Federal plan for northern Syria advances with U.S.-backed forces

[Tigerace117]

Saddam? Oh yea! That's the ally we supplied the poison gas precursors and satellite info to gin up a nice war against Iran. He must be a good guy. Our leaders wouldn't support a scumbag. Well, maybe only a few hundred because a nice dictatorial scumbag is a lot easier to negotiate with than some ragtag bunch of voters, don't ya' know? Arbenz. Pinochet. Somoza. Pahlavi. Mugabe. and maybe 30 or 40 other scumbag dictators on our close friends list.

Hey your the one arguing Saddam= good guy because he was "secular", not me.

 

[DaveFagan]

I'm getting tired of repeating this over and over, but if you look at ISIS you'll notice that a lot of ex Mukhabaret guys occupy key positions in said organization.

The Mukhabaret were Saddam's secret police, in case you missed it.

Gaddafi sponsored dozens of terrorist groups, including a number of Islamic radical groups as well as the usual suspects.

The idea you seem to think the United States wants to install radical Islamists is laughable.

Radical Islamists, you say? That would be Saudi Arabia, home of the Salafist/Wahabi/Sunni radicals and financing, training and arming money for those ISIS in Iraq and Syria. They are also big allies of the US of A. We sell them lots of arms and I think that is where the ISIS arms come from. They nice folks to deal with because they ain't got no voting scumbags to screw up the local dictators decision making abilitiies, or lack thereof, don't ya' know? Actually, ISIS is supported by SA, Turkey and Qatar and all three are big allies of the US. Some people get confused and think we are fighting ISIS but we love al Qeda in Syria and we keep trying to get the Russians and Syrians not to bomb them. Ahrar al Sham and Nusra Front are teh more common names for the Radical Islamists that the USA supports. We got to get rid of that no goodnik elected by Syrians because they don't know whose gas pipelines they are messing with.

 

[PoS]

TBH, I think at this point the people in Washington are doing it on purpose knowing full well what the consequences would be: the M.I.C. can't be profitable in a peaceful world.

As much as I keep thinking the MIC angle is a conspiracy theory, all the evidence so far points that it is truly real. Sad, really.

 

[Tigerace117]

Radical Islamists, you say? That would be Saudi Arabia, home of the Salafist/Wahabi/Sunni radicals and financing, training and arming money for those ISIS in Iraq and Syria. They are also big allies of the US of A. We sell them lots of arms and I think that is where the ISIS arms come from. They nice folks to deal with because they ain't got no voting scumbags to screw up the local dictators decision making abilitiies, or lack thereof, don't ya' know? Actually, ISIS is supported by SA, Turkey and Qatar and all three are big allies of the US. Some people get confused and think we are fighting ISIS but we love al Qeda in Syria and we keep trying to get the Russians and Syrians not to bomb them. Ahrar al Sham and Nusra Front are teh more common names for the Radical Islamists that the USA supports. We got to get rid of that no goodnik elected by Syrians because they don't know whose gas pipelines they are messing with.

No, we have to "get rid" of Assad because he's already shown no hestiation about killing his own people en masse when they dared try to kick him out of power.

ISIS has captured a **** ton of arms from the Iraqi and Syrian armies.

The irony of you bitching about how SA is a authoritarian state yet backing Assad is too funny.

 

[PoS]

No, we have to "get rid" of Assad because he's already shown no hestiation about killing his own people en masse when they dared try to kick him out of power.

ISIS has captured a **** ton of arms from the Iraqi and Syrian armies.

The irony of you bitching about how SA is a authoritarian state yet backing Assad is too funny.

So you want to get rid of Assad and replace him with... ISIS? :doh

 

[Tigerace117]

So you want to get rid of Assad and replace him with... ISIS? :doh

Nope. Nobody wants to get rid of Assad and put ISIS in charge.

Seriously where do people get this **** from.

 

[PoS]

Nope. Nobody wants to get rid of Assad and put ISIS in charge.

Seriously where do people get this **** from.

The brutal dictator is all that stands in the way of an ISIS victory- so if you say get rid of him, then you play directly into ISIS hands. It's happened in Libya and in Iraq. I wonder why people just don't learn from history.

 

[Tigerace117]

The brutal dictator is all that stands in the way of an ISIS victory- so if you say get rid of him, then you play directly into ISIS hands. It's happened in Libya and in Iraq. I wonder why people just don't learn from history.

Uh.....no. He's not "all that stands in the way of an ISIS victory".

The Kurds have kicked ISIS' ass. The FSA is more or less a shaky coalition, but they benefit from American air power.

ISIS is a vastly overrated force.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Nope. Nobody wants to get rid of Assad and put ISIS in charge.

Seriously where do people get this **** from.

Nobody said they wanted that in Libya either but **** happens. Removing one powerful evil force creates an opportunity for the next most powerful evil force to take control.

 

[Serenity]

Assad - do not pass go, do not collect $200. Head straight to the Palace of Justice in The Hague where he should be compelled to accept responsibility and face consequences for his crimes against humanity.

 

[PoS]

Uh.....no. He's not "all that stands in the way of an ISIS victory".

The Kurds have kicked ISIS' ass. The FSA is more or less a shaky coalition, but they benefit from American air power.

ISIS is a vastly overrated force.

The Kurds havent done anything. There has been speculation that the FSA no longer even exists. The only effective forces that are holding their ground are Assad loyalists, the Iranians and Hezbollah. Get rid of Assad and you lose Syria to ISIS. Its as simple as that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Syrian_Army#2015:_debates_as_to_whether_FSA_still_exists

 

[Red_Dave]

Right. Because the Middle East was soooooo peaceful before America showed up, right?

Before the British and French showed up (and the Americans decades later) i would argue that it . Not to mention that the U.S overthrow of Syrias democracy in the 1950s hardly helped.

 

[Tigerace117]

Nobody said they wanted that in Libya either but **** happens. Removing one powerful evil force creates an opportunity for the next most powerful evil force to take control.

The Kurds havent done anything. There has been speculation that the FSA no longer even exists. The only effective forces that are holding their ground are Assad loyalists, the Iranians and Hezbollah. Get rid of Assad and you lose Syria to ISIS. Its as simple as that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Syrian_Army#2015:_debates_as_to_whether_FSA_still_exists

And ISIS really isn't as powerful as people seem to think it is. They exploit a vacuum, nothing more. Against detirmined resistance they've folded again and again.

 

[Tigerace117]

Nobody said they wanted that in Libya either but **** happens. Removing one powerful evil force creates an opportunity for the next most powerful evil force to take control.

Before the British and French showed up (and the Americans decades later) i would argue that it . Not to mention that the U.S overthrow of Syrias democracy in the 1950s hardly helped.

Obviously you haven't looked into the history of the Middle East before the mid 1800s very deeply then. The Ottomans were always fighting one group or another, most notably the Iranians/Persians.

They also were involved heavily in Yemen.

Inter-Muslim wars don't get as much press but they definitely were common.

 

[PoS]

And ISIS really isn't as powerful as people seem to think it is. They exploit a vacuum, nothing more. Against detirmined resistance they've folded again and again.

And what do you think is going to happen if the West takes out Assad? This totally naive and short-sighted attitude is what got us into trouble in Iraq in the first place.

 

[Tigerace117]

And what do you think is going to happen if the West takes out Assad? This totally naive and short-sighted attitude is what got us into trouble in Iraq in the first place.

Ah, but see, here's the kicker--- ISIS' strategic position is steadily disintegrating in Syria. They don't have the manpower for the find of surge that would be necessary to seize control of the entire country in the event of the Alawites collapsing.

 

[ttwtt78640]

And ISIS really isn't as powerful as people seem to think it is. They exploit a vacuum, nothing more. Against detirmined resistance they've folded again and again.

I guess that explains why after over 14 years we are still in Afghanistan.

 

[PoS]

Ah, but see, here's the kicker--- ISIS' strategic position is steadily disintegrating in Syria. They don't have the manpower for the find of surge that would be necessary to seize control of the entire country in the event of the Alawites collapsing.

ISIS may not have the manpower to take over Syria right now, but if Assad gets taken out anything can happen. It would be foolish to assume everything will somehow get better since recent history has shown the exact opposite tends to happen.

 

[Tigerace117]

I guess that explains why after over 14 years we are still in Afghanistan.

The Taliban ain't ISIS.

 

[Tigerace117]

ISIS may not have the manpower to take over Syria right now, but if Assad gets taken out anything can happen. It would be foolish to assume everything will somehow get better since recent history has shown the exact opposite tends to happen.

But it's equally foolish to leave somebody whose actions are just going to set off another revolt down the line in power.

 

[PoS]

But it's equally foolish to leave somebody whose actions are just going to set off another revolt down the line in power.

Thats exactly what neocons said about Saddam and we ended up getting ISIS. No thanks, I'd rather have a secular dictator in place than god knows what else.

 

[Tigerace117]

Thats exactly what neocons said about Saddam and we ended up getting ISIS. No thanks, I'd rather have a secular dictator in place than god knows what else.

Of course. After all, your not the one who actually has to live under said dicatator.

Next time I get in a conversation with somebody whose complaining about US support for dicatators, I'll just point them here and note that most people seem to prefer that kind of government.

 

[PoS]

Of course. After all, your not the one who actually has to live under said dicatator.

Next time I get in a conversation with somebody whose complaining about US support for dicatators, I'll just point them here and note that most people seem to prefer that kind of government.

And as for those that complain about radical Islamic terrorism, I'll just go ahead and point them to this thread so they can see the people who wanted to intervene in countries that we had no business in and later turned into terror attacks that were directed against us.

 

[DA60]

The Syrian Civil War is NONE of America's business.

None.