What's new

Russia and China veto UN Resolution against Syria

Russia was never going to vote no due the the military base and its finger in the Syrian pie. Russia still clings to its soviet style outlook of "my friends are not your friends" attitude. I think China's response that it didnt want regime change is pretty much the bottom line. Discussions of amended resolutions and pressure from other members is a moot point.
I think when its all said and done there will be regime change in Syria. China should recognize this and hedge its bets accordingly. And to the rest of the world it still shows China as still a schoolboy when comes to stepping up the the plate and doing the right thing. As the old saying goes "Evil only exists when good people stand back and do nothing"

nope there's not gonna be regime change because there's about 1000 terrorists in the country that hide among civilians.
 
Russia was never going to vote no due the the military base and its finger in the Syrian pie. Russia still clings to its soviet style outlook of "my friends are not your friends" attitude. I think China's response that it didnt want regime change is pretty much the bottom line. Discussions of amended resolutions and pressure from other members is a moot point.
I think when its all said and done there will be regime change in Syria. China should recognize this and hedge its bets accordingly. And to the rest of the world it still shows China as still a schoolboy when comes to stepping up the the plate and doing the right thing. As the old saying goes "Evil only exists when good people stand back and do nothing"

I also agree, very much regret, you look China has no power to stop the West from crime.
 
To clarify and answer some points:

- All existing and upcoming powers are engaged in a battle of influence and resources, so it is wrong to say that Russia/China do not desire to 'control' other countries. Realistically, they all do. When I wrote my 'advice' about installing puppets, it was an acknowledgement of reality. Ideally, each country should be left alone to find its democratic balance based on purely internal forces but, if the big powers will do their power play, it's much better that they 'fight' in the media, rather than with guns. The only people who get hurt in these proxy battles are the locals.

- Secondly, while the international media is a tough nut to crack for non-Anglo countries, there is still room for local media manipulation. The dark side of 'free' media is 'for sale' media. Chinese/Russian propagandists are not even in the same league as Western propagandists. The latter are absolute masters of subliminal control.
 
If I take some of the Chinese comments here of "let them work it out themselves" it seems perfectly reasonable. But there is no chance here of anybody working anything out. I dont know what your history is like but Assad is just a leaf out of his fathers book. A brutal dictator, supporter of terrorism and knows only how to rule down the barrel of a gun. Sure I can understand China's unwillingness to get involved, they should of abstained from voting.
 
If I take some of the Chinese comments here of "let them work it out themselves" it seems perfectly reasonable. But there is no chance here of anybody working anything out. I dont know what your history is like but Assad is just a leaf out of his fathers book. A brutal dictator, supporter of terrorism and knows only how to rule down the barrel of a gun. Sure I can understand China's unwillingness to get involved, they should of abstained from voting.

That's Dr. Assad, btw. He is a medical doctor.
 
As long as majority of Syrians support the government, and main source of unrest is foreign armed and trained terrorists, I dont see any use of UN resolution, which is just meant to legitimize military attack to change the regime to puppets.
 
To clarify and answer some points:

- All existing and upcoming powers are engaged in a battle of influence and resources, so it is wrong to say that Russia/China do not desire to 'control' other countries. Realistically, they all do. When I wrote my 'advice' about installing puppets, it was an acknowledgement of reality. Ideally, each country should be left alone to find its democratic balance based on purely internal forces but, if the big powers will do their power play, it's much better that they 'fight' in the media, rather than with guns. The only people who get hurt in these proxy battles are the locals.

- Secondly, while the international media is a tough nut to crack for non-Anglo countries, there is still room for local media manipulation. The dark side of 'free' media is 'for sale' media. Chinese/Russian propagandists are not even in the same league as Western propagandists. The latter are absolute masters of subliminal control.

Can only say that any country want to get more influence, but that some principle is best not to break, for example, direct interference and armed intervention.
 
weldone russia and china
but what did pakistan?

Probably because of Saudi Arabia, in any case, the spokesman for Pakistan at the UN, has said that China and Russia's proposal needs to be more concerned about, I can understand Pakistan, everyone has some difficulties.
 
If I take some of the Chinese comments here of "let them work it out themselves" it seems perfectly reasonable. But there is no chance here of anybody working anything out. I dont know what your history is like but Assad is just a leaf out of his fathers book. A brutal dictator, supporter of terrorism and knows only how to rule down the barrel of a gun. Sure I can understand China's unwillingness to get involved, they should of abstained from voting.

Problem is that if China forfeit and let western powers overthrow leaders that are not friendly to them, one after another and soon enough NATO powers will start to do the same thing to China, given the fact that western media never stop manipulating news to bash China. China simply doesn't like imperalism power messing up internal affairs of developing countries in the name of spreading "freedom".
 
Russia was never going to vote no due the the military base and its finger in the Syrian pie. Russia still clings to its soviet style outlook of "my friends are not your friends" attitude. I think China's response that it didnt want regime change is pretty much the bottom line. Discussions of amended resolutions and pressure from other members is a moot point.
I think when its all said and done there will be regime change in Syria. China should recognize this and hedge its bets accordingly. And to the rest of the world it still shows China as still a schoolboy when comes to stepping up the the plate and doing the right thing. As the old saying goes "Evil only exists when good people stand back and do nothing"

when china first learned to act like a great power, aussies hadn't even conquered england yet, so no one gives a damn about what you think of chinese
 
Russia was never going to vote no due the the military base and its finger in the Syrian pie. Russia still clings to its soviet style outlook of "my friends are not your friends" attitude. I think China's response that it didnt want regime change is pretty much the bottom line. Discussions of amended resolutions and pressure from other members is a moot point.
I think when its all said and done there will be regime change in Syria. China should recognize this and hedge its bets accordingly. And to the rest of the world it still shows China as still a schoolboy when comes to stepping up the the plate and doing the right thing. As the old saying goes "Evil only exists when good people stand back and do nothing"

That's what happened in Libya. Fortunately, Russia and China are not standing back this time and are making sure that evil NATO doesn't destroy Syria.
 
Back
Top Bottom