扭腰时报读者评论几乎成为反美论坛

我怀疑是不是俄罗斯政府的水军发的帖子


smath,  Nj 7 hours ago
I think what this shows is not so much "Obama is feckless and clueless" "Obama being in over his head" that seems to be a mantra for many on the right. Rather, it shows us how we, citizens of a pluralistic democracy, cannot even begin to understand all the internecine, tribal, shifting alliances in the region. They seem to change their alliances on what seems to be a daily basis. How on earth can we keep track of all these groups, tribes, clans, movements? The U.S./Obama trying to hold the place together would be like trying to hold off an ocean using a bathroom stopper. We had absolutely NO business sticking our noses into their business.
     我并不觉得奥巴马显得不负责任和无知,在很多右派的人看来"奥巴马......."
We were the proverbial bull in a china shop and the havoc and chaos we unleashed with our ill begotten invasion of Iraq has tragically left our armed forces and the innocent civilians of the region holding the shards and smithereens of the china - what was at least a semblance of peace for a good part of the region, with Saddam Hussein mostly contained.
Again, my condolences to all those who have suffered as a result of this war and the ensuing chaos and destruction.

Reply
228Recommend


OrtoAzia
New York 7 hours ago
The hypocrisy of the West get ever more mind boggling. Russia is attacking Al-Queda elements and the West is not happy. Al-Quaeda that US has blamed for 9/11!!! Looks like the West's anti-Russia hysteria transcends andy rational thinking. At this point even if Russia comes up with a cure for cancer, the West stands to come up with phony explanation why the treatment is not good. Unbelievable.
     西方国家的虚伪让人吃惊,俄罗斯攻打基地组织而西方很不高兴.就是那个被我们谴责制造9/11的那个盖达,看起来西方国家歇斯底里般的反俄罗斯让他们失去理性;现在如果俄罗斯找到治疗癌症的方法,西方国家也会找出虚假的理由说这个(治疗癌症的方法)不好,真的难以置信.



Tim
Atlanta 5 hours ago
It's somewhat infuriating to hear people bemoan this as the result of "weak" or "failed" leadership. Such statements beg the question of what exactly we could have done in the past five years that would have altered the situation. Invade? Send 100,000 Americans (because that's what it would take) to occupy a neighbor of Iraq? How'd that go last time? Is Yemen our fault to? What about Egypt? Pakistan? Are regional/tribal/ethnic conflicts really something the military is good at resolving? Hmm what's going on in Afghanistan as we speak? Sound like the neocons from the 2000's... reading too much Tom Clancy. Easy to say, impossible to do. Good luck to Russia, and I mean it somewhat sincerely.
   有时听到人们抱怨(奥巴马)的领导能力,说什么"虚弱,失败的",这些言论让我们深思过去五年里我们应该干什么才会真正的改变当前的局势? 派10万美军(因为真正需要这么多)去占领伊拉克邻国? 上一次(占领别的国家)的结局是什么样的? 也门是不是也是我们的错? 那么埃及呢?巴基斯坦? 美军是不是真的是解决地区/教派/种族冲突的良方呢? 现在的阿富汗是什么情形呢? 听起来和10年前的新保守分子说的那样? (意思是说美国应该再次介入其它国家内政),读了太多Tom Clancy的(军事/间谍相关的小说家),说得容易,做起来难, 祝俄罗斯好运气,我可是真心.


Reply
152Recommend


jrhamp
Overseas 7 hours ago
Someone in the news business should ask George W. of what he would do with the current crisis, assuming that it, if he knows where Syria is...!
   媒体界的人应该问问小布什他面对当前的局势会怎么办,当然我们假定小布什知道叙利亚在什么地方?



Upstate Joe
Upstate 6 hours ago
The Russians are looking to keep Assad in power and help him retake all of Syria. Frankly, it is the only way to end ISIS in Syria and stabilize the country. In order to accomplish this though Syria and the Russians have to get through territory that is under other rebel control first then push on through. Why would any military force leave an enemy force to their rear? Enough with the Anti-Russian propaganda, we will let then continue because even our politicians know that the Russians have the only plan to stabilize Syria. Of course you will never hear the administration admit it, just like the previous administration never admitted their mistakes "liberating" the Middle East.
     俄罗斯希望让阿萨德继续掌权并重新控制叙利亚全境;说实话,这是在叙利亚干掉ISIS并稳定国家的唯一办法,为了达到这个目的叙/俄得首先从叛军夺回控制权. (想想看)会有任何军队会把屁股留给敌人吗? (意思是说让ISIS/反政府控制叙利亚大片领土) 我听够了反俄罗斯的宣传,但是美国依然让俄罗斯继续下去因为我们的政客知道只有俄罗斯才打算稳定叙利亚. 当然你永远听不到奥巴马政府承认这个,就像上届政府绝不会承认"解放"中东所犯的错误那样.


Reply
91Recommend

etb
DC 7 hours ago
This is what happens when your president is a community organizer.
     你的总统是一个社区组织者(意思是说奥巴马没有真的领导能力)的话,你所得到的就是这些(中东当前混乱的结局)

Outside the Box
is a trusted commenter America 7 hours ago
We need to press on with the liberal agenda of happy talk about democracy, diversity, equality, and passivity. Eventually Putin and Assad will see the evil of their ways and and we will all be joining hands and singing kumbaya.
     我们应该继续自由派的纲领:民主,多元化,平等,非激进. 最终普京和阿萨德会看到他们的邪恶的一面,而我们也会和他们携手共同向上帝祈祷 {这个是在讽刺美国的政策}

Reply
76Recommend

Carol lee
Minnesota 6 hours ago
I suggest that John McCain, who stirred this thing up to begin with, go to Syria and figure out who the moderate rebels are. The place is a mess, and it's a lot closer to Russia than the U.S. One would hope that the next time a Senator or free lancer at the State Department wants to go out and save the world for democracy someone will raise the alarm. It appears that the usual suspects think that we should control Syria, Ukraine, Crimea etc. The neo cons and the new American Century ---last week I read that Paul Wolfowiz has contacted the President to support taking in Syrian refugees. That's rich.
     我建议麦凯恩 (他促成叙利亚的局势)去叙利亚弄清楚谁是温和的反对派. 那个地方一片混乱,离俄罗斯比离美国要近的多. 真希望下一次某个参议员或国务院(相当于中国的外交部)的自由撰稿人再次宣传(美国应该)拯救世界的民主,大家应该警觉. 看起来这些人通常认为我们应该掌控叙利亚,乌克兰,克里米亚. 新保守派和American Century(美国极度保守的右翼智囊团体,极力鼓吹美国价值观)---上一次我读到有关沃尔福威茨的事是说他和奥巴马联系并支持美国收留叙利亚难民, 那真的很丰富啊{这个是讽刺保守派一方面大肆宣传美国基督教国家是多么的好,穆斯林是多么的怀,而他却做出对美国不利的事[吸收穆斯林难民]}



Thinker
Northern California 4 hours ago
"To put it quaintly, Putin deserves a taste of American steel."  "说得维妙一些: 普京应该品尝美国的铁拳"

To put it even more quaintly:   说得再维妙一些:

Putin deserves our thanks, and our non-interference. It's long past time that someone stepped in to stabilize Syria. We'd rather see the chaos continue than to see Assad win. I'd rather see Assad win if that ends the chaos. So would Russia, and so would Assad. So be it -- at least that approach gets rid of ISIS, which is the only alternative (other than the al Qaeda affiliate, al Nusra Front).
    我们应该感谢普京,更应该不要干涉别国. 早就应该有人来介入并让叙利亚稳定下来.但是美国更希望看到叙利亚混乱,而不是阿萨德赢得胜利. 如果能够结束叙利亚混乱的话我宁愿看到阿萨德获胜. 俄罗斯是那样想的,阿萨德也一样. 还是接受这个吧,至少(支持阿萨德)可以干掉ISIS,我们别无选择(除非你想让基地组织的伙伴al Nusra Front控制叙利库iya)

Who, exactly, would be better off if ISIS, or the al Nusra Front, ends up in control of Syria rather than Assad? Israel may not like Assad, but he's the devil they know; I'm sure they prefer him to the alternatives.
We've had fun, I suppose, prolonging this war with our semi-competent CIA commandos sneaking into Syria with boxes of weapons and fistfuls of $100 bills. But it's been a lot less fun for the Syrian people. Why don't we poll them with this question:

"If Russia helps Assad to regain control of Syria and prevent ISIS or the al Nusra Front from taking control, will you consider that a good outcome?"

How do you suppose the Syrian people would answer that question? Do you think their answer might be different from the answer given by the US government? If so, whose answer should matter here?


Dan
New York, NY 6 hours ago
What is the problem here?   这个到底有什么问题? (指俄罗斯支持阿萨德)

Russia is attacking the Islamist terrorists across the board not just ISIS but any type of Islamist terrorist running amok in Syria trying to topple a secular government chosen by popular vote.
  俄罗斯打击所有的伊斯兰恐怖分子,而不仅仅是ISIS,而是叙利亚所有的伊斯兰恐怖分子,他们试图推翻民选的世俗政府

This type of outcry starting from the Obama administration to the NYTimes Editorials plainly exhibits hypocrisy running in this country.
     奥巴马政府对于纽约时报的社论发出的惊呼(应该是奥巴马对于纽约时报批评他的中东政策的社论 )明显的展示出这个国家虚伪的一面.

Sir, there was no moderate Islamist terrorist that CIA has been arming for years in Syria! They were and all are terrorists that must be dealt with.
    总统先生,中央情报局多年来训练的人当中没有温和的伊斯兰恐怖分子,他们过去/现在都是恐怖分子,必须得到美国的打击

Now Putin of Russia is exactly onto point to get rid of this poor country savaged by these barbarians.
    现在俄罗斯的普京说他清除摧毁的那个国家野蛮人真是说道点子上了.

What's the purpose of of this hypocrsy?
    我们的虚伪的政策的目的到底是为什么?




Southern Boy
Spring Hill, TN 7 hours ago
Russia is doing what the US does not have will to do.
    俄罗斯正在干美国没有勇气去干的事.

Reply
66Recommend




NYT Pick

B. Rothman
NYC 5 hours ago
Many of the comments here denigrate our President and his policies in the ME, but their alternative is for the US to go back into the area with our own troops or with more fire power, e.g. John McCain. We know from our experience in Iraq and elsewhere that we cannot win for the people what they are unwilling or unable to do for themselves and Syria is more complicated, given at least two stakeholders besides Assad.
   这里的很多评论贬低我们的总统和他在中东的政策,但是另外的选择是美国重新派军,或者利用麦凯恩的火力(讽刺他开口就是要军事打击某某某). 从我们过去的经验来看,伊拉克和周边国家的人们要么不愿意,要么没有能力为他们自己奋斗(是指结束内战,重新和平发展自己的国家),而叙利亚更复杂,因为除了阿萨德以外还有两个利益相关方.

Are all these war lovers prepared to see their kids end up as de facto Assad supporters? Because that is what you'll have at the end of this. Putin is there and bombing first the moderates who oppose Assad because they are fewer in number and less well organized (in fact, still quarreling amongst themselves.) I'll wait to see how Putin handles ISIS for Assad. That is the real test. Sometimes you don't know that you've put your foot in quick sand until you start sinking. But in any case, Assad would be the winner; and the same people now talking about how incapable our President has been would then start complaining about the fact that he did what they recommended and it didn't get the desired result. Putin only needs to support Assad. Obama's critics want to replace Assad. The critics live to denigrate what they already hate but they have no alternative ideas that are better -- and that includes Senator McCain who seemingly never saw a war he didn't want us to fight, until we don't win through absolutely to some line of post WWII victory.
    那些所有好战分子准备让他们的子女成为阿萨德实际上的支持者吗? (意思是说美国介入内政最终获利的是阿萨德)? 因为这个是最终的结果.普京首先轰炸反阿萨德的温和派,因为他们人数少并且组织性差(实际上他们之间还互相争吵),我想等着看普京如何为阿萨德清除ISIS.......

Thinker
Northern California 4 hours ago
Yes, this is good for Assad, but it's also good for us:
    是的,这个有利于阿萨德,对我们也是有利的.

"The Russians are bombing all Assads opponents, starting with non ISIS rebels. Sounds like a good turn of events for Assad."
   俄国人轰炸阿萨德的所有对手,首先从非ISIS反叛分子开始,看起来对阿萨德是一个转机

Are we so intent on getting rid of Assad that we'll weaken the effort to defeat ISIS? That's really the question, isn't it? I say: Do what it takes to get rid of ISIS. If backing Assad is the best way to achieve that result, then back Assad. That's what Russia's doing. If you just can't bear to help Assad, then at least stay out of the way. That's what we should do.
     我们是不是决心清除阿萨德从而削弱我们击败ISIS的努力? 那可真是一个问题啊? 是不是? 依我说: 用一切手段清除ISIS. 如果支持阿萨德是清除ISIS的最佳方案的话,那么就应该支持他. 俄罗斯正在干这个,如果你无法容忍支持阿萨德,那么至少请让开.那是我们应该做的.



Isak Borg
Enisey 6 hours ago
This is a great opportunity for us to get out of this mess. Russians, Syrians, Al-Qaida, Nusra, ISIS and their Arab supporters - none of them friendly to the U.S., are killing each other wholesale. All we have to do is leave them to their own devices, and they'll do the work for us. Obama should take this gift from Putin, and stop any involvment in the Middle Eest.
    这个是我们脱离这个混乱形势的绝佳机会. 俄罗斯人,叙利亚,基地组织, Nusra, ISIS 和他们的阿拉伯支持者,没有一个人是我们的朋友.他们之间大规模互相杀戮. 我们所需要做的就是让他们互相斗争,他们帮助我们干我们需要做的事(指清除ISIS). 奥巴马应该大方的接受普京的这个礼物,停止在中东的任何军事行动


Reply
54Recommend


Student
New York, NY 5 hours ago
Russian plan:   俄罗斯的计划:
get rid of rebels  杀死反对派
restore assad's grip on power  恢复阿萨德的权力
with assad firmly at the reins, no room/tolerance for ISIS   在阿萨德完全控制后,不让ISIS获得任何空间
therefore, bombing rebels means attacking ISIS    这样来看的话,轰炸反对派就等于攻击ISIS

US plan:   美国的计划
arm rebels   武装反对派
foment unrest   制造混乱
drop bombs      丢下炸弹
increase disorder  增加混乱
improve conditions for ISIS growth and regional destabilization    给ISIS发展壮大提供条件并促进该地区的混乱


JSH
Louisiana 7 hours ago
What we are seeing in Syria right now is due to weak American leadership. The fact that Russia is openly supporting the dictator Assad is just more proof that Obama just doesn't get it when it comes to foreign policy. What is even scarier is that so many in the US are just fine with a weak America. The situation in Syria would be much different today if Obama had more conviction in opposing, with force if necessary, the Assad regime as well as standing up to Russia as they invade neighbors and now openly attack the Syrian forces who neither want ISIS nor a dictatorship. Meanwhile Obama says we will take in tens of thousands of migrants and the west is left with a huge humanitarian crisis in Europe. This is what the lack of American leadership looks like.
    我们在叙利亚所看到的一切归咎于懦弱的美国领导力量. 俄罗斯公开支持独裁者阿萨德的这个事实更加证明奥巴马对外交一无所知. 更为可怕的是那么多的美国人对于削弱了的美国这一点无所谓........................



Patrick
New York 6 hours ago
The US government's policy reminds me of the shifting alliances and propaganda of Orwell's "1984." Lest we forget or are tempted to engage in doublethink, Al-Qaeda used to be depicted as the terrorist enemy of America. Now Al-Qaeda has been transformed into our rebel ally against Syria's Assad, who replaces Orwell's Emmanuel Goldstein as the designated arch-villain du jour we are all supposed to hate and loath during the media's "two minutes hate" pieces.


Reply
42Recommend

ScottK
Atlanta 7 hours ago
If one chooses not to lead, someone else (Russia) will.


Marvinsky
New York 5 hours ago
If I was President I would drop the hysterical American anti-Russia momentum in its tracks, and state that there are common interests and then I would pursue them where practical. If the US can find cause to "ally" with Saudi Arabia -- and dozens of others hideous regimes since 1945 and before -- it surely can work with Russia instead of against it. To suggest we have been more virtuous than Russia at all times is ridiculous and a lie that is not even self-serving.

The one thing the US has not done -- except in space where the results have been spectacular -- is trying to partner with the Russians to see whether giving that old nation its due might have gigantic pay-offs. We are killing ourselves with ethnocentric, myopic, box-think.




Jose Pardinas
Conshohocken, PA 6 hours ago
Putin is the smartest political leader alive today by something like a light-year. And he's demonstrating this fact (again) in Syria:

He's lancing the boil that is ISIS by going immediately for its source. Namely, the US-backed CIA-trained “moderates” who provide ISIS with an endless supply of advanced American weapons and a constant stream of fighters.


Reply
40Recommend


Joshua Schwartz
Ramat-Gan, Israel 7 hours ago
"But the Army of Conquest itself embodies the ambivalence of American policy".

Ambivalence perhaps, but confusion might be a more apt description. The Russians, though, do not seem to be confused and they are not ambivalent as to who they support and whom they do not, nor regarding their priorities in the matter.

Not to worry, though. By the time the Russians are finished, the non-extremist (or less extremist) opposition forces will not exist. If the Russians are successful, only Mr. Assad will exist. How many will die on the way in the wake of the US's ambivalent (or confused) policy?


Nevis07
CT 6 hours ago
Now that America and our 'allies' have lost the strategic initiative, here's the lesson learned for those in Washington: the use of our military needs to be viewed as a broad sword, not a surgical knife. Senator Rubio, during the last GOP debate was spot on regarding this issue; if we're going to put our men and women in harms way, we had better have a winnable goal and give them the resources to eventuate that outcome. That means the use of force needs to be carefully debated. This will hopefully force our leaders to truly consider what is in America's true best interests - unfortunately, Iraq has caused our leadership to be scared of their own shadow. Either go all in and provide the necessary resources, or stay out of it entirely, half measured involvement doesn't help serve America's interests and it just puts our men and women in harms way.




maryann
austinviaseattle 5 hours ago
There is a fundamental reality that the leadership in the West continues to ignore: Pro-Western moderates are a minority in the Middle East. And that being the case, how can we install a pro Western, moderate government in Syria or anywhere else and call it a representative democracy?

The simple reality is that you can't. The Russians understand that, and are dealing with the reality that an Assad government is better than anarchy which will allow ISIS to seize more land and power. Allowing fifteen million
people to permanently migrate from the Middle East assures a permanent dearth of pro Western moderates in the region, so that's not a solution either. No good, obvious choices here.


Reply
33Recommend



KB
Michigan 6 hours ago
Let us step back & look at the situation.
The real enemies of the free world are the Islamic militants. In the middle of civil war in Syria, various factions change their affiliation. ISIS & Nusra Front, both considered terrorist organizations have usurped power in various parts of Syria. Free Syrian Army is a figment of imagination by Obama's administration. Tax payers money to equip Free Syrian Army with weapons is being used to coordinate their attacks with Nusra Front. In short, our money is being wasted, and has made the militant Islamists much stronger. They have the latest weapons. Hundreds of thousands of civilians are fleeing as a result of American ineptitude. It is time to support the forces that represent religious tolerance. It happens to be the ones that President Assad controls. Rest of the miltants are there to implement the Sharia law in some form or another. ISIS ideology is similar to the Nazis, purification of unbelievers by death. The world needs to band together to stop their atrocities. US actions and policies by both Bush &Obama's administrations over the past



blackmamba
IL 5 hours ago
American arrogance and stupidity in invading and occupying Iraq based upon lies about Iraqi WMD's and a connection to 9/11/01 start this raging volcanic cauldron. Removing Saddam Hussein and his Baath Party Sunni Muslim Arab acolytes was the beginning of America's disastrous devastating descent into ethnic sectarian defeat.


Reply
29Recommend



NYT Pick

John
NYC 4 hours ago
ISIS is worse than Assad.

ISIS's ideology is expansionist, revolutionary, fundamentalist, Islamist.

Assad is just another, weaker Saddam. But this time backed up by Iran and its proxy Hezbollah.

There are no unequivocally good outcomes over there, but I think


Gerard M.D.
St.Augustine 4 hours ago
Looks like U.S.has no bargaining chip to influence Putin.
There is no military option given nuclear parity.
They don't respond to economic sanctions.
We have lost big getting involved in civil and sectarian wars not /in our sphere of influence.
The U.S.always has done best propping up friendly dictators who help American businesses for as long as they can last.
Maybe military expenditures reach exceeds our grasp
This ISIS,without a navy,Air Force,seals etc doesn't seem fazed confronting the 2 largest world military powers,while surrounded by a whole bunch of Hostile Islamic dictator U.S.clients.


我怀疑是不是俄罗斯政府的水军发的帖子


smath,  Nj 7 hours ago
I think what this shows is not so much "Obama is feckless and clueless" "Obama being in over his head" that seems to be a mantra for many on the right. Rather, it shows us how we, citizens of a pluralistic democracy, cannot even begin to understand all the internecine, tribal, shifting alliances in the region. They seem to change their alliances on what seems to be a daily basis. How on earth can we keep track of all these groups, tribes, clans, movements? The U.S./Obama trying to hold the place together would be like trying to hold off an ocean using a bathroom stopper. We had absolutely NO business sticking our noses into their business.
     我并不觉得奥巴马显得不负责任和无知,在很多右派的人看来"奥巴马......."
We were the proverbial bull in a china shop and the havoc and chaos we unleashed with our ill begotten invasion of Iraq has tragically left our armed forces and the innocent civilians of the region holding the shards and smithereens of the china - what was at least a semblance of peace for a good part of the region, with Saddam Hussein mostly contained.
Again, my condolences to all those who have suffered as a result of this war and the ensuing chaos and destruction.

Reply
228Recommend


OrtoAzia
New York 7 hours ago
The hypocrisy of the West get ever more mind boggling. Russia is attacking Al-Queda elements and the West is not happy. Al-Quaeda that US has blamed for 9/11!!! Looks like the West's anti-Russia hysteria transcends andy rational thinking. At this point even if Russia comes up with a cure for cancer, the West stands to come up with phony explanation why the treatment is not good. Unbelievable.
     西方国家的虚伪让人吃惊,俄罗斯攻打基地组织而西方很不高兴.就是那个被我们谴责制造9/11的那个盖达,看起来西方国家歇斯底里般的反俄罗斯让他们失去理性;现在如果俄罗斯找到治疗癌症的方法,西方国家也会找出虚假的理由说这个(治疗癌症的方法)不好,真的难以置信.



Tim
Atlanta 5 hours ago
It's somewhat infuriating to hear people bemoan this as the result of "weak" or "failed" leadership. Such statements beg the question of what exactly we could have done in the past five years that would have altered the situation. Invade? Send 100,000 Americans (because that's what it would take) to occupy a neighbor of Iraq? How'd that go last time? Is Yemen our fault to? What about Egypt? Pakistan? Are regional/tribal/ethnic conflicts really something the military is good at resolving? Hmm what's going on in Afghanistan as we speak? Sound like the neocons from the 2000's... reading too much Tom Clancy. Easy to say, impossible to do. Good luck to Russia, and I mean it somewhat sincerely.
   有时听到人们抱怨(奥巴马)的领导能力,说什么"虚弱,失败的",这些言论让我们深思过去五年里我们应该干什么才会真正的改变当前的局势? 派10万美军(因为真正需要这么多)去占领伊拉克邻国? 上一次(占领别的国家)的结局是什么样的? 也门是不是也是我们的错? 那么埃及呢?巴基斯坦? 美军是不是真的是解决地区/教派/种族冲突的良方呢? 现在的阿富汗是什么情形呢? 听起来和10年前的新保守分子说的那样? (意思是说美国应该再次介入其它国家内政),读了太多Tom Clancy的(军事/间谍相关的小说家),说得容易,做起来难, 祝俄罗斯好运气,我可是真心.


Reply
152Recommend


jrhamp
Overseas 7 hours ago
Someone in the news business should ask George W. of what he would do with the current crisis, assuming that it, if he knows where Syria is...!
   媒体界的人应该问问小布什他面对当前的局势会怎么办,当然我们假定小布什知道叙利亚在什么地方?



Upstate Joe
Upstate 6 hours ago
The Russians are looking to keep Assad in power and help him retake all of Syria. Frankly, it is the only way to end ISIS in Syria and stabilize the country. In order to accomplish this though Syria and the Russians have to get through territory that is under other rebel control first then push on through. Why would any military force leave an enemy force to their rear? Enough with the Anti-Russian propaganda, we will let then continue because even our politicians know that the Russians have the only plan to stabilize Syria. Of course you will never hear the administration admit it, just like the previous administration never admitted their mistakes "liberating" the Middle East.
     俄罗斯希望让阿萨德继续掌权并重新控制叙利亚全境;说实话,这是在叙利亚干掉ISIS并稳定国家的唯一办法,为了达到这个目的叙/俄得首先从叛军夺回控制权. (想想看)会有任何军队会把屁股留给敌人吗? (意思是说让ISIS/反政府控制叙利亚大片领土) 我听够了反俄罗斯的宣传,但是美国依然让俄罗斯继续下去因为我们的政客知道只有俄罗斯才打算稳定叙利亚. 当然你永远听不到奥巴马政府承认这个,就像上届政府绝不会承认"解放"中东所犯的错误那样.


Reply
91Recommend

etb
DC 7 hours ago
This is what happens when your president is a community organizer.
     你的总统是一个社区组织者(意思是说奥巴马没有真的领导能力)的话,你所得到的就是这些(中东当前混乱的结局)

Outside the Box
is a trusted commenter America 7 hours ago
We need to press on with the liberal agenda of happy talk about democracy, diversity, equality, and passivity. Eventually Putin and Assad will see the evil of their ways and and we will all be joining hands and singing kumbaya.
     我们应该继续自由派的纲领:民主,多元化,平等,非激进. 最终普京和阿萨德会看到他们的邪恶的一面,而我们也会和他们携手共同向上帝祈祷 {这个是在讽刺美国的政策}

Reply
76Recommend

Carol lee
Minnesota 6 hours ago
I suggest that John McCain, who stirred this thing up to begin with, go to Syria and figure out who the moderate rebels are. The place is a mess, and it's a lot closer to Russia than the U.S. One would hope that the next time a Senator or free lancer at the State Department wants to go out and save the world for democracy someone will raise the alarm. It appears that the usual suspects think that we should control Syria, Ukraine, Crimea etc. The neo cons and the new American Century ---last week I read that Paul Wolfowiz has contacted the President to support taking in Syrian refugees. That's rich.
     我建议麦凯恩 (他促成叙利亚的局势)去叙利亚弄清楚谁是温和的反对派. 那个地方一片混乱,离俄罗斯比离美国要近的多. 真希望下一次某个参议员或国务院(相当于中国的外交部)的自由撰稿人再次宣传(美国应该)拯救世界的民主,大家应该警觉. 看起来这些人通常认为我们应该掌控叙利亚,乌克兰,克里米亚. 新保守派和American Century(美国极度保守的右翼智囊团体,极力鼓吹美国价值观)---上一次我读到有关沃尔福威茨的事是说他和奥巴马联系并支持美国收留叙利亚难民, 那真的很丰富啊{这个是讽刺保守派一方面大肆宣传美国基督教国家是多么的好,穆斯林是多么的怀,而他却做出对美国不利的事[吸收穆斯林难民]}



Thinker
Northern California 4 hours ago
"To put it quaintly, Putin deserves a taste of American steel."  "说得维妙一些: 普京应该品尝美国的铁拳"

To put it even more quaintly:   说得再维妙一些:

Putin deserves our thanks, and our non-interference. It's long past time that someone stepped in to stabilize Syria. We'd rather see the chaos continue than to see Assad win. I'd rather see Assad win if that ends the chaos. So would Russia, and so would Assad. So be it -- at least that approach gets rid of ISIS, which is the only alternative (other than the al Qaeda affiliate, al Nusra Front).
    我们应该感谢普京,更应该不要干涉别国. 早就应该有人来介入并让叙利亚稳定下来.但是美国更希望看到叙利亚混乱,而不是阿萨德赢得胜利. 如果能够结束叙利亚混乱的话我宁愿看到阿萨德获胜. 俄罗斯是那样想的,阿萨德也一样. 还是接受这个吧,至少(支持阿萨德)可以干掉ISIS,我们别无选择(除非你想让基地组织的伙伴al Nusra Front控制叙利库iya)

Who, exactly, would be better off if ISIS, or the al Nusra Front, ends up in control of Syria rather than Assad? Israel may not like Assad, but he's the devil they know; I'm sure they prefer him to the alternatives.
We've had fun, I suppose, prolonging this war with our semi-competent CIA commandos sneaking into Syria with boxes of weapons and fistfuls of $100 bills. But it's been a lot less fun for the Syrian people. Why don't we poll them with this question:

"If Russia helps Assad to regain control of Syria and prevent ISIS or the al Nusra Front from taking control, will you consider that a good outcome?"

How do you suppose the Syrian people would answer that question? Do you think their answer might be different from the answer given by the US government? If so, whose answer should matter here?


Dan
New York, NY 6 hours ago
What is the problem here?   这个到底有什么问题? (指俄罗斯支持阿萨德)

Russia is attacking the Islamist terrorists across the board not just ISIS but any type of Islamist terrorist running amok in Syria trying to topple a secular government chosen by popular vote.
  俄罗斯打击所有的伊斯兰恐怖分子,而不仅仅是ISIS,而是叙利亚所有的伊斯兰恐怖分子,他们试图推翻民选的世俗政府

This type of outcry starting from the Obama administration to the NYTimes Editorials plainly exhibits hypocrisy running in this country.
     奥巴马政府对于纽约时报的社论发出的惊呼(应该是奥巴马对于纽约时报批评他的中东政策的社论 )明显的展示出这个国家虚伪的一面.

Sir, there was no moderate Islamist terrorist that CIA has been arming for years in Syria! They were and all are terrorists that must be dealt with.
    总统先生,中央情报局多年来训练的人当中没有温和的伊斯兰恐怖分子,他们过去/现在都是恐怖分子,必须得到美国的打击

Now Putin of Russia is exactly onto point to get rid of this poor country savaged by these barbarians.
    现在俄罗斯的普京说他清除摧毁的那个国家野蛮人真是说道点子上了.

What's the purpose of of this hypocrsy?
    我们的虚伪的政策的目的到底是为什么?




Southern Boy
Spring Hill, TN 7 hours ago
Russia is doing what the US does not have will to do.
    俄罗斯正在干美国没有勇气去干的事.

Reply
66Recommend




NYT Pick

B. Rothman
NYC 5 hours ago
Many of the comments here denigrate our President and his policies in the ME, but their alternative is for the US to go back into the area with our own troops or with more fire power, e.g. John McCain. We know from our experience in Iraq and elsewhere that we cannot win for the people what they are unwilling or unable to do for themselves and Syria is more complicated, given at least two stakeholders besides Assad.
   这里的很多评论贬低我们的总统和他在中东的政策,但是另外的选择是美国重新派军,或者利用麦凯恩的火力(讽刺他开口就是要军事打击某某某). 从我们过去的经验来看,伊拉克和周边国家的人们要么不愿意,要么没有能力为他们自己奋斗(是指结束内战,重新和平发展自己的国家),而叙利亚更复杂,因为除了阿萨德以外还有两个利益相关方.

Are all these war lovers prepared to see their kids end up as de facto Assad supporters? Because that is what you'll have at the end of this. Putin is there and bombing first the moderates who oppose Assad because they are fewer in number and less well organized (in fact, still quarreling amongst themselves.) I'll wait to see how Putin handles ISIS for Assad. That is the real test. Sometimes you don't know that you've put your foot in quick sand until you start sinking. But in any case, Assad would be the winner; and the same people now talking about how incapable our President has been would then start complaining about the fact that he did what they recommended and it didn't get the desired result. Putin only needs to support Assad. Obama's critics want to replace Assad. The critics live to denigrate what they already hate but they have no alternative ideas that are better -- and that includes Senator McCain who seemingly never saw a war he didn't want us to fight, until we don't win through absolutely to some line of post WWII victory.
    那些所有好战分子准备让他们的子女成为阿萨德实际上的支持者吗? (意思是说美国介入内政最终获利的是阿萨德)? 因为这个是最终的结果.普京首先轰炸反阿萨德的温和派,因为他们人数少并且组织性差(实际上他们之间还互相争吵),我想等着看普京如何为阿萨德清除ISIS.......

Thinker
Northern California 4 hours ago
Yes, this is good for Assad, but it's also good for us:
    是的,这个有利于阿萨德,对我们也是有利的.

"The Russians are bombing all Assads opponents, starting with non ISIS rebels. Sounds like a good turn of events for Assad."
   俄国人轰炸阿萨德的所有对手,首先从非ISIS反叛分子开始,看起来对阿萨德是一个转机

Are we so intent on getting rid of Assad that we'll weaken the effort to defeat ISIS? That's really the question, isn't it? I say: Do what it takes to get rid of ISIS. If backing Assad is the best way to achieve that result, then back Assad. That's what Russia's doing. If you just can't bear to help Assad, then at least stay out of the way. That's what we should do.
     我们是不是决心清除阿萨德从而削弱我们击败ISIS的努力? 那可真是一个问题啊? 是不是? 依我说: 用一切手段清除ISIS. 如果支持阿萨德是清除ISIS的最佳方案的话,那么就应该支持他. 俄罗斯正在干这个,如果你无法容忍支持阿萨德,那么至少请让开.那是我们应该做的.



Isak Borg
Enisey 6 hours ago
This is a great opportunity for us to get out of this mess. Russians, Syrians, Al-Qaida, Nusra, ISIS and their Arab supporters - none of them friendly to the U.S., are killing each other wholesale. All we have to do is leave them to their own devices, and they'll do the work for us. Obama should take this gift from Putin, and stop any involvment in the Middle Eest.
    这个是我们脱离这个混乱形势的绝佳机会. 俄罗斯人,叙利亚,基地组织, Nusra, ISIS 和他们的阿拉伯支持者,没有一个人是我们的朋友.他们之间大规模互相杀戮. 我们所需要做的就是让他们互相斗争,他们帮助我们干我们需要做的事(指清除ISIS). 奥巴马应该大方的接受普京的这个礼物,停止在中东的任何军事行动


Reply
54Recommend


Student
New York, NY 5 hours ago
Russian plan:   俄罗斯的计划:
get rid of rebels  杀死反对派
restore assad's grip on power  恢复阿萨德的权力
with assad firmly at the reins, no room/tolerance for ISIS   在阿萨德完全控制后,不让ISIS获得任何空间
therefore, bombing rebels means attacking ISIS    这样来看的话,轰炸反对派就等于攻击ISIS

US plan:   美国的计划
arm rebels   武装反对派
foment unrest   制造混乱
drop bombs      丢下炸弹
increase disorder  增加混乱
improve conditions for ISIS growth and regional destabilization    给ISIS发展壮大提供条件并促进该地区的混乱


JSH
Louisiana 7 hours ago
What we are seeing in Syria right now is due to weak American leadership. The fact that Russia is openly supporting the dictator Assad is just more proof that Obama just doesn't get it when it comes to foreign policy. What is even scarier is that so many in the US are just fine with a weak America. The situation in Syria would be much different today if Obama had more conviction in opposing, with force if necessary, the Assad regime as well as standing up to Russia as they invade neighbors and now openly attack the Syrian forces who neither want ISIS nor a dictatorship. Meanwhile Obama says we will take in tens of thousands of migrants and the west is left with a huge humanitarian crisis in Europe. This is what the lack of American leadership looks like.
    我们在叙利亚所看到的一切归咎于懦弱的美国领导力量. 俄罗斯公开支持独裁者阿萨德的这个事实更加证明奥巴马对外交一无所知. 更为可怕的是那么多的美国人对于削弱了的美国这一点无所谓........................



Patrick
New York 6 hours ago
The US government's policy reminds me of the shifting alliances and propaganda of Orwell's "1984." Lest we forget or are tempted to engage in doublethink, Al-Qaeda used to be depicted as the terrorist enemy of America. Now Al-Qaeda has been transformed into our rebel ally against Syria's Assad, who replaces Orwell's Emmanuel Goldstein as the designated arch-villain du jour we are all supposed to hate and loath during the media's "two minutes hate" pieces.


Reply
42Recommend

ScottK
Atlanta 7 hours ago
If one chooses not to lead, someone else (Russia) will.


Marvinsky
New York 5 hours ago
If I was President I would drop the hysterical American anti-Russia momentum in its tracks, and state that there are common interests and then I would pursue them where practical. If the US can find cause to "ally" with Saudi Arabia -- and dozens of others hideous regimes since 1945 and before -- it surely can work with Russia instead of against it. To suggest we have been more virtuous than Russia at all times is ridiculous and a lie that is not even self-serving.

The one thing the US has not done -- except in space where the results have been spectacular -- is trying to partner with the Russians to see whether giving that old nation its due might have gigantic pay-offs. We are killing ourselves with ethnocentric, myopic, box-think.




Jose Pardinas
Conshohocken, PA 6 hours ago
Putin is the smartest political leader alive today by something like a light-year. And he's demonstrating this fact (again) in Syria:

He's lancing the boil that is ISIS by going immediately for its source. Namely, the US-backed CIA-trained “moderates” who provide ISIS with an endless supply of advanced American weapons and a constant stream of fighters.


Reply
40Recommend


Joshua Schwartz
Ramat-Gan, Israel 7 hours ago
"But the Army of Conquest itself embodies the ambivalence of American policy".

Ambivalence perhaps, but confusion might be a more apt description. The Russians, though, do not seem to be confused and they are not ambivalent as to who they support and whom they do not, nor regarding their priorities in the matter.

Not to worry, though. By the time the Russians are finished, the non-extremist (or less extremist) opposition forces will not exist. If the Russians are successful, only Mr. Assad will exist. How many will die on the way in the wake of the US's ambivalent (or confused) policy?


Nevis07
CT 6 hours ago
Now that America and our 'allies' have lost the strategic initiative, here's the lesson learned for those in Washington: the use of our military needs to be viewed as a broad sword, not a surgical knife. Senator Rubio, during the last GOP debate was spot on regarding this issue; if we're going to put our men and women in harms way, we had better have a winnable goal and give them the resources to eventuate that outcome. That means the use of force needs to be carefully debated. This will hopefully force our leaders to truly consider what is in America's true best interests - unfortunately, Iraq has caused our leadership to be scared of their own shadow. Either go all in and provide the necessary resources, or stay out of it entirely, half measured involvement doesn't help serve America's interests and it just puts our men and women in harms way.




maryann
austinviaseattle 5 hours ago
There is a fundamental reality that the leadership in the West continues to ignore: Pro-Western moderates are a minority in the Middle East. And that being the case, how can we install a pro Western, moderate government in Syria or anywhere else and call it a representative democracy?

The simple reality is that you can't. The Russians understand that, and are dealing with the reality that an Assad government is better than anarchy which will allow ISIS to seize more land and power. Allowing fifteen million
people to permanently migrate from the Middle East assures a permanent dearth of pro Western moderates in the region, so that's not a solution either. No good, obvious choices here.


Reply
33Recommend



KB
Michigan 6 hours ago
Let us step back & look at the situation.
The real enemies of the free world are the Islamic militants. In the middle of civil war in Syria, various factions change their affiliation. ISIS & Nusra Front, both considered terrorist organizations have usurped power in various parts of Syria. Free Syrian Army is a figment of imagination by Obama's administration. Tax payers money to equip Free Syrian Army with weapons is being used to coordinate their attacks with Nusra Front. In short, our money is being wasted, and has made the militant Islamists much stronger. They have the latest weapons. Hundreds of thousands of civilians are fleeing as a result of American ineptitude. It is time to support the forces that represent religious tolerance. It happens to be the ones that President Assad controls. Rest of the miltants are there to implement the Sharia law in some form or another. ISIS ideology is similar to the Nazis, purification of unbelievers by death. The world needs to band together to stop their atrocities. US actions and policies by both Bush &Obama's administrations over the past



blackmamba
IL 5 hours ago
American arrogance and stupidity in invading and occupying Iraq based upon lies about Iraqi WMD's and a connection to 9/11/01 start this raging volcanic cauldron. Removing Saddam Hussein and his Baath Party Sunni Muslim Arab acolytes was the beginning of America's disastrous devastating descent into ethnic sectarian defeat.


Reply
29Recommend



NYT Pick

John
NYC 4 hours ago
ISIS is worse than Assad.

ISIS's ideology is expansionist, revolutionary, fundamentalist, Islamist.

Assad is just another, weaker Saddam. But this time backed up by Iran and its proxy Hezbollah.

There are no unequivocally good outcomes over there, but I think


Gerard M.D.
St.Augustine 4 hours ago
Looks like U.S.has no bargaining chip to influence Putin.
There is no military option given nuclear parity.
They don't respond to economic sanctions.
We have lost big getting involved in civil and sectarian wars not /in our sphere of influence.
The U.S.always has done best propping up friendly dictators who help American businesses for as long as they can last.
Maybe military expenditures reach exceeds our grasp
This ISIS,without a navy,Air Force,seals etc doesn't seem fazed confronting the 2 largest world military powers,while surrounded by a whole bunch of Hostile Islamic dictator U.S.clients.