I am not convinced that this is some sinister plot by Russia to undermine democracy and good governance in Africa while challenging US foreign policy.
It seems more likely that Russia and China see trade matters vastly different from the US and Western Europe. Russia and China on several occasions have made it clear that they do not believe in restricting trade based on a nations internal politics and record of good governance. The US and Europe on the other hand constantly decide trade issues based on their approval of how a nation governs itself and runs its economy.
So it makes sense that a nation with limited trade options or sanctioned by the west for not running their internal politics and economy in a manner that pleases the west would represent a great trading opportunity to nations that don't care about a nations internal politics and feel no need to approve the way they run their economy.
I am also not convinced that the primary interest of the US in Africa is about democracy and good governance but that is a different argument.
I am curious. What would be the US legal cover for engaging Syrian planes over Syrian airspace to protect US soldiers who are fighting in the country without the permission of the Syrian government or a UNSC resolution.
I think this article is further proof of why Daesh (ISIS, ISIL) has been so successful and prosperous over the last few years. There are a lot of countries in the world that want the chaos and death that this group of radicals bring because it serves their geopolitical interests or ideology. Daesh (ISIS, ISIL) despite universal world wide condemnation is clearly heavily supported both directly and indirectly by many world governments especially the regional ones.
I once thought that the dreams of Daesh (ISIS, ISIL) of a caliphate were just crazy nonsense that could never be a reality but I am starting to suspect that had Russia not chosen to intervene in Syria that in a couple of years it would have become a reality with the capital located in Syria. Even now i still don't think it is out of the question given how many powerful nations are happy to have Daesh (ISIS, ISIL) do their bidding.
What I don't understand is why Russia is being sneaky about this. They are on solid moral and legal territory to deploy military forces in Syria, if requested or invited by the Syrian government and I don't think that will be a problem. It is the NATO countries that are on shaky legal and moral ground by engaging in military action and supporting and funding rebels within another sovereign country without their consent and with no authorization from the UN. Not to mention the fact that they have made it clear that they should be the ones to determine who the leader of Syria should be and not the Syrian people.
As for the soldiers, they are fully within their rights to resist an illegal order or an order that does not follow the proper protocol. However, if they don't want to "die" in Syria then they should really reconsider a career in the military of Russia or any NATO, or middle eastern nation. When you join a military you don't get to pick and choose your deployments or where you will "die" and both Russia and NATO have made it clear that they will deploy globally if they deem it necessary.
I think I am missing something. I have a solar powered home that does everything this video promises and I have had it for 5 years. Why should I care about Elon Musks Tesla battery? If I am not mistaken this technology has been around for decades and is now more affordable.
There are no details that make me think this battery is going to do anything special.
I am not convinced that this is some sinister plot by Russia to undermine democracy and good governance in Africa while challenging US foreign policy.
It seems more likely that Russia and China see trade matters vastly different from the US and Western Europe. Russia and China on several occasions have made it clear that they do not believe in restricting trade based on a nations internal politics and record of good governance. The US and Europe on the other hand constantly decide trade issues based on their approval of how a nation governs itself and runs its economy.
So it makes sense that a nation with limited trade options or sanctioned by the west for not running their internal politics and economy in a manner that pleases the west would represent a great trading opportunity to nations that don't care about a nations internal politics and feel no need to approve the way they run their economy.
I am also not convinced that the primary interest of the US in Africa is about democracy and good governance but that is a different argument.
I am curious. What would be the US legal cover for engaging Syrian planes over Syrian airspace to protect US soldiers who are fighting in the country without the permission of the Syrian government or a UNSC resolution.
I think this article is further proof of why Daesh (ISIS, ISIL) has been so successful and prosperous over the last few years. There are a lot of countries in the world that want the chaos and death that this group of radicals bring because it serves their geopolitical interests or ideology. Daesh (ISIS, ISIL) despite universal world wide condemnation is clearly heavily supported both directly and indirectly by many world governments especially the regional ones.
I once thought that the dreams of Daesh (ISIS, ISIL) of a caliphate were just crazy nonsense that could never be a reality but I am starting to suspect that had Russia not chosen to intervene in Syria that in a couple of years it would have become a reality with the capital located in Syria. Even now i still don't think it is out of the question given how many powerful nations are happy to have Daesh (ISIS, ISIL) do their bidding.
What I don't understand is why Russia is being sneaky about this. They are on solid moral and legal territory to deploy military forces in Syria, if requested or invited by the Syrian government and I don't think that will be a problem. It is the NATO countries that are on shaky legal and moral ground by engaging in military action and supporting and funding rebels within another sovereign country without their consent and with no authorization from the UN. Not to mention the fact that they have made it clear that they should be the ones to determine who the leader of Syria should be and not the Syrian people.
As for the soldiers, they are fully within their rights to resist an illegal order or an order that does not follow the proper protocol. However, if they don't want to "die" in Syria then they should really reconsider a career in the military of Russia or any NATO, or middle eastern nation. When you join a military you don't get to pick and choose your deployments or where you will "die" and both Russia and NATO have made it clear that they will deploy globally if they deem it necessary.
I think I am missing something. I have a solar powered home that does everything this video promises and I have had it for 5 years. Why should I care about Elon Musks Tesla battery? If I am not mistaken this technology has been around for decades and is now more affordable.
There are no details that make me think this battery is going to do anything special.