Syrian civil war (22 Viewers)

king Ale

Senior Member
Oct 28, 2004
21,689
You know that there are very strong economic relations between the Syrian and the Russian regimes. You can read about the last weapons deal which took place weeks ago.
I think their motives are beyond their economic relations with Syria. So are our regime's.

Anyways, I think Syrians are doing what Iranians did 33 years ago. I'm similarly (not equally) pessimistic about Egypt and Libya's revolutions.
 
OP

ReBeL

The Jackal
Jan 14, 2005
22,871
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #1,966
    I think their motives are beyond their economic relations with Syria. So are our regime's.

    Anyways, I think Syrians are doing what Iranians did 33 years ago. I'm similarly (not equally) pessimistic about Egypt and Libya's revolutions.
    Well, IMO nothing can be worse than Mubarak, Qadhafi and Assad's regimes
     

    king Ale

    Senior Member
    Oct 28, 2004
    21,689
    Well, IMO nothing can be worse than Mubarak, Qadhafi and Assad's regimes
    That could well be an invalid premise because you wouldn't know until you see how things change under the successors but even if we assume that what you say is right, it's not merely about changing the worst possible regimes. The question is whether or not the alternatives are good enough to be worth all those lives and damages.
     

    Azzurri7

    Pinturicchio
    Moderator
    Dec 16, 2003
    72,692
    I think their motives are beyond their economic relations with Syria. So are our regime's.
    I would say it's more about geopolitics and a bit of economic interests (not much though), few billions less for Russia wouldn't make much difference IMO.

    Putting down the Syrian regime would mean the disappearance of Russia's last hand/friend/partner in the region while the Americans on the other hand are in good position with most of Arab countries.

    It's strategic consideration they're making more than about selling them some arms or few fighter jets.
     
    OP

    ReBeL

    The Jackal
    Jan 14, 2005
    22,871
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #1,969
    That could well be an invalid premise because you wouldn't know until you see how things change under the successors but even if we assume that what you say is right, it's not merely about changing the worst possible regimes. The question is whether or not the alternatives are good enough to be worth all those lives and damages.
    Till now, Egyptian revolution has not finished yet, so you can't say the new regime is worse than the previous one because simply both of them are the same regime.

    The Libyan revolution succeeded but we need time to see its results.

    I would say it's more about geopolitics and a bit of economic interests (not much though), few billions less for Russia wouldn't make much difference IMO.

    Putting down the Syrian regime would mean the disappearance of Russia's last hand/friend/partner in the region while the Americans on the other hand are in good position with most of Arab countries.

    It's strategic consideration they're making more than about selling them some arms or few fighter jets.
    But Russia is not that strong power that used to be before decades, so I doubt anybody thinks of them as a strong power except themselves.
     
    Jul 1, 2010
    26,352
    Till now, Egyptian revolution has not finished yet, so you can't say the new regime is worse than the previous one because simply both of them are the same regime.

    The Libyan revolution succeeded but we need time to see its results.



    But Russia is not that strong power that used to be before decades, so I doubt anybody thinks of them as a strong power except themselves.
    You're talking about a country which has 4650 active nuclear warheads, more than the USA. Russia's military is regarded as the second strongest in the world after the USA.

    Russia is on the rise again as a military power.
     

    Fred

    Senior Member
    Oct 2, 2003
    41,113
    Up until now i'm hugely optimistic about things in Libya. While there is still chaos and lack of order, there are so many things that have changed for the better. One thing is for sure, we are definitely not going back to a dictatorship. What i am most worried about is if the Western countries would leave us alone or not, i find it hard to believe they helped us for humanitarian motives.

    Back to Syria, they can't really go back now Hoori, a change of regime is the only thing that will stop all this bloodshed, there is no going back at all. So the Syrians will have to topple the regime one way or another. After 9-10 months of the regime butchering innocent unarmed civilian protestors, i think it has become obvious that the only way to topple the regime is by means of force. Thats where the Free Syrian Army comes in.
     
    OP

    ReBeL

    The Jackal
    Jan 14, 2005
    22,871
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #1,972
    You're talking about a country which has 4650 active nuclear warheads, more than the USA. Russia's military is regarded as the second strongest in the world after the USA.

    Russia is on the rise again as a military power.
    They are a shadow of the strong power they used to be a long time ago. Now, they can't do anything material using their nuclear weapons except maybe wiping one of Chechen cities.

    You're talking about a country which has 4650 active nuclear warheads, more than the USA. Russia's military is regarded as the second strongest in the world after the USA.

    Russia is on the rise again as a military power.
    They are a shadow of the strong power they used to be a long time ago. Now, they can't do anything material using their nuclear weapons except maybe wiping one of Chechen cities.
     

    Fred

    Senior Member
    Oct 2, 2003
    41,113
    Guys, about Russia and Cina:

    http://translate.google.nl/translat.../02/05/perche-russia-e-cina-proteggono-assad/

    Remember, nothing happens on a whim, every decision is backed by interests.
    Of course. But if they were smart they'd think more in the long term. In the long term they're doing serious damage to their future relationship with the next Syrian regime. They're banking on the current regime staying in power, which is just not going to happen, they can't keep on killing people forever. The Syrians have shown over the past 10 months that they won't back down, which only means that the regime will be toppled one way or the other.
     

    Martin

    Senior Member
    Dec 31, 2000
    56,913
    Of course. But if they were smart they'd think more in the long term. In the long term they're doing serious damage to their future relationship with the next Syrian regime. They're banking on the current regime staying in power, which is just not going to happen, they can't keep on killing people forever. The Syrians have shown over the past 10 months that they won't back down, which only means that the regime will be toppled one way or the other.
    Isn't that what Western governments always do? Mubarak, Gheddafi etc?
     

    delrey

    Senior Member
    Jan 5, 2009
    1,121
    Western governments in general have actually backed the Arab Spring revolutions, only Russia and China have been against regime changes in the Arab world.
    Dude, it doesnt mater which are the names. Mubarak was good for west, Ben Ali too. They will put diferent ones on important positions.
    IMO, this all arab spring was faked so they can remove some individulas(Gadaffi, Al Asad, Khamenei) and put theirs version. They all ready did it in Avganistan and Pakistan, but having trouble for Irak now.
    My opinion, it doesnt mean its truth
     

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 20)