The risks of letting Putin posture as Charlemagne in Syria
PLUS: The Vatican braces for new blockbusters on money scandals
By John L. Allen Jr.
Associate editor | November 1, 2015
It’s a well-known Achilles heel of Western foreign policy to undervalue the strategic importance of religion, and perhaps nowhere is that more clear at the moment than in assessments of Russia’s intervention in Syria and Iraq.
Beginning in late September, Russia unleashed a massive bombing campaign against ISIS and Al Qaeda targets. Some pundits believe its perceived success could translate into a boost for Russian influence in the region.
In part, that may explain why the Obama administration announced Friday that a small contingent of American special operations troops, fewer than 50, will move into northern Syria to assist moderate opposition groups in fighting ISIS.
Of course, Americans have been down this road before.
http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2015/11/01/the-risks-of-letting-putin-posture-as-charlemagne-in-syria/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
beemer27
(460 posts)This is nothing more than a pit of quicksand for us to blunder into. Why are we doing ANYTHING in that country? They do nothing for us, nor do they represent a threat against us. This time it would be to our advantage to let the people in that region work it out themselves. As for Putin getting involved, let him. We all saw how well the Russians did in Afghanistan. Let them do a repeat performance in Syria. The Russians will gain no more than we have from meddling in that part of the world. We have spent over a trillion dollars and 5000 American lives there, and have nothing to show for it. We could tell the whole world that if any of those governments chose to mess with Israel, they will find themselves under two feet of radioactive glass. And MEAN it. Then we should recall all of our troops, announce to American industry that we will NOT protect their financial interests in the region, and declare Peace with Honor. Let Putin deal with the problems there. We don't need their problems, we don't need their oil, and we don't need to be there.
rug
(82,333 posts)Check this out from BBC today.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34619068
beemer27
(460 posts)It seems to me as if the only people who can see the truth in these matters are the little guys on the bottom who end up paying the price for decisions made by the powerful people on the top. The big dogs do not have to go out and die for their bad decisions. It is the small guy on the bottom who dies, and sees his son or brother come home in a casket, who pays taxes for the rest of his life to pay for the wars, and has little or no say in these matters. Election time is coming up for us, and I see few candidates who have a chance of winning who are sensible about this subject. Most of them take a very military pro-war stance to pander to the fringe groups. I am afraid that I will never figure the system out.
rug
(82,333 posts)Whether that is in the thousands or in the millions is weighed against the economic and political gain. Either way, people and their families are considered expendable.
The sad truth in politics is that casualties are also calculated into the equation.
Whether that is in the thousands or in the millions is weighed against the economic and political gain. You can see it in the compromises built into food stamps, health care, trade treaties and everything else across the board.
Which people and which families are considered expendable is the art of politics.
It sucks.
My expectations from electoral politics are quite limited. In the end, it is up to us, individually and collectively, to determine how far we go along and how much is intolerable.
