BruceVC

Yes. And he's just done it again. That kind of attitude common amongst Russian 'liberals' is one reason why Putin is popular. They have no loyalty to their own. The type of people that would put their own soldiers in prison while praising islamist head cutters as freedom fighters because "it's our own fault". No he isn't that bad, he cares about Russia ......just not Putins rashness

Aren't you glad I convinced you to not just drop the West and rather just have smaller trade ties with China...in other words BRICS is not the solution..my country was fooled into aligning with them

Why not just nuke them? Just kill them all, men, women, children. Why bother. Just drop nukes on everyone and then we can finally have peace. Now I am not sure if this is sarcasting or does it have some backing among more nationalistic movements in Russia :D If it does, i'm certainly not sharing that view. It's beyond stupid to ask for more violence when the whole affair is ridiculous in the first place. Russia should've never went into Syria, and it was really just a matter of time before something like that happened considering what kind of person Putin is. The only positive solution here is complete withdrawal. but of course that's not going to happen and so there will be more blood. I agree with part of what my Russian friend says, Putin let this go too far... but I think Putin getting involved is a good thing so now he understands what the West has been doing for the last 14 years

It's more than "unnecessary", it's murder. They were waiting in an ambush with cameras at the ready like rats. This is the view in Russia. Okay I'm not sure if that is true ....what do you mean cameras? Are you being serious I would guess that he means that there are videos about shooting that plane that surfaced quite soon after the incident. You know Elerond I don't care what ANY of the guys in the EU say about you....you are clever

It's more than "unnecessary", it's murder. They were waiting in an ambush with cameras at the ready like rats. This is the view in Russia. Okay I'm not sure if that is true ....what do you mean cameras? Are you being serious

The next time a turkish jet or helicopter wanders for example into Armenia as they do sometimes we will remind Erdogan of his own chosen method of "defending borders". That or Kurds will find some new weapons. Either way retribution will come in kind. Yeah, we hear you. Turkeys actions seem unnecessary How is the general view in Russia?

Nice Ros But you not married, you not worried about living in sin....eternal fire and all that ?

Oh I meant to say the West should just stay out of the ME....I'm sorry its not worth the blood, the effort, the sacrifice ....for what? The local people don't appreciate it, they still blame the West for everything And now that the USA produces its own oil there is less imperative to actually ensure stability

Yep. Given all this trouble that's resulted from this adventure, can't say their lives were worth anything near it. I hear you, we actually still don't know if the West could trust them It feels weird thinking that the West should have done nothing because as I keep mentioning the West tries very hard to prevent genocides But lets look at how messed the whole region is ....and we wouldn't have known once Assad was removed if the rebels were really trust worthy I really never thought I would say this but non-intervention in this case seems it would be right decision But then it may have been harder to get Iran to agree to the negotiations?

Clowns? You mean the initial Syrian rebels who wanted the West to help?

Like everybody was on the same page in Iraq, Yugoslavia etc.? Careful your hypocrisy counter is going over 9000 Russia didn't intervene in Iraq as far as I remember, as for Yugoslavia at one point Nato and Russian forces were close to shooting at oneanother, definately not a good idea to pretend to inteverne together while backing different factions. Russia doesn't have the military muscle to be pressing its case in Syria, not any more really, she's doing it out of pride, some sense of lost empire, you know like Britain in the Falklands. But they were against those interventions, in the mechanisms (UN) instituted with the idea that conflicts should be resolved on the basis of consensus instead of unilateral action. When NATO was doing as it pleased the world over, that's all well and good but when Russia is protecting its interests it needs to be "taken down a notch", even though its targeting an entity that is now more or less the enemy of the entire world and is attacked by country that is supporting said entity - a country that is also a member of the NATO alliance and is undermining the supposed goals of the alliance in the matter. Long story short - Turkish support for ISIS is okay, Russians protecting their interests isn't? So by your logic, what entitles Russa to intervene in Syria. Shouldn't they be going through propper channels and attempt to woo over the UN. The UN was never able to account for the cold war dynamic so a 'consensus' for anthing, not just Iraq and Yugoslavia meant everyone except Russia and China, they were going to vote 'no' nomatter what. Is that hypocritical, sure, I'll go allong with that. Not a lot of the UN's lofty ideals of peace and cooperation survived contact with reality. Russia was invited to intervene by the legitimate, elected government of Syria. That is the major difference between the Russian and US interventions in Iraq, Yugo etc. If the international framework can be ignored at will then there is nothing wrong with Russia intervening anywhere it pleases. OMG....you actually think Assad was the legitimate leader of Syria, he never had a democratic election but he somehow is legitimate? Its not a matter of what I think, the Syrian government had years of relations with more or less the entire world. It was de facto and de iure accepted as a legitimate representative of the Syrian people. Up until the point that the west decided to remove Assad. And even then post the 2014. presidential election the number of countries reaffirming their stance that Assad is legitimate (by way of congratulating him on his victory, which is one of the ways a government can be accepted under international law) far outnumbers the few western countries that called the elections a farce. Incidentally, your own government is among those that congratulated Assad on his victory. How does anyone let you discuss politics on air when you know so little of international relations? Yes well my government is facing so many challenges this must be the worst state our economy is in So please don't read anything into what my government says ....as far as making the right foreign policy decisions they fail almost all the time Now why you getting personal? I can easily do that with you as your idea of a prudent strategic partner is .....Russia But I don't, I just make the post about where I disagree with you

You need to be more accepting of their values. KP.... I really shouldn't find that funny but I did

We shouldn't even trade. It's because of business interests that we have gotten so involved in the situation in the first place. And trade interferes with the area, propping up rulers and supplying them. Hard not to trade given the oil in that region. And that's why we are all fighting over that place. On the point that some people are making that the Middle-East has never known democracy and that it is alien to them: Iran used to be a secular democracy, that was very progressive and was quite enlightened. Then they made a heinous mistake, they tried to nationalise their oil. Us (my British government I'm sad to say) went "Nu uh!" and sponsored a coup to replace this government with the current nutjob one, the one we now all hate. The Iranians naturally now hate us for that, as one of their wistful thoughts is "What could have been..." All because "The Oil Must Flow!" Sure you right. But I have to be honest I don't think one country that was a Democracy 30 years is much to recognize or celebrate

What about purple hair...u guys still together ? Anyway I have had some really good news about South Africa, we have finally got our electricity parastatel profitable. This may seem like a non-issue but we have issues with all the government run parastatels ....almost all of them run at a loss Anyway this proves that black South Africans can run these complex entities

Like everybody was on the same page in Iraq, Yugoslavia etc.? Careful your hypocrisy counter is going over 9000 Russia didn't intervene in Iraq as far as I remember, as for Yugoslavia at one point Nato and Russian forces were close to shooting at oneanother, definately not a good idea to pretend to inteverne together while backing different factions. Russia doesn't have the military muscle to be pressing its case in Syria, not any more really, she's doing it out of pride, some sense of lost empire, you know like Britain in the Falklands. But they were against those interventions, in the mechanisms (UN) instituted with the idea that conflicts should be resolved on the basis of consensus instead of unilateral action. When NATO was doing as it pleased the world over, that's all well and good but when Russia is protecting its interests it needs to be "taken down a notch", even though its targeting an entity that is now more or less the enemy of the entire world and is attacked by country that is supporting said entity - a country that is also a member of the NATO alliance and is undermining the supposed goals of the alliance in the matter. Long story short - Turkish support for ISIS is okay, Russians protecting their interests isn't? So by your logic, what entitles Russa to intervene in Syria. Shouldn't they be going through propper channels and attempt to woo over the UN. The UN was never able to account for the cold war dynamic so a 'consensus' for anthing, not just Iraq and Yugoslavia meant everyone except Russia and China, they were going to vote 'no' nomatter what. Is that hypocritical, sure, I'll go allong with that. Not a lot of the UN's lofty ideals of peace and cooperation survived contact with reality. Russia was invited to intervene by the legitimate, elected government of Syria. That is the major difference between the Russian and US interventions in Iraq, Yugo etc. If the international framework can be ignored at will then there is nothing wrong with Russia intervening anywhere it pleases. OMG....you actually think Assad was the legitimate leader of Syria, he never had a democratic election but he somehow is legitimate?

I think that it is the first time i can agree on something. I've been pointing it out since forever. The concept of democracy is alien to that area. Western civilization was raised on the greeko-latin culture... middle east, aside of the short rule of Alexander and later Seleucids was never under its influence. Thats the main reason we should just let them do whatever they want and only trade with whoever is ruling without meddling in their affairs. Guys I don't have the energy to go into detail because I'm focusing on my Apartheid comments But yes you right, most of the ME doesn't understand or really even wants Democracy...and yes sometimes in life you cannot force people to want to uplift themselves so we must leave them alone

Hold on....are you seriously telling me there are no cases of rape or murder where you live? Obviously there are, but not in significant numbers. I cant check the data now as i am using phone for forum tracking and not using my work related computer to do anything not related to my job. IIRC it is something like 1 per 40k populace a year in case of rapes. Please find out ...I'm interested I have to be honest its been quite a shock to realize how bad South Africa is ...I will raise this tonight on that radio station and get others opinions

Look this may seem severe but its not ...no one said there wouldn't be any issues We have about 1300 cases of rape in South Africa per day...yes per day So I'm sure this tragedy will be appropriately dealt with in Finland But yes I'm sorry for what happened ...sometimes I forget most people aren't desensitized to crime like us But I have to ask...is a single case of rape such a big deal? Between 2005-2010, there were 505 cases of rape in Finland, where 70% were done by natives, 23% foreign born and 7% by people not living in Finland at all. Since then, it has been raising. For men born up until the 80's in Finland, a man hitting a woman usually got a beating himself. It was veeery thrown upon. A rape was something that only borderline mentally ill people did. This kind of surprise rape that we have seen the last 20 years is a new phenomenon in finnish society. Okay Meshugger I need to say something very important to you and all other EU members I feel very guilty for some reason...like I haven't been honest but I didn't realize you have almost no crime where you live We have to realistic about something, we are talking about people who have come from a brutal war and have probably lost all material possessions. They have also given up all hope of going home...so think about that, imagine having no country. Then they walk for days through strange and protective EU lands where they realize ...they not really wanted And then they arrive in Finland....which must seem very strange to them. I am not justifying crime or saying " you must now accept rape " . All I'm saying is there will be instances of crime but the majority of Muslims will be ordinary people Anyway once again I thought you were talking about only Islamic extremist attacks when we spoke about what may be an issue...I am sure I didn't realize you meant crime as well

Hold on....are you seriously telling me there are no cases of rape or murder where you live?

Look this may seem severe but its not ...no one said there wouldn't be any issues We have about 1300 cases of rape in South Africa per day...yes per day So I'm sure this tragedy will be appropriately dealt with in Finland But yes I'm sorry for what happened ...sometimes I forget most people aren't desensitized to crime like us But I have to ask...is a single case of rape such a big deal?

Well that will be a massacre to think any group of Muslim countries has the military might to stop the USA or Russia But don't worry, the West doesn't like massacring Muslims anymore ..but I cant speak for Russia This is war of deception...nobody know who they are shooting...but in the end the west who gain, when Assad toppled, mission accomplished. So, the west used to like massacring Muslims..... The Arab spring is what made Syria unstable, we can't really claim to have done that ourselves. Political instability and a desire for progress and a need to demolish existing conservative institutions and power structures. It is what happens when a system of government is nolonger compatible with the people it governs. Experience shows that in those cases it is perhaps unavoidable to go through a period of civil unrest/civil war. Yes Qistina, Gorgon is right about this I'm sorry I just don't have the energy to correct your view of the West ....I just need a little break

Like everybody was on the same page in Iraq, Yugoslavia etc.? Careful your hypocrisy counter is going over 9000 Russia didn't intervene in Iraq as far as I remember, as for Yugoslavia at one point Nato and Russian forces were close to shooting at oneanother, definately not a good idea to pretend to inteverne together while backing different factions. Russia doesn't have the military muscle to be pressing its case in Syria, not any more really, she's doing it out of pride, some sense of lost empire, you know like Britain in the Falklands. But they were against those interventions, in the mechanisms (UN) instituted with the idea that conflicts should be resolved on the basis of consensus instead of unilateral action. When NATO was doing as it pleased the world over, that's all well and good but when Russia is protecting its interests it needs to be "taken down a notch", even though its targeting an entity that is now more or less the enemy of the entire world and is attacked by country that is supporting said entity - a country that is also a member of the NATO alliance and is undermining the supposed goals of the alliance in the matter. Long story short - Turkish support for ISIS is okay, Russians protecting their interests isn't? So by your logic, what entitles Russa to intervene in Syria. Shouldn't they be going through propper channels and attempt to woo over the UN. The UN was never able to account for the cold war dynamic so a 'consensus' for anthing, not just Iraq and Yugoslavia meant everyone except Russia and China, they were going to vote 'no' nomatter what. Is that hypocritical, sure, I'll go allong with that. Not a lot of the UN's lofty ideals of peace and cooperation survived contact with reality. Yes I agree....but you see the real problem here is Drowsy refuses to accept proper Serbian responsibility in Bosnia and Kosovo. Now some people may think I'm being rude to Drowsy but I'm not, I'm actually trying to liberate him. As a white South African I have accepted my parents role in Apartheid and my own white privilege. It doesn't make you weak it actually gives you clarity on how you should help with the racial transformation in South Africa So I am happily part of the solution but at times its tough and depressing..I won't lie and its difficult to explain. I get confronted by black South Africans who have had everything taken from them by Apartheid...no job, no family ...no future. Yet they not bitter or angry with you, they just want to be acknowledged So you feel shame ...how can you not. But of course most of the time we discuss politics and issues of racism for example. And everyday I am reminded how forgiving and reasonable black South Africans can be....they should hate me but for most its just a form of resentment So I understand how important accepting responsibility is ....I have an issue with people who for some reason just refuse to?

Well that will be a massacre to think any group of Muslim countries has the military might to stop the USA or Russia But don't worry, the West doesn't like massacring Muslims anymore ..but I cant speak for Russia

Like everybody was on the same page in Iraq, Yugoslavia etc.? Careful your hypocrisy counter is going over 9000 Russia didn't intervene in Iraq as far as I remember, as for Yugoslavia at one point Nato and Russian forces were close to shooting at oneanother, definately not a good idea to pretend to inteverne together while backing different factions. Russia doesn't have the military muscle to be pressing its case in Syria, not any more really, she's doing it out of pride, some sense of lost empire, you know like Britain in the Falklands. But they were against those interventions, in the mechanisms (UN) instituted with the idea that conflicts should be resolved on the basis of consensus instead of unilateral action. When NATO was doing as it pleased the world over, that's all well and good but when Russia is protecting its interests it needs to be "taken down a notch", even though its targeting an entity that is now more or less the enemy of the entire world and is attacked by country that is supporting said entity - a country that is also a member of the NATO alliance and is undermining the supposed goals of the alliance in the matter. Long story short - Turkish support for ISIS is okay, Russians protecting their interests isn't? What interests are you insisting Russia needs to protect...oh thats right., Assad the brutal dictator who refused to make any political concessions to his own citizens, I guess Syrians don't understand how great a dictatorship is, and then decided to use the full might of his army to annihilate his people ....and then he used chemical weapons. But none of this bothers you....because of NATO intervention 20 years ago in Bosnia and Kosovo, seriously drowsy its time to move on And finally you still think Russia a better choice to support than the countries that have been fighting ISIS for years. And yes we like Turkey as they have been helping with Syrian refugees and military support ..

Like everybody was on the same page in Iraq, Yugoslavia etc.? Careful your hypocrisy counter is going over 9000 Russia didn't intervene in Iraq as far as I remember, as for Yugoslavia at one point Nato and Russian forces were close to shooting at oneanother, definately not a good idea to pretend to inteverne together while backing different factions. Russia doesn't have the military muscle to be pressing its case in Syria, not any more really, she's doing it out of pride, some sense of lost empire, you know like Britain in the Falklands. Gorgon does raise a good point, it was Russia and China who vetoed military action in the beginning. Do you guys who are anti-USA and supported this veto realize that this war would have been over 5 years ago if the USA had been allowed to intervene I am always amazed how low the standards are when people make comments like " no the West had no right to attack Assad " ...and then of course the West doesn't get involved as Obama respected the UNSC So......Syria is now the most convoluted mess in the region...you guys must be happy. Very good solution Drowsy