Trevor wrote:I'll believe it when I see it. I've been hearing for years that a strike on Syria is imminent, that we'll be starting a major war, that we'll be blowing up Assad's air force, try to force him out, end up causing more chaos (guess the half a million dead doesn't count) etc. If we haven't done it by now, I doubt we're going to. It's little more than empty words at this point.
If the World War alignment really is what Generational Dynamics predicts, if we do anything, we'll end up supporting Assad. It's essentially what we've been doing for the past couple years anyway, even if unofficially.
(This is composed AFTER the US attack on the one Syrian airbase.)
The Russians will "kick in" with the US to "save Syria for the Syrians" FROM Assad.
Their goal is not to keep Assad,.. it's to acquire air/naval military bases. They now have an excuse to "protect" Syria by occupying bases there, as well as to grab inland bits of land (for bases) in their "extermination" of ISIS.
The "long implied" threat from the US, directed at Russia, is that if you can attack the Ukraine and only receive "US/EU economic sanctions" we (the US) will be willing to take "Russian economic sanctions" (whatever the HELL that means) if we choose to "move on" some target that will "advantage" us at some point.
US sanctions minus (-) Russian sanctions equals (=) end of Syria-under-Assad plus (+) Russian Military Bases plus (+) Russia/US quasi-alliance-against-ISIS(et al) plus (+) Scared Iranians willing to "make a deal" plus (+) Nervous NKorean Generals in the mood to not-die following the orders of an insane snowflake named Un.
..plus (+) China not wanting to lose the "advantage" (in the [game of] Go sense) by losing NKorea plus (+) China's bluff potentially being called in the South China Sea because they're not ready to deal with the US asserting international sea rights.
[quote="Trevor"]I'll believe it when I see it. I've been hearing for years that a strike on Syria is imminent, that we'll be starting a major war, that we'll be blowing up Assad's air force, try to force him out, end up causing more chaos (guess the half a million dead doesn't count) etc. If we haven't done it by now, I doubt we're going to. It's little more than empty words at this point.
If the World War alignment really is what Generational Dynamics predicts, if we do anything, we'll end up supporting Assad. It's essentially what we've been doing for the past couple years anyway, even if unofficially.[/quote]
(This is composed AFTER the US attack on the one Syrian airbase.)
The Russians will "kick in" with the US to "save Syria for the Syrians" FROM Assad.
Their goal is not to keep Assad,.. it's to acquire air/naval military bases. They now have an excuse to "protect" Syria by occupying bases there, as well as to grab inland bits of land (for bases) in their "extermination" of ISIS.
The "long implied" threat from the US, directed at Russia, is that if you can attack the Ukraine and only receive "US/EU economic sanctions" we (the US) will be willing to take "Russian economic sanctions" (whatever the HELL that means) if we choose to "move on" some target that will "advantage" us at some point.
US sanctions minus (-) Russian sanctions equals (=) end of Syria-under-Assad plus (+) Russian Military Bases plus (+) Russia/US quasi-alliance-against-ISIS(et al) plus (+) Scared Iranians willing to "make a deal" plus (+) Nervous NKorean Generals in the mood to not-die following the orders of an insane snowflake named Un.
..plus (+) China not wanting to lose the "advantage" (in the [game of] Go sense) by losing NKorea plus (+) China's bluff potentially being called in the South China Sea because they're not ready to deal with the US asserting international sea rights.