[quote PerkingFaintly]I certainly care about Syria and what has been done to people there.
One of the major differences between what's happening in Ukraine and what's happening in Syria is that Ukraine has a democratically elected government which opposes the Russian invasion. The Syrian government, on the other hand, invited the Russians in and their atrocities were carried out with its complicity.
"The Syrian civil war [...] is an ongoing multi-sided civil war in Syria fought between the Syrian Arab Republic led by Syrian president Bashar al-Assad (supported by domestic and foreign allies) and various domestic and foreign forces that oppose both the Syrian government and each other, in varying combinations."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_civil_war
Syria's head of state, Assad, already ran a harsh regime which prompted anti-government demonstrations in 2011 as part of the Arab Spring. Out of that grew a civil war which has been joined by a large number of outside groups, including Da'esh against Assad, and Russia for Assad at his request.
Syria is a hot mess. One wants to rush into the middle and shout "Stop this, the lot of you," but what would be the next step? Supposing one somehow militarily defeated... everybody... who would form the next government? How? This is the Afghanistan problem, of course. And even given 20 years of occupation and new government we saw what happened there.
Whereas in Ukraine, despite the "independent" regions and despite some of the many excuses Russia has been making for itself, Ukraine does have a functioning central government which does (appear to) oppose atrocities against its citizens. So there continues to be a “side” on which one can intervene which appears to be on the side of the lives of the country’s citizens. That government isn’t perfect (no side ever is, especially while there have been armed separatists and a foreign power controlling parts of the country), but it’s recognisable as a "good enough" side for many outsiders to support. This is being further underlined by what we're seeing of the way Russian soldiers have been treating people.
This is why Zelensky’s call for a foreign legion has had people in eg Nigeria turning up trying to volunteer. The Russian invasion of Ukraine is clear cut aggression by a foreign state, and the Russians’ treatment of civilians is looking increasingly like clear cut atrocities.
Kereti Usoroh, a Nigerian living in the capital, Abuja, said his motivations for volunteering had nothing to do with financial gain or the prospect of citizenship. "I already live a comfortable life. If I wanted to go to Europe, I'd do it through education, not war," the 29-year-old lawyer said. "This is about beating a bully - injustice for one is injustice for all."
www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-60712913[/quote]
I totally agree with this.
But I also think there is another factor at play here, and that is Iraq. Britain and the US went into Iraq on the understanding that Saddam Hussain has used chemical weapons on his own and Iranian civilians and (probably) believing he had weapons of mass destruction. The response to Iraq was very negative, with a lot of people saying they shouldn't have gone.
The conclusion most people have drawn from this was that the US and Britain shouldn't intervene, no matter what without a UN resolution (and even, a lot say they shouldn't) - and especially in a place like Syria where the Russians were actively supporting the government (which didn't happen in Iraq). There were loads of demonstrations and Stop the War movements aimed at making sure there was no Western intervention in Syria - arguing that it was a repeat Iraq and that people must learn from history. Britain and the US listened and didn't intervene in Syria, even when red lines were crossed and they knew they were being crossed.
The message that therefore was sent loud and clear as a consequence of Iraq is that "the West" mustn't ever intervene, and Putin knew that this is the mindset and counted on it in each of these places.
And indeed, Britain and NATO and the US have to a certain extent been keeping to this script, having learnt from Iraq and are not intervening militarily in Ukraine, even knowing that atrocities were undoubtedly going to occur.
The other factor to bear in mind is that atrocities can be better hidden if you win. A lot of these are coming to light now because Putin is withdrawing. When you don't have to withdraw, they much easier to cover up. But if one can only go to war when one has cast iron evidence (and not just intelligence, which as we discovered in Iraq can be wrong), then you are likely to sit on the sidelines, and hence not win the war, and hence not see these atrocities.