+- Mock (https://mockforums.net)
+-- Forum: Serious Shit? (https://mockforums.net/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Discussions, Opinions & Debate (https://mockforums.net/forum-11.html)
+--- Thread: Syria (/thread-5869.html)
RE: Syria - username - 10-28-2015
(10-27-2015, 08:04 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:(10-01-2015, 11:11 AM)username Wrote: Backed in to a corner. Do we really want to potentially go to war with Russia? Yeah, between Ukraine and this, they're asking for it (I do believe Putin would like to revive some form of the USSR) but crap on toast-not something that was high on my immediate to-do list.
I see news reports that Russia has agreed to help the U.S. support "patriotic" Syrian rebels. I'll believe it when I see it.
And, today, Secretary of Defense Carter told the Senate Armed Forces Committee that the U.S. soldier killed on the ground in Iraq a few days ago died in "combat" as part of a joint mission with the Kurds to rescue hostages.
He says the U.S. is now engaged in "direct ground action" in both Iraq and Syria and will continue ground raids if opportunities with solid partners arise.
Story: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sec-carter-direct-u-s-action-ground-iraq-syria-n452131
Well, that sounds like a segway into boots on the ground to me.
"Patriotic Syrian Rebels" sounds like a contradiction in terms to me. You're probably not considered patriotic if you're trying to topple Assad.
Yep, boots be on the ground now. It was convenient that the first time was supposedly an accident and the decision was made by a few on the ground to go in and assist. Now it's Seals (or Delta force) missions.
There hasn't been much outcry over the first incident so I think the administration is comfortable in further dipping combat boots in to the waters.
RE: Syria - HairOfTheDog - 10-28-2015
(10-28-2015, 02:41 AM)username Wrote: "Patriotic Syrian Rebels" sounds like a contradiction in terms to me. You're probably not considered patriotic if you're trying to topple Assad.
Yeah, since Putin is a strong defender and ally of Assad, seems likely he considers it unpatriotic to overthrow Assad's rule by force.
But, here's the official Russian stance.
"We are ready to also support patriotic opposition, including the so-called Free Syrian Army, from the air," (Russian Foreign Minister) Lavrov told the Rossiya 1 television channel.
"The main thing for us is to approach the people fully in charge of representing these or those armed groups fighting terrorism among other things," he said, according to a transcript released by the state-controlled channel.
Mr Lavrov said the Kremlin also wanted Syria to prepare for parliamentary and presidential elections. "External players can not decide anything for the Syrians," he said.
"We must force them to come up with a plan for their country where the interests of every religious, ethnic and political group will be well protected.
"Of course they need to prepare for both parliamentary and presidential elections."
Mr Lavrov's comments represented a dramatic shift in Russia's position.
Ref: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-24/russia-ready-to-provide-air-support-to-syria-rebels-fighting-is/6882626
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Free Syrian Army is the main Western-backed opposition group battling to overthrow Syrian president Bashar al-Assad.
To date, as far as I know, they haven't been willing to consider a new government where Assad could possibly play a role (via election or other means), and Assad and Putin haven't been open to a new government without any possibility of Assad playing a role.
RE: Syria - BlueTiki - 10-28-2015
(10-28-2015, 03:36 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: "We are ready to also support patriotic opposition, including the so-called Free Syrian Army, from the air," (Russian Foreign Minister) Lavrov told the Rossiya 1 television channel.
My Russian is a bit rusty, but I believe what he said was:
"As long as the Free Syrian Army isn't engaging the pro-Assad forces, we will fly over them and alert ISIS and Assad of their position."
RE: Syria - HairOfTheDog - 10-28-2015
Your inference translator might be right on target, Tiki.
Another possibility in my mind is that Assad and Putin would genuinely like to help the coalition forces and the Syrian rebels do major damage to ISIS -- "one down, one to go" kind of strategy.
Once ISIS is impotent, then it's on to handling the rebels, at which point Assad and allies will try to convince the coalition forces that immediate "free elections" is the most reasonable (and democratic) next step for the country (and they might be right).
But, I don't think there is any organized rebel-led group that's qualified to take control and I don't believe Assad and Putin (and probably not Iran) would easily agree to an election where Assad isn't a candidate anyway.
If Assad was allowed to run and he won fair and square with international oversight, would the rebels give up their fight to oust him again? I doubt it, based on what they've invested for more than 4 years now.
So, maybe Assad's allies would ultimately agree to elections without Assad but with a variety of puppet candidates, in order to minimize the risk of ongoing war. Or, Russia would suggest a temporary occupation in order to stabilize the country.
I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud. It's a mess. Sometimes I agree with those in the U.S. who say, "let Russia take the burden this time; we've got our hands full with Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya." But, I don't think that's where any of the 2016 Presidential candidates is heading (except possibly Sanders and Paul).
RE: Syria - HairOfTheDog - 10-28-2015
And Trump, I think, has alluded to letting his next BFF Putin handle Syria too.
RE: Syria - BlueTiki - 10-28-2015
(10-28-2015, 04:48 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: And Trump, I think, has alluded to letting his next BFF Putin handle Syria too.
Yup.
He was the first.
RE: Syria - HairOfTheDog - 10-28-2015
To be fair, the Democratic Socialist's and the Libertarian's long-standing views have seen them objecting to such foreign intervention for many years.
But, I'm not really surprised that Trump was the first to say "leave Syria to Putin" specifically.
Maybe he's right.
RE: Syria - HairOfTheDog - 10-30-2015
As of this morning, the U.S. is officially sending special ground forces into Syria to join the Kurds in fighting ISIS.
For now, the sets of U.S. boots on the ground will be 50 or less and they will only be there to "advise and assist". That's the official announcement.
Also, Iran has for the first time been invited to join the multi-national Syrian peace talks.
RE: Syria - Duchess - 10-30-2015
(10-30-2015, 11:22 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: As of this morning, the U.S. is officially sending special ground forces into Syria to join the Kurds in fighting ISIS.
I don't like that at all. I don't approve!
RE: Syria - BlueTiki - 10-30-2015
(10-30-2015, 11:22 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: As of this morning, the U.S. is officially sending special ground forces into Syria to join the Kurds in fighting ISIS.
Every time I see the word "special" as an adjective, my mind translates it to "TARD" . . . errr . . . "challenged".
I wish they would use another descriptor such as "focused", "corps d'elite". . .
I don't like the image of armed, short-bus folks.
RE: Syria - Maggot - 10-30-2015
I would hate to have to go to war especially with the political atmosphere today. I wouldn't feel as though backup was right around the corner.
RE: Syria - BlueTiki - 10-30-2015
I sure hope this isn't another "Vietnam Creep".
RE: Syria - username - 10-30-2015
Iraq creep.
RE: Syria - BlueTiki - 10-30-2015
(10-30-2015, 07:35 PM)username Wrote: Iraq creep.
No way, baby . . . Iraq went from zero to sixty in seconds.
Nam started out with a few non-combatant "advisers" in the 50's.
RE: Syria - Maggot - 10-30-2015
Iraq would have been a great venture capitalist adventure. Now its the stupid poopid moon.
RE: Syria - Mohammed - 10-31-2015
(10-30-2015, 07:47 PM)BlueTiki Wrote: No way, baby . . . Iraq went from zero to sixty in seconds.
Nam started out with a few non-combatant "advisers" in the 50's.
I actually don't think so. It all started with Bush Senior when he had his grudge with Saddam. What did he do? He destroyed general infrastructure, thereby not pissing off Saddam but the general population. After that came the UN with the oil for food program, making Saddam very wealthy in the process, and which was then followed by Bush Junior. Took quite a few years but resulted in the very same way that got the Nazis to power, mainly a large amount of pissed off population, which we call now Daesh or ISIS.
Same is happening now here in Yemen where our wonderfully "liberated" Aden is now full of Al Qaeda and Daesh, making sure that it stays .... liberated.
Good Lord am I having a hangover or what?!
RE: Syria - Maggot - 11-04-2015
Why is America sending planes with air to air missiles to Syria? Dogfights?
RE: Syria - username - 11-04-2015
(11-04-2015, 02:51 PM)Maggot Wrote: Why is America sending planes with air to air missiles to Syria? Dogfights?
Better to be prepared. It just takes one or two crazy Russian pilots and we're at war with Russia.
RE: Syria - Midwest Spy - 11-04-2015
Our guys would dominate those cocksuckers.
Russia doesn't want to make a mistake like that.
RE: Syria - username - 11-04-2015
(11-04-2015, 03:09 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: Our guys would dominate those cocksuckers.
Russia doesn't want to make a mistake like that.
I was reading that Russia has broken out some very advanced equipment in this effort. That said, I'm pretty confident that the intelligence community wasn't terribly surprised.
I dunno. I don't think Putin is near as crazy as Jong-un but he's inching up the nut tree.