Lets all give props to Putin for averting WW III!!

[ExodusNirvana]

LOL those chicks from p*ssy Riot are still in jail...keep stanning Putin though

 

[Blackking]

... perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the commander-in-chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 42 other countries -- including Norway -- in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.
Still, we are at war, and I'm responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill, and some will be killed. And so I come here with an acute sense of the costs of armed conflict -- filled with difficult questions about the relationship between war and peace, and our effort to replace one with the other.

... over time, as codes of law sought to control violence within groups, so did philosophers and clerics and statesmen seek to regulate the destructive power of war. The concept of a "just war" emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when certain conditions were met: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the force used is proportional; and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence ....

...with the advent of the nuclear age, it became clear to victor and vanquished alike that the world needed institutions to prevent another world war. And so, a quarter century after the United States Senate rejected the League of Nations -- an idea for which Woodrow Wilson received this prize -- America led the world in constructing an architecture to keep the peace: a Marshall Plan and a United Nations, mechanisms to govern the waging of war, treaties to protect human rights, prevent genocide, restrict the most dangerous weapons.

And yet, a decade into a new century, this old architecture is buckling under the weight of new threats. The world may no longer shudder at the prospect of war between two nuclear superpowers, but proliferation may increase the risk of catastrophe. Terrorism has long been a tactic, but modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder innocents on a horrific scale.

Moreover, wars between nations have increasingly given way to wars within nations. The resurgence of ethnic or sectarian conflicts; the growth of secessionist movements, insurgencies, and failed states -- all these things have increasingly trapped civilians in unending chaos. In today's wars, many more civilians are killed than soldiers; the seeds of future conflict are sown, economies are wrecked, civil societies torn asunder, refugees amassed, children scarred.

We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth: We will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations -- acting individually or in concert -- will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified....

Pres. Obama

 

[Suicide King]

support autocrats brehs

I'll add and re-post what I said in the syria thread from a NYTimes commentator

I'll add and re-post what I said in the syria thread from a NYTimes commentator

"We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos."

For over two years, Russia has blocked every UN intervention proposed to stop Assad's slaughter of 100,000 Syrian people, the creation of 2,000,000 refugees fleeing their own country and over 6,000,000 Syrians displaced from their own homes, all along supplying Assad with state of the art weaponry.

During this period, when Russia and Syria worked against the United Nations, ignoring the pleas of human rights organizations and the US and the EU to negotiate a political solution with the Free Syria movement, Al Quaeda fighters from every corner of the globe took advantage and entered Syria. Al Nusra Front, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant in Syria is largely the result of that.

In a UN report recently released documenting the horrendous use of chemical weapons in Syria, one attack, among the smallest, has been linked to the rebels while every other one, and there have been many, have been found to have been directly released by the Assad government.

This is a beautifully written piece but it ignores years of Russian obstruction of UN intervention.

However, I applaud President Putin's move toward the UN and President Obama's, also. If the Syrian people are to be saved, it will be at the UN. How unfortunate that two long, brutal years have been wasted.

All this means is Russia is not hypocrites if they are pushing their agenda through the proper channels. They are asking America to do the same. Because where was American when Russia/Syria was given people that work? This is what I want to know. America's m.o. can't be ignore a problem when it is not big enough, and then go to the guns when things get unpleasant. Not many people are happy with the prospect of the U.S. going to war and it seems U.S. is still using the same approach of the 80s and 90s.

 

[keepemup]

http://www.thecoli.com/threads/the-putin-system.144326/

It's not my job to watch a forty minute video to look for what you're claiming is evidence.

Simply point out what evidence you think you have. At least give a time in the video.

 

[keepemup]

They have blocked UN intervention simply because the evidence is lacking and they always seem to want to involve themselves in the domestic disputes of others. Imagine if China or Britain had insisted on picking a side during the civil war? It's nonsense.

It is not the UN's job to involve itself in domestic disputes. The UN exists to prevent nations from attacking each other, particularly protecting weaker countries from smaller ones, for precisely the reasons that are being pushed for intervention today.

 

[Suicide King]

It is not the UN's job to involve itself in domestic disputes. The UN exists to prevent nations from attacking each other, particularly protecting weaker countries from smaller ones, for precisely the reasons that are being pushed for intervention today.

No. Especially if you have been paying attention to the last 40 years.

 

[keepemup]

No. Especially if you have been paying attention to the last 40 years.

Nonsense.

The excerpt below is directly from the charter of the UN.


CHAPTER I: PURPOSES AND PRINCIPLES
Article 1
The Purposes of the United Nations are:

1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
3. To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.

The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.

1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
5. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.
6. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.
7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.

 

[Suicide King]

Nonsense.

The excerpt below is directly from the charter of the UN.

My best guess you don't understand the charter, especially the first paragraph of Article 1.

 

[keepemup]

And you didn't bother to read article 2.

 

[Suicide King]

Pres. Obama

I know Putin is playing chess, and he his agenda is obvious with this op-ed. But these guys deal with conflicts right at their door step. Can you blame them? They have interest just as anyone else and they have a right to persevere their interests just as anyone. Right or wrong, America needs to come to the table. Its 2013 and America still on that War shiit? China already let it be know, to miss them with all that. Now, Russia wants it to be known too. Obama is taking the wrong approach and leaving us exposed again, times of peace is important to national security just the same as a show of force.

And you didn't bother to read article 2.

They don't contradict each other, Article 2 adds teeth to Article 1.

 

[thekingsmen]

I kind of feel bad for Obama. No matter what he does people will always demonize him even though it's clear he's trying to do the right thing. Unlike his predecessor he never invaded countries for his personal/political benefits. The Libyan people asked for help to over throw a tyrant and we did just that and got the fukk out of there. No the Syrian people are asking for help and Obama is getting criticized for doing the humane thing. 99% of Muslims aren't terrorists and helping some of these Muslim countries get rid of there dictators might actually be beneficial to the US because the number one tool a terrorist organization has is recruiting people who hate America. If we go in there and get rid of Asad I find it hard to believe that the Syrian people will somehow become terrorists who will attack America.

It's sad that the Right and Russians are brainwashing people into thinking Asad is a good guy and is the only person who can keep Syrians together. Guys like Asad is why the Middle East hates us because we hand picked these dictators and put them in power for our personal agendas instead of letting the democratic process take it's course. No Obama want's to undo that and people are bashing him for it. Reality is that people want to live in peace and that's no different in the Middle East.

1. So Obama is a saint that is innocent of wrong doing?
2. The Libyan People didn't ask for the help, you are misinformed.
3. The Tool is to assume the Muslim Countries hate America for just hating America. It's the Foreign Policy.
4. 99% of the dictators in the Middle East are because of the U.S. putting them in power
5. Assad has kept the country together. He has been in office since 2000, why didn't he feel threaten then? How about the next year or the follow year after that?
6. This is about helping Israel and nothing else.

 

[Suicide King]

5. Assad has kept the country together. He has been in office since 2000, why didn't he feel threaten then? How about the next year or the follow year after that?

Basically.

Just because America got guns, they can't keep going to the extreme on everything.

Going from 0 to 60 is not going to fly in 2013. It is making us look silly.

I don't side with Assad, Russia, or U.S., I'm just looking for a middle ground.

 

[thekingsmen]

Basically.

Just because America got guns, they can't keep going to the extreme on everything.

Going from 0 to 60 is not going to fly in 2013. It is making us look silly.

word...

 

[¯\_(ツ)_/¯]

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Are people still dying in Syria, i'm confused, what did Putin accomplish that want aided by Obama threatening military strikes and key not being a fukking blabbermouth