Play online chess!

Pages:  1 2 Next »
From	Message
ipsissimus 09-Apr-17, 01:01	Atrocities in Syria .. Russia We have all witnessed the atrocities that have recently occurred in Syria. We can all agree that there are those alive today for whom home money and power is everything. There are of course many variables in this conflict and I cannot possibly go into all of them. I will however try to present to you some of these. One of the opinions that are being presented as fact is that if you don’t support Bashar Al-assad. You must certainly be a terrorist. This position is being espoused by Mr. Al-assad himself and Russia. Now let’s carry this one step forward and it seems to be believed by at least some people that this justifies the use of chemical weapons such as sarin gas which is generally considered a weapon of mass destruction. The following day chlorine gas was used in the Damascus suburbs and although this is not banned by the treaty it is nevertheless inhumane to use such a thing. I do believe that Mr. Trump did the right thing by ordering the Tomahawk missile strike. It is regrettable that we did not target Mr. Al-assad himself. Now let’s talk about Russia. As many of you know I have dated some Russian women and even lived in Russia for 11 months. I love Russia but detest what it has become under Mr. Putin. So we ask ourselves the question why would the Russian strongman support such a brutal dictator as Al-Assad. The truth is that Russia would dump this man in a heartbeat except for one thing. Russia wants to maintain its bases. This has been a central theme of Russian history. That Russia really does not have a clear warm water port. It had much to do with the annexation of Crimea. Most of the ports that Russia possesses freeze during the winter and are unusable and even these can be blocked because they must pass through the Dardanelles which are controlled by Turkey a NATO member. There are some very big guns at the Dardanelles. So if we wanted we could shut off Russia from the Mediterranean Sea hence the importance of those ports in Syria. I have no doubt that Mr. Putin would betray Mr. Al-assad in a heartbeat if he had another clear passage into the Mediterranean. It should be understood that even with its bases in Syria Russia has not really solved this problem because it would take very little for Naval and Air Forces of the United States to shut Russia off from its ports in Syria. This harbors badly for future world events as this will continue to be a Russian priority. The real truth is that Russia dreams of becoming a global power and controlling world events but its geography does not favor this and it is doubtful that this will ever happen. Russia is at this point in time nothing but an absolute dictatorship. It is at best an oligarchy. This should be well understood by all the TV news anchors and politicians in Washington but little or nothing is said about even though this should be clear to even a casual observer of Russia and its history. To support someone like Mr. Al-assad betrays all sense of decency and honesty. Are money and power that important? These things mean nothing to me but I live my life by a different belief system. Martin
stalhandske 09-Apr-17, 04:02	<I love Russia but detest what it has become under Mr. Putin.> What was better (for the Russian people) before Putin? Lenin? Stalin? Chrustschev? Bresznev? Nikolai II?
dmaestro 09-Apr-17, 06:24	Well Stahl I liked Gorbachev and democracy wasn't working so well in Russia under Yeltsin but it's headed back towards a virtual nationalist dictatorship with Putin in charge. Nationalism and authoritarism is on the rise again. It's clear Assad is a brutal dictator who kills his own people with gas and he is largely responsible for creatiing the terrorism in his country. The Russian people are great but their leadership is not. Until the world figures out how to stop the atrocities it's reasonable to act. In any case defending Putins role and Assad here is strange to say the least.
stalhandske 09-Apr-17, 06:28	Gorbachev was very "short-lived" and never had any real power. Yeltsin was a courageous drunk, also reigning for a very short time. Don't mix Assad into this - that's a different story. I am no fan of Putin, but one needs to be realistic. I highly doubt anyone else could do the job any better at this time.
dmaestro 09-Apr-17, 11:59	Putin is entrenched. The issue is to keep his expansion contained to Russian majority areas like Crimea.
chaz- 09-Apr-17, 12:08	...Putin is riding high on his nationalistic ideals, that's for sure. Plus, he's competent at assuring his competition does not have free reign. He's zeroed in on what most folks want, and creates a good Russian image. I am able to "admire" his abilities notwithstanding that I deplore his methods. His "style" needs to be respected for what it is.
dmaestro 09-Apr-17, 12:33	m.huffpost.com? Syria is a multiple front proxy war with Russia and and our enemies Iran and Hezbolah against our alliies, as well as enemy Jihadists. To allow Russia and Iran to win in this way would be a disaster. Like with Saddam we must have large safe zones the butcher Assad can't control. Russia can have their base and their port in return.
ace-of-aces 09-Apr-17, 21:26	A proxy war between Shia and Sunni Muslims. Don't you see, since Trump became president, there were radical Islamic attacks in England, St Petersburg subway station Russia, in Sweden and in Egypt when suicide bomber went into Coptic church where they were celebrating Easter Sunday. If US eliminate, Syria and Iran, radical Islamic extremism by Sunni Muslims will get worse IMHO. We should wait until ISIS is gone. US should not get involve in this Muslim religious war. US already learned the lesson when strong man Saddam Hussein was eliminated. If Putin wants to take the risks by involving in ME, that is his choice.
ipsissimus 09-Apr-17, 22:29	Deleted by ipsissimus on 09-Apr-17, 22:33.
dmaestro 09-Apr-17, 22:36	So you think that Russia who is aligned with the Shiites will get itself bogged down in Syria fighting Sunnis? The issue is Russia is strong enough to kill the more moderate rebels.
ipsissimus 09-Apr-17, 22:36	Deleted by ipsissimus on 09-Apr-17, 22:40.
ipsissimus 09-Apr-17, 22:41	Deleted by ipsissimus on 09-Apr-17, 22:59.
ipsissimus 09-Apr-17, 23:02	It is well understood that this is a proxy war. The problem is that there are many warring factions. The Sunni do not like the Shia and vice versa. What should also be understood is that some of these factions specifically Isis envision a global caliphate where they could impose sharia law on everyone in the world. Then and only then can the end times when Allah will reign supreme over all the world. There is currently no danger of this happening but if they were ever to become strong enough the West could be in danger. The only real solution is to partition the middle east into Shia and Sunni states. This was not done at the end of World War I because the people that partitioned the Middle East had little or no knowledge of what they were doing. There were of course many factors involved but this does not absolve them of some responsibility (en.wikipedia.org). It should have been partitioned into Sunni and Shia regions it was not. The main argument against isolationism is that we cannot allow this to spill into the West more than it already has. it is a pity that the massive Empire of Russia did not destroy the Ottoman Empire during the Crimean wars. That it did not do so is due to the intervention of France and Britain. Had this happened maybe 70 years of communism would have succeeded in uprooting at least some of this religious fanaticism. We could go into the history of Russia and talk about why it has been such a difficult place to live and why democracy has never flourished there but maybe this is a subject for another day. Suffice it to say for now that serfdom lasted longer in Russia than it did anywhere else. It should also be apparent to you then I am not a Muslim and I am in fact not religious at all. I am a pantheist. I also have very left wing leanings. I am further left than Bernie Sanders, Nancy Pelosi or Dianne Feinstein. From where I stand these people are conservatives! There is one more thing that I wish to say. This is that Mohammad is known to have been a worshiper of the Arab moon god. This is the real reason that the crescent of the moon can be seen above most Islamic mosques. Islam is a hybrid of Judaism, Christianity and ancient Arab paganism. We could discuss how this came to be but again this is beyond the scope of this paper and maybe a subject for another day. Martin
ace-of-aces 10-Apr-17, 07:26	Partition may not work in Syria and Iraq My opinion may be biased but I don't think partition of Syria and Iraq into smaller countries may not work. When Yugoslavia was broken down into smaller countries there was lot of chaos and bloodshed. Soviet Union was broken down into smaller countries without much bloodshed but still Russia have problems. American was great because it was not broken down to several countries in civil war. It appears that European Union will become a great superpower and peaceful when they unite together instead of fighting each other in first and second world wars but now cracks are appearing with the exit of UK. When Indian subcontinent was partitioned into Hindu India and Muslim Pakistan, millions of Hindus and Muslims died fighting each other. Having said that will partition of Syria and Iraq into smaller countries depending on their ethnicities and religions bring peace ? First of all, how will your divide it ? People would like to get the best lands which produce oil and have water resources for farming. That is a formidable if not impossible task to divide the resources equally when they are partitioned. When it is partitioned, some parts need to build walls to protect from invaders. Israel is relatively peaceful because they build walls and separate the Islamic terrorists' intrusion. Israel could afford to build walls because it is a small country. Trump's plan to build wall along the Mexican border is still up in the air because it is very costly. Even with walls, people are still not safe from missiles, air planes and drone attacks.
dmaestro 10-Apr-17, 07:33	m.huffpost.com? As long as the Russians support Assad over his people regardless of his brutality it is similar to Iraq under Saddam. The Russians can keep their base but people need to be free to flee to safe zones.
stalhandske 10-Apr-17, 07:39	This is exactly why a thoughtful American President would/should have serious negotiations with Putin about how to solve this crisis. Such an agreement could well include the right for Russians to their Mediterranian naval base. For example, they could rent the area for a nominal sum for 99 years.
ace-of-aces 10-Apr-17, 08:53	Putin needs more than a naval base in Syria. American President may be thoughtful in negotiating with Putin but if you look from Putin's point of view it is a despicable humiliating. Trump should negotiate first before he unleashed a missile strike against Assad's air force base. Putin already said, there is significant damage to Russian - American relationship after the attack which may irreparable. This is like an armed man threatening to a weaker victim that if he does not comply with his demands, Putin will suffer the consequences. Putin wants more than a naval base in Syria. Why Putin is making problems in Ukraine ? He wants more than a naval base in Crimea. After the breakup of Soviet Union, NATO forces are creeping eastwards close to Russia. He feels threatened when US led NATO forces are close to his doorsteps. If Syria and Iran falls and becomes the allies of US, Russia will be totally besieged from the south and west. He might think that Russia will then automatically collapse. I doubt Putin will agree to abandon Assad. Putin was very upset when US led NATO forces got rid of Gadhafi from Libya. What if, Putin disagree with US plan to remove Assad, what should US do ? Does US has the rights to remove Assad ?
stalhandske 10-Apr-17, 08:55	<Trump should negotiate first before he unleashed a missile strike against Assad's air force base.> I completely agree
stalhandske 10-Apr-17, 09:07	US alone has no right whatsoever to remove Assad by military force! The Ukraine (and indeed Crimea) are entirely different cases from Syria! They are part of classical Russia, and the people of Crimea and eastern Ukraine want to join the Russian Federation. Present day Ukraine with Crimea was always a very artificial combination; I believe made by Chrustchev at the time it did not matter.
chaz- 10-Apr-17, 09:11	...perhaps we need to consider how we intend on "living with our adversaries" instead of spending assets on overwhelming ANYone who dares to cross our path. If I were in Russia, I would not like how NATO in infringing on my own security (how did WE respond in Cuba, after all? how would we respond to a Russian incursion into Mexico?). We do know this, of course. There are numerous things we could ask for to balance the concerns of adversaries; but, sometimes, we just thrive being the "big dog" on the street.
stalhandske 10-Apr-17, 09:15	chaz: very well said!
softaire 10-Apr-17, 12:22	"Trump should negotiate first before he unleashed a missile strike against Assad's air force base." Well, that was the Obama strategy. That got Russia involved, saving the day by removing all the WMD gas weapons for Obama... except that they didn't and we got more gas attacks. "US alone has no right whatsoever to remove Assad by military force!" Well, who then is gonna do it? The U.N.... Finland?
chaz- 10-Apr-17, 14:55	...I think we're drilling down to the fundamental question. Who has the right (or any right) to make rules outside one's own border. How are these enforced? What is the legitimacy of such "rules" (whose philosophies or beliefs or history is most precious?).
stalhandske 10-Apr-17, 20:19	"Well, who then is gonna do it? The U.N.... Finland?" That's precisely one of the reasons the UN was founded! It had worked before, but it requires WORK! Which in this case first of all means serious negotiations!
ptitroque 10-Apr-17, 22:30	By the way... A convention signed by many nations 30 years ago prohibits the use of chemical weapons. The US signed but hasn't destroy all of their stocks of chemical weapons. Why not ? en.wikipedia.org
lord_shiva 11-Apr-17, 14:07	Stockpile Destruction It is a dirty, dangerous job. Many of the munitions are stored with aging and decrepit primers in place. We HAVE been reducing our chemical weapon stockpiles. The following story aired in September, but I would not be surprised if, as a cost saving measure, Groper cancelled the demolition. There is a lot of stuff there--if it began in October as scheduled we're still talking years worth of work. www.foxnews.com The Blue Grass depot in Kentucky will finish its demolition program in 2023, again barring cancellation by Comrade Groper, who may think up a better solution with his powerful, supremely intelligent brain. Smartest brain on planet Earth. The Pueblo Plant (my grandparents used to live in Pueblo, Colorado) is set to complete its mission by 2020. pueblo.bechtel.com
stalhandske 11-Apr-17, 20:37	diplomacy! Now with foreign secretary Tillerson visiting Moscow would be a great opportunity to persuade the Putin regime to abandon Assad! If that could be done Assad could be swiftly removed by UN action and put to trial for his likely criminal acts.
lord_shiva 11-Apr-17, 21:16	Likely "ALLEDGED" criminal acts. I wonder how to correct my spell check.
stalhandske 11-Apr-17, 21:55	yes, sorry & thanks, I was looking for that word!
lord_shiva 12-Apr-17, 22:55	Brown Cake Desert Comrade Groper knows what he had taxpayers pay him for his dessert, but cannot recall the name of the country he just bombed. Plus he has been calling China a currency manipulator and would have them declared as such on day one. Ho hum, another bald faced lie? Anyone surprised?
Pages:  1 2 Next »

GameKnot: play chess online, chess clubs, monthly chess tournaments, Internet chess league, chess teams, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database and more.