I can't believe it even needs countering.
Why were those regions volatile and conflict-ridden? Did that happen in a vacuum? It's the exact same vibes as all the "journalism" we've seen in recent days talking about how we aren't used to seeing wars in "civilised" countries, as if the West had absolutely no part to play in the reason the Middle East is the way it is
Well to the original post, it arguably goes back to the Iranian Revolution (the seeds for which were sown in 1953). As a result, Saddam opportunistically invaded Iran, with literally the entire world - USSR
and US on the same side - backing Iraq. (
Apart from Syria, who allowed Iranian planes to fly over its airspace to decimate Iraqi airfields on the border of Saudi Arabia - pay back for which came in the 2010s).
That turned into a quagmire after eight years of WW1 style tactics with modern weaponry. A million odd deaths and a broke Iraq later, Saddam now couldn't pay back the Arab states that had backed him. Saddam blamed Shiites and Kurds for siding with Iran, committed atrocities against them and that would have been all well and good but he decided to invade Kuwait to write off the debt he owed. Then it's the Gulf War with his very allies from 1980-88 firmly against him and Saddam is booted out of Kuwait. However, they make the decision of
not toppling Saddam because of the worry of who would replace him. Saddam continues to gas the Kurds in revenge for helping the coalition, no one really minds in the West other than an odd air strike here and there (e.g. Clinton in 97, I think).
So between 1979 and 2003, you had the West (and Soviets) heavily arm Iraq from 1980-88. Then you had 35 countries, but mainly USA, intervene in 1990-1.
Then shit loads of sanctions on Saddam. Then he's overthrown in 2003 and the country turns to chaos.
What's this got to do with Russia and Ukraine? Well, very little in the same way that previous right or wrong foreign policy of any of the "Great" powers in 1939 had to do with declaring war on Hitler. To your point around the quality of journalism - I partially agree, the statements that have been made regarding the victims are ridiculous and insensitive. However, Western cases for intervening in Iraq, Syria and Libya whilst horrifically criminal in the case of Iraq and deeply misguided in the latter two were done in countries where the leaders - without any impetus from the West - regularly committed war crimes and genocide on their own people. There's a reason why for all three the West at least went to the UN to get a resolution.
Something that is true - we have never seen in our lifetime a member of the UN Security Council unilaterally invade a democratic and free country. There is no hypocrisy in being absolutely shocked by what has happened and calling it what it is - an unprecedented modern military action.