An interesting article in the Wall Street Journal (not behind paywall).
What caught my eye was this:
While the U.S. backed Arab monarchies and Israel, the Soviets sided with leftist regimes in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Libya and South Yemen, which became the Arab world’s only Marxist state.
Hmm…. what else do these places have in common? Is what is going on over there as much the death throes of communism as the birth of radical islamism? We can see what is happening in Venezuela. Cuba may be able to minimize the effects if it can find a way to generate the tourism and other industries Puerto Rico has not. North Korea will be worst. But the entire Soviet Bloc has not fallen, only the European part.
Further,
Russia was too busy trying to prevent the breakup of its own rump post-Soviet state, bloodied by separatist uprisings in Chechnya and other Muslim regions. Mr. Putin successfully pacified those borderlands
Well, if Russia created the problem, and Russia has demonstrated that it can fix the problem, what is the matter with allowing Russia to do so?
http://www.wsj.com/articles/russias-long-road-to-the-middle-east-1464361067
Is perhaps the link that does not work.
Some insight indeed.
Fixed. Thanks.
Russia created the problem?
May be you short in stating that Russia created the problem?
Iraq, Afghanistan. Libya& Syria in fact US and other west aliens created the miss there you like it or not the reality is clear in Iraq and Libya however Syria although Qatari and Sudies and other members of GCC financed and support Anusrah front with turkey let those jihadests from around the world as hub for training and transition to Syria which very obvious with US & the west loudly for regim change which ended to million of flooded EU countries of refugees that none of you did asked very simple question why these people leaving their homes and land for unknown.
Anonymous Says:
May 30th, 2016 at 2:43 am
Uh. You might want to consider how Germany, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan etc. came back after wars.
Then contemplate Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan. Libya, Syria etc. Maybe the culture has something to d with it.
Then contemplate Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan. Libya, Syria etc. Maybe the culture has something to d with it.
Agreed
Let me make it explicit for our anonymous Ruskie, who is surprisingly illiterate for one chosen to troll in the west. How is the historic culture different in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Libya and South Yemen from that in Saudi Arabia, Oman, GCC states, Jordan, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco? Not much. The difference is in how thoroughly they fell into the Soviet camp. And how thoroughly they destroyed their indigenous culture and institutions to become part of the Soviet bloc. That left them defenceless when the Islamists arose. Certainly Osama and the 9/11 bombers were Saudi and Saudi’s continue to support Wahabbism. But not in Saudi Arabia. The poison only takes real roots in the former Russian colonies.
May be you short in stating that Russia created the problem? Iraq, Afghanistan. Libya & Syria in fact US and other west aliens created the miss there..
Ummm, what??? That’s what comes from being immersed in Russian propaganda. The entire mess we currently see in south Asia began when the USSR overthrew the peaceful kingdom in Afghanistan and attempted to set up a puppet marxist state there. Iraq, Libya and Syria are all former – and now failed – Soviet client states that have been waging wars on their neighbors for decades with Soviet and Russian support. Militant islam has arisen in the vacuum. Russia has poisoned the entire region and continues to do so. PenGun lends his moral support whenever he’s occasionally sober and able. Proud little traitor that he is.
Oh Michael you are a joy. Iraq, Libya and Syria were all either overthrown by America military force, Iraq, or pushed over, by America, in concert with their allies in that area.
Libya was really stupid and has unleashed Gaddafi’s vast store of weapons across the middle east. “We came we saw he died” My favorite Hillary quote.
In Syria we had a trumped up rebellion, actually quite similar to the Ukrainian fiasco, with snipers firing on the protesters to create a false narrative of oppression.
But this is detail, you want … I’m not sure what, but the truth does not support most of your narrative.
“Libya was really stupid”: like Iraq, it seemed so stupid that it made me wonder what the real purpose was. I doubt that I’ll live long enough to find out. Of course, maybe there was no hidden purpose: make they were all just bloody fools. Who knows?
We’ve discussed why Bush felt the Iraq invasion was necessary.
The real Iraq problem was the mental problems of Saddam. Like Idi Amin, he could have been left alone if he had confined his madness to his own people.
The Libya thing was brought about by the Europeans and Obama followed “leading from behind.” Hillary has no idea of geopolitics. She is into graft and corruption.
Syria was homegrown but Iran was the outside force that stimulated Assad, The Russians came along as Putin saw an advantage in the Mediterranean port that Russia has desired for 200 years.
The Soviets set off a lot of this with Afghanistan although the king was really “The Mayor of Kabul.” The rest of the Afghans were about at 400 BC except for AK 47s.
PehGun is a leftist who likes to blame the US for every world problem, probably as an outlet for his/her own feelings of inadequacy.
“PehGun is a leftist who likes to blame the US for every world problem, probably as an outlet for his/her own feelings of inadequacy.”
OK. As you have military bases all over the world and control a great deal of it, most of the world’s problems are indeed, if not your direct fault, because of it.
It is the continued need for preeminence that drives what America does. As any equal is a problem, to say nothing of those who will eventually be larger, American military and political force is directed to stopping that as long as possible. Russia was separated from Europe because the combination was larger, and becoming more successful, than the US economy. China is going to be the largest economy in the world fairly soon, and the ‘pivot to Asia’ is completely concerned with managing that.
The vast numbers of refugees that are trying to get to Europe, are largely created by American supported campaigns to consolidate and rule the middle east.
Not everything that goes wrong can be laid at America’s feet, but a great deal can.
“Putin saw an advantage in the Mediterranean port that Russia has desired for 200 years.”
Russia has leased and used that port since 1971.
Mrs. Davis Says (May 30th, 2016 at 5:26 am):
How is the historic culture different in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Libya and South Yemen from that in Saudi Arabia, Oman, GCC states, Jordan, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco? Not much. The difference is in how thoroughly they fell into the Soviet camp. And how thoroughly they destroyed their indigenous culture and institutions to become part of the Soviet bloc.
The errors in this paragraph are enormous.
To start with, the historic culture of Saudi Arabia, the GCC, Oman, and Yemen is of rural poverty and isolation, whereas the historic culture of Egypt, Syria, and Iraq is one of ancient civilization, great cities, and continual interaction with the rest of the world. Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia are more similar to Egypt than Arabia, and were in addition governed by France for a century. So there were great cultural differences before the Soviets got involved at all.
Second, none of the listed states ever “destroyed their indigenous culture… to become part of the Soviet bloc”. The USSR was quite ruthless about allying with and arming regimes that were in no way Communist, provided they were anti-Western. They had essentially no influence on the domestic policies of any of these regimes. The Ba’ath creed of Syria and Iraq owed more to Nazism than anything else. But the Soviets didn’t care; they got a naval base in the Med from Syria. Iraq and Libya bought billions in arms, and Libya provided a safe base for terrorists, including those the Soviets sponsored.
Beyond these weltpolitik maneuvers, the Soviets had little further involvement.
Ba’athists were socialists. Co-founder Michel Aflaq was a communist. Their ideology was based on one-party secular Pan-Arabism, which was a disaster for indigenous people such as Syriac Christians and Mizrahim.
Interesting, even at this stage in the game, this is still being referred to as a “refugee” situation. Suspension of disbelief?