Ukrainian victory over Russia is inevitable

[Anonymous]

Русский мир:



The ancient, historic city of Aleppo, reduced to rubble and ash.

This is what Russia leave behind, everywhere they go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This kind of nonsense is why every non-Russian company needs to shut down and pull all of their resources out of Russia.

https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/chechen-leaders-nephew-new-head-russias-danone-subsidiary-media-2023-07-19/

Russia is a criminal state.

it's not like Russian-owned assets abroad were left in peace you know.

Lots of people weren't aware of this, or stuck their head in the sand when it happened. Between random Russians getting their property stolen and the whole nation getting kicked off SWIFT, it really turned a lot of countries against the US.

It's not like that happened for no reason. Maybe you're unaware that Russia conducted an illegal and illegitimate invasion of their neighbor, an attack and invasion which was almost universally condemned and an overwhelming majority of nations voted in the UN to demand Russia's complete withdrawal. Maybe don't invade for no reason other than your own lies. As for "a lot of countries turned against the US" be honest - that's the 5 or so countries still in Russia's pathetic orbit like Belarus, Syria and Cuba.

I agree, you truly are clownish. I certainly hope you don't actually believe any of the ridiculous talking points you're posting. Certainly nobody else here does.

Oh dear.

That's already been discussed and flogged to death over and over again. If you want to talk about Iraq, go start a new thread. This thread is about Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

If only it were just Iraq... Why do we have a base and support a bunch of separatists in Syria again?

Why does Russia have bases in Syria again?

Straight from wiki:
In 1971, under an agreement with President Hafez al-Assad, the Soviet Union was allowed to open its naval military base in Tartus, giving the Soviet Union a stable presence in the Middle East.[5][6] Thousands of Syrian military officers and educated professionals studied in Russia during al-Assad's presidency (1971–2000).[23]

Note the difference, one was invited in and one is an invader.

Syria fragmented after the Arab Spring in 2011 and several years in, Assad only had claim to the western portion of Syria, whereas Kurds and opposition groups had established control and set up governments in other parts of the country. In 2014, the US and its allies were invited in by the Kurds and other parties to help them fight ISIS.

Wait wait I thought we were all about territorial integrity, sovereign borders and all that jazz?

Or is this only for countries we approve of? All others are OK to help dismember?

Open up your copy of "Rules Based Order" to page 173 and read the exceptions list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This kind of nonsense is why every non-Russian company needs to shut down and pull all of their resources out of Russia.

https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/chechen-leaders-nephew-new-head-russias-danone-subsidiary-media-2023-07-19/

Russia is a criminal state.

it's not like Russian-owned assets abroad were left in peace you know.

Lots of people weren't aware of this, or stuck their head in the sand when it happened. Between random Russians getting their property stolen and the whole nation getting kicked off SWIFT, it really turned a lot of countries against the US.

It's not like that happened for no reason. Maybe you're unaware that Russia conducted an illegal and illegitimate invasion of their neighbor, an attack and invasion which was almost universally condemned and an overwhelming majority of nations voted in the UN to demand Russia's complete withdrawal. Maybe don't invade for no reason other than your own lies. As for "a lot of countries turned against the US" be honest - that's the 5 or so countries still in Russia's pathetic orbit like Belarus, Syria and Cuba.

I agree, you truly are clownish. I certainly hope you don't actually believe any of the ridiculous talking points you're posting. Certainly nobody else here does.

Oh dear.

That's already been discussed and flogged to death over and over again. If you want to talk about Iraq, go start a new thread. This thread is about Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

If only it were just Iraq... Why do we have a base and support a bunch of separatists in Syria again?

Why does Russia have bases in Syria again?

Straight from wiki:
In 1971, under an agreement with President Hafez al-Assad, the Soviet Union was allowed to open its naval military base in Tartus, giving the Soviet Union a stable presence in the Middle East.[5][6] Thousands of Syrian military officers and educated professionals studied in Russia during al-Assad's presidency (1971–2000).[23]

Note the difference, one was invited in and one is an invader.

Syria fragmented after the Arab Spring in 2011 and several years in, Assad only had claim to the western portion of Syria, whereas Kurds and opposition groups had established control and set up governments in other parts of the country. In 2014, the US and its allies were invited in by the Kurds and other parties to help them fight ISIS.

LOL so you're saying that Donetsk and Lugansk governments (controlled by opposition groups that set up governments) could invite in anyone?

In any case, ISIS is gone but the American base isn't.

Why?

Because Assad wants to slaughter the people who don't bow to him.

Wait you're saying that's not allowed?

I'm confused. If it's OK not to bow to the government, why did the US help suppress the Bahrain uprising where people didn't want to bow to the monarchy government?

Oh yes yes I see. Lesser evil. Can't have these monkeys have a role in ruling themselves.

Yes, I totally recall when the US helped the government of Bahrain slaughter over 140,000 civilians, displace millions and reduce its second-biggest city of a population of 2 million to rubble.

Oh wait, that wasn't Bahrain, that was Syria. And it wasn't the US, it was Russia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US entered Syria several years after Syria Arab Spring uprisings fractured the country in a civil war, and the reason the US entered was as part of a multinational alliance to fight ISIS and protect people in areas that were well beyond the Assad regime's control.

Russia entered Syria to help their brutal dictator Assad slaughter dissident groups who did not want to be under his rule. Nearly 90% of Syria's civilian deaths were at the hands of Assad, supported by Russia and Iran. The next largest group of civilian casualties were inflicted by ISIS. It's crystal clear who the bad guys have been - Syria, Russia, Iran and ISIS.

ISIS is defeated so why is the US still there?

This has nothing to do with civilians, "brutal rule" or whatever. This is a battle over who gets to lord over which country.

The US is strangely averse to anyone else having "spheres of influence" on the planet. Only America is allowed to have influence.

Aww you jealous?

But yes, it DOES have to do with brutal rule and murder of civilians. I'll pick the lesser evil every time. And over history, hands down that's been the US over Russia and the Soviet Union.

Invasion of Iraq has been a lesser evil?

You're clearly an American who doesn't count dead brown non-Christian people.

Invasions are like abortions - only mine is a moral one.

Dead brown non-Christian people apparently don't matter to brown non-Christian people, because the overwhelming majority of civilian deaths in Iraq were at the hands of terrorists and insurgents. So by your logic, if I don't care about them then I'm clearly not an American but instead, a brown non-Christian person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This kind of nonsense is why every non-Russian company needs to shut down and pull all of their resources out of Russia.

https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/chechen-leaders-nephew-new-head-russias-danone-subsidiary-media-2023-07-19/

Russia is a criminal state.

it's not like Russian-owned assets abroad were left in peace you know.

Lots of people weren't aware of this, or stuck their head in the sand when it happened. Between random Russians getting their property stolen and the whole nation getting kicked off SWIFT, it really turned a lot of countries against the US.

It's not like that happened for no reason. Maybe you're unaware that Russia conducted an illegal and illegitimate invasion of their neighbor, an attack and invasion which was almost universally condemned and an overwhelming majority of nations voted in the UN to demand Russia's complete withdrawal. Maybe don't invade for no reason other than your own lies. As for "a lot of countries turned against the US" be honest - that's the 5 or so countries still in Russia's pathetic orbit like Belarus, Syria and Cuba.

I agree, you truly are clownish. I certainly hope you don't actually believe any of the ridiculous talking points you're posting. Certainly nobody else here does.

Oh dear.

That's already been discussed and flogged to death over and over again. If you want to talk about Iraq, go start a new thread. This thread is about Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

If only it were just Iraq... Why do we have a base and support a bunch of separatists in Syria again?

Why does Russia have bases in Syria again?

Straight from wiki:
In 1971, under an agreement with President Hafez al-Assad, the Soviet Union was allowed to open its naval military base in Tartus, giving the Soviet Union a stable presence in the Middle East.[5][6] Thousands of Syrian military officers and educated professionals studied in Russia during al-Assad's presidency (1971–2000).[23]

Note the difference, one was invited in and one is an invader.

Syria fragmented after the Arab Spring in 2011 and several years in, Assad only had claim to the western portion of Syria, whereas Kurds and opposition groups had established control and set up governments in other parts of the country. In 2014, the US and its allies were invited in by the Kurds and other parties to help them fight ISIS.

LOL so you're saying that Donetsk and Lugansk governments (controlled by opposition groups that set up governments) could invite in anyone?

In any case, ISIS is gone but the American base isn't.

Why?

Because Assad wants to slaughter the people who don't bow to him.

Wait you're saying that's not allowed?

I'm confused. If it's OK not to bow to the government, why did the US help suppress the Bahrain uprising where people didn't want to bow to the monarchy government?

Oh yes yes I see. Lesser evil. Can't have these monkeys have a role in ruling themselves.

Yes, I totally recall when the US helped the government of Bahrain slaughter over 140,000 civilians, displace millions and reduce its second-biggest city of a population of 2 million to rubble.

Oh wait, that wasn't Bahrain, that was Syria. And it wasn't the US, it was Russia.

I thought the invader (America in this case) caused all the deaths and destruction by the very act of the invasion. This is getting very complicated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US entered Syria several years after Syria Arab Spring uprisings fractured the country in a civil war, and the reason the US entered was as part of a multinational alliance to fight ISIS and protect people in areas that were well beyond the Assad regime's control.

Russia entered Syria to help their brutal dictator Assad slaughter dissident groups who did not want to be under his rule. Nearly 90% of Syria's civilian deaths were at the hands of Assad, supported by Russia and Iran. The next largest group of civilian casualties were inflicted by ISIS. It's crystal clear who the bad guys have been - Syria, Russia, Iran and ISIS.

ISIS is defeated so why is the US still there?

This has nothing to do with civilians, "brutal rule" or whatever. This is a battle over who gets to lord over which country.

The US is strangely averse to anyone else having "spheres of influence" on the planet. Only America is allowed to have influence.

Aww you jealous?

But yes, it DOES have to do with brutal rule and murder of civilians. I'll pick the lesser evil every time. And over history, hands down that's been the US over Russia and the Soviet Union.

Invasion of Iraq has been a lesser evil?

You're clearly an American who doesn't count dead brown non-Christian people.

Invasions are like abortions - only mine is a moral one.

Dead brown non-Christian people apparently don't matter to brown non-Christian people, because the overwhelming majority of civilian deaths in Iraq were at the hands of terrorists and insurgents. So by your logic, if I don't care about them then I'm clearly not an American but instead, a brown non-Christian person.

Analysis of the Iraq War Logs dataset from Wikileaks reveals that the US was responsible for 5% of civilian deaths in Iraq. Compare that to 80% of civilian deaths being at the hands of Assad and Russia in Syria, followed by ISIS for most of the rest. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1067&context=jpur

THAT is a perfect example of why your "well the US does x so Russia should be allowed, too" logic is a complete failure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This kind of nonsense is why every non-Russian company needs to shut down and pull all of their resources out of Russia.

https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/chechen-leaders-nephew-new-head-russias-danone-subsidiary-media-2023-07-19/

Russia is a criminal state.

it's not like Russian-owned assets abroad were left in peace you know.

Lots of people weren't aware of this, or stuck their head in the sand when it happened. Between random Russians getting their property stolen and the whole nation getting kicked off SWIFT, it really turned a lot of countries against the US.

It's not like that happened for no reason. Maybe you're unaware that Russia conducted an illegal and illegitimate invasion of their neighbor, an attack and invasion which was almost universally condemned and an overwhelming majority of nations voted in the UN to demand Russia's complete withdrawal. Maybe don't invade for no reason other than your own lies. As for "a lot of countries turned against the US" be honest - that's the 5 or so countries still in Russia's pathetic orbit like Belarus, Syria and Cuba.

I agree, you truly are clownish. I certainly hope you don't actually believe any of the ridiculous talking points you're posting. Certainly nobody else here does.

Oh dear.

That's already been discussed and flogged to death over and over again. If you want to talk about Iraq, go start a new thread. This thread is about Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

If only it were just Iraq... Why do we have a base and support a bunch of separatists in Syria again?

Why does Russia have bases in Syria again?

Straight from wiki:
In 1971, under an agreement with President Hafez al-Assad, the Soviet Union was allowed to open its naval military base in Tartus, giving the Soviet Union a stable presence in the Middle East.[5][6] Thousands of Syrian military officers and educated professionals studied in Russia during al-Assad's presidency (1971–2000).[23]

Note the difference, one was invited in and one is an invader.

Syria fragmented after the Arab Spring in 2011 and several years in, Assad only had claim to the western portion of Syria, whereas Kurds and opposition groups had established control and set up governments in other parts of the country. In 2014, the US and its allies were invited in by the Kurds and other parties to help them fight ISIS.

LOL so you're saying that Donetsk and Lugansk governments (controlled by opposition groups that set up governments) could invite in anyone?

In any case, ISIS is gone but the American base isn't.

Why?

Because Assad wants to slaughter the people who don't bow to him.

Wait you're saying that's not allowed?

I'm confused. If it's OK not to bow to the government, why did the US help suppress the Bahrain uprising where people didn't want to bow to the monarchy government?

Oh yes yes I see. Lesser evil. Can't have these monkeys have a role in ruling themselves.

Yes, I totally recall when the US helped the government of Bahrain slaughter over 140,000 civilians, displace millions and reduce its second-biggest city of a population of 2 million to rubble.

Oh wait, that wasn't Bahrain, that was Syria. And it wasn't the US, it was Russia.

I thought the invader (America in this case) caused all the deaths and destruction by the very act of the invasion. This is getting very complicated.

It's not complicated. You're just confused. Or dishonest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This kind of nonsense is why every non-Russian company needs to shut down and pull all of their resources out of Russia.

https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/chechen-leaders-nephew-new-head-russias-danone-subsidiary-media-2023-07-19/

Russia is a criminal state.

it's not like Russian-owned assets abroad were left in peace you know.

Lots of people weren't aware of this, or stuck their head in the sand when it happened. Between random Russians getting their property stolen and the whole nation getting kicked off SWIFT, it really turned a lot of countries against the US.

It's not like that happened for no reason. Maybe you're unaware that Russia conducted an illegal and illegitimate invasion of their neighbor, an attack and invasion which was almost universally condemned and an overwhelming majority of nations voted in the UN to demand Russia's complete withdrawal. Maybe don't invade for no reason other than your own lies. As for "a lot of countries turned against the US" be honest - that's the 5 or so countries still in Russia's pathetic orbit like Belarus, Syria and Cuba.

I agree, you truly are clownish. I certainly hope you don't actually believe any of the ridiculous talking points you're posting. Certainly nobody else here does.

Oh dear.

That's already been discussed and flogged to death over and over again. If you want to talk about Iraq, go start a new thread. This thread is about Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

If only it were just Iraq... Why do we have a base and support a bunch of separatists in Syria again?

Why does Russia have bases in Syria again?

Straight from wiki:
In 1971, under an agreement with President Hafez al-Assad, the Soviet Union was allowed to open its naval military base in Tartus, giving the Soviet Union a stable presence in the Middle East.[5][6] Thousands of Syrian military officers and educated professionals studied in Russia during al-Assad's presidency (1971–2000).[23]

Note the difference, one was invited in and one is an invader.

Syria fragmented after the Arab Spring in 2011 and several years in, Assad only had claim to the western portion of Syria, whereas Kurds and opposition groups had established control and set up governments in other parts of the country. In 2014, the US and its allies were invited in by the Kurds and other parties to help them fight ISIS.

Wait wait I thought we were all about territorial integrity, sovereign borders and all that jazz?

Or is this only for countries we approve of? All others are OK to help dismember?

Open up your copy of "Rules Based Order" to page 173 and read the exceptions list.

LOL would it have Colin Powell's photo? Will there be a "Colin Powell exception"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Русский мир:



The ancient, historic city of Aleppo, reduced to rubble and ash.

This is what Russia leave behind, everywhere they go.

Baghdad:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Русский мир:



The ancient, historic city of Aleppo, reduced to rubble and ash.

This is what Russia leave behind, everywhere they go.

Baghdad:

Oh, one crater. Now show the rest of Baghdad. It was never pounded into rubble the way Aleppo was - or Bakhmut, or so many other cities reduced to rubble by Russia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US entered Syria several years after Syria Arab Spring uprisings fractured the country in a civil war, and the reason the US entered was as part of a multinational alliance to fight ISIS and protect people in areas that were well beyond the Assad regime's control.

Russia entered Syria to help their brutal dictator Assad slaughter dissident groups who did not want to be under his rule. Nearly 90% of Syria's civilian deaths were at the hands of Assad, supported by Russia and Iran. The next largest group of civilian casualties were inflicted by ISIS. It's crystal clear who the bad guys have been - Syria, Russia, Iran and ISIS.

ISIS is defeated so why is the US still there?

This has nothing to do with civilians, "brutal rule" or whatever. This is a battle over who gets to lord over which country.

The US is strangely averse to anyone else having "spheres of influence" on the planet. Only America is allowed to have influence.

Aww you jealous?

But yes, it DOES have to do with brutal rule and murder of civilians. I'll pick the lesser evil every time. And over history, hands down that's been the US over Russia and the Soviet Union.

Invasion of Iraq has been a lesser evil?

You're clearly an American who doesn't count dead brown non-Christian people.

Invasions are like abortions - only mine is a moral one.

Dead brown non-Christian people apparently don't matter to brown non-Christian people, because the overwhelming majority of civilian deaths in Iraq were at the hands of terrorists and insurgents. So by your logic, if I don't care about them then I'm clearly not an American but instead, a brown non-Christian person.

Analysis of the Iraq War Logs dataset from Wikileaks reveals that the US was responsible for 5% of civilian deaths in Iraq. Compare that to 80% of civilian deaths being at the hands of Assad and Russia in Syria, followed by ISIS for most of the rest. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1067&context=jpur

THAT is a perfect example of why your "well the US does x so Russia should be allowed, too" logic is a complete failure.

As many as 10,000 non-combatant civilian deaths during 2003 have been reliably reported so far as a result of the US/UK-led invasion and occupation of Iraq . These reports provide figures which range between a minimum of 8,235 and a maximum of 10,079 as of Saturday 7th February 2004.

That's just one year. https://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/beyond/ten-thousand/

Let's also not forget the decimation of Iraqi civilian infrastructure and healthcare, already weakened by years of sanctions. How many civilians have died because they couldn't get to the hospital, because there WAS no hospital or because the hospital had no relief to give them due to sanctions? How many life-saving medications were denied to the Iraqi civilians "because Saddam"?

But yeah. The only moral invasion is my invasion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US entered Syria several years after Syria Arab Spring uprisings fractured the country in a civil war, and the reason the US entered was as part of a multinational alliance to fight ISIS and protect people in areas that were well beyond the Assad regime's control.

Russia entered Syria to help their brutal dictator Assad slaughter dissident groups who did not want to be under his rule. Nearly 90% of Syria's civilian deaths were at the hands of Assad, supported by Russia and Iran. The next largest group of civilian casualties were inflicted by ISIS. It's crystal clear who the bad guys have been - Syria, Russia, Iran and ISIS.

ISIS is defeated so why is the US still there?

This has nothing to do with civilians, "brutal rule" or whatever. This is a battle over who gets to lord over which country.

The US is strangely averse to anyone else having "spheres of influence" on the planet. Only America is allowed to have influence.

Aww you jealous?

But yes, it DOES have to do with brutal rule and murder of civilians. I'll pick the lesser evil every time. And over history, hands down that's been the US over Russia and the Soviet Union.

Invasion of Iraq has been a lesser evil?

You're clearly an American who doesn't count dead brown non-Christian people.

Invasions are like abortions - only mine is a moral one.

Dead brown non-Christian people apparently don't matter to brown non-Christian people, because the overwhelming majority of civilian deaths in Iraq were at the hands of terrorists and insurgents. So by your logic, if I don't care about them then I'm clearly not an American but instead, a brown non-Christian person.

LOL right, first I invade and remove the government, along with law and order. But I'm totes not responsible for whatever happens as a result. Nooo that's not on me at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This kind of nonsense is why every non-Russian company needs to shut down and pull all of their resources out of Russia.

https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/chechen-leaders-nephew-new-head-russias-danone-subsidiary-media-2023-07-19/

Russia is a criminal state.

it's not like Russian-owned assets abroad were left in peace you know.

Lots of people weren't aware of this, or stuck their head in the sand when it happened. Between random Russians getting their property stolen and the whole nation getting kicked off SWIFT, it really turned a lot of countries against the US.

It's not like that happened for no reason. Maybe you're unaware that Russia conducted an illegal and illegitimate invasion of their neighbor, an attack and invasion which was almost universally condemned and an overwhelming majority of nations voted in the UN to demand Russia's complete withdrawal. Maybe don't invade for no reason other than your own lies. As for "a lot of countries turned against the US" be honest - that's the 5 or so countries still in Russia's pathetic orbit like Belarus, Syria and Cuba.

I agree, you truly are clownish. I certainly hope you don't actually believe any of the ridiculous talking points you're posting. Certainly nobody else here does.

Oh dear.

That's already been discussed and flogged to death over and over again. If you want to talk about Iraq, go start a new thread. This thread is about Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

If only it were just Iraq... Why do we have a base and support a bunch of separatists in Syria again?

Why does Russia have bases in Syria again?

Straight from wiki:
In 1971, under an agreement with President Hafez al-Assad, the Soviet Union was allowed to open its naval military base in Tartus, giving the Soviet Union a stable presence in the Middle East.[5][6] Thousands of Syrian military officers and educated professionals studied in Russia during al-Assad's presidency (1971–2000).[23]

Note the difference, one was invited in and one is an invader.

Syria fragmented after the Arab Spring in 2011 and several years in, Assad only had claim to the western portion of Syria, whereas Kurds and opposition groups had established control and set up governments in other parts of the country. In 2014, the US and its allies were invited in by the Kurds and other parties to help them fight ISIS.

LOL so you're saying that Donetsk and Lugansk governments (controlled by opposition groups that set up governments) could invite in anyone?

In any case, ISIS is gone but the American base isn't.

Why?

Because Assad wants to slaughter the people who don't bow to him.

Wait you're saying that's not allowed?

I'm confused. If it's OK not to bow to the government, why did the US help suppress the Bahrain uprising where people didn't want to bow to the monarchy government?

Oh yes yes I see. Lesser evil. Can't have these monkeys have a role in ruling themselves.

Yes, I totally recall when the US helped the government of Bahrain slaughter over 140,000 civilians, displace millions and reduce its second-biggest city of a population of 2 million to rubble.

Oh wait, that wasn't Bahrain, that was Syria. And it wasn't the US, it was Russia.

Do you recall the US helping the governments of KSA and UAE starve hundreds of thousands of Yemeni kids? Providing intelligence, supplies and ship patrols so that god forbid, some food doesn't reach the dying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US entered Syria several years after Syria Arab Spring uprisings fractured the country in a civil war, and the reason the US entered was as part of a multinational alliance to fight ISIS and protect people in areas that were well beyond the Assad regime's control.

Russia entered Syria to help their brutal dictator Assad slaughter dissident groups who did not want to be under his rule. Nearly 90% of Syria's civilian deaths were at the hands of Assad, supported by Russia and Iran. The next largest group of civilian casualties were inflicted by ISIS. It's crystal clear who the bad guys have been - Syria, Russia, Iran and ISIS.

ISIS is defeated so why is the US still there?

This has nothing to do with civilians, "brutal rule" or whatever. This is a battle over who gets to lord over which country.

The US is strangely averse to anyone else having "spheres of influence" on the planet. Only America is allowed to have influence.

Aww you jealous?

But yes, it DOES have to do with brutal rule and murder of civilians. I'll pick the lesser evil every time. And over history, hands down that's been the US over Russia and the Soviet Union.

Invasion of Iraq has been a lesser evil?

You're clearly an American who doesn't count dead brown non-Christian people.

Invasions are like abortions - only mine is a moral one.

Dead brown non-Christian people apparently don't matter to brown non-Christian people, because the overwhelming majority of civilian deaths in Iraq were at the hands of terrorists and insurgents. So by your logic, if I don't care about them then I'm clearly not an American but instead, a brown non-Christian person.

Analysis of the Iraq War Logs dataset from Wikileaks reveals that the US was responsible for 5% of civilian deaths in Iraq. Compare that to 80% of civilian deaths being at the hands of Assad and Russia in Syria, followed by ISIS for most of the rest. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1067&context=jpur

THAT is a perfect example of why your "well the US does x so Russia should be allowed, too" logic is a complete failure.

As many as 10,000 non-combatant civilian deaths during 2003 have been reliably reported so far as a result of the US/UK-led invasion and occupation of Iraq . These reports provide figures which range between a minimum of 8,235 and a maximum of 10,079 as of Saturday 7th February 2004.

That's just one year. https://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/beyond/ten-thousand/

Let's also not forget the decimation of Iraqi civilian infrastructure and healthcare, already weakened by years of sanctions. How many civilians have died because they couldn't get to the hospital, because there WAS no hospital or because the hospital had no relief to give them due to sanctions? How many life-saving medications were denied to the Iraqi civilians "because Saddam"?

But yeah. The only moral invasion is my invasion.

Sanctions, sanctions, sanctions. Don't like sanctions? Then don't be an a-hole.

And for that death count, that "ten thousand in the first year alone" was out of 210,000. That's right - the remaining 200,000 civilian casualties were NOT inflicted by the US, and numerous analyses show this, including the paper above. The invasion took from March 20th 2003 to April 15th, 2003. After that, there were no more sanctions and the US spent billions upon billions building hospitals, providing supplies and rebuilding destroyed and failed infrastructure.

And, the US didn't just run around shelling village after village, just because. That's Russia. The US wasn't responsible for most of the civilian casualties. That's Russia. The US didn't go around intentionally attacking hospitals, schools, residential buildings - that's Russia. Again, compare 80-90% of civilian casualties at the hands of Russia in their typical military operations to less than 5% at the hands of the US in their typical military operations. Night and day difference. Undeniable. Stop with the "both sides" and "yabut they did it too" on this because it's utterly ludicrous for you to do so and the data does not back you up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US entered Syria several years after Syria Arab Spring uprisings fractured the country in a civil war, and the reason the US entered was as part of a multinational alliance to fight ISIS and protect people in areas that were well beyond the Assad regime's control.

Russia entered Syria to help their brutal dictator Assad slaughter dissident groups who did not want to be under his rule. Nearly 90% of Syria's civilian deaths were at the hands of Assad, supported by Russia and Iran. The next largest group of civilian casualties were inflicted by ISIS. It's crystal clear who the bad guys have been - Syria, Russia, Iran and ISIS.

ISIS is defeated so why is the US still there?

This has nothing to do with civilians, "brutal rule" or whatever. This is a battle over who gets to lord over which country.

The US is strangely averse to anyone else having "spheres of influence" on the planet. Only America is allowed to have influence.

Aww you jealous?

But yes, it DOES have to do with brutal rule and murder of civilians. I'll pick the lesser evil every time. And over history, hands down that's been the US over Russia and the Soviet Union.

Invasion of Iraq has been a lesser evil?

You're clearly an American who doesn't count dead brown non-Christian people.

Invasions are like abortions - only mine is a moral one.

Dead brown non-Christian people apparently don't matter to brown non-Christian people, because the overwhelming majority of civilian deaths in Iraq were at the hands of terrorists and insurgents. So by your logic, if I don't care about them then I'm clearly not an American but instead, a brown non-Christian person.

Analysis of the Iraq War Logs dataset from Wikileaks reveals that the US was responsible for 5% of civilian deaths in Iraq. Compare that to 80% of civilian deaths being at the hands of Assad and Russia in Syria, followed by ISIS for most of the rest. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1067&context=jpur

THAT is a perfect example of why your "well the US does x so Russia should be allowed, too" logic is a complete failure.

As many as 10,000 non-combatant civilian deaths during 2003 have been reliably reported so far as a result of the US/UK-led invasion and occupation of Iraq . These reports provide figures which range between a minimum of 8,235 and a maximum of 10,079 as of Saturday 7th February 2004.

That's just one year. https://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/beyond/ten-thousand/

Let's also not forget the decimation of Iraqi civilian infrastructure and healthcare, already weakened by years of sanctions. How many civilians have died because they couldn't get to the hospital, because there WAS no hospital or because the hospital had no relief to give them due to sanctions? How many life-saving medications were denied to the Iraqi civilians "because Saddam"?

But yeah. The only moral invasion is my invasion.

Are you actually trying to claim Russia's invasion is somehow moral?