1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

General News Russia and USA-Trumps response to Syrian CW attack and Russia's resonse

Discussion in 'Current Events, World News, & LGBT News' started by jaska, Apr 8, 2017.

  1. jaska

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2014
    Messages:
    519
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    new zealand
    Gender:
    Male (trans*)
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
  2. Argentwing

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2012
    Messages:
    6,682
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Southern FL
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    Some people
    I really don't want a war with Russia. The world is a horrific mess.
     
  3. Aussie792

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    3,317
    Likes Received:
    62
    Location:
    Australia
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Russia's response is fascinating. It both clarifies Russia's support for Assad (instead of the myth of supporting a vaguer concept of Syrian statehood, which was of course exercised only on Assad's terms) but also demonstrates a newly public frustration with Assad for taking Russian support for granted.

    Russia almost certainly does not intend to turn this into a war against the USA - Assad was entirely at fault and the use of chemical weapons humiliates Russia by repudiating the Russian attempt to gain diplomatic legitimacy in 2013 by facilitating the removal of chemical weapons.

    Russia's proposal for an independent investigation is quite telling - it will almost certainly confirm Assad's direct role but will show the Kremlin did not approve of the use of chemical weapons. The Kremlin probably doesn't believe that rebels had the capacity to use significant quantities of sarin gas in the way it was used - its story of an accidental bombing of a rebel sarin cache is weak. Russia's coordinated media campaign, to suggest Assad didn't need to use chemical weapons, seems to come from a place of not understanding why Assad had to make the war even more diplomatically costly for Russia when Assad had the upper hand. The attack revived concerns about Russian complicity in war crimes and entrenched Western beliefs that Assad could never be a stable, legitimate leader.

    I think the attack was justified. The use of chemical weapons is not only illegal in its own right - it contravenes even the sordid standards of the Assad regime's implicit agreement with Russia, Iran and the West to limit its war crimes to the use of conventional forces.

    Sabre rattling is going to happen. It doesn't mean that Russia will seek direct hostilities with the USA.
     
  4. Joelouis

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2013
    Messages:
    707
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Great Britain
    I wonder how things would escalate if either Russia or the U.S. were to shoot down the other country's planes? It happened in Turkey remember? Why Russia didn't retaliate (I'm pleased they didn't) no one really knows.

    I can just see this getting really ugly in the near future.
     
  5. sldanlm

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    1,322
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Eastern U.S.A. commuter
    Gender:
    Female
    Gender Pronoun:
    She
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    Some people
    I was very worried about an aircraft incident myself, but I have it on very good authority that although there are a few technical inaccuracies in the story, the link below is still basically correct for now. The communications benefit them as well as the US.

    U.S. and Russia still talking on Syria, despite Moscow's claims it cut off communications - LA Times\

    As for why Russia didn't retaliate, experts have said the reason is basically Trump didn't do anything substantial, more a show of force. He destroyed some of Syria's aircraft and buildings, but not destroying any Russian aircraft or buildings used to support them and their crews. All of the very few casualties were Syrian, not Russian. The runway is still functional, and this is only one of Syria's air bases anyway.

    The Russian frigate is another symbolic sabre rattling gesture. If the Russians really were going to take action against the US navy, they would've sent more than that particular vessel against two destroyers. Now if Trump does some of the additional things Hillary Clinton and John McCain has said, then perhaps there would be an escalation.
     
  6. PatrickUK

    Advisor Full Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2014
    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    1,655
    Location:
    England
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    If not Assad, then who? I think this is the biggest, unanswered question and the one that really needs to be addressed before there can be any resolution to this long and terrible conflict that has destroyed Syria and further poisoned relations between Russia and the West.

    Russia has strategic interests in Syria and they'll want to protect those interests, but to what degree? I'm not convinced they are so great that Putin will stand solidly behind Assad and his regime, come what may, but he will do so if the removal of Assad creates a power vacuum that threatens Russian interests and the Western backed rebels do represent such a threat to Russia. We know that IS represents a threat to everyone, so there is still scope for cooperation on this point, but there will need to be movement from Russia and the West on the issue of Assad before any further resolution can be found. Is any of that likely to happen after the US missile attack and threats of more sanctions against Russia? I don't think so actually.