GOOD & BAD

Hat tip Francis Marion

Guest Post by Daniel Gordis

If in case it was all too confusing for you, here’s a summary:

President Assad (who is bad) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels (who are good) started winning (hurrah!).

But then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty and are now called Islamic State (who are definitely bad!) while some continued to support democracy (who are still good.)

So the Americans (who are good ) started bombing Islamic State (who are bad ) and giving arms to the Syrian Rebels (who are good ) so they could fight Assad (who is still bad) which was good.

There is a breakaway state in the north run by the Kurds who want to fight IS (which is good) but the Turkish authorities think they are bad, so the U.S. says they are bad while secretly thinking they’re good and giving them guns to fight IS (which is good) but that is another matter.

Getting back to Syria.

So President Putin (who is bad because he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine and killed lots of folks, including that nice Russian man in London with polonium poisoned sushi, has decided to back Assad (who is still bad) by attacking IS (who are also bad ) which is sort of a good thing (!?).

But Putin (still bad) thinks the Syrian Rebels (who are good) are also bad, and so he bombs them too, much to the annoyance of the Americans (who are good) who are busy backing and arming the rebels (who are also good).

Now Iran (who used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons with which to bomb Israel are now good) are going to provide ground troops to support Assad (still bad) as are the Russians (bad) who now have ground troops and aircraft in Syria.

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 good, but also the Syrian Rebels (who are good) which is bad.

Now the British (obviously good, except that silly anti-Semite who leads the Labor Party, Mr. Corbyn in the corduroy jacket, who is bad) and the Americans (also good) cannot attack Assad (still bad) for fear of upsetting Putin (bad) and Iran (good/bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to IS (super bad — see Paris, November 2015).

So Assad (bad) is now probably good, being better than IS and, because 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 nice 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 consistently bad).

To Sunni Muslims an attack by Shia Muslims (Assad and Iran) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a Holy War. Therefore, the ranks of IS will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only Jihadis fighting in the Holy War and hence many Muslims will now see IS as good (duh).

Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal (might have a point?) and hence we will be seen as bad.

So now we have America (now bad) and Britain (also bad) providing limited support to Sunni Rebels (bad ) many of whom are looking to IS (good/bad ) for support against Assad (now good) who, along with Iran (also good) and Putin (now, straining credulity, good ) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started.

Got it?

17
Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Ghost

That clears it all up! Thanks for the scorecard.

Rife
Rife

Syrians weren’t leaving in droves before we started bombing their country. Where are the UN “peacekeepers”? Putin was able to delay our starting this crap until ISIS came along with their nice Toyota pickups and McCain photo ops.

kokoda
kokoda

Objection!!!
Your starting point for the U.S. as ‘good’ is ruining my morning.

How about a re-write with U.S. as bad, Russia as good.

Data: U.S. fomented the uprising in UKR. U.S. did same in Syria to support the gas pipeline. Assad may be bad, but U.S. is badder.

susanna

Thank you Mr. Gordis,
Great sarc.

DRUD
DRUD

Homer once had such a conundrum. He would be a worthy statesman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Krbl911ZPBA

javelin
javelin

If only I could believe this narrative how wonderful it would be–but alas, America never started out as the “good” guy in this, Russia never did anything “bad” and NONE of the muslims-(whose “holy” book calls for the murder of all apostates, infidels and establishment of a global caliphate) are ever “good”, just a little ” less bad”

Westcoaster
Westcoaster

Problem is, the U.S. is on the wrong side of history in this conflict. Never thought I’d see the day when I’d be rootin’ for the Ruskies!
We seriously need to pull out of the ME and let them sort it out amongst themselves.

EL Coyote spotting the worst grammar
EL Coyote spotting the worst grammar

kokoda says: Assad may be bad, but U.S. is badder.

Too bad there isn’t a word for ‘badder’ how about ‘baddest’ ‘more bad’ or ‘super bad’?

AC
AC

Article needs more Saudi-Qatari natural gas pipeline.

left a comment
left a comment

Syrian “terrorists” celebrating Christmas

MuckAbout

LMASO!!! ’nuff said..

MA

EL Coyote
EL Coyote

@flash, Hope that Syrian assault on Christians doesn’t happen here. We should fry our own falafels.

Ouirphuqd
Ouirphuqd

Whiter shades of pale, I am sorry to say, but who is good or bad? Here is the deal, it is all coming undone. What can we do? I’m not for sure, but make sure you have a bible, to keep you from going completely off the deep end. History repeats!

gm
gm

POCB’s is what I read , stirring up shit , to see which power structure survives?

whatever lol going to bed , happy turkey day )

Aheinousanus
Aheinousanus

What I got is that whoever wrote this is clueless followed of the crap that is fed to the dimwitted by various main stream media outlets.
Another thing I got is the the author is not very bright either as he believed all that crap.
Perhaps he did not and was only sarcastically giving a summary of the official narrative.
If that is the case then he lost me after a few paragraph as I got bored and skipped to the bottom to read some of the comments.

Ouirphuqd
Ouirphuqd

He succeeded in exposing the absurdity of all the different coalitions. Good, bad and otherwise, confusion is the natural state of all of the so called United Nations, the political zoo in New York is wanting a one world government, which is really bad, or it could be good! Boy, where was I at a few minutes ago?

Chen
Chen

This is not a news update, it is a humorous piece. If you can’t tell that after the first sentence of the “summary”, you should stay in your safe zone called mom’s basement.

Discover more from The Burning Platform

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading