Google maps.
Yeah I think US/Western influence has just brought further disaster there. I saw these pics on google images and while they're off for laying the blame entirely on "democracy" it is pretty telling:
Also Iraq and Afghanistan (though Afghanistan is Russia's doing):
And I think we can credit the Soviets and Taliban for most of the destruction in Afghanistan.I think it's a very fair point for Iraq, but the rest of those examples are pretty ridiculous. Syria is a disaster because of a raging civil war, not because of US actions. The idea that the US caused the catastrophe there is ridiculous.
I think it's a very fair point for Iraq, but the rest of those examples are pretty ridiculous. Syria is a disaster because of a raging civil war, not because of US actions. The idea that the US caused the catastrophe there is ridiculous.
I think it's a very fair point for Iraq, but the rest of those examples are pretty ridiculous. Syria is a disaster because of a raging civil war, not because of US actions. The idea that the US caused the catastrophe there is ridiculous.
Russia is also invading its other neighbors and repeatedly violating NATO airspace in both Turkey and the Baltic states. They are doing this deliberately in order to try and fracture NATO.
But the invasion of Iraq did lead to the subsequent creation of ISIS and gave it the ability to spread out unfettered. So while the West isn't directly responsible for starting the mess in Syria, it does hold some accountability. But yeah the Afghan one as I noted is completely misleading as the vast majority of the destruction was because of the Russians.
Was it?
Robert Gates, who was the Sec of Defense under Jimmy Carter, stated in his Memoirs that the US began assisting the Mujahadeen rebels militarily 6 months before the USSR moved into Afghanistan. The purpose was to draw the USSR into a quagmire and drain them of resources.
The reason they would be drawn in is that, before US interference, Afghanistan was a Moscow-friendly country. The US was trying to undermine its government by supporting a rebel faction, the Mujaheddin.
The USA created the Mujaheddin, not Russia.
source :
Operation Cyclone was the code name for the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) program to arm and finance the Afghan mujahideen prior to and during the Soviet war in Afghanistan, from 1979 to 1989. The program leaned heavily towards supporting militant Islamic groups that were favoured by the regime of Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq in neighbouring Pakistan, rather than other, less ideological Afghan resistance groups that had also been fighting the Marxist-oriented Democratic Republic of Afghanistan regime since before the Soviet intervention.[1] Operation Cyclone was one of the longest and most expensive covert CIA operations ever undertaken;[2] funding began with $20–$30 million per year in 1980 and rose to $630 million per year in 1987.[1] Funding continued after 1989 as the mujahideen battled the forces of Mohammad Najibullah's PDPA during the civil war in Afghanistan (1989–1992).[3]
The amount of blow back we've received from seemingly well intended actions is mind boggling. From our and the Brits involvement with the overthrow of Mossadegh and the subsequent rise of the revolution in 1979 that gave rise to the radical Islamic state on through the Afghanistan war in the 80's on up through the present it's almost as if whatever we do winds up being worse than doing nothing.
Brian
The Taliban movement traces its origin to the Pakistani-trained mujahideen in northern Pakistan, during the Soviet war in Afghanistan. When Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq became President of Pakistan he feared that the Soviets were planning to invade Balochistan, Pakistan so he sent Akhtar Abdur Rahman to Saudi Arabia to garner support for the Afghan resistance against Soviet occupation forces. In the meantime, the United States and Saudi Arabia joined the struggle against the Soviet Union by providing all the funds.[57]
Zia-ul-Haq aligned himself with Pakistan's Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam and later picked General Akhtar Abdur Rahman to lead the insurgency against the Soviet Union inside Afghanistan. About 90,000 Afghans, including Mohammad Omar, were trained by Pakistan's ISI during the 1980s.[57]
How did that work out for the US and Pakistan?
What Russian Surface-to-Air Missiles (SAM) in Syria Mean for U.S. Sorties.
Major Tyson Wetzel, an intelligence weapons officer, explains what the Russian deployment of the S-400 means for U.S. air assets. He calls it the “most dangerous operationally deployed modern long-range SAM” out there. Armed with its longer range missile variant, the missile engagement zone (MEZ) of this system is both impressive and troubling. It now covers most of Syria, all of Cyprus, and much of southern Turkey – to include Incirlik Air Base, where the United States is launching sorties against the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Read the rest to see what U.S. aircraft are best positioned to operate within range of the S-400 and what it means for the anti-ISIL campaign
Yeah I think US/Western influence has just brought further disaster there. I saw these pics on google images and while they're off for laying the blame entirely on "democracy" it is pretty telling:
Also Iraq and Afghanistan (though Afghanistan is Russia's doing):
While the US is not responsible for the Soviet invasion as obviously that was a Soviet decision, the US did work to destabilize Afghanistan through support for the mujahideen. Between Soviet meddling and US meddling, we managed to kill off the moderates, leaving the communists and theocrats to duke it out and provide a pretext for the Soviet invasion.No. Repression from the Soviet aligned government created the mujahideen.
Now I've heard it all, the US being blamed for the soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Haha. Were we responsible for any other acts of Russian aggression we should know about?
I'm not buying your notion that they're going to lose to terrorists.I'm not a neocon by any stretch of the imagination. I also think it's incredibly naive to think that Assad would have the ability to control Syria even if he 'won' at this point. That's puppies and rainbows level wishful thinking.
As for who is doing it 'right', Russia is not actually attempting to win. Look at the incredibly small number of aircraft they have committed and the very limited effectiveness of them. If war is for winning, you should be absolutely enraged by Putin and yet you aren't. Why?
If I'm not mistaken you also defended his aggression in Crimea and Ukraine more broadly as well. What about this guy attracts you?
I wonder how much different the second photo would be if it wasn't taken during a sand storm which is common for the area.
Arming terrorists to topple a government.
When are we going to stop this?
It continues to this very day.
Syria army says Turkey increases arms shipments to rebels