Syria - What should we do if anything?

[vilas 477]

[ProfTournesol 956]

Well, that's a little caricatural. It's true that IS is made of all kinds of foreign fighters as you described, while other Syrian rebel factions are mainly composed of Syrians, AFAIK.

On the other side, there are a lot of foreign fighters too (Iranians, Lebanese Hezbollah, Russians now...).

[spooky lynx 73]

Meanwhile a group of rebels belonging to FSA surrendered to Jabhat al Nusra just after crossing the Turkish-Syrian border.

Nice way of arming jihadists, I'd say. Not mentioning such nice and lawful things like hosting and training armed rebels.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Meanwhile a group of rebels belonging to FSA surrendered to Jabhat al Nusra just after crossing the Turkish-Syrian border.

Nice way of arming jihadists, I'd say. Not mentioning such nice and lawful things like hosting and training armed rebels.

Yes, that's what i quote here : https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/128311-syria-what-should-we-do-if-anything/?p=2914168, where US military themself said it was a complete failure.

[spooky lynx 73]

Maybe it's not a failure but some way of distributing weapons to needed guys. Arming jihadists directly will bring too much questions across the world. Photos of McCain with them were quite enough, open arming would be too much.

[ProfTournesol 956]

(Vice News) US Believes Russia Has Started Airstrikes in Syria

 

 

The United States believes that Russia has started carrying out airstrikes in Syria in the vicinity of Homs, an American official told Reuters on Wednesday, adding that Moscow gave the US a one-hour advanced notice of its operations.

The US official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the information on the airstrikes was preliminary and declined to give any details, including on the number of strikes or the aircraft used.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Lavrov and Sana (Syrian state news agency) said IS has been targeted by Russian strikes, while several reports said Homs has suffered from an air raid, where there isn't IS troops AFAIK.

[Tonci87 163]

Somehow I have the impression that Russian aircraft will target all of Assads enemies, no matter if they are IS, Kurds, or smth else.

The situation must be quite confusing for the Kurdish fighters. Sometimes they get air support from coalition fighters, sometimes they get bombed by Turkey with fighters that look just like the ones the coalition uses, now there are Russian fighters to worry about too....

[vilas 477]

Turkey hit Kurds already several times

indeed this nation suffers lack of independence for centuries and should have their own country

[ProfTournesol 956]

Somehow I have the impression that Russian aircraft will target all of Assads enemies, no matter if they are IS, Kurds, or smth else.

The situation must be quite confusing for the Kurdish fighters. Sometimes they get air support from coalition fighters, sometimes they get bombed by Turkey with fighters that look just like the ones the coalition uses, now there are Russian fighters to worry about too....

 

Indeed :

 

 

As the Turkish governement, pretending to fight IS but striking the PKK, the Russian seem to be following their own agenda, securing Regime controlled area against Syrian rebels, which is far from IS controlled areas. The Kurds are still alone.

[vilas 477]

 

securing Regime controlled area against Syrian rebels, which is far from IS controlled areas.

 

what differs Syrian rebels from ISIS  ?

that USA helped them ? they their violence is less cinematic cause ISIS prodce movies for best-gore websites

they both want sharia system, both fight to set islamic religious country or am i wrong and syrian rebels want to establish secular country in which we can build Catholic church and walk in bikini?

because if syrian rebels fight to establish topless beach, local cider factory (apple drink) , few Catholic churches, swingers club and invite Slayer to play there show with Behemoth  - than i support them

[drebin052 324]

 

Somehow I have the impression that Russian aircraft will target all of Assads enemies, no matter if they are IS, Kurds, or smth else.

 

ISIS were never their main targets to begin with (though the same can be said with Western governments too)

 

Fancying up their wording at the UN by saying that they were going after ISIS was just the Kremlin's way to get public support, and boy do they have it; every bleeding heart lefty (and righty!) from America to Europe and even down under here are cheering on the "winning team"...

 

The whole operation is just a way to deny any chance of a coalition-led NFZ from being established, and at the same time presents the U.S. with a choice: since attacking Russian aircraft is obviously out of the question, Washington either has to co-operate with the Kremlin (which would be geopolitical suicide), or maintain the status quo and keep the fighting going on for however long it takes.

 

You can be damned sure that the latter option is going to be the one they stick with though, since it's the most profitable option for both sides.

[ProfTournesol 956]

At least Russia has a real strategy here, backing Syrian army or what is left of it, in creating a 'safe' area for Assad regime, while the coalition air strikes against IS have no 'next step' as nobody wants to go on the ground.

[vilas 477]

Prof , others have strategy too, but you are decent man and you do not belive that someones strategy may be evil

of course others have strategy - create hell , than people escape, than there is flood in europe, than there is civil war , than people ask for tyrany, than Year 1984 , in 2030 you will realize :)

if present plans will work out, our future is hell on earth,

if societies will stop those plans, we sustain our lifestyle , but in this war there is no place for being morraly high or tollerant and feeling sorry,

this is war of civilisations, that will kill one or other side, and this war is fueled by those who wish our future to look like in Year 1984 and turn us to Proles (i believe you read Orwell)

because probably this was not planned by middle east, middle east is just part of plan, if it was planned by middle east - worse for us cause our tolllerance will kill us in 2040 or like this

[Tonci87 163]

Yeah the west really has a problem here...

I think most western countries realise that ISIS can only be defeated by ground troops. With that in mind you have two options:

 

Supporting Assad.

That is something the western countries don´t want to do because they have been against him for so long, they can´t just do a 180° on that. And well, he is a murderous bastard...

 

Supporting the moderate rebels. 

Sound good on paper, but those rebels often aren´t a match for ISIS due to numbers and in some cases cooperate with the IS. Everything you give them will end up in the hands of ISIS sooner or later.

 

Supporting the Kurds.

I´m sure this is something many western countries would LOVE to do because they are the most stable and most religiously moderate force around, however, Erdogan would loose his shit. And since Turkey hosts many vital military bases for the coalition and is a partner of NATO....they won´t support the Kurds too much....

 

So in the end they will continue to do what they are doing now and maybe let Russia deal with it....

[vilas 477]

 

And well, he is a murderous bastard...

 

Chrisitian native Syrians who lived there say opposite - that noone asked them for religion

[d_lukin 16]

Live stream fron UN

discuss the situation with isis

 

finally from "expression of concern" will move on to the real action

 

Air strikes on targets of the ISIS rebels 

[vilas 477]

i afraid that real action will double refugee flood, moreover, destroying ISIS will move all extremists abraoad - to our countries,

all loonies and cycos who are there - will escape

cause Russia will not eliminate every single person saying about Jihad

jihadists are in Syria, great, we should export there ALL who want jihad, sharia,

when ISIS will get serious kick and will be destroyed, all jihadists back to Europe "o mister, i was so abused by them, i am refugee, i need help, my family is there, mister, i need help, i am moderate"

[ProfTournesol 956]

Yes, the protection of Syrian christians, as well as Iraki ones, is a real problem. France used to be protective for them, but didn't do much for them these last years. What's puzzling is that Lebanese christians were direct opponents of Assad regime, which assassinated several Christians leaders, sometimes with the help of Hezbollah.

[vilas 477]

kicking deamons out from hell is not good idea,

deamons left in hell - just need stone that will close crater

 

 

France used to be protective for them, but didn't do much for them these last years.

in 2030 you will understand it was planned ;) and you will drink bottle of wine sayin "o my god, this vilas had right" ;)

if there will be wine in shops

[spooky lynx 73]

i afraid that real action will double refugee flood, moreover, destroying ISIS will move all extremists abraoad - to our countries,

all loonies and cycos who are there - will escape

cause Russia will not eliminate every single person saying about Jihad

jihadists are in Syria, great, we should export there ALL who want jihad, sharia,

when ISIS will get serious kick and will be destroyed, all jihadists back to Europe "o mister, i was so abused by them, i am refugee, i need help, my family is there, mister, i need help, i am moderate"

All of most famous islamic extremist projects were more or less connected with 'stars and stripes'. Even now when Russia (as one who can really mix snackbars with mud) entered the scene the hysteria from DoS and its Arab puppets happened quickly.So real action will cool down some real masters of that jihadists.

[vilas 477]

religious extremism existed since ancient Egypt , only Europeans gone secular after French Revolution (it was Lenin who said that religion is opium for crowd, religion always was most basic social engineering tool to control crowd when police is not sufficient) , it is not created by US activity, whole west made raghead snackbars to be set free from tyranny of dictators , i would not call them projects, Third Reich also supported them, they are from middleages no matter is it USA or not USA who eliminated dictators, till that religion exist and as long it has freedom till extremism is present, 

just some study of Quran gives answer - we are worse than cattle (similar to Talmud btw)

USA licks their ass because of oil, because if USA please them, than oil is cheap and USA doesn't use own oil, when their oil gonna finish, than Texas will be rich as Emirates, and Middle East goes back to camel-travel era , they know it too, till they have oil they are strong, without oil, they will die in sand, and thats why they do demographic jihad invasion here, 2050 ? when oil will finish ? todays demographic jihad may be based on it, cause without it , in 60-70 years they back to middle ages, we are strong , US starts really use their oil and US is super rich, if now migration jihad is stopped, 

if i said that US made mistake by supporting extremists (what you suggest) it would mean that US is led by idiots who not foresee obvious facts, 

elites are not stupid, they are long distance thinking people, they do things from evil , not from stupidity, 

those are not mistakes, this is strict plan : help extremist > extremists cause civil war > societies ask for help > societies get "help" and "safety" plus many people die (mostly old and weak) which clears all debts of social care and pension system (depopulation)

who need so many people when in  2040 all junk jobs are filled with robots  ? who will pay all pensions to bilions of people ? 

if there is occasion to kill bilion , why not use it, they are useless, 

but to kill them there is war needed, 

who will do war better than religious freaks ? if plan is made by NWO in USA it would be like this, 

if plan is made in religious minds it is different "lets create world caliphate"

of course to this we have to add naive leftists - people who in case of DayZ "zombie apocalypse" gonna fight for "zombie rights" (so called "usefull idiots")

 

so religious freaks + naive leftitst = big boom 

 

who would die in big boom ? we

who should stop religious freaks and leftists ? we 

cause we cannot halt hand that shake hammer, so we can destroy at least hammer (if it is NWO plan , not religious freaks plan to create world caliphate)

people who believe in god are dangerous for one reason, they do not believe that this life is all they have, you  cannot scare them, only physical elimination of them or destruction of religion allow to control them, you cannot scare someone who believes that death is not over, 

you can scare atheist , but not believer, thats why we need to destroy religion to have ability to control them , cause we have all to loose (our life) they believe that life is just part of existence, 

and war will continue till such people believe that 70 virgins await them, 

if they were convinced that only worms await them, they would not fight but sit down and drink something cool  watchin porn

[drebin052 324]

 

 

coalition air strikes against IS have no 'next step' as nobody wants to go on the ground.

 

If 2011 was anything to go by there just isn't the political will in all Western governments at this time to do anything more than just token air strikes. We're four years too late to intervene at this point. We'd also be copping flak for attempting to pull another Iraq '03 all over again, which would create even more material for anti-West propaganda.

 

Of course, it doesn't help that the current U.S. administration is rather spineless and dysfunctional. Perhaps 2016 will have a brighter outlook?

 

So in the end they will continue to do what they are doing now and maybe let Russia deal with it....

 

I think the "plan" (if it can even be called that...) is to hope that Russia does go in to deal with Assad's enemies via boots on the ground and bleeds itself out in the process through attrition in the same way that Afghanistan bled out the USSR. Only time will tell if this actually works though, which I doubt it will but it remains to be seen.

[ProfTournesol 956]

 

If 2011 was anything to go by there just isn't the political will in all Western governments at this time to do anything more than just token air strikes. We're four years too late to intervene at this point. We'd also be copping flak for attempting to pull another Iraq '03 all over again, which would create even more material for anti-West propaganda.

 

Of course, it doesn't help that the current U.S. administration is rather spineless and dysfunctional. Perhaps 2016 will have a brighter outlook?

 

 

Yes it's obviously too late, and there is no way in attempting any "Iraq 2003" again, considering this is the main cause of what is happening today (particularly the dismissal of Saddam's army by sorcerer's apprentices). A direct ground intervention of any Western army would lead nowhere, as it would be the direct enemy of all factions on the grounds, Kurds set aside.

[Tonci87 163]

Yes it's obviously too late, and there is no way in attempting any "Iraq 2003" again, considering this is the main cause of what is happening today (particularly the dismissal of Saddam's army by sorcerer's apprentices). A direct ground intervention of any Western army would lead nowhere, as it would be the direct enemy of all factions on the grounds, Kurds set aside.

 

 

It´s the same with Russia though. I think the radical Muslims hate Russia just as much as the US, if not even a bit more...