President Assad (who is bad) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels (who are good) started winning.
So, a Coalition of Assad (still bad) Putin (extra bad) and the Iranians (good, but in a bad sort of way) are going to attack IS (who are bad) which is a good thing, but also the Syrian Rebels (who are good) which is bad.
So Assad (bad) is now probably good, being better than IS (no real choice there) and since Putin and Iran are also fighting IS that may now make them good. America (still good) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr Putin (now good) and that mad ayatollah in Iran (also good) and so they may be forced to say that the Rebels are now bad, or at the very least abandon them to their fate. This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join IS (still the only constantly bad group).
That should clear it up.
3 comments:
if you start out with the US being bad, which it is, then everything else makes sense. the US starts all this chaos, toppling nations, installing puppet regimes, 5 nations in 7 years remember? what is the need for the US military being in the middle east anyway?
I saw a Tee shirt right after 9-11 that said "Nuke them all and let God sort it out". Sounds good to me.
Should've left Saddam Hussein the hell alone, he was exactly the kind of brutal dictator needed to keep Iraq functioning, and the extremists put down.
Post a Comment