BruceVC

That's twentieth century colonial power thinking No. But you can't always force a cultural change at gunpoint. Sure, it would be nice to accelerate the process, but cultural changes sometimes takes generations. And without a cultural change and the embracing of new ideas, outside intervention will most likely have no positive long term effect. I.e. point in case the 3 above examples. Would you say the world is a better place now than it was before the west encouraged (and in some cases outright supported militarily) the destabilizing of the ruling regimes in the countries above? All of those conflicts had one thing in common, it was never about accepting "Western ideas", it was about religious differences, old grudges and tribal/clan affiliations. Okay I see you guys seem to misunderstand what I mean by " regime change " and " western intervention " I need to clarify a few things first, I'm just going to be direct. Please don't take this wrong way and think I'm being condescending or rude. I'm confidant you won't take offense....oh I'll also make some assumptions about your view which you can obviously correct if you want. Its easier to explain my overall point if I make assumptions about what I think you believe So firstly please lets try to not even use the word " colonial " when I talk about Western intervention. I'm not trying to tell you what words to use but the words like " colonialism " , " neo-colonialism" , '' imperialism", " white capital " are used by people as an insult to the West for the historical injustice many people suffered under due to Colonialism. But we aren't talking about anything even remotely like what the Colonists did hundreds of years ago in Africa. So what I often find in my own country is people will use the word "colonialism " when they don't want to transform something in our society that needs to change...they prevent certain changes in our society that are for the good of everyone For example so you see I'm not joking, read this http://www.dawn.com/news/1210357/safrican-tribal-chief-gets-12-years-jail So you may think " yeah this seems fair" and it is except for the fact last night on one of the radio talk shows there was real debate where some people were saying " its not right to charge an African Chief " and one guy was seriously raising a point that basically said " we as Africans shouldn't be judged under Colonial Western law systems ...its un-Affrican " He wants African tribal law to have precedent which means NOTHING would happen to this chief ...so thats there idea of justice Of course our Constitution and normal legal system always wins but you then have this group of people who will phone in and make these irritating comments like " we need to stop following the West" .....they would just prefer these Chiefs, who live on Taxpayers money, to be above the law So those are types of people who still use words like " colonial " Anyway thats PART 1 .,....I need a break before I continue

What exactly did you do? It sounds interesting

«It would be well for your government to consider that having your ships and ours, your aircraft and ours, in such proximity... is inherently DANGEROUS. Wars have begun that way, Mr. Ambassador.» (lol @ "moderate rebels" btw. Yeah, the whole three of them need protecting!) Okay that is true ....what exactly is a " moderate rebel " in the context of the whole ME actually

Strip club do make everything better and I'm sure youre a swell guy. You are just what I classify as a "chicken little" where not a day passes where a bit of sky doesn't fall on your head. Due to certain personality flaws within myself I find this type of person unpleasant to socialize with irl. Its not you, its me. Aside, the above joke was in poor taste and I apologize. I'm not a violent person unless circumstances force me to be. Come now...you can't think I took that seriously? You are absolutely under NO obligation to meet me in RL....and its not rude to say that. I suppose my forum etiquette may seem a little erratic at times...and annoying I wouldn't want to meet someone like that in RL But for me its not a big deal, I would basically meet everyone on these forums for a drink. And then I would formulate an opinion This is a forum...its best to not take anything potentially rude or insulting personally

I know, my intelligence can be intimidating. But Gfted1 not everyone can be clever...you have other skills like your DIY..that's something to be proud of ? Actually 95% of people really like me when they first meet me ( I obviously am aware and control my excessive talking )....but you and I would be at a hardcore strip club for our first meeting, we don't want to overdo the whole " lets sit and prove we need to get to know each other in RL )

I don't know Gorth...your view seems to me like someone who is just prepared to let genocide happen....the world and the West has a moral responsibility to prevent this. But it cannot also have to govern the country once the dictator is removed This is up to the citizens of the country...and all those examples you mentioned are cases where the new rulers and or leaders failed to govern properly. Surly you cannot blame the West for leaving countries to there own political destiny?

That's a good read and raises several valid concerns but the main ones should be mitigated, for me these are Russia and USA accidentally shooting each others planes down but they are communicating so this seems unlikely The Syrian rebels aligned with the West getting attacked....I cant see how this is going to work out if the Russians stay committed? Surly they would at sometime attack this group? But they are in the North and ISIS is in the West so this also should be negligible

Yeah an influential, respected, reasonable and charismatic Arab leader to unit the region ....but thats wish fill thinking if you consider just the historical resentment between Sunni and Shia But what really gets to me is the lack of empathy and concern that the likes of Saudi Arabia and the UAE have for the sufferings of the Syrians. These countries are the most stable and wealthiest in the region yet they haven't taken in 1 Syrian ....not one Now I understand the Shia\Sunni conflict but they are all Arabs....they all belong to the Arab League and you would think under the circumstances they would help the refugees. But no ....so much for this concept of " Arab unity " And some of you guys think they would be able to subvert and control the West

No, the West needs to abide by the rules of the United Nations Security Council and respect the veto But these aren't the West rules, these are the UN and therefore global rules Yeah, but not everyone on the world follows them - back to the topic - so want is your problem, 'west' can't intervene even if want. So what is your solution? Yes sometimes countries do ignore the UN .....but it always ends badly. People tend to dismiss the UN and say its " useless and a puppet of the West" but when it comes to long term economic support and effective sanctions the UN does work, yes the Veto can be argued is actually a hindrance to action,like Syria, but I accept that we need China and Russia on the Security Council as it adds balance Even the USA learnt this lesson that you cannot dismiss the UN....2005 and the reality started dawning on all of us that Iraq was a complete mistake....a real disaster and correctly so countries like France and Germany refused to help due to being dismissed by the Neo-cons like Rumsfeld Now back to your question. Lets be clear the West could intervene in Syria, and the UN would support this, if it wanted to...but it mustn't. I am of the opinion that you just leave Syria to the ME and countries like Russia Now you may think " but the war is a stalemate and its just dragging on " but I believe the ME needs to learn to resolve its own issues Also you must realize the West does believe in things like human rights and Assad has demonstrated he is one of the worst and most brutal leaders we have seen so its highly unlikely they will help him in anyway . Its quite amazing how this just doesn't bother the Russians ....they seem to have no problem with the mass murder he ordered of his own people. And he used chemical weapons So in summary the West will continue to use airstrikes and train people like the Kurds but it won't do more than that so others will need to sort it out

No, the West needs to abide by the rules of the United Nations Security Council and respect the veto But these aren't the West rules, these are the UN and therefore global rules

I am not well informed about Lybia but as far as I know there were no ground troops either. And think you are overlooking is that OSN dont have mandate to send troops here as it Russia veto it as there is no formal invitation from legit goverment. So you are saying that 'west' should break its own rules and laws? Yes let me explain further, any type of regime change like this would require ground troops. Libya was exactly like that, the West used airstrikes to destroy Gaddafi's artillery and military hardware. But the hard city to city fighting was done by the Libyan rebels. Syria in the beginning was the same, the Syrian rebels wanted the West to destroy Assads military hardware but they were prepared to do the hand to hand fighting which would have been much more brutal than Libya And yes you correct the Russians and Chinese vetoed the West intervening in the beginning of the Syrian conflict and I'm glad that they are respecting the UN Security council....so they must not rules of the UN Still evading my question do you I thought I did answer it, my bad. What question are you referring to?

I am not well informed about Lybia but as far as I know there were no ground troops either. And think you are overlooking is that OSN dont have mandate to send troops here as it Russia veto it as there is no formal invitation from legit goverment. So you are saying that 'west' should break its own rules and laws? Yes let me explain further, any type of regime change like this would require ground troops. Libya was exactly like that, the West used airstrikes to destroy Gaddafi's artillery and military hardware. But the hard city to city fighting was done by the Libyan rebels. Syria in the beginning was the same, the Syrian rebels wanted the West to destroy Assads military hardware but they were prepared to do the hand to hand fighting which would have been much more brutal than Libya And yes you correct the Russians and Chinese vetoed the West intervening in the beginning of the Syrian conflict and I'm glad that they are respecting the UN Security council....so they must not rules of the UN

Well I know one thing, we can't send in you Czechs to handle the negotiations with the Syrians .....you guys aren't that good at dealing with Muslims it seems? I was watching how some Syrians who came to Czech were marked with some stamp...like prisoners in a concentration camp ... Oh well ...you can't be good at everything Ah, you didn't comment anything I said at all. But oh well, what to expect from you right? And yeah they get numbers on hands (same we do to new born baby so its not switched to someone else baby in hospital) because they didn't got any documentation. Do you have better idea how to identify someone? . Anyway we in Czech are laughting on EU currently. For example there is free border crossing inside EU and we are supposed to get some refugees via quotas, but how on Earth we are supposed to keep them here when Motherland Merkland is right next to us? I don't even bring up how much less our social system is giving Sorry I had commented earlier, the West could have solved the Syrian problem in the beginning. They would have removed Assad like Gaddafi and then left the country in the hands of the Free Syrian Army....would that have been maintained peacefully? Who knows ....look at Libya now but I assume Libya would have been helped by The West and the Sunni countries. But end of the day I don't know ...but surly its better than the current disaster Don't worry about getting refugees...you guys have done a good job at putting them off wanting to immigrate to Czech. But my view is the Syrians shouldn't be coming to the EU at all in these numbers and even then the EU shouldn't be forcing countries like Hungary and Czech to accept refugees. There are too many cultural differences and thats understandable

And we like to talk about restaurants and cheese, thats important

Lets be honest do we really care about the ME? I'm not being hateful but they don't care about me and thats fine. Of course I would rather there was peace and the average citizen had a good life but end of the day until the governments in the region start adopting the proper principles of what a Democracy stands for and what real human rights means they are just going to be going through turmoil Yeah and you right, Assad can stay in power. He is a mass murderer of his own people and doesn't deserve to rule a country but this is the ME, I'm done getting upset with people who are intransigent. I'm happy with the fact the Iran negotiations went well and as long as the Gulf states are peaceful then thats probably the best I can hope for under the current circumstances Well I know one thing, we can't send in you Czechs to handle the negotiations with the Syrians .....you guys aren't that good at dealing with Muslims it seems? I was watching how some Syrians who came to Czech were marked with some stamp...like prisoners in a concentration camp ... Oh well ...you can't be good at everything

Okay so Malc has raised a valid question " why only airstrikes ïf they aren't enough to defeat ISIS " So I think the USA did feel some responsibility for the the disastrous state that Iraq deteriorated to 3 years after the last US troops left...and I think the idea of a genocide that they were indirectly responsible for would have been something that they wouldn't want to be associated with But there were several informed opinions that said airstrikes weren't enough and this was something Obama would have been aware of , the USA is relying on coalition partners like the Kurds to do the ground fighting but this is clearly not working But I'm sorry I don't see why the West should commit ground troops so what Zora said is also relevant. Its the " best " strategy under the circumstances.

It's bad because the west has consistently made a mess of things, has had a year to degrade ISIS with little progress shown and apart from having made a mess of things looks likely to make a further mess of things with no consistent strategy from the past, present or future. Russian intervention can scarcely be worse than that. Plus, if you happen to loathe retrograde extremists you can pretty much guarantee that Russia will go after the lot, not just selective ones based on not offending certain 'allies'. No Zora your view about the West in Syria is wrong...again They know to defeat ISIS ground troops are needed....but why should Western soldiers have to die for a ME conflict ? So its more a case of " its not worth the sacrifice and commitment of resources " And the airstrikes helped prevent the massacre of tens of thousands of Yazidis....it seems you conveniently forget that but I understand its hard to give credit to the West

TN in real life people sometimes ask me " if I ever stop talking " ....cause I talk a lot in RL

Nah this board is much better ...now we all respect SJ issues and everyone is very PC You'll notice there isn't even a " Hot Women Thread " as we don't like to objectify women unless it can't be helped

Yeah the whole Russian involvement does seem a little late and ultimately lackluster Think about the best result, somehow the Russians manage to beat the Free Syrian Army and ISIS and the Al-Qaeda groups in Syria and Assad stays in power ....in power of what? He will be alienated by the West and most of the ME....his country will stay broken and completely economic dependent on Iran and other allies ....a Russian victory would be a Pyrrhic Victory. If the West was involved then it would work but I doubt they would help Russia to help Assad...and I can't blame them Drowsy doesnt generally want to acknowledge much Serbian responsibility for any atrocities or blame for there involvement in Bosnia or Kosovo. Its the most bizarre thing as I accept my families role in Apartheid and I condemn the system ....but it doesn't define me Its strange how most Serbs I speak to dont want to accept there role in the wars....its not a big deal as it should be seen as a way to actually liberate people.

The Russian are welcome to the ME, they will quickly realize what a difficult place it is to be involved in Personally I don't think they have the real commitment to make a meaningful difference but lets see how things progress

See, that's what I thought for a long time, too, but the truth is...no, it's really just not. There's definitely still *a* point in still replying, for sure, but is it a convincing point - a point that is enough that you should actually still do it? I just don't think so. If such...unsavory individuals want to demagogue and weasel their way into feeling like they win all their arguments (or at least don't lose them), I say let 'em: most people will pick up on such ridiculous antics after some time of being around them, anyways, and adjust accordingly. If other people without such terrible behavior - even completely unknown people - want to raise the same points, then I'll engage with them...but I personally have had my full share's worth of people who haven't had seemingly even one good faith discussion throughout their entire existence. So...that's that. Barti its not nice to talk about people like that...I'm sure 2133 wants to engage in meaningful discussions even if we don't agree with him

I'm glad the Russians are getting more involved in global events apart from Putins irrational desire to create a geographical barrier between Russia and NATO\Western countries...like the Ukraine debacle They have correctly realized that they have to become more committed and interested in crisis points around the world that they could influence ....this way they are seen to be " just trying to help the Syrians " and " nice and friendly " ...they will need to convince certain countries of there new amicable personality in order to get sanction relief ..which they really need But I don't care what there motives are, its good they want to " help " ....Syria is such a calamitous mess and all they doing is committing airstrikes ....this has been proven to not be that effective at destroying groups like ISIS, it does slow them down and can hamper there operating capacity, as you need ground troops....so unless they send Russian troops I dont see what difference it will make ? "

Yeah both of those work for me, I probably prefer the cabin but the RV is very convenient ...you can basically camp anywhere you can park I imagine

Okay, I really have to ask. Have you actually read any of the links you posted? I don't need to refute your sources, because your sources don't back your points! Let's see, factual errors first, politics later. Nearly four in every five (79 %) asylum seekers in the EU-28 in 2014 were aged less than 35 (see Table 3); those aged 18–34 accounted for slightly more than half (54 %) of the total number of applicants, while minors aged less than 18 accounted for one quarter (26 %). — Yep, clearly 3/4 of them are men in their best fighting age. (men aged 18-34 actually amount to ~41%) Out of the 185k first-time asylum seekers in Q1 2015, 26% were Kosovars, 16% Syrians, Afghans amounting to 7%. Those of Maghrebi (North African) origin are a negligible fraction at best — Yep, clearly about half of them are North African or Arab. In 2014, close to half (45 %) of EU-28 first instance asylum decisions resulted in positive outcomes, that is grants of refugee or subsidiary protection status, or an authorisation to stay for humanitarian reasons [...] This share was considerably lower (18 %) for final decisions (based on appeal or review) / At the end of March 2015, around 530,000 persons were the subject of an application for asylum protection in the EU still under consideration by the responsible national authority — Yep, clearly everyone (well mostly everyone) is welcomed in Europe. In most regions, fewer favor other specific aspects of sharia, such as cutting off the hands of thieves and executing people who convert from Islam to another faith. [...] While many say there is only one true interpretation, substantial percentages in most countries either say there are multiple interpretations or say they do not know. [...] By contrast, only a minority of Muslims across Central Asia as well as Southern and Eastern Europe want sharia to be the official law of the land. [...] Among Muslims who support making sharia the law of the land, most do not believe that it should be applied to non-Muslims. [...] In Central Asia as well as Southern and Eastern Europe, relatively few Muslims who back sharia support severe criminal punishments. [...] Muslims in Central Asia as well as Southern and Eastern Europe are generally less likely to support stoning adulterers. [...] Elsewhere in the two regions, fewer than four-in-ten favor this type of punishment, including roughly a quarter or fewer across the countries surveyed in Southern and Eastern Europe. [...] In Central Asia as well as Southern and Eastern Europe, only in Tajikistan (22%) do more than a fifth of Muslims who want sharia as the official law of the land also condone the execution of apostates. — Yep, clearly executing apostates and non-Muslims and conducting female genital amputation is morally paramount. And you ask me why I'm so hostile? Well, you should well know: "The amount of energy necessary to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it." Seriously, if you try to flood me with a bunch of irrelevant or misleading links again, I'm just going to reply by posting a ton of cat memes. I do have a lot of free time — that doesn't mean you get to waste it. Now: Yes. Or we could also look at the rape of Polish and Soviet women by Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS members, the rape of German women by RKKA members, the Rape of Nanking, the rape rate in Detroit in '85 and so on and so forth, to see why "the increase in sex crimes in Germany is being fueled by the preponderance of Muslim males among the mix of refugees/migrants entering the country" is total bull****. It's not about Muslims as much as it is about a bunch of other factors such as a complete breakdown of the rule of law, absence of repercussions, dismal living conditions and hopelessness. A bit of сum hoc ergo propter hoc never hurt anyone, right? Now, for some quick fun, let's try a little thought experiment. Let's take Marseille, which ZeroHedge claims has the highest Muslim ratio of any city in Europe, and go with a worst-case scenario: 35% are already Muslims. Now we dump the whole of France's refugee quota (30k) in there. The Muslim percentage goes up from 35% to a whopping... 38%!!! OMFG!!! Clearly, this scheme is going to "radically change the entire demographics in Europe". If you want me to find links to prove that refugees fleeing from IS and Boko Haram who are granted asylum in Europe will not be raped en masse and murdered by IS and Boko Haram, well, yes, I don't have any. I also don't have any links proving that water is wet and rope is useful for pulling but not for pushing, so please don't ask. I still believe however that we have an immediate moral mandate to at least give people whose countries we're complicit of turning into hellholes a chance to request asylum. I haven't argued for accepting everyone no matter what, because nobody is proposing that. I'm just calling bull**** on your doomsaying. Europe and "the West" at large is much more likely to fall due to to dumbass westerners more worried about their level 100 Pikachu than the fact that their government murders abroad in their name, and who are incapable of thinking for themselves, of even understanding what the freedoms earned by their forebears entail (let alone standing up for them), than to hordes of Muslim refugee-rapists. No, I don't have evidence that absorption of unskilled and uneducated foreigners is positive from a socioeconomic standpoint, and to be honest, I don't believe it is. However, I'm of the opinion that moral imperatives must overrule macroeconomic arguments. And by the way: being an able-bodied male does not mean you are generally obligated to fight in any war. Especially not in those you haven't had a hand in causing. Removing potential manpower reserves from war-torn areas is a good thing, I should think. I think a much greater risk to the future of the EU is where countries like Spain don't see the value of austerity and blame the Germans for the fact that they haven't managed there economies properly...and then anti-austerity parties come to power who now expect bailouts and financial restructuring of there economies without making the necessary changes that are expected of them So yes I am not worried that Muslim refugees are going to in anyway undermine the EU or somehow weaken it. I am much more concerned with countries undergoing austerity not seeing the long term value of that austerity