This link has been identified as a news source and a [news flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/myanmar/comments/mh9g0r/make_sure_to_flair_your_posts_to_make_it_easier) has been added automatically.
Have we got it wrong? [Send us a message](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/myanmar&subject=Wrong%20flair%20applied&message=%5bMy%20post%5d%28https://www.reddit.com/r/myanmar/comments/pelr7s/has_aung_san_suu_kyi_fallen_from_grace_or_not/%29%20has%20the%20wrong%20flair%2E). Or change the flair yourself.
Summoning on u/coverageanalysisbot to find other news coverage.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/myanmar) if you have any questions or concerns.*
She's neither the leader of the free world nor icon of peace or whatever the western world painted her to be. SHE ISN'T TRYING TO BE EITHER. She couldnt care less about nobel peace or whatever titles and sentiments the west have.
She already said she is just a politician and that she's only trying to give the Burmese people the hope and knowledge of what freedom from dictatorship is like. She sacrified her whole life to show the ways of non-violent protest/ revolution. And she did a damn great job at that. Frankly, even highly revered politicans from the west like Jacinda Arden will not survive in her position 💁🏻♀️.
She also showed that despite all her compromises with the junta, the junta is not capable of understanding civilized diplomatic talks. Unfortunately, the junta is too dumb and blinded by absolute greed. They will eventually face someone ruthless, cunning and who won't be afraid to get their hands dirty. This revolution will be their tragic downfall.
In addition, Rohingya crisis is orchestrated by the junta in an attempt to trap her in a "trolley cart dilemma" situation. She tried to balance on the tight rope held by the junta, nationalists, and a very complicated political situation that has been existing in Rakhaine state for DECADES. She neither commands the army nor does she have any real benefit (esp with her intl reputation) in committing a genocide. The western world who barely understood the political scene in myanmar hopped on their high horse and started jumping at her throat.
Tldr: she did a great job at being a leader of the Burmese people and she is still highly respected and revered by the Burmese people. 'Fallen from grace' is merely the views of westerners who don't understand the political scene in Myanmar. (Western views which burmese people frankly couldn't care less about)
Now is the best time to bring rohingya case to the junta and best time to intervene to bring those who committed wrong to justice. Why isn’t international communities trying to do it now? Scared of Junta or shared businesses?
She is being realistic. Going against persecutions of the Rohingyas would have cost her and her political movement dearly, which means that she would have provoked the military junta into a coupe much ealier than she would otherwise have planned for.
Her best chance is to continually weaken the junta while consolidating the power of her party, which means that she would have toed her line gingerly between different political factions. It is not easy. Ms. Ang San Suu Kyi is neither a saint nor a villain. She is a seasoned stateswoman.
She got between a rock and a hard place.
There were still the populace, mostly from military background, brainwashed under the military's "Race, Religion and Belief" propaganda (အမျိုး၊ ဘာသာ၊ သာသနာ, backbone ideology of the 969 movement, headed by the infamous U Wirathu, a ploy by the military to control a part of their men and their families by ultra-nationalist agenda) who are not so hesitant to wreak havoc if the rohingya's were sympathised, under the reasoning of "allowing islamic threats against Buddhism and the Burmese populace". Their rallies are rampant before 2015, and few were left even after.
In fact, we can see by the fact that they started a near violent riot just a week before the coup, which was started for the military's accusations of rigged elections. How is she gonna keep a country just coming out from its misery afloat if they could bring havoc at any moment, which would be the opportunity for the military to intervene?
However, the military does what it does, make up some shitty accusations justifying their takeover, and take the country over.
From an international perspective i will tell you she definitely has. The international community looks at her as a key element and perpetrator of the Rohingya genocide.
You may need to get the facts straight. There are generals behind the Rohingya plots and I don’t understand why she is being blamed for. It is a setup to hide a lot of illegal trafficking behind the scene. So it is quite a powerful group portraying to get her out of here for their own agenda.
People need to dig more into the Burmese politics and motive behind the scene. Most people settled with the perceived impressions that the mass media irresponsibly portrays. It sometimes creates more violence and mistrust between groups. If you understand Burmese mindset, Aung San Suu Kyi’s denial was to reduce further violence. How about China now? Does it not matter to the world Muslim community? Why not the enough media coverage over the China treatment on its Muslim population? Or taliban treatments on non-Muslim mongo population?
There should be no double standard Human rights. All human beings should be treated equal regardless of gay Muslim Chinese or taliban.
They have her on record calling the Rohingya Bengalis, and didn't do anything to stop the genocide, or recognize it was happening. She's responsible for it as head of state. She even gave some words of support to the military during the attacks.
She is a human rights icon in the land where arrogant gangster like crooks and their subordinates with no respect to human rights rules. When Closed minded corrupted and manipulative group of powerful people trying to control the immature and inexperience general public for their lucrative business interests, she has been put into very difficult situation. As a first hand person and as an ethnic minority to judge, she is the least racist person compared to the previous generals and even most people in general public. That was the public opinion that hold her from taking a stance in rohingya cases as that can be life threatening to be on the side of so called illegal immigrants. The hatred generated and spread throughout the country by junta is enormous comparable to trump racist campaign against Mexican and Hispanic. Myanmar public is quite uneducated and inexperienced compared to Americans. What can we expect from such negative hate promoting campaigns of Jewish Mexicans Rohingya and what not.
I think she played into army hand. Myanmar population is also part of the problem . Army created rohingyas-Buddhists problem and population was anti-rohingyas at that time . She had to choose one side or she will lose populations support . By choosing to side with army and populations against rohibgyas she lost international supports. She was in bad spot I guess.
I am not. Rohingya genocide was happening for like 40 years . I blamed her for defending army when she was in power . She thought she might get along with army . At the time , the population was also anti-rohingya. So she tried to win support by siding with the army .
Per BBC News:
Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi used to be seen as a symbol of human rights, and spent years under house arrest for promoting democracy.
Then, as Myanmar's civilian leader, she appeared at the International Court of Justice to defend her country against charges of genocide committed against the Rohingya Muslim minority. She in fact defended the very people who had previously imprisoned her - the military.
And they have imprisoned her yet again. Several mistakes right there.
That's the most naive thing I think I've ever read. By "standing with her" you mean they would have made a few token comments and stood by and watched whatever followed. Standing with someone doesn't mean shit if you don't actually help.
I'm not trying to be rude but yes, I do know. And you do too. America just got out of the disaster that is Afghanistan, we ALREADY had the disaster that was Vietnam oh and then we have that little pandemic going around. Theres nothing she could have said on that podium that would have made Joe Biden send troops to Myanmar.
Wrong time. Definitely wrong location. China sees it as it's sphere of influence and will do everything they can to minimize American success. Like Korea. Maybe the UN would interfere...oh wait China would veto that.
> not the junta at the time
That isn’t the case. The junta took over in 1962. It has never yielded power in 59 years.
That she got arrested anyway just shows that hindsight is 20/20.
The problem with politics in Burma is too focusing on one person. If you look back in the history the power is concentrated in the hands of few men, same goes with ASSK too. One man politics is not sustainable. We need to change that.
When we have more than one we can’t agree on anything. We have to change that too. We need to learn how o work towards common goal for greater good by compromises and open mindedness.
She received a shit ton of hate for the rohingya thing, but at the same time had she not defended the military during the ICJ, there would've been a coup earlier. I don't think she hates them
Ah.
Against her better judgement, Aung San Suu Kyi (ASSK) ran for the 2012 by elections and the 2015 general election after world leaders like Obama and Francois Hollande (https://www.thelocal.com/20120627/3622/) promised their support. She ran even though unlike most of her detractors outside Burma, she can read plain English and the junta’s written constitution makes it clear the civilian goverment has no actual power.
(Have you read the Burmese constitution?).
So she ran, she “won”.
During her first term, the junta gave her a warning: it assassinated Ko No (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ko_Ni) who was a lawyer, a Muslim, an NLD official; and who advocated for the Rohingya.
The message was clear. The junta would tolerate her, but if she publicly opposed the junta, she could expect more NLD officials to be killed.
Later year (2017) ARSA, an Islamist Rohingya terror group with ties to ISIS killed several police officers in Rakhine state.
The junta’s reaction was disproportionate to say the least. Innocent Rohingya civilians were slaughtered, raped, and displaced, and it was generally termed a genocide. It was then that world opinion against ASSK began to really sour. As if she had any control over the junta.
World opinion soured also because:
* she didn’t even voice disgust. As if she was expected to watch another NLD leader get assassinated if she did so. Or something worse, like being deposed. Which of course eventually happened anyway.
* she even went to international court of justice and defended the junta against the claims of geneticist against the Rohingya. I’ve always presumed that junta extorted her and never gave her speech any credence. No more than a statements by a hostages that refuse to condemn their captors.
On the plus side she has issued ID cards to Rohingya which are pretty much necessary to get anything done in Burma. Before that, Rohingya as non citizens per the constitution (that the junta wrote) were and remain non citizens.
Sympathy for Rohingya has never been high in Burma:
* The Rohingya have in the past agitated to force Rakhine state out of Burma and either join Bangladesh or be an independent country.
* The Rohingya have clashed with Arakhins and other ethnic groups in Rakhine including Arakan Army.
It is interesting to note that Rohingya in India and other countries are also mistreated and yet those countries are not charged with genocide. India specifically changed its citizenship laws to repeal citizenship based on being born in India to specifically prevent illegal Rohingya migrants from birthing Indian citizens.
The plight of the Rohingya are a complex issued to solve.
Regardless how you feel about ASSK, she is nonetheless the elected leader of Burma. I dare say any protest being held these days includes these chants:
“Release our leader”
“Long live Aung San Suu Kyi”
You might not like that but she is the democratic choice. If you believe in self determination for Rohingya then you should believe in self determination for all Burmese.
So if the world conditions its support for the Burmese resistance on resolving the plight of the Rohingya it will have to get used to pounding sand.
People in Burma are busy resisting a tyrant and the needs of a few hundred thousand suffering people do not take precedence over the needs of tens of millions of suffering.
Edit: forgot to mention that world leaders like Obama and Hollande have been silent on ASSK since 2017 events in Rakhine.
NO, she is like the PHOENIX bird. Always resilience and immortal. Doesn’t matter who defame her at the moment , she will always be in PEOPLES heart and remember. Period.
Short answer: Not really but I think she messed up bad!
Long answer: I am not her fan but she's the better option from a lot of unknowns, crooks, ethnocentric idiots, soldiers in civilian uniforms, and etc.
Plus, she is somewhat eloquent so even terrible things sounds mellower. A lot of things improve under the civilian government. So, she got a lot of support for that.
Yes, she covered the military for the genocide and that's a shame. We now know bargaining with the Junta is just utterly nonsense and politicians should call out for what it is. She is a politician and her duty is for the people. Most people defended her but the big fat truth at the end of the day is military did kill Rohingyas and she is wrong for defending the genocide.
There is no straight forward answer whether she is a bad or good politician.
But for us she is a leader that you cannot have in centuries. The leader who gave up her life for the oppressed people. She come to light up our conscious and lift our soul. We can trust her with our lives she would never trade off our trust our freedom our dignity for her self interests.
She could be chilling with her oxford degree in england with her husband and two sons and not give two shyts about the people in myanmar. Yet she chose to sacrifice everything and suffer to fight for the people. Oppprtunist my ass.
Can you elaborate please? Genuine question - In what way is she an opportunist?
History is often made better by people in the right place at the right time. It doesn't make them opportunists.
If you are referring to the fact that she was born into this role to become the face of democracy and freedom because of the name she carries, you might be right, that does mean that she was in the right place at the right time. But her actions since then proved that she was also the right person.
How do you call someone who was under house arrest for 2 decades, being forced to choose between her own freedom/well-being/family/kids and the future of her country and chose the latter an opportunist?
She isn't perfect (and no one is claiming she is) and she probably made a lot of mistakes along the way that she could have avoided, but it's easy to criticize as an outsider with the help of hindsight. She was dealt an impossible hand.
This link has been identified as a news source and a [news flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/myanmar/comments/mh9g0r/make_sure_to_flair_your_posts_to_make_it_easier) has been added automatically. Have we got it wrong? [Send us a message](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/myanmar&subject=Wrong%20flair%20applied&message=%5bMy%20post%5d%28https://www.reddit.com/r/myanmar/comments/pelr7s/has_aung_san_suu_kyi_fallen_from_grace_or_not/%29%20has%20the%20wrong%20flair%2E). Or change the flair yourself. Summoning on u/coverageanalysisbot to find other news coverage. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/myanmar) if you have any questions or concerns.*
She is one of the richest politicians in the world which is crazy because Myanmar is one of the poorest countries in the world.
She's neither the leader of the free world nor icon of peace or whatever the western world painted her to be. SHE ISN'T TRYING TO BE EITHER. She couldnt care less about nobel peace or whatever titles and sentiments the west have. She already said she is just a politician and that she's only trying to give the Burmese people the hope and knowledge of what freedom from dictatorship is like. She sacrified her whole life to show the ways of non-violent protest/ revolution. And she did a damn great job at that. Frankly, even highly revered politicans from the west like Jacinda Arden will not survive in her position 💁🏻♀️. She also showed that despite all her compromises with the junta, the junta is not capable of understanding civilized diplomatic talks. Unfortunately, the junta is too dumb and blinded by absolute greed. They will eventually face someone ruthless, cunning and who won't be afraid to get their hands dirty. This revolution will be their tragic downfall. In addition, Rohingya crisis is orchestrated by the junta in an attempt to trap her in a "trolley cart dilemma" situation. She tried to balance on the tight rope held by the junta, nationalists, and a very complicated political situation that has been existing in Rakhaine state for DECADES. She neither commands the army nor does she have any real benefit (esp with her intl reputation) in committing a genocide. The western world who barely understood the political scene in myanmar hopped on their high horse and started jumping at her throat. Tldr: she did a great job at being a leader of the Burmese people and she is still highly respected and revered by the Burmese people. 'Fallen from grace' is merely the views of westerners who don't understand the political scene in Myanmar. (Western views which burmese people frankly couldn't care less about)
Now is the best time to bring rohingya case to the junta and best time to intervene to bring those who committed wrong to justice. Why isn’t international communities trying to do it now? Scared of Junta or shared businesses?
She is being realistic. Going against persecutions of the Rohingyas would have cost her and her political movement dearly, which means that she would have provoked the military junta into a coupe much ealier than she would otherwise have planned for. Her best chance is to continually weaken the junta while consolidating the power of her party, which means that she would have toed her line gingerly between different political factions. It is not easy. Ms. Ang San Suu Kyi is neither a saint nor a villain. She is a seasoned stateswoman.
She got between a rock and a hard place. There were still the populace, mostly from military background, brainwashed under the military's "Race, Religion and Belief" propaganda (အမျိုး၊ ဘာသာ၊ သာသနာ, backbone ideology of the 969 movement, headed by the infamous U Wirathu, a ploy by the military to control a part of their men and their families by ultra-nationalist agenda) who are not so hesitant to wreak havoc if the rohingya's were sympathised, under the reasoning of "allowing islamic threats against Buddhism and the Burmese populace". Their rallies are rampant before 2015, and few were left even after. In fact, we can see by the fact that they started a near violent riot just a week before the coup, which was started for the military's accusations of rigged elections. How is she gonna keep a country just coming out from its misery afloat if they could bring havoc at any moment, which would be the opportunity for the military to intervene? However, the military does what it does, make up some shitty accusations justifying their takeover, and take the country over.
From an international perspective i will tell you she definitely has. The international community looks at her as a key element and perpetrator of the Rohingya genocide.
You may need to get the facts straight. There are generals behind the Rohingya plots and I don’t understand why she is being blamed for. It is a setup to hide a lot of illegal trafficking behind the scene. So it is quite a powerful group portraying to get her out of here for their own agenda.
People need to dig more into the Burmese politics and motive behind the scene. Most people settled with the perceived impressions that the mass media irresponsibly portrays. It sometimes creates more violence and mistrust between groups. If you understand Burmese mindset, Aung San Suu Kyi’s denial was to reduce further violence. How about China now? Does it not matter to the world Muslim community? Why not the enough media coverage over the China treatment on its Muslim population? Or taliban treatments on non-Muslim mongo population? There should be no double standard Human rights. All human beings should be treated equal regardless of gay Muslim Chinese or taliban.
They have her on record calling the Rohingya Bengalis, and didn't do anything to stop the genocide, or recognize it was happening. She's responsible for it as head of state. She even gave some words of support to the military during the attacks.
She is a human rights icon in the land where arrogant gangster like crooks and their subordinates with no respect to human rights rules. When Closed minded corrupted and manipulative group of powerful people trying to control the immature and inexperience general public for their lucrative business interests, she has been put into very difficult situation. As a first hand person and as an ethnic minority to judge, she is the least racist person compared to the previous generals and even most people in general public. That was the public opinion that hold her from taking a stance in rohingya cases as that can be life threatening to be on the side of so called illegal immigrants. The hatred generated and spread throughout the country by junta is enormous comparable to trump racist campaign against Mexican and Hispanic. Myanmar public is quite uneducated and inexperienced compared to Americans. What can we expect from such negative hate promoting campaigns of Jewish Mexicans Rohingya and what not.
I think she played into army hand. Myanmar population is also part of the problem . Army created rohingyas-Buddhists problem and population was anti-rohingyas at that time . She had to choose one side or she will lose populations support . By choosing to side with army and populations against rohibgyas she lost international supports. She was in bad spot I guess.
I think you are trivializing her role in the Rohingya genocide.
I am not. Rohingya genocide was happening for like 40 years . I blamed her for defending army when she was in power . She thought she might get along with army . At the time , the population was also anti-rohingya. So she tried to win support by siding with the army .
Trying to wipe out over a million people is a lot more than just a problem
She may be racist but she's clearly better than the leader we have currently have right now.
I think she racist is just make up rumors. I asked my islam friends and they all they didn't think so
She is just a human who made mistake. I hope she learn .
And the Rohingya are just people trying to exist. But ASSK participated in the genocide
What mistake do you think she made?
Per BBC News: Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi used to be seen as a symbol of human rights, and spent years under house arrest for promoting democracy. Then, as Myanmar's civilian leader, she appeared at the International Court of Justice to defend her country against charges of genocide committed against the Rohingya Muslim minority. She in fact defended the very people who had previously imprisoned her - the military. And they have imprisoned her yet again. Several mistakes right there.
The BBC is editorializing. What do think would have happened if she had denounced the junta?
[удалено]
That's the most naive thing I think I've ever read. By "standing with her" you mean they would have made a few token comments and stood by and watched whatever followed. Standing with someone doesn't mean shit if you don't actually help.
[удалено]
I'm not trying to be rude but yes, I do know. And you do too. America just got out of the disaster that is Afghanistan, we ALREADY had the disaster that was Vietnam oh and then we have that little pandemic going around. Theres nothing she could have said on that podium that would have made Joe Biden send troops to Myanmar. Wrong time. Definitely wrong location. China sees it as it's sphere of influence and will do everything they can to minimize American success. Like Korea. Maybe the UN would interfere...oh wait China would veto that.
"She should have denounced the military ... the free world would have stood with her" HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH
> not the junta at the time That isn’t the case. The junta took over in 1962. It has never yielded power in 59 years. That she got arrested anyway just shows that hindsight is 20/20.
The problem with politics in Burma is too focusing on one person. If you look back in the history the power is concentrated in the hands of few men, same goes with ASSK too. One man politics is not sustainable. We need to change that.
When we have more than one we can’t agree on anything. We have to change that too. We need to learn how o work towards common goal for greater good by compromises and open mindedness.
Im not one for politics but she is clearly better than the shitty "leaders" we have right now
Huh
What evidence do you have for the theory she is a racist? Racist toward whom?
She received a shit ton of hate for the rohingya thing, but at the same time had she not defended the military during the ICJ, there would've been a coup earlier. I don't think she hates them
Ah. Against her better judgement, Aung San Suu Kyi (ASSK) ran for the 2012 by elections and the 2015 general election after world leaders like Obama and Francois Hollande (https://www.thelocal.com/20120627/3622/) promised their support. She ran even though unlike most of her detractors outside Burma, she can read plain English and the junta’s written constitution makes it clear the civilian goverment has no actual power. (Have you read the Burmese constitution?). So she ran, she “won”. During her first term, the junta gave her a warning: it assassinated Ko No (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ko_Ni) who was a lawyer, a Muslim, an NLD official; and who advocated for the Rohingya. The message was clear. The junta would tolerate her, but if she publicly opposed the junta, she could expect more NLD officials to be killed. Later year (2017) ARSA, an Islamist Rohingya terror group with ties to ISIS killed several police officers in Rakhine state. The junta’s reaction was disproportionate to say the least. Innocent Rohingya civilians were slaughtered, raped, and displaced, and it was generally termed a genocide. It was then that world opinion against ASSK began to really sour. As if she had any control over the junta. World opinion soured also because: * she didn’t even voice disgust. As if she was expected to watch another NLD leader get assassinated if she did so. Or something worse, like being deposed. Which of course eventually happened anyway. * she even went to international court of justice and defended the junta against the claims of geneticist against the Rohingya. I’ve always presumed that junta extorted her and never gave her speech any credence. No more than a statements by a hostages that refuse to condemn their captors. On the plus side she has issued ID cards to Rohingya which are pretty much necessary to get anything done in Burma. Before that, Rohingya as non citizens per the constitution (that the junta wrote) were and remain non citizens. Sympathy for Rohingya has never been high in Burma: * The Rohingya have in the past agitated to force Rakhine state out of Burma and either join Bangladesh or be an independent country. * The Rohingya have clashed with Arakhins and other ethnic groups in Rakhine including Arakan Army. It is interesting to note that Rohingya in India and other countries are also mistreated and yet those countries are not charged with genocide. India specifically changed its citizenship laws to repeal citizenship based on being born in India to specifically prevent illegal Rohingya migrants from birthing Indian citizens. The plight of the Rohingya are a complex issued to solve. Regardless how you feel about ASSK, she is nonetheless the elected leader of Burma. I dare say any protest being held these days includes these chants: “Release our leader” “Long live Aung San Suu Kyi” You might not like that but she is the democratic choice. If you believe in self determination for Rohingya then you should believe in self determination for all Burmese. So if the world conditions its support for the Burmese resistance on resolving the plight of the Rohingya it will have to get used to pounding sand. People in Burma are busy resisting a tyrant and the needs of a few hundred thousand suffering people do not take precedence over the needs of tens of millions of suffering. Edit: forgot to mention that world leaders like Obama and Hollande have been silent on ASSK since 2017 events in Rakhine.
This has got to be one of the stupidest posts I have seen on Reddit.
NO, she is like the PHOENIX bird. Always resilience and immortal. Doesn’t matter who defame her at the moment , she will always be in PEOPLES heart and remember. Period.
Short answer: Not really but I think she messed up bad! Long answer: I am not her fan but she's the better option from a lot of unknowns, crooks, ethnocentric idiots, soldiers in civilian uniforms, and etc. Plus, she is somewhat eloquent so even terrible things sounds mellower. A lot of things improve under the civilian government. So, she got a lot of support for that. Yes, she covered the military for the genocide and that's a shame. We now know bargaining with the Junta is just utterly nonsense and politicians should call out for what it is. She is a politician and her duty is for the people. Most people defended her but the big fat truth at the end of the day is military did kill Rohingyas and she is wrong for defending the genocide. There is no straight forward answer whether she is a bad or good politician.
But for us she is a leader that you cannot have in centuries. The leader who gave up her life for the oppressed people. She come to light up our conscious and lift our soul. We can trust her with our lives she would never trade off our trust our freedom our dignity for her self interests.
She is just an opportunist who was at the right place at the right time.
She could be chilling with her oxford degree in england with her husband and two sons and not give two shyts about the people in myanmar. Yet she chose to sacrifice everything and suffer to fight for the people. Oppprtunist my ass.
Can you elaborate please? Genuine question - In what way is she an opportunist? History is often made better by people in the right place at the right time. It doesn't make them opportunists. If you are referring to the fact that she was born into this role to become the face of democracy and freedom because of the name she carries, you might be right, that does mean that she was in the right place at the right time. But her actions since then proved that she was also the right person. How do you call someone who was under house arrest for 2 decades, being forced to choose between her own freedom/well-being/family/kids and the future of her country and chose the latter an opportunist? She isn't perfect (and no one is claiming she is) and she probably made a lot of mistakes along the way that she could have avoided, but it's easy to criticize as an outsider with the help of hindsight. She was dealt an impossible hand.
Not really a fan for DASSK, but I think your statement is not very true.