“Russia Betrayed Syria”: Geopolitics Through the Eyes of a Fearful “Pro-Russia” Westerner

By Ollie Richardson

A river of tears is flowing from the Western “pro-Russia” social media club because Uncle Putin hasn’t (and won’t) subject Israel to a “shock and awe” doctrine. But why is this so?

Four years ago this club didn’t exist. It came into “existence” after the war in Donbass started. The alleged aim of this club was to support the people of Donetsk and Lugansk whilst they faced extermination at the hands of the Banderist junta in Kiev. But already in 2014 this club changed its mind. Strelkov decided to abandon Slavyansk, and then Ukraine captured it. Then Minsk 1 came along after the UAF was smashed in Ilovaisk. At this time there were some distant rumblings of “Putin betrayed Novorossiya” from Westerners, but it wasn’t yet an earthquake. Five months later and the UAF were smashed again, this time in Debaltsevo.

Merkel (at the demand of Obama) proverbially dashed to Moscow and begged Putin to stop the massacre. It was at this moment that the project of an “independent” Ukraine was liquidated. Minsk 2 was signed, and the US’ Okraina springboard was neutralised definitively. Over the next 12 months the western “pro-Russia” club would start to lose its marbles because of the “end of war”, and Mr Strelkov (along with his pet keyboard warriors El Murid, Mr Cassad (during 2014, today he is more reserved), Suchan, etc) started to earn his State Department cash.

Thus, a flow of toxic junk was published on various websites that tried to present the Kremlin as some selfish, “oligarchic” entity that “doesn’t care” about Donbass or “Novorossiya”. All of this was “legitimised” simply because Strelkov once (!) had some “skin in the game”.

The actual keyboard warriors themselves were either sat in the West and risked absolutely nothing by promoting the “Russia = traitor” fairytale or were sat in Russia but remained locked in their liberal basements, doing the occasional Youtube interview.

Here is an example of a private Facebook group that was active between 2015-2016. Some of the names may be familiar to the reader:

At this time some trends couldn’t but jump into the eyes: all the complainers had ZERO experience in high-level politics/international relations; they never left the confines of the Internet or went to the frontline; they attacked everything Putin did abroad and at home. Being frustrated because Putin didn’t give Strelkov what he wanted (self-enrichment), the keyboard warriors moved onto the Syrian theatre when Russian jets arrived in Latakia in September 2015. The first reproach: “Russia cares more about Syria than Donbass”.

The RBC newspaper – a disgustingly fifth-column mouthpiece – soon published some “expose” that tried to convince people that Putin is splashing out the cash in Syria, but not at home, where some imaginary financial catastrophe is taking place. It turns out, however, that the Syria operation costs the same as a regular military exercise. Thus it wasn’t possible to take this propaganda much further, despite RBC’s way of twisting the figures.

“RBC investigation: how much Russia spends on the war in Syria

The operation costs in Syria for the Defense Ministry is at least $2.5 million daily, according to RBC’s estimates. These expenses are still within the framework of the defense budget for 2015, but the long-term operation will require additional expenses”

From this moment onwards there was a new complaint everyday from the “pro-Russia” club. If America bombed the SAA, it was “Russia’s fault”. If Palmyra was re-captured by ISIS, Putin had to be hung, drawn, and quartered on Red Square. An avalanche arrived when Turkey shot down the Russian jet. The author of these lines can still remember verbatim some of the tweets posted by prominent “pro-Russia” westerners. Basically, if Putin didn’t nuke the Bosphorus, then the entire Syrian operation was a sham. But Putin didn’t do this. Instead he starved Turkey economically and forced Ankara to take a few more steps away from the NATO bloc. The result was the complete liquidation of the “moderate rebel” multi-headed hydra and the entrance of the S-400.

READ:  About that NATO Bomber Near St. Petersburg...

The next tremor arrived when apparently (no proof has ever been presented ) Russia didn’t respond to America bombing the “Wagner” PMCs. This topic was pushed very hard by RBC’s anti-Putin ally “Kommersant”, and the liberal Russian press in general wanted to present Russia as a “mercenary” State. The main suggestion from the “pro-Russia” club was to bomb American troops in Syria. After all, Putin at this point had “committed so many sins” that he had to “make up for it” to rectify the “abandonment” of Novorossiya. At around the same time, Uncle Sam & Co launched Tomahawks at the Shayrat airbase. The “smart” club wanted Russia to respond by bombing…you guessed it… American troops in Syria. Instead, Russia continued to assist the SAA in liberating Syria. Aleppo was taken. Then there was the Deir Ezzor fiasco. Elijah Magnier reported that Russia and America had an unofficial agreement whereby the Euphrates river would be a demarcation line. The “pro-Russia” club went nuts. Apparently this was the tipping point – Putin had become the ultimate traitor.

At this point, with the pace of the war slowing down, this club started to reflect on the past 5/6 years of war and to stick the knife further into Putin’s “wounds”. Apparently letting Turkey into Syria was a big mistake. Not shooting down enemy jets is “simply wrong”! During this whole time of events of Syria, this “perfect” little “pro-Russia” club seemingly didn’t care about Ukraine/Donbass anymore. The “Novorossiya” Disney-esque romance story was no longer interesting. “If Putin won’t send a Sarmat to Kiev, then why should I care?” It never occurred to the “Putin betrayed everyone” club that all theatres of military operations are connected – that we are all connected, as people. A basic comprehension of international reactions was (and still is) completely absent.

So, now let’s dissect the complaints:

“Putin betrayed Novorossiya”

Well, your humble servant has already explained how this concept is lunacy. You can read the Twitter thread here:


“Putin cares more about Syria than Donbass”

When a chess player moves one piece, does that mean that they “don’t care” about their other pieces? I.e., Russia entered Syria because here the presence of Russian troops is covered by International Law and wouldn’t provoke the collapse of the Russian nation, which is what would happen if they were deployed in Ukraine.

READ:  What Feeds Kharkov

“The NAF would’ve gone all the way to Kiev if it wasn’t for the Minsk Agreements”

This is a logical fallacy. It’s like saying that a kicked ball would travel all the way to the moon if it wasn’t for gravity. In fact, the NAF “coming to Kiev” is EXACTLY what Washington wants!

“Russia had to bomb Turkey”

Last time the author of this article checked, the Middle East needed more peace, not war. Such a frankly sickening act would literally throw the human race into the abyss. Maybe this is what the West’s “pro-Russia” club actually want – pure misanthropy?

 “Putin not massacring American troops is treason”

Similar to the example of bombing Turkey, directly attacking American troops would be the “swansong” of the Russian nation. This is known as “harakiri” in Japanese culture. How does this help to end the war in Syria? How many more people will die as a result?

“Losing Palmyra twice showed that Putin is clueless”

Syria is a big country. America tried to make Russia go from East to West and West to East – back and forth – to exhaust Russia and Assad’s forces. ISIS attacked in Deir Ezzor, and then Nusra went on the attack in the South. This continued for a long time until Russia liberated Deir Ezzor. Then the US tried to manoeuvre ISIS out of Raqqa and towards the Russian/Syrian forces in Deir Ezzor. Then Iraq liberated the border areas, and US was forced to occupy oil fields in order to have a slice of leverage.

“Turkey is occupying Syria & Putin does nothing to stop it”

Yes, Turkey is violating international law. And? Has the UNSC passed any resolution that helps to end the war in Syria (this is why Russia created the Astana format, to negate the UNSC’s bias)? The only thing that can stop Turkey is Russia bombing it? Hmm… A more peaceful solution is more preferable.

 “Russia allows the USA to steal Syrian oil and occupy territory”

America is a nuclear-armed country. At first they tried to use jihadists to capture Damascus, this failed. Then when Turkey switched camps the USA & Co injected some spec ops to clear out North Raqqa. Then when Russia & Co took Deir Ezzor the US was forced to literally seize the entire North-East corner of Syria in order to “stay in the game”. If to revise the chronology of the conflict, American troops were already in Syria before Russia arrived (near Jordan and “Rojava”). Russia firstly removed Turkey from the game (bombing ISIS in Latakia; S-400 response to Sukhoi to shootdown; pressuring Ahrar al-Sham), then Saudi Arabia (liquidating FSA factions, forcing mergers to happen), and now Israel has almost lost its last proxies (Daraa/Quneitra). In other words, when the majority of the enemies units have been destroyed, in order to secure victory the protagonist must herd the remaining units that can’t be immediately finished off towards the deliberately-crafted “escape route”. Hence the unofficial Russia-USA agreement about the Euphrates River. Russia likes this situation because it is controlled. The variables of the algorithm are known and the possible outcomes can be accurately formulated.

 “Russia allows Israel to act like the king of the jungle, bombing Syria with impudence”

This laughable statement was already debunked in the past, but it should be added that Russia’s policy is to make friends from enemies, akin to Sun Tzu’s precepts.

READ:  "My Son Is a Traitor, the Country Must Punish Him"

 “Not giving the S-300 to Damascus shows that Putin wants the SAA to be bombed”

This affirmation is pure comedy. The Twitter thread below is very explicative in this regard. It can be said in addition to this that everything happens (or doesn’t happen) for a reason. Why would Russia “spend” a piece of leverage over Israel (giving S-300 to Damascus) when the stakes are not high enough? The whole point of a deterrent is that it isn’t used! Using one is a sign of weakness, like the Tomahawk strikes.

“Inviting Netanyahu to the Immortal Regiment in Moscow is State treason and pro-Zionist”

Seriously, who cares? Did his visit change anything in the “great game”? When Putin shakes Bibi’s hand does it mean that he aids and abets violence against Palestinians? Nyet.

Putin was also abused on social media because he met with the King of Saud. What is he expected to do? Does this mean that he “betrayed Yemen”? Well, newsflash: Russia has been supporting the Houthis with weapons and intel for a long time. Geopolitics isn’t black and white.

There are so many examples of tantrums because Moscow didn’t bomb X or Y. The truth is that this Western “pro-Russia” club doesn’t actually care about Russians or Russia. It is superficial sh*t. It’s like attaching yourself to a sports team because it wins a lot. This “pro-Russia” club’s criticism of Moscow and the “advice” thrown in its direction is based on a total lack of any high-level political experience. The members of the club do not risk the same or more as what Kremlin officials risk every single day. The whiners deliver their article, tweet, or post in the most cowardly way. There are no consequences for demanding on social media to bomb country X or Y. Putin is, first and foremost, responsible for the everyday lives of approximately 145 million Russian citizens. The “Putin is a weak coward” complainers aren’t prepared to send their sons or daughters to any war that may happen as a result of their bullsh*t suggestions. They, like Charles Lister, demand toys from mommy and then drop them when they become “unfashionable”.

By the way, some are now saying that Russia is losing the information war. When a person claiming this is asked explain why, an answer doesn’t arrive. Basically, Israel dropped a few bombs (which changed nothing in the “great game”) and Armenia got a new Prime Minister, and suddenly it is doomsday. The first things the “pro-Russia” complainers in the West should ask themselves before logging into social media is: do I have any “skin in the game”? If the answer is no, then please kindly keep quiet. You might think you can do a better job than Putin, but only on the Xbox.

Syria is being rebuilt. Life is returning to streets than were once the concrete graves of children. Ukraine comes closer to resolving its 100-year-old problem with each passing day. And Russia and its economy is like a juggernaut. A question: what is there to be afraid of?

This article is dedicated to the Russian soldiers who sacrificed their lives in Syria. They are real examples that should be followed by everyone who wants their children to grow up in a peaceful world.

Это вам за пацанов!

Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.

Tags: