“Both leaders affirmed the need for international cooperation but provided little hope for a solution.”
Source: Putin and Obama Have Profound Differences on Syria – The New York Times
This editorial leaves me cold. But there was a comment I found brilliant.
Mark Thomason
is a trusted commenter Clawson, Mich 10 hours ago
“Putin is inflexible and not offering much compromise. But neither is Obama, nor is truth all on the side of Obama.
Yes, Assad’s initial repression of opposition created the conditions for an insurgency.
What Obama’s story line leaves out is that the West then took that opportunity. It began to fund, arm, train, organize in camps, and otherwise promote that insurgency.
Obama also leaves out that the armed groups of the insurgency promoted by the West ran out of control and became ISIS and al Nusra/alQaeda.
Obama also leaves out that the very same Western powers which took that opportunity of Assad’s repression to promote this insurgency ALSO themselves engaged in the exact same repression against the exact same democracy movement at the same time, as in Bahrain and the Shiite areas of Saudi Arabia itself.
Obama also leaves out that with those insurgency groups having run out of control, and our new groups having failed completely, Obama now has no alternative to Assad to offer. His best offer today is Assad’s regime without Assad personally. Obama as a head of state himself must know it is the regime that is the issue in running or oppressing a country, not one person. Obama’s idea makes no sense.
As for Putin, his forces have NOT “flooded” into Syria, at least not yet. Nine tanks is not a flood, nor is half a dozen helicopters. Any at all is significant, but Putin has not yet paid the price of sending a flood, and we don’t know he is willing to pay such a high price.”
