So some of the same people who are upset over a foreign nation possibly tampering with the US election are getting upset that the US may no longer be directly backing someone trying to overthrow a sovereign nation?
I'm not from the US, but maybe it's time for them to take their ball and go home. If the UN wants to get involved, great. that's their job.
As I understand it, this only applies to the CIA's covert backing of certain rebel groups of uncertain reliability. It does not apply to the overt backing of the SDF or the Kurds.
Basically Trump is trying to quash a bloody quagmire in Syria that resulted in thousands of dead by resolving the conflict in favor of Assad. Like or hate the man, this will put an end to the fighting and mounting civilian casualty toll.
People who advocate for CIA-backed weapons programme to moderate rebels are basically sacrificing Syrian civilians for the sake of "cold war 2.0".
The title of this thread is deeply missleading. Trump is abandoning the rebels in the North who are allied with Al-Qaeda or Al-Sham, radical wahhabi groups.
What he isn't doing is abandoning the SDF which now hold a very significant chunk of territory. The actual impact of this decision is that it will move Syria towards reduced fighting in the near future and once the rebels outside the SDF are defeated an end to the fighting.
As for those talking about Turkey. TURKEY has no intention at this stage to continue arming many of these groups. They'll arm the rebels standing between the Kurdish territories but they've lost interest in other aspects.
Finally the idea that Russia is the only player on the government side is farcical. Did everyone forget Iran? Hezbollah? Iraqi Militias. There's a lot of players there and it's likely that they could end up fighting each other.
What Trump wants is for Russia to help against Iran.
The defense establishment has been firmly against arming groups that were allied with crazies like Al-Nusra or Al-Sham, that's why they arm the SDF and will continue arming the SDF and based on the article it was McMaster and Mike Pompeo that supported it.
Now if those are putinists well then we're on another planet.
Last edited by CostinR; 2017-07-20 at 07:15 AM.
"Life is one long series of problems to solve. The more you solve, the better a man you become.... Tribulations spawn in life and over and over again we must stand our ground and face them."
I think most Americans agree with you in that they cheer when events make their enemies in America look bad, even if America pays a price for these events. You, and a lot of Americans, agree that hurting America is a small price to pay for being able to make fun of your political enemies that you hate so much.
There are still people trying to peddle that 'moderates' bullshit? Colour me surprised. I thought even the most stubborn people would have had to admit that all factions involved in the middle east are equally 'bad'. Huh. What's next? People who actually believe in the 'moderates' bullshit?
Arming the "freedom fighters" seems like a good idea. We havent tried that before, and it cant possibly fail
This is really sad. We should be arming more freedom fighters and moderate rebels. There's no way that can go wrong.
#1 Freedom Fighter
Also, there is no way that the weapons the aforementioned freedom fighters are sent end up with other moderate rebels like ISIS or Somalian pirates, etc. Too lazy to add links, do a quick search for something like "US weapons going to terrorist groups".
Challenge Mode : Play WoW like my disability has me play:
You will need two people, Brian MUST use the mouse for movement/looking and John MUST use the keyboard for casting, attacking, healing etc.
Briand and John share the same goal, same intentions - but they can't talk to each other, however they can react to each other's in game activities.
Now see how far Brian and John get in WoW.
You really do not have a clue what went wrong in places like Afghanistan do you? Impressive to know so little of ones war history yet to make such statements. But considering your post history not all that surprising.
I'll give you a hint, it's what happens after the fighting dies down that determines the future after a nation.
I am more keenly aware of the history of the area then I believe you are. Heck a university gave me a piece of paper saying so. Your assumption rests on the notion that Russia is going to leave them be. I do not believe that the case. I can see a strong push towards colonization and perhaps a end to this regions war torn history.
I think that piece of paper is just good enough to wipe your own ass with if you think Russia will bring forth peace and stability, not to mention what a dumb argument to make you once wrote something being intentionally vague what is suppose to claim you know anything about it yet your statements here show the opposite. But it's no surprise that some americans are becoming desperate in making Russia look as the good guys looking at recent events.
If you knew how the war in Syria started and how it got this far you wouldn't be saying that Assad is the option forward, that alone displays your ignorance here but at least you're generally consistent regardless of what subject is being talked about, so you got that going for you
Wrong the majority of the rebels were former Syrian soldiers that refused to follow Assad's order on shooting on unarmed peaceful protestors, who were not even asking him to step down. Most of them wanted him to control the runaway inflation that was going on making food unafordable for the majority of Syrians.
When the war started the FSA went around looking for Allies to help, especially in the west first who said yeah we'll help then suddenly Oh only lightly though cause many remember Iraq (When in reality the west should have been remembering Iraq 1991 with the failed uprising which we should have helped not the 2003 war). When the help didn't come they did what we had to do in WW2. Get our hands dirty and ally with scum. We did it with the Soviets, they decided to become co-belligerents with AQ.
Assad on the other hand was more than happy. A few AQ helping FSA + the rise of ISIS which only got as big cause Assad allowed it to. Pulling his forces back so they could grow and he could scream "Look every one of them is a fanatical terrorist." while people like you fell for it.
If history repeated itself we would have toppled Assad and then left the place in shambles. Leaving with Assad still in power is different. Also can someone please tell me what separates these "rebels" from being called terrorists, is it just because the US supports them. Let's face it, if the US supported Assad instead of Russia you'd have every news outlet screaming that Russia supports terrorism.
As example, Russia DID bring peace and stability to Chechnya. Despite them still being being muslim and highly tribal.
It can be done even if it's not easy.
What cannot be done is bringing both peace AND "Western values" at the same time (or Russian values, for that matter).
Only option remains the only option despite all negatives.If you knew how the war in Syria started and how it got this far you wouldn't be saying that Assad is the option forward, that alone displays your ignorance here but at least you're generally consistent regardless of what subject is being talked about, so you got that going for you
Last edited by Shalcker; 2017-07-20 at 02:34 PM.