Punxsutawney Phil
Footballguy
Whatever happened to Assad?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Turkey invades Syria: Update- ISIS rebuilds (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
Henry Ford
Footballguy
He announced that Kurdish controlled land in Northern Syria will be coming back under Syrian State control.
Five minutes ago or so.
Punxsutawney Phil
Footballguy
Ha, that's weird that a news story on the guy just happened to come out about the time I posted. I was thinking how strange that he just kind of disappeared after his name was in the news daily at one point. Maybe he thinks things have settled down enough to poke his head out.
Sounds like he's onboard with us controlling the oil fields. Much better than ISIS, and I guess as long as we control it that means stability. So basically Trump pulled a bs Antonio Cromartie pull out of Syria. Saying he pulled out, but it sounds like we are going to control the oil fields for sometime going forward. Again, better than ISIS, but now the question is who gets the oil. I suppose it belongs to the Kurds, but if we are there paying to protect it, and it was basically going to ISIS before, we at least need to cover our out of pocket expenses imo.
ren hoek
Footballguy
Yep, it’s definitely about the oil. Trump forgot he’s not supposed to say that part out loud.
ren hoek
Footballguy
ren hoek
Footballguy
A separate deal between Turkey and Russia accelerated Syrian government deployment as joint Russian-Syrian patrols are part of the new border arrangements.
But Russia was critical that Washington will continue to keep troops in Syria.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov said “what Washington is doing now, the seizure and control of oil fields in eastern Syria under its armed control, is, quite simply, international state banditry.”
“All hydrocarbon deposits and other minerals located on the territory of Syria do not belong to the IS terrorists, and even less to the ‘American defenders from IS terrorists,’ but exclusively to the Syrian Arab Republic,” he added.
https://apnews.com/099ddacb51184717b562f160c4cf6fc2
But Russia was critical that Washington will continue to keep troops in Syria.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov said “what Washington is doing now, the seizure and control of oil fields in eastern Syria under its armed control, is, quite simply, international state banditry.”
“All hydrocarbon deposits and other minerals located on the territory of Syria do not belong to the IS terrorists, and even less to the ‘American defenders from IS terrorists,’ but exclusively to the Syrian Arab Republic,” he added.
https://apnews.com/099ddacb51184717b562f160c4cf6fc2
timschochet
Footballguy
It would be interesting to rewrite the history of the Middle East over the last 100 years if there was no oil there.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
No one is disputing that for Trump it is now about oil.
That doesn’t make the history of US intervention in Syria over the last decade about oil.
Who would have predicted that? It’s not like he criticized the previous administrations for not taking the oil during the Iraq war.
ren hoek
Footballguy
These topics are always busiest when the propaganda is on full blast. Not just here, but the whole news cycle. 'Trump has betrayed the Kurds. Trump gave the house away to Putin and Assad. All roads lead to Russia.'
When the propaganda narrative is laid bare as a lie- 'protecting the Kurds' actually being about 'protecting the oil', Trump's actions actually being belligerent toward Russia and Syria- the issue has long since disappeared to the backburner.
I get that it's stupid hard to keep up with this news cycle, but it's annoying that we are commonly left with a distorted version of events.
When the propaganda narrative is laid bare as a lie- 'protecting the Kurds' actually being about 'protecting the oil', Trump's actions actually being belligerent toward Russia and Syria- the issue has long since disappeared to the backburner.
I get that it's stupid hard to keep up with this news cycle, but it's annoying that we are commonly left with a distorted version of events.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
That is certainly your contention, and I understand that. But current developments don’t prove that to be the case.
saintfool
Dead sexy
US cannot completely surrender the area to Syria and allow Russians to expand their presence in the area. My guess is that Joint Chiefs explained this to POTUS but needed a reason to have him sign off. Saying there are some assets gives us something to protect even if it's just dumb.ren hoek said:
ren hoek
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
It really wouldn't....it would be a desert wasteland where different belief systems were killing each other off....nothing more.
timschochet
Footballguy
They might not be killing each other off. The Sunni-Shiite conflict was pretty much dormant for 800 years prior to the 20th century. It was revived by ambitious leaders who were given money and prestige from England and France during and after World War I once the value of oil was finally recognized. Later on the USA got involved, supporting our own guys in the conflict like Ibn Saud and the Shah of Iran. All for the same purpose: to control the oil supply.
I disagree with @ren hoek about 99% of the time. But he’s right about this general point: there is no decision we make with regard to the Middle East that is not ultimately about oil.
saintfool
Dead sexy
Russians tend to have a destabilizing effect. This is problematic in regions that seem to have an affinity for discord. US and its allies are a necessary counterweight.
ren hoek
Footballguy
Couldn't we look at the USA's work in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Libya, and conclude it's had a destabilizing effect as well? It was Russia that protected Damascus from a massive bombing campaign by the west. I think you would at least agree that bombing other countries tends to destabilize them. The difference between US and Russian intervention in Syria is that Russia is a welcome, co-operative partner of the Syrian govt, while the US is an illegal occupier. I don't think we should concern ourselves with Russian influence in the region anymore than we should support Saudi influence in the region (also bad).
If Russia wants to be the next empire to collapse trying to control the Arab world, let them. If they want to forge an economic partnership with the Syrian people for energy markets, then good for them. This oil empire stuff needs to die. It's bad for the region, bad for peace in the world, and completely unsustainable.
timschochet
Footballguy
Again I tend to agree with this overall point. But it’s tied very much to our addiction to oil in general. And like a heroin addiction, we can’t let that go cold turkey, we need to wean ourselves off it. We need to develop some methadone. That will take time. And until it happens we can’t allow Russia or anybody else to dominate the Middle East.
saintfool
Dead sexy
You might as well be parroting from RT. I'm not sure what "massive bombing campaign" you're referring to but I'm guessing it's when folks were trying to stop Assad from barrel bombing and gassing more Syrians. Russia blocked that effort and hired themselves out to an overmatched Assad military. Syria has become a client state of Russia rather than a "welcome co-operative partner". As long as the checks clear then Russia has Assad's back.
You're being obstinate - more than usual really - to ignore the original purpose of US in Syria and that's to defeat IS. Phrases and language like "the US is an illegal occupier" signals to me that your memory is rather convenient when it comes to the topic of Syria.
ren hoek
Footballguy
Ok, well I guess RT was telling the truth then. It was a big scare. Some of us were afraid it could trigger a massive conflict. A US/Brit/French coalition attempted to bomb Damascus, long before there was independent confirmation of a "chemical attack" "against his own people" in Douma. Their evidence for this attack was social media videos by groups like the White Helmets. The OPCW, realizing this was not sufficient proof to blame Assad for a chemical weapons attack, made the decision to launch a fact-finding mission. But the US/FR/UK wanted to bomb Syria before their work was complete, and did.
About a year or so later there was a leaked OPCW report which undercut the notion that the ballistics for the canisters were consistent with a Syrian airstrike, which was apparently withheld from the official OPCW report. Recently another OPCW researcher that was tasked with handling samples in Douma has reportedly come forward with "major revelations" that have been suppressed by the organization.
The US goal in Syria, like its goals in Iraq and Libya, were to topple the regime. Turkey funneled weapons into Syria and helped anti-Assad forces with sarin production. The goal on paper was to handle Assad's human rights abuses while also dealing with ISIS, but the CIA provided tons of weaponry to many different warring factions in Syria, and didn't always "know" where they ended up. Our partners, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, directly funded ISIS, and the Clinton State Dept. knew about it.
Yes- the notion of chemical attacks in Syria made all the sense in the world for forces that were trying to draw in the West over the 'red line', and zero sense at all as a military strategy for the Syrian regime. Yes- OPCW officials have come forward to dispute what the official reports say. Yes- the US has illegally invaded Syria and has no legitimate pretense for occupying their lands.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
Isis is back, thanks to the Turkish invasion:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/19/politics/pentagon-report-syria-turkey-ceasefire/index.html
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/11/19/politics/pentagon-report-syria-turkey-ceasefire/index.html
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
ren hoek
Footballguy
CNN really burying the lede here:
"Syrian opposition forces who joined the Turkish incursion had not carried out any counterterrorism operations against ISIS since the start of the offensive and were unlikely to do so," the report said, adding that "the DIA said that some of the militias backed by Turkey had previously helped smuggle ISIS fighters across opposition-held territory and probably maintain low-level ties to ISIS because they share a similar, strict interpretation of Sharia law."
Our allies- Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar- have SUPPORTED ISIS in Syria. ISIS is a problem because western/gulf powers keep SUPPORTING them. If they'd STOP SUPPORTING THEM- whether by tacit approval, outright support, or by dumping weapons into the Syrian opposition and looking the other way- the problem would STOP. But CNN can't bring themselves to report the truth- that this is the inevitable aftermath of our endless wars in the middle east.
None of this is an accident. They knew this would happen just like it happened in Iraq and Libya, and they're ok with it. They don't want the wars to end, and they never have. CNN is actually dumb enough to blame it on a troop drawdown rather than the anticipated results of a multilateral intervention in Syria.
"Syrian opposition forces who joined the Turkish incursion had not carried out any counterterrorism operations against ISIS since the start of the offensive and were unlikely to do so," the report said, adding that "the DIA said that some of the militias backed by Turkey had previously helped smuggle ISIS fighters across opposition-held territory and probably maintain low-level ties to ISIS because they share a similar, strict interpretation of Sharia law."
Our allies- Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar- have SUPPORTED ISIS in Syria. ISIS is a problem because western/gulf powers keep SUPPORTING them. If they'd STOP SUPPORTING THEM- whether by tacit approval, outright support, or by dumping weapons into the Syrian opposition and looking the other way- the problem would STOP. But CNN can't bring themselves to report the truth- that this is the inevitable aftermath of our endless wars in the middle east.
None of this is an accident. They knew this would happen just like it happened in Iraq and Libya, and they're ok with it. They don't want the wars to end, and they never have. CNN is actually dumb enough to blame it on a troop drawdown rather than the anticipated results of a multilateral intervention in Syria.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
I have never heard of a calendar like that. Is that a common federal government thing? Where does October 28-31st get booked then? In November?
ETA: Also do they always divide things into 1/3 of a year periods?
Last edited by a moderator:
Gr00vus
Footballguy
The fiscal calendar is a common federal government thing, yes, I believe it's also common in other areas, like finance. The 38th -31st did get booked in November this year.
The year is divided into months and quarters. This year Q1 started at the beginning of Fiscal October (which was September 30 this year), Q2 starts at the beginning of fiscal January (Dec 30), Q3 starts at the beginning of fiscal April (March 30), Q4 starts at the beginning of fiscal July (June 29). In this way the calendar is divided up into months that are exactly 28 or 35 days long (4 or 5 weeks), 160 or 200 non-overtime full time work hours.
Last edited by a moderator:
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
My last employer was fiscal year end September 30th which was annoying, but I had never heard of the 4-4-5. Makes sense. I know our CFO hated the partial pay period calculations especially when commissions were involved.
This report was from July 1st to October 25th though which still doesn't fit anything. That's a third.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
I can't speak to the start date, but the end date makes sense in terms of lining up with a month end. It may be they do reporting on some sort of trimester basis, or maybe the start date was arbitrary or related to current events at the time.
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
A trimester report that ends in October? That seems odd still, but maybe some of the federal guys on here can speak to it better.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
LIke I said, I can't speak to the start date. But more importantly, I don't find the time span chosen very relevant to understanding the implications of the findings.
The Tick
Footballguy
Read that Turkey is threatening to remove American access to two Turkish bases over the sanctions imposed by Congress, including the Incirlik where we have some nuclear weapons stored. I'm sure this is just posturing and won't happen, but damn we need to get any top level strategic tech out of Turkey at this point including those weapons. Things are just too bad with our relationships with that country to have those types of things stored there.
