Montecresto
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,561
- Reaction score
- 5,507
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
The destruction of the Assad regime would be of great benefit to the entire region. Of course documents from 2012 emphasize fighting Assad over fighting ISIL. ISIL wasn't a concern in early 2012.
“The United States and its dependencies in Europe and Canada do not want to cooperate with Syria or Russia on this [counterterrorism efforts] because their primary objective is not as they claim to destroy ISIL but to destroy the government of Syria as they did the government in Libya and Iraq.”
Declassified Defense Intelligence Agency documents from 2012 reveal the Pentagon is working with the Gulf States and Turkey to “isolate the Syrian regime” and establish a Salafist principality in Syria.
Considering that all went to hell in a hand basket, policy has changed.
For some, but not so much for others as evidenced by those that are going to make sure that that doesn't happen. And, the Islamic State formed in 2006.
I see a stalemate on the ground. Lots of dead Iranian soldiers going home in boxes.Yes, Russia's now setting the Syrian agenda.
Largely erased as a factor in Iraq by 2009. Revival enabled the the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq in 2011 and failure to aid the Syrian opposition in early 2012. ISIL was not a factor in Syria until 2013.
Yes, Russia's now setting the Syrian agenda.
False. Islamic extremists will never be erased, and it doesn't matter what transformations they take, Mujahideen, Taliban, AQ, Islamic State, they can only be contained. The West has proven they aren't interested in that, as China, Russia, Iran and others have been complaining all along watching US policy.
I see a stalemate on the ground. Lots of dead Iranian soldiers going home in boxes.
Oh the agenda is still moving. Perhaps the Alawites will finish up their ethnic/religious cleansing and set them selves a mini state as Syria falls down the rabbit hole of dividing along ethnic - religious lines.
You'll need more than propaganda. Of course they can be erased. As for China, Russia and Iran, only a fool would take their critiques of US policy at face value.
Hardly blame him from not putting large numbers of troops on the ground. If Turkey and Saudi wanted Assad gone, they should have done it way back.Under withering fire from political opponents, Barack Obama is once again shuffling his Syria cards, hoping against hope that he can salvage US credibility from the wreckage of his twin failures to defeat Isis terror and topple Bashar al-Assad.
Fear is driving Obama’s latest rethink: fear that Russia and Iran are winning the strategic tug-of-war for decisive influence in both Syria and Iraq; and fear that his Middle East legacy will be an anarchic arc of muddle and mayhem stretching from Mosul to the Mediterranean.
Obama fumbles for credibility in Syria as Russia and Iran seize initiative | US news | The Guardian
Only a silly looking sophomoric patron would think that if China, Russia and Iran speak it's lies and propaganda, and when the US speaks, it's truth. A hearty lol. And you're incorrect thinking they can be erased. They never have been and never will be, let alone by the US DOD.
The Russians have done it (Chechnya) and we have done it (Iraq). In the course of the ongoing Long War we will do it again. I did not say the claims of China, Russia and Iran were lies and propaganda; they do, however, attempt to frame the discussion to suits their interests. Propaganda is your department.
Hardly blame him from not putting large numbers of troops on the ground. If Turkey and Saudi wanted Assad gone, they should have done it way back.
But Syria is still a stalemate. Yes?
I don't care about the sovereignty of Assad's regime. I'm not one to worship at the altar of sovereignty, but I always find it funny that it's usually the self-confessed libertarians who will come out of the woodworks to groan and moan about how we've trampled on the most internationalist of sacred concepts: the sovereignty of nations.
I don't care about the sovereignty of Assad's regime. I'm not one to worship at the altar of sovereignty, but I always find it funny that it's usually the self-confessed libertarians who will come out of the woodworks to groan and moan about how we've trampled on the most internationalist of sacred concepts: the sovereignty of nations.
Well you're certainly not alone, we've had few administrations that concern themselves with national sovereignty whenever it conflicts with "US interests"!
Well you're certainly not alone, we've had few administrations that concern themselves with national sovereignty whenever it conflicts with "US interests"!
"And what are you talking about "rights" nations don't have any "rights" that they cannot force." --Montecresto, post #475, "Russia - Putin" thread.
Where's the conflict, or were you just acknowledging sovereignty exists if you can hold it?
You were the one complaining about the US pursuing national interests rather than respecting sovereignty. Just thought I'd point out the selective application of your principles.
Well first, I could turn that right back around on you, don't forget. But again, I'll show you the difference. Both Crimea and Syria are a matter of direct strategic and national security interests to Russia, not so for the US, and they had ports in both by permission of the two countries governments. What I can see is a clear burr in the saddle for the fringe right is that Russia, and China too, aren't going to put up with a US dominated world any longer, and they are pushing back. The US having abused it's power is being diminished, and is faced with direct confrontation with powers that don't look like the little guys we've been poking our DOD chest out at, or concession. Although I know you'd be grinning ear to ear to take them on.
There is no "open season" on Syria. Document one aggressive act by Syria against the USA. There's no reason "Assad must go." He has considerable support in Syria, but no support by ISIS/ISIL. We are not just another player. We are the leader of the Western Empire and Banking Hegemony. It must be Syria has something to do with that. Think about it.
Irrelevant. You're in favor of sovereignty when it complicates matters for the US, and you denigrate sovereignty when it's in Russia's path. You're exposed.
Even more reason why "Assad must go" because we said so. I mean what is Assad going to do against us? What is Putin going to do with a dead Assad?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?