Pretty much says it all…
Pat, I totally agree with you when you say our role in Aleppo is a disgrace but you cannot pin this on Obama and Russia. To put it crudely US/Syrian beef goes back to the days of Hafez- al-Assad.
I feel like there is a major cognitive dissonance when it comes to these issues with some people. We armed Taliban to fight the Russians, we are arming ISIS to fight Assad and the Russians. When Assad wins this fight where will all those ISIS mercenaries that we armed go? Into Turkey? Into another region and we will arm them again and maybe they won’t be called ISIS anymore but we will keep feeding the troll I can assure you.
Remember back when the great heroic leader Obama made Syria and Russia so afraid they were forced to give up their Sarin gas?
They must have missed some:
I guess we shouldn’t be too worried. Those people don’t matter anyway. Can’t stop every last chemical random chemical attack here and there, so it has been said. And Syria gave up a lot of chemical weapons after all…so just let them slide.
Sounds about right.
1 Like
It does seem so…
Really no surprise here unfortunately…
What’s the deal? Any opinions of the US shooting down a Syrian war plane? Is this the start of a no-fly zone? What’s Russia’s response going to be? Anyone fear this conflict will now escalate?
Iran lobbing medium range ballistic missiles at ISIS and the US trying (again after the failure of “moderate” rebels) to artificially build a politically correct sunni alternative to radical sunni islamists.
Iran (with some justification, one might say) claim that the “revolving door policy” means that many of these new SDF sunnis are former AQ and Jat/JaN members.
What could possibly go wrong?
1 Like
I watched some program about the ‘moderate’ rebels Obama was funding to fight in Syria. They trained them and sent them in and immediately they were captured by Al-Qaeda backed rebels. So, given the choice, they joined up. Meanwhile the US forces were contacted by the remaining moderate rebels…I think there were literally 2 or 3 left. So, basically, that worked out real well.
Why do we continue to fund these guys who will eventually and historically turn on us with the drop of a hat.
The only real alternative to the Shia movement at least in Iraq, was the Awakening Movement. They were an actually political, possibly moderate force, but they where ostracized by the Iraqi Shia government and then, when ISIS invaded their areas, they were given the choice, join us or die. They reached out to the Iraqi government and the US for help, the government gave none, the US called ISIS the J.V. team and the rest is history. A sad history at that.
So we are once again arming so called moderate Muslims who either will end up turning on or being abandoned by us.
We want Assad out? I agree with the Russians? What’s the alternative? Another Libya? Another Afghanistan under the Taliban? Even more terrorist attacks across the world?
If I were in charge, I’d let ISIS and Iran fight it out and stay the hell out of it. Why fund 'moderate" Muslims to do our fighting. Hell, we just gave Saudi Arabia over 115 billion, let them do the funding and the arm groups to fight.
Starting in 1602 there were a series of wars between the Sunni Ottoman Empire and the Shia Persian Empire. These in fact saved the West from further Muslim invasion. We could have a rematch today, which if played right could serve the same purpose, agree or disagree?
Lol you’re contradicting yourself, Iran or any other nation with a barely equipped and organised army would obliterate ISIS in a few weeks at most but the reason why they haven’t is because your government is funding them.
Please help me clear up this alleged contradiction:
Our government?
Or the Saudi’s?
Are we arming ISIS?
Or arming the Iraqi army to destroy them?
Which is it?
When the American government was arming the so called resistance against Assad they were knowingly arming ISIS fighters, the exact same thing was done in Libya.
You may also be somewhat helping the Iraqi army fight ISIS as well. Exactly the same way that you helped Saddam fight against Iran for 8 years while trickling some arms to Iran through the backdoor just to prolong the war.
Also Saudi Arabia won’t do Jack without your permission, it’s not like they have a say in the region and can act autonomously. You tell them to go into Yemen and they do it etc
But, but, but, Obama got them to remove 100 million-kajillions tones of Sarin and nerve agent so it was a win, right!.. Oh he’s still gassing people, never mind. /sarcasm
1 Like
I don’t fear it’s going to escalate, it’s going to escalate, that is a foregone conclusion. All these hostile players in one spot? Yeah, I don’t see how escalation is not possible.
I said it 3 years ago and I still believe the only real option to contain the threats therein and about would have been a full scale invasion of Syria. The world’s most unpopular idea. But had it been done, we would not be dealing with Assad or ISIS right now. We would be containing pockets of resistance and aiding the rebuilding of the country. As long as we didn’t do stupid things like completely undo Syria’s infrastructure like we did in Iraq, it would have worked.
But it is still a wholly unpopular idea and idea whose time has past. We can’t do it with Russia, Iran, Turkey, and God knows who else carving out stakes for themselves there.
I don’t know what’s going to happen specifically, but as ISIS falls, I expect escalation.
Everything that can, will.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/isis-lebanon-courage-christian-town-112456395.html
These are the people we should be arming and backing…not Muslim terrorists. Yet, no one can ever see it.
It was fun while it lasted. So Trump is playing into Russia’s hands. Obviously this will boost the influence of Assad, Iran and Russia in the region. What will Saudi Arabia and it’s allies do?