Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sheb]

Well, there is a certain degree of responsibility: after all, Russia pretty much created the whole situation in Ukraine.

[nenjin]

nenjin: Just because you arm someone doesn't mean you're automatically responsible for all the shit they do. Else, the US has killed way more people than that in Syria.

Where did I claim this was otherwise? We're basically responsible for arming the mujahadeen and the former Iraqi army. Then again, we weren't playing territorial adventurism in either of those cases. Russia is.

That said, Russia created the situation directly by their actions. I find it hard to place the blame anywhere else.

Well, there is a certain degree of responsibility: after all, Russia pretty much created the whole situation in Ukraine.

ninja'd by...you.

[miljan]

If German troops shot down a plane, Berlin would have to answer for that, even if it was a mistake. The same holds for Washington, for Ankara, and for every other nation's troops. So if Russian troops shot down a plane by mistake, Moscow would still be responsible.
The separatists aren't proper Russian troops, of course, but since the separatists are exclusively supplied, equipped, and directed by Moscow - do you really think they start any major military operations without getting Putin's okay first? - there is a similar, if lesser, degree of responsibility here.
Direct control is not necessary for responsibility, and neither is a direct order.

Yes, they start without any Putin direct command, because there is no line of command in most of pro russian military. I can give you videos where you can see them fighting each other, who is in command and similar in the past.

If someone gives them weapons it doesnt mean a lot. It is a responsibility , but it is not direct, and it is 100% same as what USA did in syria and other countries, with supplying them, giving training and similar. Both are responsible indirectly. But rebels are NOT russian military, and cannot be considered that in any way or form as you tried to say it in your post.

Also your comment on that a country will need to answer for shooting down a plane and that it holds true for every country is very naive that you think like that. It matters a lot who shoot down a plane, because depending from country , consequences will be different as you saw in the past.

[Sergarr]

If German troops shot down a plane, Berlin would have to answer for that, even if it was a mistake. The same holds for Washington, for Ankara, and for every other nation's troops. So if Russian troops shot down a plane by mistake, Moscow would still be responsible.
The separatists aren't proper Russian troops, of course, but since the separatists are exclusively supplied, equipped, and directed by Moscow - do you really think they start any major military operations without getting Putin's okay first? - there is a similar, if lesser, degree of responsibility here.
Direct control is not necessary for responsibility, and neither is a direct order.

I don't know if you know, but many commanders of rebel forces are basically acting independently from each other, and their central government only controls areas near the main cities. The Kozitzin individual is so anarchic that he was compared with Makhno.

I don't know how you can direct an anarchic mob like that in any way, except with threats of supply blocks.

[nenjin]

Or arms supplies.

[Sheb]

Well, the Syrian rebels aren't made up largely of American war tourists, and there is no US soldiers fighting alongside them.

[Helgoland]

I don't know how you can direct an anarchic mob like that in any way, except with threats of supply blocks.

That's sufficient, innit? Also threatening to step up supplies for rival groups, disappearances/targeted killings, threats of reprisal once the commander in question returns to Russia...

Also your comment on that a country will need to answer for shooting down a plane and that it holds true for every country is very naive that you think like that. It matters a lot who shoot down a plane, because depending from country , consequences will be different as you saw in the past.

I'm familiar with Realpolitik - you may have noticed it is in fact a German word The responsibility is always the same; consequences and responsibilities are not at all the same thing.
Also, I didn't mean to say that the rebels were part of Russia's military - precisely the opposite! I did however say that they are dependant on Russia to such a degree that they may be considered Russian armed forces, i.e. armed forces acting in the interests of and directed by Russia. Kinda like the Contras and the US, really - especially the Russians in this thread should have few problems with blaming the US for the actions of the Contras

[miljan]

Well, the Syrian rebels aren't made up largely of American war tourists, and there is no US soldiers fighting alongside them.

Normally as there are no US people living there, unlike in ukrain where a lot of russian live and are you know next to russia where Syrian  is a long way away from US and they still put their shit there.

But it really doesnt matter, because Syrian rebels are made of a lot of war tourists from other countries, and US military did trained them in the past, and armed them.

[mainiac]

nenjin: Just because you arm someone doesn't mean you're automatically responsible for all the shit they do. Else, the US has killed way more people than that in Syria.

Degrees of responsibility rely on the why of people get killed.  For instance no one would blame the Soviets for killing invading Nazi soldiers during WWII.  But when the Soviets invaded Poland or Finland and killed Polish or Finish soldiers that was killing them in the name of aggression.  The question isn't just how many people's deaths were you involved in, there's also the matter of why they are dying.

[Sheb]

Well, the US doesn't have troops in Syria, Russia got troops in Ukraine.

Also, the US never trained the Syrian rebels, where did you get that silly notion of yours? RT?

[miljan]

Well, the US doesn't have troops in Syria, Russia got troops in Ukraine.

Also, the US never trained the Syrian rebels, where did you get that silly notion of yours? RT?

Where does russia have troops in ukraine (not counting crimea)?

About US
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/foreign-affairs-defense/syria-at-war/syrian-rebels-describe-u-s-backed-training-in-qatar/

[Sergarr]

I don't know how you can direct an anarchic mob like that in any way, except with threats of supply blocks.

That's sufficient, innit? Also threatening to step up supplies for rival groups, disappearances/targeted killings, threats of reprisal once the commander in question returns to Russia...

Also your comment on that a country will need to answer for shooting down a plane and that it holds true for every country is very naive that you think like that. It matters a lot who shoot down a plane, because depending from country , consequences will be different as you saw in the past.

I'm familiar with Realpolitik - you may have noticed it is in fact a German word The responsibility is always the same; consequences and responsibilities are not at all the same thing.
Also, I didn't mean to say that the rebels were part of Russia's military - precisely the opposite! I did however say that they are dependant on Russia to such a degree that they may be considered Russian armed forces, i.e. armed forces acting in the interests of and directed by Russia. Kinda like the Contras and the US, really - especially the Russians in this thread should have few problems with blaming the US for the actions of the Contras

Rival groups don't quite exist, you can hardly threat people on the front with a targeted killing, many commanders are locals (not from Russia).

There isn't any real way for Russia to direct supplies to one group preferentially anyway, since
1) most of the supplies are divided up on the place ,and
2) there are many private organizations who organize the supplies, too (russian nationalists, communists, those kind of people).

[Culise]

I don't know how you can direct an anarchic mob like that in any way, except with threats of supply blocks.

That's sufficient, innit? Also threatening to step up supplies for rival groups, disappearances/targeted killings, threats of reprisal once the commander in question returns to Russia...

Also your comment on that a country will need to answer for shooting down a plane and that it holds true for every country is very naive that you think like that. It matters a lot who shoot down a plane, because depending from country , consequences will be different as you saw in the past.

I'm familiar with Realpolitik - you may have noticed it is in fact a German word The responsibility is always the same; consequences and responsibilities are not at all the same thing.
Also, I didn't mean to say that the rebels were part of Russia's military - precisely the opposite! I did however say that they are dependant on Russia to such a degree that they may be considered Russian armed forces, i.e. armed forces acting in the interests of and directed by Russia. Kinda like the Contras and the US, really - especially the Russians in this thread should have few problems with blaming the US for the actions of the Contras

Even the Contras are pushing it, because it was a matter of only armament (no US soldiers), and the US legislature explicitly and directly outlawed assistance to the Contras; Reagan was violating US law with the Iran-Contra scandal, which is why North had to fall on his sword so thoroughly.  I'd consider Russian activities in Ukraine to be closer to a filibuster, albeit one such that William Walker would have been proud of.

Well, the Syrian rebels aren't made up largely of American war tourists, and there is no US soldiers fighting alongside them.

Normally as there are no US people living there, unlike in ukrain where a lot of russian live and are you know next to russia where Syrian  is a long way away from US and they still put their shit there.

But it really doesnt matter, because Syrian rebels are made of a lot of war tourists from other countries, and US military did trained them in the past, and armed them.

Not all of them, by the same token; a lot of them in al-Nusra and the like actually made a lot of their "street cred" fighting the US in Iraq as well, which is part of the reason why the US looked rather askance at Qatari and Saudi assistance to the rebels even pre-ISIS.  US involvement in Syria before 2013 (a full two years after the civil war began) has largely been anti-government rather than pro-rebel, in the form of economic sanctions, reams of "firmly worded letters", suggestive fleet movements (that never actually did anything), and the like, a fact which has not been lost on parties like the FSA.  You might as well assert that Russians are also supporting the Kyiv government because the handful of Chechens that joined the fight on their side learned to fight in Russia. 

EDIT:

Well, the US doesn't have troops in Syria, Russia got troops in Ukraine.

Also, the US never trained the Syrian rebels, where did you get that silly notion of yours? RT?

Where does russia have troops in ukraine (not counting crimea)?

Ukraine crisis: Russian troops crossed border, Nato says
And this is just the latest incursion.

[nenjin]

Well, the US doesn't have troops in Syria, Russia got troops in Ukraine.

Also, the US never trained the Syrian rebels, where did you get that silly notion of yours? RT?

He's actually right to a degree. We've been arming some vetted Syrian rebel groups that are opposed to Asad, and there are plans already in the works to train them. It's about 3 months behind schedule and isn't going to produce anything for another year or so.

[Culise]

Well, the US doesn't have troops in Syria, Russia got troops in Ukraine.

Also, the US never trained the Syrian rebels, where did you get that silly notion of yours? RT?

He's actually right to a degree. We've been arming some vetted Syrian rebel groups that are opposed to Asad, and there are plans already in the works to train them. It's about 3 months behind schedule and isn't going to produce anything for another year or so.

Yes, but it's been a very recent phenomenon (2013-2014).  That's two years of instability that went on without US aid.