The war in Syria (2 Viewers)

[cstu]

What is Assad's end game here - does he actually think Syria will remain in his families possession long-term?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

What is Assad's end game here - does he actually think Syria will remain in his families possession long-term?

Uh, yes.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

As another activist is murdered, the least we owe Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently is our attention

The risks are extreme. Their bravery quite extraordinary

From the outset of the Syrian uprising, the regime of Bashar al-Assad and the Isis have been united on their strategic goal: eliminate the moderate opposition and make Syria a binary choice between themselves. This is why on the battlefield Assad and Isis largely leave one-another alone and the Assad regime's propaganda—that the whole rebellion is composed of Islamist terrorists—reinforces Isis's propaganda claim that it is the only effective protection for Sunnis against the regime. Both IS and the Assad regime are led by military and intelligence officers trained in the KGB and both rely on propaganda as a means of internal control, not only of controlling their international image, which is why both so virulently repress independent media that contradicts their officially sanctioned version. Last night, IS again struck down a member of an activist group that has tried to bring the truth about life under its rule to the outside world.
....

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-activists-of-raqqa-is-being-slaughtered-silently-pay-with-their-lives-to-expose-isis-the-least-a6777601.html

 

[matuski]

Things changed when Russia jumped in and as ISIS continued to become more problematic.

We should never have gotten involved in Syria in the first place. Had we maintained a presence in Iraq, we might have been able to prevent ISIS from gaining the military power they were able to.

We should never have been in Iraq.

OK, but we were.

Ok, we couldn't/can't stay forever.

 

[jamny]

Things changed when Russia jumped in and as ISIS continued to become more problematic.

We should never have gotten involved in Syria in the first place. Had we maintained a presence in Iraq, we might have been able to prevent ISIS from gaining the military power they were able to.

We should never have been in Iraq.

OK, but we were.

Ok, we couldn't/can't stay forever.

No one said forever, but clearly we left too soon.

 

[matuski]

100,000 Syrians have quietly made it into America since 2012 under Barack Obama's watch. For anyone who doubts that figure or might have missed it...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/12/16/as-lawmakers-clash-over-refugees-syrian-immigration-quietly-tops-100000-since/?intcmp=hpbt1

Comments are money:

texanholdum 23 minutes agoTELL ME ? JUST HOW MUCH ,ARE YOU WILLING TO PUT UP WITH FROM THIS BOGUS PRESIDENT ??? I MEAN COME ON ! HE HAS DONE JUST ABOUT EVERY THING HE CAN TO DIVIDE US. RACISM, HOMOPHOBIA, SATANISM, DEVIL WORSHIP . HE HAS LEFT NO STONE UN TURNED. AND YOU PEOPLE STILL ADORE HIM . WHY ???? HAVE YOU BEEN REWARDED ? ARE YOU WORKING LESS HOURS ? BETTER HEALTH CARE ? BETTER RETIREMENT? HAVE YOU FOUND THE MYTHICAL RAINBOW , WITH A POT OF GOLD ? OH I SEE , YOUR LOOKING FOR REPARATIONS FROM SLAVERY.

ALL MUSLIMS ARE REQUIRED BY THE UNHOLY QURAN TO BE JIHADISTS OR THEIR FULL SUPPORTERS! QURAN 7:74-75 So we are going to be attacked and killed! Embiciles!

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Things changed when Russia jumped in and as ISIS continued to become more problematic.

We should never have gotten involved in Syria in the first place. Had we maintained a presence in Iraq, we might have been able to prevent ISIS from gaining the military power they were able to.

We should never have been in Iraq.

OK, but we were.

Ok, we couldn't/can't stay forever.

It's also possible that we willingly allowed or wanted Isis and before that AQI to destabilize Syria from its west.

 

[mr roboto]

Things changed when Russia jumped in and as ISIS continued to become more problematic.

We should never have gotten involved in Syria in the first place. Had we maintained a presence in Iraq, we might have been able to prevent ISIS from gaining the military power they were able to.

We should never have been in Iraq.

OK, but we were.

Ok, we couldn't/can't stay forever.

No one said forever, but clearly we left too soon.

But it felt soooooooo good to leave

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Things changed when Russia jumped in and as ISIS continued to become more problematic.

We should never have gotten involved in Syria in the first place. Had we maintained a presence in Iraq, we might have been able to prevent ISIS from gaining the military power they were able to.

We should never have been in Iraq.

OK, but we were.

Ok, we couldn't/can't stay forever.

No one said forever, but clearly we left too soon.

Only way to have not allowed ISIS was the forever scenario.

 

[Rove!]

Colin Powell said " you broke it, you bought it". But nobody listened

 

[cstu]

It's also possible that we willingly allowed or wanted Isis and before that AQI to destabilize Syria from its west.

We've been 'projecting American power' in the region for 12 years now. Solid plan if that was indeed the goal.

 

[cstu]

Colin Powell said " you broke it, you bought it". But nobody listened

More like "I lied about it, bite it suckers!"

 

[jonessed]

Things changed when Russia jumped in and as ISIS continued to become more problematic.

We should never have gotten involved in Syria in the first place. Had we maintained a presence in Iraq, we might have been able to prevent ISIS from gaining the military power they were able to.

We should never have been in Iraq.

OK, but we were.

Ok, we couldn't/can't stay forever.

No one said forever, but clearly we left too soon.

Invading, and subsequently, abandoning Iraq were two massive foreign policy blunders stemming from much the same seed. Too much focus on ideology and not enough on the current reality.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

It's also possible that we willingly allowed or wanted Isis and before that AQI to destabilize Syria from its west.

We've been 'projecting American power' in the region for 12 years now. Solid plan if that was indeed the goal.

Between Bush and Obama, both?

Yeah, if so it's not unlike the Bay of Pigs carrying over between Ike and JFK.

If Obama just walked in and took Bush's plan for continued destabilization in the interest of establishing democracy, yeah it would look just like this. Only we did not have a presence there to guide the course of that democractization.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Things changed when Russia jumped in and as ISIS continued to become more problematic.

We should never have gotten involved in Syria in the first place. Had we maintained a presence in Iraq, we might have been able to prevent ISIS from gaining the military power they were able to.

We should never have been in Iraq.

OK, but we were.

Ok, we couldn't/can't stay forever.

No one said forever, but clearly we left too soon.

Only way to have not allowed ISIS was the forever scenario.

Why was this again?

Howe big was AQI/Isis in 2009 or 2011? There wasn't much left of them in Iraq, was there?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Things changed when Russia jumped in and as ISIS continued to become more problematic.

You mean to say we have been defeated.

 

[cstu]

It's also possible that we willingly allowed or wanted Isis and before that AQI to destabilize Syria from its west.

We've been 'projecting American power' in the region for 12 years now. Solid plan if that was indeed the goal.

Between Bush and Obama, both?

Yeah, if so it's not unlike the Bay of Pigs carrying over between Ike and JFK.

If Obama just walked in and took Bush's plan for continued destabilization in the interest of establishing democracy, yeah it would look just like this. Only we did not have a presence there to guide the course of that democractization.

Bush set it up, but every President for the foreseeable future is going to keep us a dominant force in the ME.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Things changed when Russia jumped in and as ISIS continued to become more problematic.

We should never have gotten involved in Syria in the first place. Had we maintained a presence in Iraq, we might have been able to prevent ISIS from gaining the military power they were able to.

We should never have been in Iraq.

OK, but we were.

Ok, we couldn't/can't stay forever.

No one said forever, but clearly we left too soon.

Only way to have not allowed ISIS was the forever scenario.

Why was this again?

Howe big was AQI/Isis in 2009 or 2011? There wasn't much left of them in Iraq, was there?

Yeah, they weren't showing themselves until we left. You wanted to stay forever?

Hell the people of Iraq... the ones we put forth in government... wanted us out. And we wanted us out.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Things changed when Russia jumped in and as ISIS continued to become more problematic.

You mean to say we have been defeated.

Not at all. We were never in Syria. We didnt send our sons and daughters there.

Thank God.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Things changed when Russia jumped in and as ISIS continued to become more problematic.

You mean to say we have been defeated.

Not at all. We were never in Syria. We didnt send our sons and daughters there.

Thank God.

We have been in Syria:

• We have special forces troops there.
• We have been supplying rebels since 2013.
• Obama asked for an AUMF vs Syria
• Our air force has been flying cover for Syrian rebels.

Why again?

- To take out Assad.

Which we just said we're not doing anymore.

So that is in fact a US military campaign for 2 years which we just went pffft, never mind. And I'm sure you care so I will remind you, lots of Syrians have died.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

All well and good, we have been manipulative. But we are not in there.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

All well and good, we have been manipulative. But we are not in there.

Syrians have died with our help, yes? Thousands?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

All well and good, we have been manipulative. But we are not in there.

Syrians have died with our help, yes? Thousands?

They were fighting the fight without us.

But again, things have dramatically changed in that sphere.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

All well and good, we have been manipulative. But we are not in there.

Syrians have died with our help, yes? Thousands?

They were fighting the fight without us.

But again, things have dramatically changed in that sphere.

No, no they have not been fighting that fight entirely without us - we have been poring money, arms and hard support like air cover and special forces. We have been supporting many Syrians as allies. Our money and aid has led to thousands dead there and we have now just said that the putative aim of that support no longer exists.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

All well and good, we have been manipulative. But we are not in there.

Syrians have died with our help, yes? Thousands?

They were fighting the fight without us.

But again, things have dramatically changed in that sphere.

No, no they have not been fighting that fight entirely without us - we have been poring money, arms and hard support like air cover and special forces. We have been supporting many Syrians as allies. Our money and aid has led to thousands dead there and we have now just said that the putative aim of that support no longer exists.

You are saying the Syrian Civil War, was never a Syrian thing. But an American Imperialist thing? So now even the stories have changed.

Even more reason to get/stay out. Help the refugees if they want out also.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

All well and good, we have been manipulative. But we are not in there.

Syrians have died with our help, yes? Thousands?

They were fighting the fight without us.

But again, things have dramatically changed in that sphere.

No, no they have not been fighting that fight entirely without us - we have been poring money, arms and hard support like air cover and special forces. We have been supporting many Syrians as allies. Our money and aid has led to thousands dead there and we have now just said that the putative aim of that support no longer exists.

You are saying the Syrian Civil War, was never a Syrian thing. But an American Imperialist thing? So now even the stories have changed.

Even more reason to get/stay out. Help the refugees if they want out also.

I did not say that.

I said we have been contributing mightily to it. Our dollars and efforts have been directly contributing to Syrian deaths over there.

You and I probably agree on the refugee front, yes it is a US created mess (mostly) and we should handle what we have created.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

yes it is a US created mess

They did start and fight without us. This wasnt US created, it was Asad created.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War

We helped on a side we chose to help, when the sides appeared clearer. Its has changed.

Stay out.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

yes it is a US created mess

They did start and fight without us. This wasnt US created, it was Asad created.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War

We helped on a side we chose to help, when the sides appeared clearer. Its has changed.

Stay out.

Uhm, no.

IS came out of Iraq, the US drove AQI out of Anbar... and into Syria. That created instability which then led to the civil war from the more "moderate" elements.

But the situation over there is very much a US caused event and may have even been policy.

As for "stay out" - you must be dreaming, no one is going in. Even if the US wanted to we can't, Russia is there. Hillary talked about bringing the Russians to the table. She's dreaming too. It's not even our table, we aren't even at the table - it's Russia's "table"

 

[BigSteelThrill]

yes it is a US created mess

They did start and fight without us. This wasnt US created, it was Asad created.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War

We helped on a side we chose to help, when the sides appeared clearer. Its has changed.

Stay out.

Uhm, no.

Is came out of Iraq, the US drove AQI out of Anbar... and into Syria. That created instability which then led to the civil war from the more "moderate" elements.

But the situation over there is very much a US caused event and may have even been policy.

That was the Iraqis choice. They wanted us out. Fully out. 100% out.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

yes it is a US created mess

They did start and fight without us. This wasnt US created, it was Asad created.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War

We helped on a side we chose to help, when the sides appeared clearer. Its has changed.

Stay out.

Uhm, no.

Is came out of Iraq, the US drove AQI out of Anbar... and into Syria. That created instability which then led to the civil war from the more "moderate" elements.

But the situation over there is very much a US caused event and may have even been policy.

That was the Iraqis choice. They wanted us out. Fully out. 100% out.

- IS going into Syria was not Iraq's choice. And it wasn't Syria's choice. We left Iraq to deal with Isis and they have paid bad, hard, in blood and loss of 40% of their country, 60% if you count Kurdistan.

You're raising a totally different issue now. The only question was whether the US could have done something to squash out ISIS while they were there and before they left.

You and I probably have a lot of agreement about Obama having to get out and most in Iraq wanting the US out. Totally different issue though.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

yes it is a US created mess

They did start and fight without us. This wasnt US created, it was Asad created.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War

We helped on a side we chose to help, when the sides appeared clearer. Its has changed.

Stay out.

Uhm, no.

Is came out of Iraq, the US drove AQI out of Anbar... and into Syria. That created instability which then led to the civil war from the more "moderate" elements.

But the situation over there is very much a US caused event and may have even been policy.

That was the Iraqis choice. They wanted us out. Fully out. 100% out.

- IS going into Syria was not Iraq's choice. And it wasn't Syria's choice. We left Iraq to deal with Isis and they have paid bad, hard, in blood and loss of 40% of their country, 60% if you count Kurdistan.

You're raising a totally different issue now. The only question was whether the US could have done something to squash out ISIS while they were there and before they left.

You and I probably have a lot of agreement about Obama having to get out and most in Iraq wanting the US out. Totally different issue though.

Isis evolving in Iraq is a result of Iraq governance.

We couldnt RULE Iraq. Sorry about your 'forever' wishlist.

Bush signed with the Iraq government for full removal of American troops before Obama was in office.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Hey Saints... what exactly are you espousing to be done?

***Save the labels and emotions for someone else.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

yes it is a US created mess

They did start and fight without us. This wasnt US created, it was Asad created.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War

We helped on a side we chose to help, when the sides appeared clearer. Its has changed.

Stay out.

Uhm, no.

Is came out of Iraq, the US drove AQI out of Anbar... and into Syria. That created instability which then led to the civil war from the more "moderate" elements.

But the situation over there is very much a US caused event and may have even been policy.

That was the Iraqis choice. They wanted us out. Fully out. 100% out.

- IS going into Syria was not Iraq's choice. And it wasn't Syria's choice. We left Iraq to deal with Isis and they have paid bad, hard, in blood and loss of 40% of their country, 60% if you count Kurdistan.

You're raising a totally different issue now. The only question was whether the US could have done something to squash out ISIS while they were there and before they left.

You and I probably have a lot of agreement about Obama having to get out and most in Iraq wanting the US out. Totally different issue though.

Isis evolving in Iraq is a result of Iraq governance.

We couldnt RULE Iraq. Sorry about your 'forever' wishlist.

Bush signed with the Iraq government for full removal of American troops before Obama was in office.

Isis is not the result of Iraqi governance. That's crazy.

Isis is Al Qaeda in Iraq - further up this thread there is an article of their bombing a children's hospital in about 2004. They have been at this a long time.

The details of US leaving Iraq is worthy of its own thread, but there are various reports back and forth about the US wanting to leave troops there, Maliki wanting them there, back and forth. The main stickler was our insistence on an immunit clause for our soldiers.... which we relented on eventually anyway pursuant to Maliki's own proposal.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/23/obama-does-a-u-turn-on-immunity-for-u-s-troops-in-iraq.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/06/why-the-white-house-ignored-all-those-warnings-about-isis.html

What's clear is that Obama ran on getting out of Iraq and politically he had no choice. And most Iraqis wanted the US out and even today overt US support probably does more harm than good for any Iraqi politician.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Hey Saints... what exactly are you espousing to be done?

***Save the labels and emotions for someone else.

I think I was just reacting to your original post. I'm just calling for consistent policy. Bush was pushing for Assad to be ousted and Obama was as well, for years this has been our policy. We have been poring money and aid and yes US military support for some time now, it has escalated under Obama, not deescalated.

Now what are we doing? Are we still supplying and aiming the rebels? Looks like it. Why? For what?

I'm just saying be consistent, either we are in or we are out. Have a policy. Right now we do not have one.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Hey Saints... what exactly are you espousing to be done?

***Save the labels and emotions for someone else.

I think I was just reacting to your original post. I'm just calling for consistent policy. Bush was pushing for Assad to be ousted and Obama was as well, for years this has been our policy. We have been poring money and aid and yes US military support for some time now, it has escalated under Obama, not deescalated.

Now what are we doing? Are we still supplying and aiming the rebels? Looks like it. Why? For what?

I'm just saying be consistent, either we are in or we are out. Have a policy. Right now we do not have one.

No boots. That's out.

Arent we consistently manipulating geo-politics. More-so without boots. Its kind of like our national business.

 

[matuski]

yes it is a US created mess

They did start and fight without us. This wasnt US created, it was Asad created.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War

We helped on a side we chose to help, when the sides appeared clearer. Its has changed.

Stay out.

Uhm, no.

Is came out of Iraq, the US drove AQI out of Anbar... and into Syria. That created instability which then led to the civil war from the more "moderate" elements.

But the situation over there is very much a US caused event and may have even been policy.

That was the Iraqis choice. They wanted us out. Fully out. 100% out.

- IS going into Syria was not Iraq's choice. And it wasn't Syria's choice. We left Iraq to deal with Isis and they have paid bad, hard, in blood and loss of 40% of their country, 60% if you count Kurdistan.

You're raising a totally different issue now. The only question was whether the US could have done something to squash out ISIS while they were there and before they left.

You and I probably have a lot of agreement about Obama having to get out and most in Iraq wanting the US out. Totally different issue though.

Isis evolving in Iraq is a result of Iraq governance.

We couldnt RULE Iraq. Sorry about your 'forever' wishlist.

Bush signed with the Iraq government for full removal of American troops before Obama was in office.

Isis is not the result of Iraqi governance. That's crazy.

Isis is Al Qaeda in Iraq - further up this thread there is an article of their bombing a children's hospital in about 2004. They have been at this a long time.

The details of US leaving Iraq is worthy of its own thread, but there are various reports back and forth about the US wanting to leave troops there, Maliki wanting them there, back and forth. The main stickler was our insistence on an immunit clause for our soldiers.... which we relented on eventually anyway pursuant to Maliki's own proposal.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/23/obama-does-a-u-turn-on-immunity-for-u-s-troops-in-iraq.html

What's clear is that Obama ran on getting out of Iraq and politically he had no choice. And most Iraqis wanted the US out and even today overt US support probably does more harm than good for any Iraqi politician.

We were/have been in Iraq for a decade+. The ME was a cluster before we got there, and was always going to be a cluster when we left.

About the only thing we were ever going to accomplish by entering Iraq was to further stir the pot and get ourselves stuck in said cluster. Plain butt obvious to anyone with a brain from the start.

Congrats to us.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Hey Saints... what exactly are you espousing to be done?

***Save the labels and emotions for someone else.

I think I was just reacting to your original post. I'm just calling for consistent policy. Bush was pushing for Assad to be ousted and Obama was as well, for years this has been our policy. We have been poring money and aid and yes US military support for some time now, it has escalated under Obama, not deescalated.

Now what are we doing? Are we still supplying and aiming the rebels? Looks like it. Why? For what?

I'm just saying be consistent, either we are in or we are out. Have a policy. Right now we do not have one.

No boots. That's out.

Arent we are consistently manipulating geo-politics. More-so without boots. Its kind of like our national business.

I guess I'm a little surprised at the nonchalance about war we cause and fuel abroad.

We are spending half a bill this year on arming the rebels, we have our air force in action, special forces on the ground, Obama has asked for two AUMF's (count 'em, 2, including one of them for a 2nd time two Sundays ago), we and Turkey are running shield to shield with Russia in the air and on the ground, and thousands of Syrians are getting killed by our help.

No that's not "out."

 

[jamny]

yes it is a US created mess

They did start and fight without us. This wasnt US created, it was Asad created.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Civil_War

We helped on a side we chose to help, when the sides appeared clearer. Its has changed.

Stay out.

Uhm, no.

Is came out of Iraq, the US drove AQI out of Anbar... and into Syria. That created instability which then led to the civil war from the more "moderate" elements.

But the situation over there is very much a US caused event and may have even been policy.

That was the Iraqis choice. They wanted us out. Fully out. 100% out.

- IS going into Syria was not Iraq's choice. And it wasn't Syria's choice. We left Iraq to deal with Isis and they have paid bad, hard, in blood and loss of 40% of their country, 60% if you count Kurdistan.

You're raising a totally different issue now. The only question was whether the US could have done something to squash out ISIS while they were there and before they left.

You and I probably have a lot of agreement about Obama having to get out and most in Iraq wanting the US out. Totally different issue though.

Isis evolving in Iraq is a result of Iraq governance.

We couldnt RULE Iraq. Sorry about your 'forever' wishlist.

Bush signed with the Iraq government for full removal of American troops before Obama was in office.

Isis is not the result of Iraqi governance. That's crazy.

Isis is Al Qaeda in Iraq - further up this thread there is an article of their bombing a children's hospital in about 2004. They have been at this a long time.

The details of US leaving Iraq is worthy of its own thread, but there are various reports back and forth about the US wanting to leave troops there, Maliki wanting them there, back and forth. The main stickler was our insistence on an immunit clause for our soldiers.... which we relented on eventually anyway pursuant to Maliki's own proposal.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/23/obama-does-a-u-turn-on-immunity-for-u-s-troops-in-iraq.html

What's clear is that Obama ran on getting out of Iraq and politically he had no choice. And most Iraqis wanted the US out and even today overt US support probably does more harm than good for any Iraqi politician.

We were/have been in Iraq for a decade+. The ME was a cluster before we got there, and was always going to be a cluster when we left.

About the only thing we were ever going to accomplish by entering Iraq was to further stir the pot and get ourselves stuck in said cluster. Plain butt obvious to anyone with a brain from the start.

Congrats to us.

Damn the decision all you want but once we're all in, we need to set the terms. Not saying front line US troops but we left too soon and they weren't prepared for the ISIS surge. We abandoned them.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Hey Saints... what exactly are you espousing to be done?

***Save the labels and emotions for someone else.

I think I was just reacting to your original post. I'm just calling for consistent policy. Bush was pushing for Assad to be ousted and Obama was as well, for years this has been our policy. We have been poring money and aid and yes US military support for some time now, it has escalated under Obama, not deescalated.

Now what are we doing? Are we still supplying and aiming the rebels? Looks like it. Why? For what?

I'm just saying be consistent, either we are in or we are out. Have a policy. Right now we do not have one.

No boots. That's out.

Arent we are consistently manipulating geo-politics. More-so without boots. Its kind of like our national business.

I guess I'm a little surprised at the nonchalance about war we cause and fuel abroad.

We are spending half a bill this year on arming the rebels, we have our air force in action, special forces on the ground, Obama has asked for two AUMF's (count 'em, 2, including one of them for a 2nd time two Sundays ago), we and Turkey are running shield to shield with Russia in the air and on the ground, and thousands of Syrians are getting killed by our help.

No that's not "out."

That's just not how they are being killed. Not "by our help". Very peculiar way of trying to label it/frame it.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Hey Saints... what exactly are you espousing to be done?

***Save the labels and emotions for someone else.

I think I was just reacting to your original post. I'm just calling for consistent policy. Bush was pushing for Assad to be ousted and Obama was as well, for years this has been our policy. We have been poring money and aid and yes US military support for some time now, it has escalated under Obama, not deescalated.

Now what are we doing? Are we still supplying and aiming the rebels? Looks like it. Why? For what?

I'm just saying be consistent, either we are in or we are out. Have a policy. Right now we do not have one.

No boots. That's out.

Arent we are consistently manipulating geo-politics. More-so without boots. Its kind of like our national business.

I guess I'm a little surprised at the nonchalance about war we cause and fuel abroad.

We are spending half a bill this year on arming the rebels, we have our air force in action, special forces on the ground, Obama has asked for two AUMF's (count 'em, 2, including one of them for a 2nd time two Sundays ago), we and Turkey are running shield to shield with Russia in the air and on the ground, and thousands of Syrians are getting killed by our help.

No that's not "out."

That's just not how they are being killed. Not "by our help". Very peculiar way of trying to label it/frame it.

pst, I'm not claiming the US is causing all the deaths in the Syrian civil war.

We're not arming the Syrian rebels?

Or we are?

Do we not have troops there training them?

Or do we?

Are people not being killed?

Or are they?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Yeah, we are NOT full boat in there or behind them. We have never had boots on the ground there, they know that.

They had already taken up arms when we started helping them in some ways. Things have since changed.

All those questions you have above. Are not questions.

We did send them assistance, and we kept our self very clean while doing so. Again, things have changed.

 

[Fennis]

Things changed when Russia jumped in and as ISIS continued to become more problematic.

We should never have gotten involved in Syria in the first place. Had we maintained a presence in Iraq, we might have been able to prevent ISIS from gaining the military power they were able to.

We should never have been in Iraq.

OK, but we were.

Ok, we couldn't/can't stay forever.

No one said forever, but clearly we left too soon.

Clearly we left too late. every day we stayed in Iraq was a day too long..

 

[Ministry of Pain]

This Turkey firing on Russian fighter jet. Do we know if there is any truth to Turkey buying oil on the cheap directly or indirectly thru ISIS?

Here is an article from the BBC. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34973181

Iraq seems to think they do it. https://www.rt.com/news/325044-isis-oil-turkey-iraq/

I understand its uncomfortable but if you are going to advance in your global political view you cannot be afraid of learning that your government doesn't always do the right thing. I love living here in the United States but don't think for a second that I believe everything that comes out of the White House. I'm sure many of you don't either.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

This Turkey firing on Russian fighter jet. Do we know if there is any truth to Turkey buying oil on the cheap directly or indirectly thru ISIS?

Here is an article from the BBC. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34973181

Iraq seems to think they do it. https://www.rt.com/news/325044-isis-oil-turkey-iraq/

I understand its uncomfortable but if you are going to advance in your global political view you cannot be afraid of learning that your government doesn't always do the right thing. I love living here in the United States but don't think for a second that I believe everything that comes out of the White House. I'm sure many of you don't either.

I think it is grudgingly accepted that a lot if not most of ISIS' oil goes through Turkey. Are you saying they shot down the jet to protect their oil supply and the White House is providing cover for them?

I'm saying if Turkey is buying oil from ISIS and Russia was trying to stop that flow when Turkey fired on their fighter jet, I have a real problem with that whole scenario and I would hope a clear thinking fellow American would hopefully feel the same as I do.

 

[Sand]

Might as well close this one up and send the refugees home. The State Department has declared that it has brought peace to Syria in 2015.

 

[Ladsud]

Russian airstrikes are turning the tide in this war. Major rebel stronghold falls.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/russia-syria-airstrikes-salma-1.3401937

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

U.S. troops take over air base in Syria, local reports sayU.S. special operations troops have reportedly taken over an airfield in northeastern Syria, potentially clearing the way to flow more American military support to friendly militias fighting the Islamic State group.

A small team of U.S. troops is setting up a base camp at Rmeilan Air Base in the Syrian Kurdish region near Syria's Iraqi and Turkish borders, according to local reports.

American helicopters operated at the base over the past couple of weeks as local workers expanded the runway, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

The airfield was until recently under control of the Syrian Kurdish forces, known as the YPG, but was turned over to the U.S. to help expand American support for the Syrian Democratic Forces, which is the loose-knit coalition of American-backed militants fighting the Islamic State group.

"Under a deal with the YPG, the U.S. was given control of the airport. The purpose of this deal is to back up the SDF, by providing weapons and an air base for U.S. warplanes," an SDF spokesperson, Taj Kordsh, told Al-Jazeera, the Qatar-based international news network, in a report published Wednesday.

...

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2016/01/21/us-troops-take-over-airbase-syria-local-reports-say/79115490/

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Liz Sly Verified account ‏@LizSly

Biden: the US is prepared for a military solution in Syria if no political solution found. That's quite a departure https://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2016/01/23/U-S-prepared-for-military-solution-in-Syria-if-political-solution-not-possible.html …

- Are you guys paying attention?

 

[Jobber]

Ugh. So what happens when Russia bombs some of our troops (or vice versa)? I hope we're coordinating closely to avoid something like that.

 

[Ladsud]

Aleppo has been cut off from Turkey, it is the major stronghold of the rebels. This is the biggest thing to happen in this war to date. Russia pounded the rebels with air strikes, supported by ground troops and its about to collapse. The rebels will probably splinter into partisans to fight behind the lines. Theres a strong Kurdistan that isnt going anywhere, ISIS is reeling. This mess might be drawing to an end sometime soon with the birth of a new Nation.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-idUSKCN0VC169