News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Syrian government falls in end to 50-year rule of Assad f... by adamsb6 on Sunday December 08, 2024 @04:37AM (#42356117)
Saddam Hussein was a brutal despot who also kept his own country’s factions from waging war on one another.

It didn’t turn out well when we took him off the board.

Re:Syrian government falls in end to 50-year rule of Assad f... by rswail on Sunday December 08, 2024 @08:15AM (#42356936)
You might remember that the US royally fucked up the process after taking him off the board.

Both Syria and Lebanon have managed, in the past, to work out a way for their various regions and tribal/ethnic groups to co-exist.

Re:Syrian government falls in end to 50-year rule of Assad f... by jpmoral on Sunday December 08, 2024 @04:44AM (#42356149)
Wasn't a large part of that caused by the de-Baathification of the government and security forces?
Re:Syrian government falls in end to 50-year rule of Assad f... by dralley on Sunday December 08, 2024 @08:27AM (#42356993)
And Iranian / Syrian funded militias.
Re:Syrian government falls in end to 50-year rule of Assad f... by jampekka on Sunday December 08, 2024 @04:40AM (#42356133)
And the same in Libya.
Re:Syrian government falls in end to 50-year rule of Assad f... by DiscourseFan on Sunday December 08, 2024 @05:26AM (#42356310)
The Libyan war is just some bullshit to keep oil prices low, its very close to being a manufactured situation
Re:Syrian government falls in end to 50-year rule of Assad f... by jampekka on Sunday December 08, 2024 @07:54AM (#42356847)
Same could be argued about the last 100 years of the region. West doesn't give a shit about these countries as long as they keep selling oil (in dollars).

West propped and props up Islamism (and other tyrannies) to prevent nationalisations of oil resources. Seems to be mostly working as intended.

Re:Syrian government falls in end to 50-year rule of Assad f... by southernplaces7 on Monday December 09, 2024 @01:52PM (#42369211)
>It didn’t turn out well when we took him off the board.

No? The post-invasion process turned into a simmering insurgency followed by a loose civil war, but since then and so far, Iraq has stabilized into a more or less functional state in which investment is growing and living standards are again moving upwards. I don't see how the automatic response of "it didn't turn out well" applies. The shaky morality of a historical decision (invasion and toppling Saddam in this case) doesn't necessarily translate to a bad outcome in the long run.