(07-31-2022 09:10 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 09:00 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 08:53 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  On balance, I think it’s a mistake to keep US troops in Syria, and I support withdrawing them to a friendly country, or even bringing them home. But I would ask in all honesty, how do we know whether or not Syria “wants” the US military presence to continue? How do the people of Syria get to “say” if they approve, or not?

Perhaps the US can rig an election or stage a coup to show it then? Oh, wait, they’ve been trying. And Russia so no. And it stopped there.

A coup or a rigged election wouldn’t really empower the Syrian people to express their views on the US military presence in their nation.


But certainly, any person or group that took power in Syria as the result of a rigged election, or a U.S.-backed coup (or both) would have just as much legitimacy to rule that nation as the al-Assad family.

Syria has elections already. Perhaps not to our liking, but people do vote and have some say over their lives. By the standard of countries that the US fully supports with no questions asked like Saudi Arabia, by that standard, Syria is a beacon of liberal democracy.

Syria’s level of democracy is of no concern to US foreign policy. We want them to trade in US dollars, for us to “advise” their central bank, for us to control their military and foreign policy. If they did those things, they could have the most brutal and repressive government in the world on domestic matters. We don’t care AT ALL about any of the things we talk about. None. Zero. We don’t care.

(07-31-2022 09:13 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 09:10 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 09:00 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 08:53 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  On balance, I think it’s a mistake to keep US troops in Syria, and I support withdrawing them to a friendly country, or even bringing them home. But I would ask in all honesty, how do we know whether or not Syria “wants” the US military presence to continue? How do the people of Syria get to “say” if they approve, or not?

Perhaps the US can rig an election or stage a coup to show it then? Oh, wait, they’ve been trying. And Russia so no. And it stopped there.

A coup or a rigged election wouldn’t really empower the Syrian people to express their views on the US military presence in their nation.

But certainly, any person or group that took power in Syria as the result of a rigged election, or a U.S.-backed coup (or both) would have just as much legitimacy to rule that nation as the al-Assad family.

Syria has elections already. Perhaps not to our liking, but people do vote and have some say over their lives. By the standard of countries that the US fully supports with no questions asked like Saudi Arabia, by that standard, Syria is a beacon of liberal democracy.

Serious question here. How does one develop these ideas?

(07-31-2022 08:32 PM)Todor Wrote:  I just can’t understand why American troops are still occupying a country that doesn’t want them there after all these years.

I would think Syria would be able to say who occupies their country. The Americans are the only foreign troops there who aren’t wanted. I don’t know why the Americans won’t just leave and stop occupying their agricultural regions when they are also blocking economic and trade activity that could be feeding the Syrian people. Wasting our tax dollars…

We aren't occupying Syria. Don't know who feeds you that nonsense. Your handler in Moscow?

We've got a handful of advisers helping the Kurds continue to root out ISIS. And the Kurds cooperate with the Syrian government. They are fighting the Turks and the Turkish rebels in addition to ISIS. Meanwhile Russia and Syria and Iran and Hezbellah mostly leave ISIS alone and fight the regular rebels and the Turkish rebels. The Russian & their mercenaries have conducted unprovoked attacks on the limited US forces on a couple occasions. And we promptly came back and eradicated them.

(07-31-2022 09:16 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 09:13 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 09:10 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 09:00 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 08:53 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  On balance, I think it’s a mistake to keep US troops in Syria, and I support withdrawing them to a friendly country, or even bringing them home. But I would ask in all honesty, how do we know whether or not Syria “wants” the US military presence to continue? How do the people of Syria get to “say” if they approve, or not?

Perhaps the US can rig an election or stage a coup to show it then? Oh, wait, they’ve been trying. And Russia so no. And it stopped there.

A coup or a rigged election wouldn’t really empower the Syrian people to express their views on the US military presence in their nation.

But certainly, any person or group that took power in Syria as the result of a rigged election, or a U.S.-backed coup (or both) would have just as much legitimacy to rule that nation as the al-Assad family.

Syria has elections already. Perhaps not to our liking, but people do vote and have some say over their lives. By the standard of countries that the US fully supports with no questions asked like Saudi Arabia, by that standard, Syria is a beacon of liberal democracy.

Serious question here. How does one develop these ideas?

The power of observation. I just sit back and watch it happen, time after time. And it’s always the same.

I don’t understand how all Americans don’t see what most of the world knows it happening.

(07-31-2022 09:13 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 09:10 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 09:00 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 08:53 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  On balance, I think it’s a mistake to keep US troops in Syria, and I support withdrawing them to a friendly country, or even bringing them home. But I would ask in all honesty, how do we know whether or not Syria “wants” the US military presence to continue? How do the people of Syria get to “say” if they approve, or not?

Perhaps the US can rig an election or stage a coup to show it then? Oh, wait, they’ve been trying. And Russia so no. And it stopped there.

A coup or a rigged election wouldn’t really empower the Syrian people to express their views on the US military presence in their nation.

But certainly, any person or group that took power in Syria as the result of a rigged election, or a U.S.-backed coup (or both) would have just as much legitimacy to rule that nation as the al-Assad family.

Syria has elections already. Perhaps not to our liking, but people do vote and have some say over their lives. By the standard of countries that the US fully supports with no questions asked like Saudi Arabia, by that standard, Syria is a beacon of liberal democracy.

I am skeptical that “elections” in Syria serve any other purpose beyond validating the al-Assad dynasty. The fact that America supports the House of Saud does not have any bearing on the issue, other than the trite reality that the world is a messy place, and American support for one tyrant does not require support for another.

But none of that really goes to the issue of whether the US military presence in Syria is approved by any/some/most of the Syrian people. I don’t claim to know the answer to that question. If anyone else does, let them say how they know.

(07-31-2022 09:31 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 09:13 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 09:10 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 09:00 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(07-31-2022 08:53 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  On balance, I think it’s a mistake to keep US troops in Syria, and I support withdrawing them to a friendly country, or even bringing them home. But I would ask in all honesty, how do we know whether or not Syria “wants” the US military presence to continue? How do the people of Syria get to “say” if they approve, or not?

Perhaps the US can rig an election or stage a coup to show it then? Oh, wait, they’ve been trying. And Russia so no. And it stopped there.

A coup or a rigged election wouldn’t really empower the Syrian people to express their views on the US military presence in their nation.

But certainly, any person or group that took power in Syria as the result of a rigged election, or a U.S.-backed coup (or both) would have just as much legitimacy to rule that nation as the al-Assad family.

Syria has elections already. Perhaps not to our liking, but people do vote and have some say over their lives. By the standard of countries that the US fully supports with no questions asked like Saudi Arabia, by that standard, Syria is a beacon of liberal democracy.

I am skeptical that “elections” in Syria serve any other purpose beyond validating the al-Assad dynasty. The fact that America supports the House of Saud does not have any bearing on the issue, other than the trite reality that the world is a messy place, and American support for one tyrant does not require support for another.

But none of that really goes to the issue of whether the US military presence in Syria is approved by any/some/most of the Syrian people. I don’t claim to know the answer to that question. If anyone else does, let them say how they know.

If Syria had a democracy just like the US, the people voting would have equally little influence on foreign policy and foreign relations. Voting for a party and for a president makes people feel good, but don’t automatically give the people full control over all things.

5 pages of posts and 1/3 of them are the resident Russian bot. Shocking.

(07-31-2022 08:32 PM)Todor Wrote:  I just can’t understand why American troops are still occupying a country that doesn’t want them there after all these years.

I would think Syria would be able to say who occupies their country. The Americans are the only foreign troops there who aren’t wanted. I don’t know why the Americans won’t just leave and stop occupying their agricultural regions when they are also blocking economic and trade activity that could be feeding the Syrian people. Wasting our tax dollars…

The Americans are wanted where they are in Syria. On the other hand, Russia is not wanted in most of Ukraine....yet there they are in Ukraine in numbers far greater than any small token American presence in Syria. Stealing grain, raping women, killing POWs, bombing/shelling civilians, destroying infrastructure----thats why Im hoping for a long war. We need plenty of time to bleed the Russian Army dry of its ability to do this anywhere else. Eventually, the Russian people will tire of sending their children off to war in antiquated Soviet era equipment to be destroyed by 21rst century weaponry. Its just a matter of time. Within a year or two, Russian gas will no longer be needed in Europe and NATO will allow Ukraine to strike Russian economic infrastructure like gas/petro industry targets. At that point, Russia will just be a third world nation with nukes. Im mean, basically--Russia is just a gas station with nukes right now.....once the gas infrastructure is damaged---Russia is over.

Syria is basically two countries, a remnant of the Europeans' fascination with drawing straight lines in carving up the old Ottoman Empire after WWI, and with the Brits' submarining the French at San Remo. The western 1/3, including the current government, is Shia (Alawite). The eastern 2/3 is Sunni.

I was always in favor of partitioning post-Saddam Iraq into three countries--Kurdistan in the north, Shia Mesopotamia in the east, and Sunni Iraq in the west. I would ave anticipated that--with Saudi backing--Sunni Iraq and eastern Syria would have joined forces with Sunni eastern Syria against Assad, and ultimately eastern Syria would have left to join with Iraq.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/...ubles.html

So much for NATO alliance including all members.