Reply With Quote
The neocons were pushing Bush 1 to finish it off.
Successful at what you idiot?
The neocons were pushing Bush 1 to finish it off.
with the insults. Not having a good morning are you?
Obama's plan to train and arm moderate rebels is a complete joke. Being mocked by even US generals
Putin is there to stay. US generals agree and want Obama to work with Russia to work out ISIS war and Assad plan to leave office eventually. IMO that's a good idea and its coming from Russians and a good number of US generals.
what your plan besides carpet bombing 78,000 square miles in 1 week?
I thought that was your plan, tbh.what your plan besides carpet bombing 78,000 square miles in 1 week?
leadership=bombing the out of other countries
Insults?
Obama's plan to train and arm moderate rebels is a complete joke. Being mocked by even US generals
Putin is there to stay. US generals agree and want Obama to work with Russia to work out ISIS war and Assad plan to leave office eventually. IMO that's a good idea and its coming from Russians and a good number of US generals.
what your plan besides carpet bombing 78,000 square miles in 1 week?
Read your own posts and constant use of round faces.
Fine. I see nothing exceptionally insightful except one HUGE omission:
What is "work out ISIS" ?
yes, and they didn't GAF about Muslim sectarianism. When Bush didn't, they slandered him as a wimp (a slander apparently dubya wanted to avoid) and like "Real Men Go To Tehran"
work out plan to fight ISIS together.
oh and also designate protected area within Syria so refugees stop spilling to other countries.
Ok.
So we don't hit each other, makes sense.
And if and when ISIS is defeated who rules/governs?
ISIS controls large areas in Iraq and Syria. Does Assad stay. What about Eastern Syria where he has no control? Does Assad rule Damascus only? The US has agreed to let Assad stay? What about Iraq and the Sunni, Shia, Kurd mixed areas? What about the Iranians, will they be allowed to play?
So basically there still is no solution. Only a possible plan to avoid striking each other. And maybe agree on targets.
This is why I stated the difficulty in this mess.
Apparently Russians bombing Homs because they want to take that city back first and foremost.
Homs should fall back to Assad's hands in the next few hours for Russsia to start on the right foot....
Further this leads me to realize the following in American decision making and politics:
We gripe about our leaders but can't handle the truth. We will not let a leader say here is the plan, this plan will not solve the larger problem, the plan may not even solve the first minor goal. Further, if the plan does have its desired effects short run, we will have to wait until the situation gets clearer to make our next decision. If the plan does not give the desired outcome, not only will we have to wait until the new situation can be read, we may have to do something opposite of what we first tried to accomplish.
The above is understanding that policies and plans can have very foggy outcomes and unintended consequences. But our leaders are NOT allowed to speak to us in this manner. We can't handle the fact that outcomes of policy is often unknown and requires adjusting. WE asked to be lied to all the time. We must be given assurances when nothing is guaranteed.
I personally can't stand this. No one would vote for a politician who stated the above thoroughly. He would be chastised as wishy washy and with no clue. Anyone has been in a decision making position has to realize you need to tell employees the truth behind decision making if you can. It's called honesty and the basic realization that things can go wrong and you adjust. Good news must be tempered, and bad news stated and taken on with the realization that clean solutions are not necessarily possible.
Too long no read.
But it's the truth.
Russia says it’s bombing ISIS in Syria. It’s actually bombing their enemies.
Russia began bombing targets in Syria on Wednesday. Russian President Vladimir Putin has framed his military intervention there as targeting terrorist groups, especially ISIS. And Russia said its strikes today were launched against ISIS.
Don't believe it. The strikes reported this morning aren't happening anywhere near ISIS territory and aren't actually hitting ISIS positions, as a look at the following map from theIns ute for the Study of War (ISW) should make clear. In fact, Russia is bombing ISIS'senemies in the Syrian opposition — which makes a lot more sense if you understand what Russia is really trying to accomplish.
According to ISW researcher Genevieve Casagrande, a Russian airstrike this morning appears to have hit Talbiseh, a town in the tan rebel-held swatch just north of Homs, in Syria's east. You'll note that this is nowhere near ISIS territory, marked in gray:
"Talbiseh is home to Syrian al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra, hardline Islamist Ahrar al-Sham, and a number of other local rebel groups," Casagrande explains. These organizations are generally hostile to ISIS. "The airstrike," she concludes, "did not hit ISIS militants."
Michael Horowitz, a senior intelligence analyst at the Levantine Group, says that Russia bombed another town near Homs (Zaafarana) and one (Ltamenah) near the city of Hama, north of Homs. Again, as you can see on the map, none of these are near ISIS territory. According to Horowitz, all of the towns are held by non-ISIS groups.
"Russia targeted only groups that are not ISIS and it may have targeted groups backed by the US," Horowitz told BuzzFeed's Borzou Daragahi.
"It’s really clear that the airstrikes were not meant to target ISIS."
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/30/9423229...ing-isis-syria
What a ing mess!
Thanks, Repugs!
Homs is crucial for Regime to find it's footing. they are close to collapse. You can't fight ISIS without the Regime's 100,000 soldiers
damn. Abbas just said he's breaking up the Oslo agreement live at the UN.
's getting real
in "unrelated" news: oil rises 21 cents a barrel today
The Caliphate is a very long held goal on the part of most arabs. Not quite made up recently out of whole cloth.
What do you mean who decides, the legitimate government will be in charge and they'll continue to have elections going forward like they always have. USA doesn't get to decide for them if that's what you mean. Butt out.
Because the US public is about as keen to put boots on the ground as we are to re-invade Vietnam.
Who gives a ? If those countries want to fight in Syria's quagmire and wave their s around let'em
Pretty much. Most of the US combat deaths in the first 3 years can be directly blamed on the non-existent postwar planning, i.e. sheer incompetence.
About right.Not changing any numbers. Statistics show about 100,000 to 150,000 deaths in Iraq war. 80% civilian look it up.
Still waiting on your solutions to Syria crisis
As for a realistic solution... that is far more difficult.
Now that Putin wants an in, the game changes, and is made far more complex.
I don't think that leaving Assad in power is acceptable, especially since Putin is backing him so closely.
Putin has been pushing the strongman, cletpocracy model as an alternative to democracy and free-markets. That will lose over the long term, but the cost will be a lot less if that ideology is contested.
Most Arabs? Link?
so full of , Putin is finally going after the terrorists and USA is mad that they and the Saudis won't get their pipeline through Syria, Russia is protecting her interests and her allies nothing more
Looking over the map, and just considering the map, assuming it is accurate, Assad/Russian strategy:Russia says it’s bombing ISIS in Syria. It’s actually bombing their enemies.
Russia began bombing targets in Syria on Wednesday. Russian President Vladimir Putin has framed his military intervention there as targeting terrorist groups, especially ISIS. And Russia said its strikes today were launched against ISIS.
Don't believe it. The strikes reported this morning aren't happening anywhere near ISIS territory and aren't actually hitting ISIS positions, as a look at the following map from theIns ute for the Study of War (ISW) should make clear. In fact, Russia is bombing ISIS'senemies in the Syrian opposition — which makes a lot more sense if you understand what Russia is really trying to accomplish.
According to ISW researcher Genevieve Casagrande, a Russian airstrike this morning appears to have hit Talbiseh, a town in the tan rebel-held swatch just north of Homs, in Syria's east. You'll note that this is nowhere near ISIS territory, marked in gray:
"Talbiseh is home to Syrian al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra, hardline Islamist Ahrar al-Sham, and a number of other local rebel groups," Casagrande explains. These organizations are generally hostile to ISIS. "The airstrike," she concludes, "did not hit ISIS militants."
Michael Horowitz, a senior intelligence analyst at the Levantine Group, says that Russia bombed another town near Homs (Zaafarana) and one (Ltamenah) near the city of Hama, north of Homs. Again, as you can see on the map, none of these are near ISIS territory. According to Horowitz, all of the towns are held by non-ISIS groups.
"Russia targeted only groups that are not ISIS and it may have targeted groups backed by the US," Horowitz told BuzzFeed's Borzou Daragahi.
"It’s really clear that the airstrikes were not meant to target ISIS."
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/30/9423229...ing-isis-syria
What a ing mess!
Thanks, Repugs!
Take Homs first. That gives you a direct line to allow the Hezbollah reinforcements to move north and hit the remaining rebel areas. Free up the troops that were attacking it as well.
If you are Assad, you can't get to ISIS, but for going through the rebels that we are supporting, so relieving the sieges will be the next step, after Homs is secured.
Assad is running out of bodies to throw into the fray as any sane male not in the army already is running as fast as he can out of it. Time will not be on his side.
ISIS will continue to gain new fighters as men slip through the security cracks.
Looks like the US and Russia will be at some loggerheads pretty soon, since the likely regime strategy pretty much conflicts directly with the Wests support of the "moderates".
What happens after that, will be an escalation. Arming the rebels directly and openly will be increasingly attractive.
"most" is a misnomer. "many" would be better. Pardon the oversight.
If you want a link to the history of the idea, I can provide that. It remains a very attractive one, even among many non-radicalized muslims.
http://www.britannica.com/place/CaliphateThe concept of the caliphate took on new significance in the 18th century as an instrument of statecraft in the declining Ottoman Empire. Facing the erosion of their military and political power and territorial losses inflicted in a series of wars with European rivals, the Ottoman sultans, who had occasionally styled themselves as caliphs since the 14th century, began to stress their claim to leadership of the Islamic community. This served both as means of retaining some degree of influence over Muslim populations in formerly Ottoman lands and as means of bolstering Ottoman legitimacy within the empire. The caliphate was abolished in 1924, following the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and the rise of the Turkish Republic.
In the 20th century the reestablishment of the caliphate, although occasionally invoked by Islamists as a symbol of global Islamic unity, was of no practical interest for mainstream Islamist groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. It did, however, figure prominently in the rhetoric of violent extremist groups such as al-Qaeda. In June 2014 an insurgent group known as the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL; also known as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria [ISIS] and the Islamic State [IS]), which had taken control of areas of eastern Syria and western Iraq, declared the establishment of a caliphate with the group’s leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as caliph. Outside of extremist circles, the group’s claim was widely rejected.
Fairly good summary. Not a new idea.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/4110922/Russian%20Posture%20in%20Syria%2027%20SEP%202015-01.png)