@Invictus There are plenty of Russians -- but that's quibbling, I thought we were discussing the hypothetical where Russia does get involved (why even bring up the possibility otherwise?). I tend to think Russia will not be directly involved either

"Ignoring the lessons of the past when considering present events is idiotic."

wow
never considered this before
so dep
so braev

"Ignoring the lessons of the past when considering present events is idiotic."

I think that's the course description for basically every HIST100 level course.

Too bad many of our politicians evidently don't remember much of that course, 2WL.

The really pathetic thing is that the Russians and Chinese aren't even trying to pick a fight. Obama simply made an idiotic threat that he can't back up.

If you point a gun at someone, you better be ready to pull the trigger.

Obama has no real choice but to back down. America doesn't want a war, America can't afford a war, and America's military would be stretched dangerously thin by further conflict.

He shouldn't even try and save face. Putin is probably still laughing about the Snowden thing. There is not a single world leader that fears Obama. Even second-rate dictators like Assad are laughing.

North Korea is laughing.

I don't care if you like his policies or not; at this point every rational person should admit that Obama fucked up bigtime.

Well, the Chinese aren't picking a fight. The Russians have skin in the game. They'd rather have Syria as an ally.

And regardless of how this is going, Obama doing the right thing by trying to prevent the use of chemical weapons, I'll applaud him for that.

I'm willing to tolerate chemical weapons if it means NOT playing chicken with the Russians and World War Three.

The Chinese aren't in the game yet, but they'll back up the Russkies if push comes to shove.

What are you basing that on? If anything they'd jump for joy if both the United States AND Russia got dragged into that hell hole.

Sino-Russian relations have been a little too cozy in recent years

OK, that's kinda true. But how does it then follow that the Chinese would get involved in Syria on the side of the Russians? What does China have to gain from Assad staying in power?

China would side with Russia on opposing international intervention in Syria since they really are serious about protecting states' sovereignty, but anything beyond vocal support at the UN seems very unlikely to me. Considering all of China's problems (territorial disputes with most of its neighbors, an aging population, environmental degradation, a slowing economy when growth is what legitimizes continued CCP rule, etc.) I can't imagine why they would pick a fight on the other side of Asia that does not involve them in any way.

I regard China as more of a sleeping giant, much like America of the 1930s. They have most of the framework for superpower status, and we've already seen signs of this (they're flexing their muscles an awful lot over relatively insignificant disputed islands)

Sure, they have all kinds of internal problems, but nothing that a splendid little war won't solve. In 1937, no one would have imagined that America would wage a simultaneous two-front war on two opposite sides of the world over a strategically indecisive attack on a relatively isolated naval base.

That's a load of pop geopolitics. China is not about to eclipse America by any measure. The muscle flexing you reference has done nothing but drive all of its neighbors, even its quasi-satellite Burma, in the arms of the United States. It has one used aircraft carrier to our ten. It's brittle authoritarian government is one recession away from a severe crisis of legitimacy. Its population is about to crash as a result of the one child policy, and it doesn't have a welfare state ready to deal with the coming glut of old people. And on and on. China may become more aggressive to distract from these upcoming problems, but that's a far different thing from what you probably mean when you say sleeping giant.

Yeah yeah yeah. America had a fuck-ton of problems too. We still do, actually.

I regard China as a much bigger threat to America than Russia or any of the various two-bit dictator states (Iran, North Korea, Syria, et cetera)

I'm not suggesting we start another Cold War with them or anything like that, but maybe it's time to slow down the flood of cheap Chinese goods into the American economy before we lose *all* of our money. I'm hoping that 3 printing combined with a resurgence of consumer awareness will be able to compete with Chinese manufacturing.

Again, pop geopolitics. This time with economic illiteracy thrown in.

I don't suppose it would be too much trouble for you to articulate your views.

I think it'll be a waste of time, since you're obviously married to an outmoded view of China's position. Look up some recent articles online about China and some Youtube videos of Econ 101 classes about free trade. I won't teach these things to you.

its not my job to educate you shitlord!!

Bomb Shitlord 2012

Assad was on CBS this morning saying that the chemical attacks were by Rebels against his forces. Calls the US the social media government.

I'm not surprised. It doesn't make sense for Assad to use chemical weapons. He's winning the war. Why risk the international backlash just for a tactically inconclusive gas attack?

He may be a douchebag of the highest order but he's not stupid or irrational.