But as long as Russia is doing so to fight a common enemy (ISIS) we should allow it for now. The most important thing is to end the Syrian civil war and remove ISIS as a major power in the region. Russia can help in both ways. I also think Russia can be helpful in removing Assad later on. For example if we promise Russia to end some of the sanctions in return for removing Assad we may be able to convince them (along with some other concessions concerning troops in Eastern Europe and the the Minsk II accords).

I really don't think the U.S. could defeat Russia if it came to war in the Middle East, Jai.

Also, Sir Salty, you saying that is soooo idiotic, considering you first attack the US for being "Imperialist" then imply we should stop Russia in the middle east, which is the Imperialist thing to do...

I didn't say anything like that. How is stating that Russia is supporting Assad actually saying we should stop them? Perhaps you don't understand the context(the above post) or maybe you are just ignorant and stupid.

I really don't think the U.S. could defeat Russia if it came to war in the Middle East, Jai.

That's a really really really good question I think. Do you think that Russia and USA will go to war in the Middle East. You see I don't see a scenario where it would be in Russia's interest to do so and I don't see a scenario where it would be in America's interest to do so.


Another interesting question that relates to this: Why do Americans seem to continue to be Russophobic, even though the cold war is over and they are much much weaker than us?

maybe you are just ignorant and stupid.

1). This is way overboard, and this is why I don't have respect for many of the Democrats and Republicans on this forum.

"But Russia is simply backing their own interests"

SirSalty, if you cannot see that I could, knowing that you are an anti-Imperialist, would think that you would want someone to stop Russia imperialism in the middle east, then you need a dictionary.

though the cold war is over and they are much much weaker than us?

Define "weaker"



Oh, and on another note Salty, if you don't think Russia should be stopped in the Middle East, than your not anti-Imperialist, your simply anti-American.

I'm stating a fact that corresponds to Tchaikovsky' post about Russia and America working together to fight ISIS. I'm not supporting Russian imperialism one bit.

Russia would win just because the American public would have no stomach for a fight. The Russians are a) in Siberia and completely clueless, b) in the West and completely drunk, or c) in the government

Then you wouldn't have a problem with America trying to take down the Russian puppet Assad to install an American puppet?

Have I posted more than I think I have, because you seem to be pulling arguments out of your arse.

Edited 2/10/2016 02:46:16

Yes I would have a problem with that; because he isn't a Russian puppet he's a Russian ally.

No, Im simply making random assumptions for fun :)

Also, Assad is basically a puppet of Russia.

Edited 2/10/2016 02:48:04

Basically, but isn't.

I really don't think the U.S. could defeat Russia if it came to war in the Middle East

If there would be a winner, it'd be America. Arabia, the Gulf Countries, Iraq against, Syria and maybe Iran? America alone is far more powerful than Russia+Iran+Syria. This video is basically Russian counter-propaganda, but everything they say is true. At one point, they show an interesting globe with the 20 or so countries that America is "agitating" (civil war, air strikes, terrorist attacks, and Russian "interventions", extensive spy programmes, and diplomatic pressure/sanctions), with the 1 (2 now) countries Russia is "agitating".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHfBIO-alTI

China, Xpapy.

Russia and China have been sleeping together for a while.

Edited 2/10/2016 03:37:34

The real winner would be major G20 countries that don't pick a side and have the luxury of choosing the winner after any real military conflict.

Edited 2/10/2016 03:38:37

China, Xpapy.

Russia and China have been sleeping together for a while.

In the Middle East, China is hardly involved militarily. They are also very reluctant to get involved due to former extremist Islamic "troubles".

Edited 2/10/2016 03:42:22

XD true.

I can imagine it now- billions of dollars spent, millions of lifes lost...

and suddenly India, Indonesia, Kazahkstan, South Africa, Brazil, etc. all step in to join the war effort of the winning team.

Just like Italy in WW1

Just like Italy in WW1

I am nitpicking, but I don't think Italy joined the war when Allied win was clear - it joined in 1915 - if anything, the Middle Powers seemed to be winning (in Europe). Germans had just pushed the Russians back out and captured much Polish land. Belgium was German territory with all resistance crushed, and the Germans were getting close to Paris.

I think the country you want is Romania - joined in 1916, but left the war in December 1917, since Russia stopped fighting. But then, on November 10, 1918, Romania rejoined the war, and ended it a day later.

*shrugs*

Really, the Germans lost any change of a true victory when Moltke said "Fuck the plan."

If he hadn't said "fuck the plan" Germany might well have crushed France quickly, and made Britain back down.