you left out the corruption of judges. Since in some -- O don't know how many -- states, judges are elected, they need money for their campaign, and they become beholden to the organizations that come up with it
.
What you call "regime forces" or "pro-Damascus forces" and the so called liberal press calls "Assad's army" is in fact the national army, which is fighting to reconquer territory lost to the terrorists -- mostly terrorist now, while, at the beginning of the war one could still speak of democratic opposition to Assad. What the USA does in Syria is unconscionable. The USA is using the Kurds to build yet other military bases, in a country that does not want them, with the aim to enfeebling the national government and sabotaging Iran. It is shameful.
As a European that has lived in the USA for many years, I am somewhat surprised by this prissy, arrogant attitude of the USA towards the rest of the world, an attitude based on the conviction that the USA is somehow better than the other countries and has therefore the right to "punish" them, if to "guide" them to do better.
The USA criticized Russia because of her corruption, but I am hard press to thinking of developed country more corrupt than the USA. What the USA calls lobby, the Europeans call corruption. In the USA you can buy and sell Senators and Congressmen, judges and laws.
The USA criticizes Russia as not being a democracy. But is the USA a democracy? A recent study proved that Congress ignored the citizens' demands to promote those of corporations. The USA has two parties, almost identical. There is really no choice. In the USA only the wealthy or those who are supported by wealth can become politicians. Voting participation is abysmally low, but, in several Southern states, electors -- particularly among the blacks -- are discouraged from participating.
The USA criticized Russia for interfering in other countries' affairs (including the USA itself, though, to my knowledge, no proof has emerged of that being the case). There is no other country on earth which has meddled, sometimes with catastrophic result, in the affairs of other countries.
Perhaps the politicians, the media, and the intellectuals of the USA should stop judging, sanctioning, invading, sabotaging, invading and destabilizing other countries and give their undivided attention to making the USA a better place than it is.
Surely the USA can't win the war for IS or Al Qaida with 3000 troops on the ground and 30.000 Kurdish forces. It stays in Syria, in defiance of international law, to spoil the Russian and Assad's victory against the terrorists, to make it more difficult for Assad to rebuild the country -- the Kurds are claiming about half of Syria's oil --, and to make it more expensive for Iran to arm Hizbollah. But I am not surprised. What the US has been fighting for for the past two decades is for wars to continue without end, not for peace. Endless wars swell the coffers of the arm manufacturers and of the Senators and Congressmen who are on their payroll. War is a good business for America. Who cares for the thousand Syrians that will die in this senseless slaughter? Certainly not the USA leadership.
it did not create IS but did nothing to prevent it from rising. I suspect the USA saw the km-long line of Toyotas driving from Raqqa to Mosul in 2014 and did nothing to stop it. Recently, I find convincing the story that the USA has been dealing with IS to leave free movement to the SDF for it to conquer Syria's oil wells east of the Euphrates. I am sure the USA knew that the weapons it allegedly gave to the "moderate" found their way to IS and to other terrorist organizations and did nothing to prevent it. In conclusion, the relations between the USA and IS are much closer than you make them to be.
I don't see the connection between making money with Russian businessmen and promoting Russia's interests over American interests. Has anyone inquired whether US businessmen that favored Hillary Clinton had business relations with Russian or Ukrainian oligarchs? Singling out Trump's friends is not serious journalism. I am surprised by Juan's sympathy for conspiracy theories.
Juan, I read your stuff regularly and find it almost always objective and fair. But your quip about Putin being Trump's buddy was wrong and in bad taste. To my knowledge, they never met. Whether some members of the Russian government have been in contact with Trump is uncertain. You yourself have repeatedly said that, even if Russian government officials had done what the USA intelligence agencies accuse them of, the results of the elections would have been the same. Your remark is untoward.
don't you think that the ceasefire failed because the USA has kept on supporting Al Qaida type of organizations in Syria? Because they prefer IS or Al Qaida in Syria to Assad? Pure madness, but the USA's foreign policy lately seems to be formulated in an asylum.
Gary, you are right of course. However, the USA can exercise pressure on Saudi Arabia. It could threaten withdrawing arms sales, or arming Iran, or bringing Saudi Arabia disgrace in the international arena on human rights issues. Yet, so far, it has chosen to do nothing of the above. The haste with which Obama flew to the burial of the latest king is a sign of unnecessary genuflections to these brutal dictators.
Russia does not want to be bogged down in Syria. The Saudi want Russia bogged down and arm Al Qaida to the teeth -- with American weapons. The role of the USA here is key. If it wants peace in Syria, it must join Russia and rein in Saudi Arabia. If it does not want peace -- and I suspect Obama's USA only wants chaos because chaos keeps enemies out of the fray that matters, Israel in primis -- it will sabotage the peace talks or do nothing to make them work. At that point Russia must decide whether its alliances in the region are really worth the candle. I do not believe Russia is in Syria for the long haul, it would be very damaging and counterproductive for Russia and I think Putin is no fool. I hope so at least.
Iran would make a mistake if she supported Assad to the hilt. Before 2011 Assad's dictatorship could have been condoned on account of the relatively high level of living it afforded the population and the stability it granted. Now, after barrel bombs, there is no saving Assad. But Russia and Iran are right in saying that it is not enough to kick Assad out, it is essential to put something back in, otherwise we have another Lybia and another Iraq. The West is, as usual, bent on destruction and chaos. Reasonable people cannot accept it, there must be a peaceful transition out of Assad's regime and this requires keeping essential state functions alive, and this in turn means keeping a large part of Assad's administration in the picture.
in the meantime, Turkish troops have attacked YPG positions IN Syria. What one member of NATO does is undone by another. It would serve USA interests to convince its Turkish allies to limit themselves to attack PKK IN Turkey, rather than risk sending troops to Syria and Iraq.
© 2025 All Rights Reserved
you left out the corruption of judges. Since in some -- O don't know how many -- states, judges are elected, they need money for their campaign, and they become beholden to the organizations that come up with it
.
What you call "regime forces" or "pro-Damascus forces" and the so called liberal press calls "Assad's army" is in fact the national army, which is fighting to reconquer territory lost to the terrorists -- mostly terrorist now, while, at the beginning of the war one could still speak of democratic opposition to Assad. What the USA does in Syria is unconscionable. The USA is using the Kurds to build yet other military bases, in a country that does not want them, with the aim to enfeebling the national government and sabotaging Iran. It is shameful.
As a European that has lived in the USA for many years, I am somewhat surprised by this prissy, arrogant attitude of the USA towards the rest of the world, an attitude based on the conviction that the USA is somehow better than the other countries and has therefore the right to "punish" them, if to "guide" them to do better.
The USA criticized Russia because of her corruption, but I am hard press to thinking of developed country more corrupt than the USA. What the USA calls lobby, the Europeans call corruption. In the USA you can buy and sell Senators and Congressmen, judges and laws.
The USA criticizes Russia as not being a democracy. But is the USA a democracy? A recent study proved that Congress ignored the citizens' demands to promote those of corporations. The USA has two parties, almost identical. There is really no choice. In the USA only the wealthy or those who are supported by wealth can become politicians. Voting participation is abysmally low, but, in several Southern states, electors -- particularly among the blacks -- are discouraged from participating.
The USA criticized Russia for interfering in other countries' affairs (including the USA itself, though, to my knowledge, no proof has emerged of that being the case). There is no other country on earth which has meddled, sometimes with catastrophic result, in the affairs of other countries.
Perhaps the politicians, the media, and the intellectuals of the USA should stop judging, sanctioning, invading, sabotaging, invading and destabilizing other countries and give their undivided attention to making the USA a better place than it is.
Surely the USA can't win the war for IS or Al Qaida with 3000 troops on the ground and 30.000 Kurdish forces. It stays in Syria, in defiance of international law, to spoil the Russian and Assad's victory against the terrorists, to make it more difficult for Assad to rebuild the country -- the Kurds are claiming about half of Syria's oil --, and to make it more expensive for Iran to arm Hizbollah. But I am not surprised. What the US has been fighting for for the past two decades is for wars to continue without end, not for peace. Endless wars swell the coffers of the arm manufacturers and of the Senators and Congressmen who are on their payroll. War is a good business for America. Who cares for the thousand Syrians that will die in this senseless slaughter? Certainly not the USA leadership.
It isn't only Assad that should be grateful to Russia. If the USA had had its way, we would have Al Baghdadi in Damascus.
it did not create IS but did nothing to prevent it from rising. I suspect the USA saw the km-long line of Toyotas driving from Raqqa to Mosul in 2014 and did nothing to stop it. Recently, I find convincing the story that the USA has been dealing with IS to leave free movement to the SDF for it to conquer Syria's oil wells east of the Euphrates. I am sure the USA knew that the weapons it allegedly gave to the "moderate" found their way to IS and to other terrorist organizations and did nothing to prevent it. In conclusion, the relations between the USA and IS are much closer than you make them to be.
I don't see the connection between making money with Russian businessmen and promoting Russia's interests over American interests. Has anyone inquired whether US businessmen that favored Hillary Clinton had business relations with Russian or Ukrainian oligarchs? Singling out Trump's friends is not serious journalism. I am surprised by Juan's sympathy for conspiracy theories.
Juan, I read your stuff regularly and find it almost always objective and fair. But your quip about Putin being Trump's buddy was wrong and in bad taste. To my knowledge, they never met. Whether some members of the Russian government have been in contact with Trump is uncertain. You yourself have repeatedly said that, even if Russian government officials had done what the USA intelligence agencies accuse them of, the results of the elections would have been the same. Your remark is untoward.
don't you think that the ceasefire failed because the USA has kept on supporting Al Qaida type of organizations in Syria? Because they prefer IS or Al Qaida in Syria to Assad? Pure madness, but the USA's foreign policy lately seems to be formulated in an asylum.
Gary, you are right of course. However, the USA can exercise pressure on Saudi Arabia. It could threaten withdrawing arms sales, or arming Iran, or bringing Saudi Arabia disgrace in the international arena on human rights issues. Yet, so far, it has chosen to do nothing of the above. The haste with which Obama flew to the burial of the latest king is a sign of unnecessary genuflections to these brutal dictators.
Russia does not want to be bogged down in Syria. The Saudi want Russia bogged down and arm Al Qaida to the teeth -- with American weapons. The role of the USA here is key. If it wants peace in Syria, it must join Russia and rein in Saudi Arabia. If it does not want peace -- and I suspect Obama's USA only wants chaos because chaos keeps enemies out of the fray that matters, Israel in primis -- it will sabotage the peace talks or do nothing to make them work. At that point Russia must decide whether its alliances in the region are really worth the candle. I do not believe Russia is in Syria for the long haul, it would be very damaging and counterproductive for Russia and I think Putin is no fool. I hope so at least.
Iran would make a mistake if she supported Assad to the hilt. Before 2011 Assad's dictatorship could have been condoned on account of the relatively high level of living it afforded the population and the stability it granted. Now, after barrel bombs, there is no saving Assad. But Russia and Iran are right in saying that it is not enough to kick Assad out, it is essential to put something back in, otherwise we have another Lybia and another Iraq. The West is, as usual, bent on destruction and chaos. Reasonable people cannot accept it, there must be a peaceful transition out of Assad's regime and this requires keeping essential state functions alive, and this in turn means keeping a large part of Assad's administration in the picture.
in the meantime, Turkish troops have attacked YPG positions IN Syria. What one member of NATO does is undone by another. It would serve USA interests to convince its Turkish allies to limit themselves to attack PKK IN Turkey, rather than risk sending troops to Syria and Iraq.