Something's going on in Syria

[KevinNYC]

Just reading various new stories, it feels like this could be a pivotal time in Syria.

The Kurdish YPG militia has made big gains in the last several months and now controls an unbroken swath of northern Syria bordering Turkey.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/Northern_Syria_offensive_%282015%29.png/320px-Northern_Syria_offensive_%282015%29.pngThey have been knocking ISIS out of these areas by working with American airpower. In this story a NY Times reporter watched Kurdish YPG fighters use Google Earth to call in airstrikes on ISIS locations (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/10/world/middleeast/syria-turkey-islamic-state-kurdish-militia-ypg.html)

Now the US has made a deal for Turkey to get more serious about control of its border. Part of the deal allows US airplanes to be based in Turkey right near the border. This means more US strikes and quicker response times.

The Turkish deal with the United States sets up an “ISIS-free” bombardment zone along a 60-mile strip of the border region that features another exclusion: At Turkey’s request, it is also explicitly a zone free of the Kurdish militia, even though the Kurds had begun advancing toward the area to start battling the Islamic State there."]The Turkish deal with the United States sets up an “ISIS-free” bombardment zone along a 60-mile strip of the border region that features another exclusion: At Turkey’s request, it is also explicitly a zone free of the Kurdish militia, even though the Kurds had begun advancing toward the area to start battling the Islamic State there.
If they can knock ISIS out of this zone, it cuts off ISIS path of new recruits entering from Turkey. The green parts are YPG controlled.
http://img.sondakika.com/haber/277/abd-incirlik-ten-isid-e-karsi-operasyonlar-7593277_3064_m.jpg

It's a big, big if, though, because of the tensions between Turkey and the Kurdish group, PKK who are not the YPG, but have similar ties.

The control of Syria looks like this. So if they are succesful taking that area, ISIS would not have access to the North or West of Syria and could only move people/supplies from Iraq in the East or South. I dunno if they are active along the Jordanian border in the South.
http://www.defence24.pl/media/cache/inside_article_image/uploads/images/9b374f923ea72cb3ea272ae6b4b2b782.png

[KevinNYC]

Lots of high level meetings have been happening.

Syria crisis: What's behind the fresh diplomatic push? (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33939806)
The last few weeks have seen intense diplomacy between Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United States and Russia, in what seems to be a concerted effort to break the logjam over the Syrian conflict.
The multi-faceted civil war has lasted over four years, killed more than a quarter of a million people and dislodged upwards of 10 million, in what is being seen as the worst refugee crisis for half a century.
Some of the meetings have been rare or unprecedented:
In Doha, three-way talks on Syria between the US, Russian and Saudi foreign ministers
A rare trip to Oman by the Syrian foreign minister, who also shuttled to Tehran to meet top Iranian and Russian officials
In Riyadh, reports of a low-key but groundbreaking meeting between top Syrian and Saudi intelligence officials
To Moscow, a stream of rather more high-profile visitors, from the Saudi foreign minister to various Syrian opposition members
A tour by the Iranian foreign minister through Middle Eastern and South Asian capitals to promote a new peace plan which Tehran says it will take to the United Nations

[CNNonceAgain]

Hopefully based Assad can remain in power, but given the news that Comrade obomber has decided he can authorize air strikes on a foreign nation without congressional approval, I bet we'll have a "moderate" Sunni government before the end of 2016

[NumberSix]

Obama administration should have just let Assad massacre all the "rebels".

[KevinNYC]

The answer the article gives to why now is the fact that Assad has been weakened

If the Assad government were to collapse altogether then a frightening prospect of general chaos looms. That might allow IS jihadists to extend their grip over the whole country.
That is a nightmare scenario which in theory should unite the US, the Saudis, Iran and Russia.
It is almost certainly what is fuelling their latest fevered diplomatic consultations.

[KevinNYC]

Obama administration should have just let Assad massacre all the "rebels".
When was Assad strong enough to do that?

What do you think was happening in 2011 and 2012.

[NumberSix]

When was Assad strong enough to do that?

What do you think was happening in 2011 and 2012.
I think there was idiots making speeches about redlines and threatening wars because, god forbid somebody kill a bunch of jihadists.

[KevinNYC]

I think there was idiots making speeches about redlines and threatening wars because, god forbid somebody kill a bunch of jihadists.
What a mess of nonsense

[poido123]

There's something strange...


In the neighbourhood...

Who you gonna call...

First thing that popped in my head when reading the thread title.

I'll see myself out.

[NumberSix]

What a mess of nonsense
Right, I must have made that all up. Talk of redlines and Putin stepping in to avoid a war that Obama was threatening must be something I imagined.


:rolleyes:

[CNNonceAgain]

The answer the article gives to why now is the fact that Assad has been weakened

Thanks to us meddling that has in no instance ever been helpful

[KevinNYC]

but given the news that Comrade obomber has decided he can authorize air strikes on a foreign nation without congressional approval, I
You do know that the President asked Congress last February to approve a new authorization of use of force and to rescind the still operational authorization from 2002? The new AUMF actually limited the president's powers.

Congress hasn't done anything with it. (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/04/14/boehner-middle-east/25775771/)

Boehner said the Authorization for Use of Military Force the president sent to Capitol Hill earlier this year is going nowhere. Obama's request would repeal the resolution used to authorize the war in Iraq and put limits on ground troops.

"Until the president gets serious about fighting the fight, until he has a strategy that makes sense, there's no reason for us to give him less authority than he has today, which is what he's asking," he said.

[KevinNYC]

Right, I must have made that all up. Talk of redlines and Putin stepping in to avoid a war that Obama was threatening must be something I imagined.


:rolleyes:
A. that was 2013 or the third year of the war.
B. Nothing about the "red line" on the use of chemical weapons prevented Assad from waging war on the rebels, nor did he stop waging war on the rebels.
C. And I say rebels and not jihadists, becuase Assad conspicuously did not not attack ISIS headquarters in Raqqa for years.

Again, I ask you, what did the US do to prevent Assad from wiping out the rebels in 2011 or 2012. And if Assad didn't win the war by end of 2012 what stopped him?

[CNNonceAgain]

Oh, I'm sorry does an AUMF trump article 1section 8 now? Oh, didn't think so. All military action in Syria is unconstitutional until congress actually declares war

[CNNonceAgain]

Reminder that "FSA" and "rebels" are euphemisms for Riyad backed Turkish Islamists

[KevinNYC]

Thanks to us meddling that has in no instance ever been helpful

What's your take on when the meddling began? Was it before or after the civil war broke out and before or after the regional proxy war broke out?

[CNNonceAgain]

70 Years. Geopolitics is a long-term game, and propping up "America's greatest ally" is difficult

[KevinNYC]

ISIS has responded before to hostile territory, by moving its fighters back to Iraq and waiting things out in Syria. Lots of bombs have been going off in iraq

http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/iraq-officials-bombs-in-and-around-baghdad-kill-22-people/

22 killed Saturday and 56 killed a couple of days ago.

[Horde of Temujin]

A. that was 2013 or the third year of the war.
B. Nothing about the "red line" on the use of chemical weapons prevented Assad from waging war on the rebels, nor did he stop waging war on the rebels.
C. And I say rebels and not jihadists, becuase Assad conspicuously did not not attack ISIS headquarters in Raqqa for years.

Again, I ask you, what did the US do to prevent Assad from wiping out the rebels in 2011 or 2012. And if Assad didn't win the war by end of 2012 what stopped him?

He is a hateful angry misinformed person.
It is well-known.

[RidonKs]

Lots of high level meetings have been happening.

Syria crisis: What's behind the fresh diplomatic push? (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33939806)
one wonders now how much the expedition of the iranian nuclear deal had to do with an exchange for iran's cooperation against isis. iran may technically be on the same 'side' anyway, but the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. i wonder what sort of agreement will be broached....

did turkey just get filibustered?

[RidonKs]

I think there was idiots making speeches about redlines and threatening wars because, god forbid somebody kill a bunch of jihadists.
see how this idiot believes 2011 would have been a perfect time for an american ground operation in syria? this is why nothing he writes on any subject should ever be taken seriously. he's a neophyte posing as expert testimony, stfu already.

[NumberSix]

see how this idiot believes 2011 would have been a perfect time for an american ground operation in syria? this is why nothing he writes on any subject should ever be taken seriously. he's a neophyte posing as expert testimony, stfu already.
Who are you talking about? Me or him? Because I don't know which one of us you think was advocating an American ground operation in Syria? Maybe he did and I didn't notice it. I dunno.

[dunksby]

one wonders now how much the expedition of the iranian nuclear deal had to do with an exchange for iran's cooperation against isis. iran may technically be on the same 'side' anyway, but the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. i wonder what sort of agreement will be broached....

did turkey just get filibustered?
Iran has been fighting ISIS from the first day, the only country to do so on ground alongsid Iraqi army and Kurdish forces. The US should start putting pressure on supposed allies in Saudi Arabia /Qatar/Turkey to stop funding ISIS and other jihhadists.

[Dresta]

A. that was 2013 or the third year of the war.
B. Nothing about the "red line" on the use of chemical weapons prevented Assad from waging war on the rebels, nor did he stop waging war on the rebels.
C. And I say rebels and not jihadists, becuase Assad conspicuously did not not attack ISIS headquarters in Raqqa for years.

Again, I ask you, what did the US do to prevent Assad from wiping out the rebels in 2011 or 2012. And if Assad didn't win the war by end of 2012 what stopped him?
1. The US had been funding democracy projects (i.e. destabilisation) in Syria for years before the outbreak of civil conflict (begun by Bush, continued by Obama), just like they have done in Ukraine:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-secretly-backed-syrian-opposition-groups-cables-released-by-wikileaks-show/2011/04/14/AF1p9hwD_story.html

Both have clearly worked out really well.

2. The NATO bombing of Libya (illegal, and unsanctioned by congress), and demise of Gaddafi, was a restraining factor, meaning Assad had to tread more carefully than his father had done when crushing the 1982 uprising, where he killed more in a month, than Assad Jnr did in a year (this is why the death count was much lower throughout the first year or so of the conflict, compared to the last 3 years, when all these jihadists have had a steady stream of heavy weaponry). Difference is: no one cared about Syria back then, and knew it had powerful allies (which are still the only thing saving it) - now it is an American, Saudi and Turkish interest. Moreover, large amounts of Gaddafi's weaponry have made their way over to Syria, something to which the Obama administration has admitted complicity:

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-admin-admits-to-covertly-sending-heavy-weapons-to-syrian-rebels-2012-12?IR=T

3. The CIA has admitted to aiding the supply of weaponry to rebel factions, as well as 'communications assistance.' The weakness of Assad was predicated on the rebels receiving heavy amounts of outside support, openly encouraged by the Obama administration, and American allies in the region.

And Assad did 'not attack ISIS headquarters for years?' - that's strange, because IS didn't secure full control of Raqqa until about a year ago. Al-Nusra and the FSA took Raqqa from Syrian army control only in March of 2013 - the next year or so was marked by heavy amounts of infighting. The regime did not target IS in particular (early on) because the most effective fighting forces against it where AN and the FSA; christ, IS didn't even start making gains in Syria until early 2013 (when it changed its name to signify this expansion from ISI to ISIL); the priority of IS was also not the regime, but securing its own territory, thus making it less of an existential threat (it's not that complicated - you were saying how weak Assad was a minute ago, then you want him to focus on 3 enemies at the same time; and what is this delusion that has you thinking that AN and the FSA aren't a bunch of fanatics also? Because that is what they are). Not to mention Obama was referring to them as a JV squad in Jan 2014 :oldlol: Assad was heavily bombing them in Raqqa by August of that same year, so yeah, not 'years' but months.

Stop making shit up just to defend Obama's utterly contradictory and chaos creating foreign policy. It's truly pathetic.

[code green]

1. The US had been funding democracy projects (i.e. destabilisation) in Syria for years before the outbreak of civil conflict (begun by Bush, continued by Obama), just like they have done in Ukraine:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-secretly-backed-syrian-opposition-groups-cables-released-by-wikileaks-show/2011/04/14/AF1p9hwD_story.html

Both have clearly worked out really well.

2. The NATO bombing of Libya (illegal, and unsanctioned by congress), and demise of Gaddafi, was a restraining factor, meaning Assad had to tread more carefully than his father had done when crushing the 1982 uprising, where he killed more in a month, than Assad Jnr did in a year (this is why the death count was much lower throughout the first year or so of the conflict, compared to the last 3 years, when all these jihadists have had a steady stream of heavy weaponry). Difference is: no one cared about Syria back then, and knew it had powerful allies (which are still the only thing saving it) - now it is an American, Saudi and Turkish interest. Moreover, large amounts of Gaddafi's weaponry have made their way over to Syria, something to which the Obama administration has admitted complicity:

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-admin-admits-to-covertly-sending-heavy-weapons-to-syrian-rebels-2012-12?IR=T

3. The CIA has admitted to aiding the supply of weaponry to rebel factions, as well as 'communications assistance.' The weakness of Assad was predicated on the rebels receiving heavy amounts of outside support, openly encouraged by the Obama administration, and American allies in the region.

And Assad did 'not attack ISIS headquarters for years?' - that's strange, because IS didn't secure full control of Raqqa until about a year ago. Al-Nusra and the FSA took Raqqa from Syrian army control only in March of 2013 - the next year or so was marked by heavy amounts of infighting. The regime did not target IS in particular (early on) because the most effective fighting forces against it where AN and the FSA; christ, IS didn't even start making gains in Syria until early 2013 (when it changed its name to signify this expansion from ISI to ISIL); the priority of IS was also not the regime, but securing its own territory, thus making it less of an existential threat (it's not that complicated - you were saying how weak Assad was a minute ago, then you want him to focus on 3 enemies at the same time; and what is this delusion that has you thinking that AN and the FSA aren't a bunch of fanatics also? Because that is what they are). Not to mention Obama was referring to them as a JV squad in Jan 2014 :oldlol: Assad was heavily bombing them in Raqqa by August of that same year, so yeah, not 'years' but months.

Stop making shit up just to defend Obama's utterly contradictory and chaos creating foreign policy. It's truly pathetic.

Dresta right on point yet again when it comes to Syria. :applause: