ChatterBank11 mins ago
Vladimir Putin Accuses David Cameron Of Betraying Humanitarian Values
38 Answers
http://
Which would it be right to support, the legitimate government of Syria or the rebels?
Which would it be right to support, the legitimate government of Syria or the rebels?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Putin seems to have forgotten that the "legitimate government" of Syria has been engaged in a campaign of genocide for the last two years.
So he's seen or heard about a YouTube video and bases his excuses on that
What needs to be done, if possible, is to try to end the conflict, either by helping one side or the other to win or preferably by peace talks. The Russians have steadfastly refused to try to persuade Assad to negotiate and they seem to have hardened their attitude since his forces - thanks to the assistance of Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, has seen an upturn in its fortunes.
It would also be worth comparing the amount of money spent by each government on humanitarian aid to Syria:
The UK: 170 million pounds
Russia: a fraction of that (about 2 million dollars to the Red Cross)
No of weapons/military aid sent to Syria to aid Assad's genocide:
Russia: a steady supply of helicopter gunships, air defence and coastal defence missile systems, etc - in all an estimated 10% of its arms sales wordwide.
The UK: a fraction of that if any
And still Mr Cameron persists in the belief - publicly stated at least - that the Russian regime wants to see an end to the conflict. it must be obvious by now that they do not.
So he's seen or heard about a YouTube video and bases his excuses on that
What needs to be done, if possible, is to try to end the conflict, either by helping one side or the other to win or preferably by peace talks. The Russians have steadfastly refused to try to persuade Assad to negotiate and they seem to have hardened their attitude since his forces - thanks to the assistance of Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, has seen an upturn in its fortunes.
It would also be worth comparing the amount of money spent by each government on humanitarian aid to Syria:
The UK: 170 million pounds
Russia: a fraction of that (about 2 million dollars to the Red Cross)
No of weapons/military aid sent to Syria to aid Assad's genocide:
Russia: a steady supply of helicopter gunships, air defence and coastal defence missile systems, etc - in all an estimated 10% of its arms sales wordwide.
The UK: a fraction of that if any
And still Mr Cameron persists in the belief - publicly stated at least - that the Russian regime wants to see an end to the conflict. it must be obvious by now that they do not.
In what way do you mean 'sort out' exactly?
The trouble with civil wars is that they're often so vicious and so intrenched that peace deals are often very difficult.
I can't see the 'rebels' (for want of a better word) accepting any solution that allows Assad to stay in power and the Russians aren't about to give up their influence and Naval base in Syria any time soon.
If we/the US/the French/whoever arm the rebels Russia will arm Assad and it will all get even worse
Not easy to see a way out of this little impasse
The trouble with civil wars is that they're often so vicious and so intrenched that peace deals are often very difficult.
I can't see the 'rebels' (for want of a better word) accepting any solution that allows Assad to stay in power and the Russians aren't about to give up their influence and Naval base in Syria any time soon.
If we/the US/the French/whoever arm the rebels Russia will arm Assad and it will all get even worse
Not easy to see a way out of this little impasse
..sorry I should expand on the "joking" comment.
Apart from the idea that Russia would be a likely candidate to lead any sort of UN force when they have consistently thwarted all UN attempts to date to end the conflict.
But mainly, I'm afraid the situation has gone a little bit beyond "stabilisable"
Apart from the idea that Russia would be a likely candidate to lead any sort of UN force when they have consistently thwarted all UN attempts to date to end the conflict.
But mainly, I'm afraid the situation has gone a little bit beyond "stabilisable"
I would declare the Russians out of bounds in any discussion
Which is a shame for they have it in their power to bring this war to an end. They are effectivley one of the protagonists.
Pretending, or thinking, that they can help or want to, is just wasting time. There is no obvious solution I'm afraid beyond that. Just try to keep going with the humanitarian aid and military aid to the forces of the recgnised opposition forces.
Which is a shame for they have it in their power to bring this war to an end. They are effectivley one of the protagonists.
Pretending, or thinking, that they can help or want to, is just wasting time. There is no obvious solution I'm afraid beyond that. Just try to keep going with the humanitarian aid and military aid to the forces of the recgnised opposition forces.
I don't see that putting a fighting force of Russians or indeed anyone else is going to help in the context of this vicious civil war.
And even if it was, there's no way it's going to happen. The Russians are effectively fighting already on one side. They aren't about to agree to go in and start fighting against their ally :-)
And even if it was, there's no way it's going to happen. The Russians are effectively fighting already on one side. They aren't about to agree to go in and start fighting against their ally :-)
Do they need to fight though......its a bit akin to separating the Cypriot Turks and Greeks but on a larger scale. Yes, there will be some pushing and shoving at first, maybe involving shooting at both lots - defence of course, but then it's about keeping them apart and somehow looking to defuse the tensions on both sides, one of the difficult things being just how many factions are involved.
"so come on then, how are you going to solve it -"
I'm not. And neither is anybody else apart from the Syrians themselves and they are unlikely to succeed. Like the Afghans and a number of other people they cannot live peaceably among themselves, have no tolerance of any opposing views, beliefs or lifestyles, and have no notion of what we understand to be democracy (that is, particularly with western democracy, that you don't always get what you want and very often everybody gets what nobody wants).
I could go on, but I'm sure you get the drift. So the answer is to leave them to it because whatever anybody else does will make not one iota of difference.
As for Mr Putin's comments, pots, kettles and black spring to mind.
I'm not. And neither is anybody else apart from the Syrians themselves and they are unlikely to succeed. Like the Afghans and a number of other people they cannot live peaceably among themselves, have no tolerance of any opposing views, beliefs or lifestyles, and have no notion of what we understand to be democracy (that is, particularly with western democracy, that you don't always get what you want and very often everybody gets what nobody wants).
I could go on, but I'm sure you get the drift. So the answer is to leave them to it because whatever anybody else does will make not one iota of difference.
As for Mr Putin's comments, pots, kettles and black spring to mind.
-- answer removed --
Latest Posts
Crosswords23 mins ago
Businesses Warn Of Job Losses Threat As...
News32 mins ago
News32 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.