The US seems keener to strike at Syria's Assad than it does to destroy Isis

[Cybran]

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a7799086.html

The extraordinary destruction of a Syrian fighter jet by a US aircraft on Sunday has precious little to do with the Syrian plane’s target in the desert near Rasafa – but much to do with the advance of the Syrian army close to the American-backed Kurdish forces along the Euphrates. The Syrians have grown increasingly suspicious in recent months that most Kurdish forces in the north of Syria – many of them in alliance with the Assad government until recently – have thrown in their lot with the Americans.

Indeed, the military in Damascus is making no secret of the fact that it has ended its regular arms and ammunition supplies to the Kurds – it has apparently given them 14,000 AK-47 rifles since 2012 – and the Syrian regime was outraged to learn that Kurdish forces recently received an envoy from the United Arab Emirates.

There is unconfirmed information that a Saudi envoy also visited the Kurds. This, of course, follows the infamous Trump speech in Riyadh, in which the US President gave total American support to the Saudi monarchy in its anti-Iranian and anti-Syrian policies – and then later supported the Saudi-led isolation of Qatar.

On the ground, the Syrian army is now undertaking one of its most ambitious operations since the start of the war, advancing around Sueda in the south, in the countryside of Damascus and east of Palmyra. They are heading parallel with the Euphrates in what is clearly an attempt by the government to “liberate” the surrounded government city of Deir ez-Zour, whose 10,000 Syrian soldiers have been besieged there for more than four years.

If they can lift the siege, the Syrians will have another 10,000 soldiers free to join in the recapture of more territory. More importantly, however, the Syrian military suspects that Isis – on the verge of losing Raqqa to US-supported Kurds and Mosul to US-backed Iraqis – may try to break into the garrison of Deir ez-Zour and declare an alternative “capital” for itself in Syria.

In this context, the American strike on Monday was more a warning to the Syrians to stay away from the so-called Syrian Democratic Forces – the facade-name for large numbers of Kurds and a few Arab fighters – since they are now very close to each other in the desert. The Kurds will take Raqqa – there may well have been an agreement between Moscow and Washington on this – since the Syrian military is far more interested in relieving Deir ez-Zour.

After the FSA and Al Qaeda failed, the Americans switched their support to the Kurds in the hope of destabilizing Syria even more.

[Independent voter]

Sunnis versus Shiites, it's an ancient struggle. This one history book I read said that the First Crusade only succeeded because the Sunnis were too busy trying to eradicate the Shiites, President Assad of Syria's ancestors, Iran etc.

[ParanoiD84]

Kurds are the best group to support there, they get shit done.

[Eggroll]

Apparently President Trump isn't involved in any strategic decisions and is dumping commander-in-chief responsibilities. It has been noted with concern that the president did not comment on Russias threat to shoot down any US-allied aircraft.

I found that comment from MSNBC very informative. Also it's quite worrying since it appears the US is slipping into a hot war with Syria/Iran/Russia

[Independent voter]

Apparently President Trump isn't involved in any strategic decisions and is dumping commander-in-chief responsibilities. It has been noted with concern that the president did not comment on Russias threat to shoot down any US-allied aircraft.

I found that comment from MSNBC very informative. Also it's quite worrying since it appears the US is slipping into a hot war with Syria/Iran/Russia

I've been hoping he would give all the decision making over to Mattis and McMaster. I'm sure I'm not the only one hoping this.

Voters don't care about foreign affairs and the only time voters notice is if you screw foreign affairs up really bad and start a war or something.

[Crispin]

It's a terrible idea, to let Military men make decisions in situations where diplomacy should be the go to solution.

[PACOX]

Didn't read the article but the headline is BS since the US has been fighting ISIS in multiple locations, not just Syria. The fight in Syria against ISIS is an opportunity to lob shots of Assad but the title is just nonsense.

[Flarelaine]

Didn't read the article but the headline is BS

Well, of course. Have you taken your time to notice who is responsible?

[Nathreim]

Blowing up ISIS doesnt make news but we are doing it a lot more that striking at Assad.

The Kurds have been close allies of the West for over 100 years they are a mixed religion culture that practices freedom of religion and rights for women.

Syria has attempted genocide against the Kurds for centuries even now Kurdish Syrians have no rights according to Syrian law. Iran and Iraq on the other hand eventually learned to life in peace with them and have given the Kurds autonomy and rights which is why Kurdish regions of these nations are safe and peaceful.

The Kurds are not Al Qaeda nor are they Muslim extremists. They are an abused and downtrodden people who have had enough of being kicked around.

[HumbleDuck]

That's what happens when the president is so incompetent that military men decide if it's a good idea to go to war or not ...

- - - Updated - - -

Blowing up ISIS doesnt make news but we are doing it a lot more that striking at Assad.

The Kurds have been close allies of the West for over 100 years they are a mixed religion culture that practices freedom of religion and rights for women.

Syria has attempted genocide against the Kurds for centuries even now Kurdish Syrians have no rights according to Syrian law. Iran and Iraq on the other hand eventually learned to life in peace with them and have given the Kurds autonomy and rights which is why Kurdish regions of these nations are safe and peaceful.

The Kurds are not Al Qaeda nor are they Muslim extremists. They are an abused and downtrodden people who have had enough of being kicked around.

No, they are not. There are terrorist attacks happening like every other day in those regions.

[Cybran]

Didn't read the article but the headline is BS since the US has been fighting ISIS in multiple locations, not just Syria. The fight in Syria against ISIS is an opportunity to lob shots of Assad but the title is just nonsense.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a7799086.html

So who is fighting Isis? And who is not fighting Isis? Russia claims it has killed the terrible and self-appointed “caliph of the Islamic State”, al-Baghdadi. Russia says it is firing Cruise missiles at Isis. The Syrian army, supported by the Russians, is fighting Isis. I have witnessed this with my own eyes.

But what is America doing attacking first Assad’s air base near Homs, then the regime’s allies near Al-Tanf and now one of Assad’s fighter jets? It seems that Washington is now keener to strike at Assad – and his Iranian supporters inside Syria – than it is to destroy Isis. That would be following Saudi Arabia’s policy, and maybe that’s what the Trump regime wants to do. Certainly, the Israelis have bombed both the Syrian regime forces and Hezbollah and the Iranians – but never Isis.

I didn't touch the Title. The author who has been to Syria and seen Russians bomb ISIS says it.

https://www.independent.co.uk/author/robert-fisk

[Deleted]

Both are problems that need to be dealt with.

[Cybran]

Both are problems that need to be dealt with.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mi...KBN19C2E7?il=0

President Emmanuel Macron said on Wednesday he saw no legitimate successor to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and France no longer considered his departure a pre-condition to resolving the six-year-old conflict.

He said Assad was an enemy of the Syrian people, but not of France and that Paris' priority was fighting terrorist groups and ensuring Syria did not become a failed state.

His comments were in stark contrast to those of the previous French administration and echo Moscow's stance that there is no viable alternative to Assad.

"The new perspective that I have had on this subject is that I have not stated that Bashar al-Assad's departure is a pre-condition for everything because nobody has shown me a legitimate successor," Macron said in an interview with eight European newspapers.

"My lines are clear: Firstly, a complete fight against all the terrorist groups. They are our enemies," he said, adding attacks that killed 230 people in France had come from the region. "We need everybody's cooperation, especially Russia, to eradicate them."

France's wonder boy seems to disagree. He'd rather cooperate with Russia and leave Assad alone.

[Skroe]

Both are problems that need to be dealt with.

Assad matters more than ISIS. And Assad matters as a target in the proxywar between the US + Sunni Arab Alliance and Russia + Iran.

The US needs to, as it's been doing on a semi-regular basis since February, keep reminding the world that Russia can't protect anybody.

They can put troops in a country.
They can sell the aircraft and defenses
They can threaten retaliation if red lines are crossed.

And all it will get the country in question is a bombing and Russia some courtesy "heads up" phone calls.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.5409c730439d

The US is turning it's attention on Iranian militias that back Assad as Raqqa falls.

Again: Russia can't protect anybody.

[Machismo]

Russia and Syria seem more keen on bombing civilians, and going after militants, than it does ISIS. I guess everyone has their priorities.

[Cybran]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.5409c730439d

The US is turning it's attention on Iranian militias that back Assad as Raqqa falls.

Again: Russia can't protect anybody.

The Kurds will turn to Turkey and close the efrat shield before they turn south. I want to see you bombing Turkish soldiers.

[zorkesh]

http://halturnershow.com/index.php/n...-mediterranean

How do you think: could that be a warning to US?
Or its just rumors?

[Independent voter]

It's a terrible idea, to let Military men make decisions in situations where diplomacy should be the go to solution.

That would be true if we were fighting a traditional enemy with European values.

[turboether]

Russia and Syria seem more keen on bombing civilians, and going after militants, than it does ISIS. I guess everyone has their priorities.

Who is more of a threat? The murderer in your house, or the one waiting outside for sloppy seconds?

On topic, Assad being removed from power and not handing the country over to the 'rebel' factions and ISIS is the desired outcome. Considering the usual alternative is a puppet leader and how well that track record has been in the past, it's a pretty safe bet Syria has no future as a stable state. By arming fringe factions against it the US are affirming this unfortunate outcome. Unfortunate not only for Assad but for the remaining people of Syria. Who is going to rebuild? The proverbial wolves at the gates? Unlikely.

[derpkitteh]

Both are problems that need to be dealt with.

that is a lie fabricated by the CIA. there were documents about it leaked a while back, they've had his head in their targets for years.

assad isn't the monster he's made out to be, it's the government using media to lie to the public about him.

assad should be supported, not dethroned.