since you can't let go of this bogus 'post-hoc' argument:<br /><br />---<br />in your festival of post hoc reasoning, considered the possibility that it would not have happened had not the US left, or, as I mentioned above, made a case that there would have been a peaceful transition to a post-Saddam Iraq. It would also have helped a great deal had you offered up some notion of why the Syrian civil war would not have happened in any event.<br />---<br /><br />1) Yes, probably we would have 4 millions less refugees from Syria today, had not the US left Iraq in 2011. I wonder how you think that helps you argument. It surely helps mine - US actions again on the line.<br /><br />2) Going back to an alternative universe where the US would not have invaded Iraq in 2003, you often argue nothing would be better after Saddam died anyway. Gosh, do I need really to answer this? How come an adult in his 60's can still believe his magical power to foresee the future?<br /><br />For one thing, ISIS would hardly have grown out of anonymity. The North Iraq sunnis would be too occupied in keeping ruling the rest of the country. Even if they were in civil war, they would be dedicating their forces to fight their own war, instead of diverting it all against Assad and destroying Syria.<br /><br /><br />Finally, I can't bother to answer stupidity on this scale:<br />---<br />considering that the US gave the Iraqis a chance to build a civil society; it would have been nice to hear why the US is to blame for them choosing otherwise. <br />---<br />I can easily forgive ignorance of facts, Skipper, but this is so far into wishful thinking, I can only regret ever touching the subject.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-48516146496757130312017-02-27T02:04:13.891-08:002017-02-27T02:04:13.891-08:00[Clovis:] But If I tell you, as I did far above, t...<i>[Clovis:] But If I tell you, as I did far above, the refugee crisis is a direct function of the US geopolitical choices and doings, you can't take it? </i><br /><br />You have told me many times the refugee crisis is a direct function of the US; unfortunately, the primary reason you have given each time is snark.<br /><br />You haven't explained why the Iraq war is responsible for the Syrian civil war, nor even attempted to come to terms with the near certainty that Saddam's leaving power, however that might have happened, would have resulted in murderous chaos. Along with leaving out those seemingly pivotal issues, you never once mentioned the Arab Spring, nor Libya and its refugees. Iran is astonishingly absent, while the CIA, whose efforts and results are piddling in comparison, is somehow super accountable.<br /><br />Invoking the Iraqi implosion would be more persuasive if you, in your festival of post hoc reasoning, considered the possibility that it would not have happened had not the US left, or, as I mentioned above, made a case that there would have been a peaceful transition to a post-Saddam Iraq. It would also have helped a great deal had you offered up some notion of why the Syrian civil war would not have happened in any event.<br /><br />Your continued blame of the US should also take into account that <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_Iraq#Iraq_War_.282003.E2.80.9311.29" rel="nofollow">Iraqi refugees started returning after Saddam was toppled</a>, only for that tide to turn because of sectarian violence. Your reasonless focus on the US as the root of all refugee evil treats Iraqis as having no agency of their own, while letting Saddam off the hook for the relentless persecution of Shia muslims, which (repeating myself again) was going to involve bloody payback. That focus is even more odd, considering that the US gave the Iraqis a chance to build a civil society; it would have been nice to hear why the US is to blame for them choosing otherwise. <br /><br />Perhaps it was when the US bombed the Golden Mosque.<br /><br />Finally, I gave you three credible and unfriendly to the US sources regarding the Syrian refugee crisis. Not one of them cited the US as a cause. They, unlike you, referred to the same facts on the ground as I did. <br /><br />I guess that makes them ignorant, too.<br /><br />Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-48142238625543026062017-02-26T19:02:49.034-08:002017-02-26T19:02:49.034-08:00Skipper,
I have nothing to refute on Tartus - yes...Skipper,<br /><br />I have nothing to refute on Tartus - yes, Russia wants to keep it. But why the heck they want it in the first place?<br /><br />Syria has been trashing plans for gas pipes from Saudi allies since 2004, making Russia all the happier. <br /><br />Not only that, but Assad has been making Israel and USA life harder altogether. The assassination of Hariri (Lebanon's prime minister) in 2005, plus their secret nuclear reactor built with North Korean help - secretly <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard" rel="nofollow">bombed</a> by Israel in 2007 with US complicity - were all determinant. <br /><br />No wonder, after the above, Saudi (and their allies) and the CIA started working harder to help Syria's rebels. Fast forward to 2011, the 'revolution' begins. Fast forward more 4 years of chaos - greatly aided by Iraq implosion (where, AGAIN, the US has a huge role) and you have the greatest refugee crisis of the last many decades.<br /><br />But If I tell you, as I did far above, the refugee crisis is a direct function of the US geopolitical choices and doings, you can't take it? Only if you are utterly ignorant of the facts on the ground, as you showed yourself to be.<br /><br />Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-91110019725613096292017-02-26T18:45:50.148-08:002017-02-26T18:45:50.148-08:00Oh for pete's fricking sake, Clovis. You aske...Oh for pete's fricking sake, Clovis. You asked why Russia is involved with Syria, and the answer from two independent sources was pretty much exactly what I told you: the Al Jazeera article -- I know, they take their news from Breitbart, but still -- laid out the case all the way down the line. Russia forgave billions in debt to keep access to Tartus.<br /><br /><i>You also should ask yourself what in that game justify America's actions. Why was the CIA, first coverlty then overtly, giving support to Syria's 'rebels'?</i><br /><br />I tell you what. Come to terms with the reality of Russia's motivations with respect to Syria, then we can talk about the CIA. <br /><br />(Coming to terms means rebutting the Al Jazeera article.)<br /><br />And if you think the CIA's involvement -- peripheral and pathetic -- has had any meaningful impact on the refugee crisis, then you are right there next to Harry in bizarro world.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-67555568570331670112017-02-26T18:31:17.160-08:002017-02-26T18:31:17.160-08:00Skipper,
That's why I told you are not even w...Skipper,<br /><br />That's why I told you are not even wrong. The port is important - were it not, you would be wrong, which I didn't say you were.<br /><br />It is just not important *enough*. It is a means to play a greater geopolitical game, and that game is what is important enough to justify Russia actions.<br /><br />You also should ask yourself what in that game justify America's actions. Why was the CIA, first coverlty then overtly, giving support to Syria's 'rebels'?<br /><br />I wonder if you will only concede the US having influence in a country's woes when it invades and overthrows its rulers. Take a step back and think about that.Clovishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08921327103613284595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-72554248309732552142017-02-26T18:29:18.732-08:002017-02-26T18:29:18.732-08:00Published by those notorious US fan boys, Al Jazee...Published by those notorious US fan boys, Al Jazeera.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-76326869890046322452017-02-26T18:25:35.417-08:002017-02-26T18:25:35.417-08:00And in case that isn't enough for you, Read th...And in case that isn't enough for you, <a href="https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20140329-the-story-of-syrian-russian-relations/" rel="nofollow">Read this</a>.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-52702940939509572282017-02-26T18:21:49.889-08:002017-02-26T18:21:49.889-08:00Guess again.
Since Russia forgave Syria 75%, or $...<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia%E2%80%93Syria_relations#Russian_naval_base_in_Tartus" rel="nofollow">Guess again.</a><br /><br /><i>Since Russia forgave Syria 75%, or $9.8 billion, of its $13.4 billion Soviet-era debt and became its main arms supplier, Russia and Syria have conducted talks about allowing Russia to develop and enlarge its naval base, so that Russia can strengthen its naval presence in the Mediterranean. Amid Russia's deteriorating relations with the West, because of the 2008 South Ossetia War and plans to deploy a US missile defense shield in Poland, President Assad agreed to the port’s conversion into a permanent Middle East base for Russia’s nuclear-armed warships. Since 2009, Russia has been renovating the Tartus naval base and dredging the port to allow access for its larger naval vessels.<br /><br /><b>In 2012, a commentator called the use of the deep-water port at Tartus Russia’s greatest strategic and geopolitical interest in Syria, and some critics saw the position of the naval facility as a chief motivating factor for Russia to speak out in favor of the Assad government.</b></i><br /><br />Emphasis added.<br /><br />Before you get snarky, again, you really should do a bit of research.<br /><br />BTW, Russia has used natural gas to pressure Europe. <a href="http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-To-Undermine-Russias-Gas-Monopoly-In-Europe.html" rel="nofollow">But not for much longer</a>.<br /><br />Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.com