It must be multi factorial for both individuals and for populations. But it's definitely one of the reasons why people join up. I wonder if having access to university funding and free healthcare also increases the flow of people in too? I imagine they wouldn't fund both of these projects if it didn't. Ironically joining the military gives you access to socialist programs, #freedom
What war did trump start? I'm aware he did some potentially hazardous stuff but nothing ever came of it on a large scale? How do you feel about people having been directed into action under obama?
To be fair Trump and Johnson have both been in charge, whilst their countries militaries have been enguaged in action, they just haven't started any external wars yet. The UK recently sent gun boats to France, so there's still plenty of time for that, for us. And Trump whilst not currently president is actively undermining the rule of law in your own country, and caused an attempted putch in your capitol, add that to, leaving the Kurdish YPG and others to face Syria and Turkey themselves, after they (with US backing) destroyed Isis for the US, you can see how this isn't a binary situation. And that's not including how both "characters" have negatively impacted both countries, both through negligence throughout covid, and in general incompetence. Character definition, : involves "the illusion of being a human person" Character (arts) - Wikipedia
I know American politics is polarised, but did people really hate Obama that much? And was that hate based on factual reasons, or just GOP talking points like he's a secret Muslim born in Kenya, who is going to disarm everyone, and place them in FEMA camps, which I think we can all agree didn't happen.
If Trump wasn't so vain, indecisive, and easily railroaded by the Pentagon and his own appointees, he might have single-handedly destroyed the American empire. Regardless of his motives, that could have been a good thing for the world once the dust had settled. He even tried to withdraw US troops from every country he could name (which would still leave a lot) in the weeks before Biden took office (link contains bad language): Off the rails: Trump’s failed 11th-hour military withdrawal campaign He handed Syria to Russia and Turkey, he handed Afghanistan back to the Taliban... as bad as things are there, less people will die as a result. Same can't be said for Iraq, which he turned into a proxy battleground for his undeclared war with Iran, but 2 out of 3 isn't so bad. Makes me wonder why Chomsky hates him so much; Trump has done more to undo US global hegemony than anyone who ever lived!
Definitely, I'm not saying they didn't, but action for humanitarian reasons, (and the death toll in the Syria civil is amazingly high), is not necessary a bad thing. Dictators arnt a good thing to have, it's just once removed you need a stable government, (and often that doesn't happen.) Otherwise you get more dictators.
Not necessarily, replacing stability with instability (and dictator's) isn't a good thing. Assad is a dictator who has used chemical weapons on the population, the death toll is huge, even with any outside interference: " On 23 April 2016, the United Nations and Arab League Envoy to Syria put out an estimate of 400,000 that had died in the war." By abandoning the Kurdish, who beat Isis with us, we have possibly prolonged the conflict. Peace by any means isn't always a good thing. The world isn't a binary place, "America always bad" is as wrong as saying "America always good".
The US were interfering since at least 2012, which, incidentally, is when the death toll rose by about a factor of 6 or 7: Timber Sycamore - Wikipedia Time Period Pro-government forces Anti-government forces Civilians Grand Total (inc. unidentified) 2011: 7,841 killed 2012: 49,361 killed Casualties of the Syrian civil war - Wikipedia I'd be interested to hear how the Obama administration prevented loss of life and instability in the region, because as far as I can see they exacerbated it immensely.
If we're talking the region, arming the local YPG to help remove ISIS was a good thing. Anything that would take Assad out of power and end the civil war would be good, obviously that didn't happen in the end. Are you in favour of leaving him in power? He's been using chemical weapons against his population, at what point would you agree he needs to be removed? Never? You can be against imperialism, and still support the removal of dictators.
The US had picked a side long before chemical weapons were used. It wasn't a humanitarian intervention, it was a proxy war against Russian interests in the region. It was deliberate destabilisation that empowered jihadi groups. Is ISIS preferable to Assad? Now the truth emerges: how the US fuelled the rise of Isis in Syria and Iraq | Seumas Milne How many people is it worth killing to remove a dictator? Let's say we had a civil war in the UK. Let's say 40,000 people had died. Would you be praying for the US to start dropping bombs on your house and supplying its favoured side, even if that meant 2 million people would die, extremists would take over much of the country and run it as a totalitarian theocracy, 5 million people would become refugees, and the country as a whole would be sent back to the stone age? You'd be cool with that? I think "do no harm" is a good motto to think of here. If a patient has cancer, but removing it would likely kill them, it's better to let them die in their own time, or at least give them a choice in the matter. How often does regime change work out for the best? How often is it initiated with the people's best interests in mind?
Syrian Democratic Forces - Wikipedia The people have already chosen, they are trying to form a secular country, hence the civil war, Assad is a dictator trying to remain in power. We have removed their support, and allowed turkey to target them. If your talking stone age theocracies that's what they've already beaten in ISIS, and what Afghanistan will have soon.
And this makes Obama a nice guy how? Regardless, you are focusing on a small percentage of the population of Syria. Read the CIA document linked in the Guardian article above. The US knew what it was doing. It knew that intervention would not end up with the people living peacefully in a democratic nation. Afghanistan is returning to theocratic rule... but look at the death rates under the Taliban before the coalition invasion in 2001. Can you tell me with a straight face that death is better for these people than oppression, and it should be the President of the United States that decides their fate?
Let's apply Occam's razor... Which scenario is more likely? "Shucks, we tried our best but it just didn't work out in Syria." or: Trump's incompetence ended a campaign of destabilisation in Syria, involving arming anyone who would pick up a gun against Assad, including ISIS, in order to draw Russia and her allies into a Vietnam-style quagmire and act as a buffer for US interests in the Middle East. Let's bear in mind that the US government's own documents predict, and in some cases suggest, the latter.
Quite a large area is actually this was dated 2/21 Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria - Wikipedia Raw death rates arnt the only metric you can use to assess peace, average life expectancy, infant mortality, and the education of women are also good metrics to consider. Imagine being so anti american, that you think leaving dictators in charge and women in bondage, is a good thing.
I said percentage of population. It's about 10%, and the uprisings didn't start there. I didn't leave Assad in charge, the US government did. Imagine being so blinded by neoliberal propaganda that you think helping half a million people die just for those left alive to end up worse off than they were before is a moral victory. Syria's war: 80% in poverty, life expectancy cut by 20 years, $200bn lost How did the US improve the lot of Syrian people? As for women in bondage, have a look at what was happening to female education even before Trump came to office. It was on the decline, and women were not exactly smelling the sweet smell of freedom: “I Won’t Be a Doctor, and One Day You’ll Be Sick” You make it sound as if you cannot invest in infrastructure unless you blow up a few hundred thousand people first. Anyway, I'll give you a chance to return to all the points you have so far evaded and/or deflected.
Maybe tonight when I have time. I'm quite amused at thinking backing the YPG means I'm a neoliberal though! Your arguing both for an against regime change then, America is the blame because they didn't remove Assad, but also America shouldn't ever interfere, even when invited to, by its own population trying to remove a dictator.
Supporting the YPG doesn't, but defending illegal smuggling of arms and proxy wars does, as does defending the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan. The YPG are just one part of Western involvement in Syria, and it is a deflection to frame the entire thing around them. The US, UK, Israel, Saudi Arabia et al were directly and indirectly arming and supporting jihadi groups in Syria. The same people who were killing kurds in Syria and Iraq. As for being for and against regime change, I would say I'm in favour of improving things for a population if you must intervene. But I don't believe the US cared, and that a power vacuum or caliphate was preferable to a Russian backed state, regardless of the human cost. The results seem to bear that out to me.
Not saying he started stuff...just saying I wouldn't want my life and career under the indirect guidance of someone I wouldn't trust to direct people to a free table at McDonalds let alone a government or military campaign. The history of both the US and the UK military is so replete with tales of incompetence and bad leadership it's not something I'd be willing to subject myself to. It'd be bad enough getting killed or injured in battle as it is. But crippled, wounded or killed because you got given a crap weapon or a poorly designed vehicle or not enough equipment or were just considered cannon fodder?
I think once your in, you should make things better, stable and then get out, removing something stable and then withdrawing leaving a power vacuum or worse is a terrible idea. We shouldn't of invaded Afghanistan, but once we're in, we have a responsibility to act correctly. With Syria, trump withdrew and left the YPG to the Russians and Turkish, after they had helped clear up the mess of ISIS. That is both morally and practically a bad idea.
