U.S. Politics

[Brumerican]

5 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I must admit, I can't see why Putin would want ISIS to destabilise Syria.

 

Me neither but they are excellent tools for destabilising the West.

[OutByEaster?]

1 minute ago, Brumerican said:

Me neither but they are excellent tools for destabilising the West.

But having friends all around Israel is a much better tool.

I guess it's possible there are other places he'd quite like to see them prosper - but then there are other places we'd quite like to see them prosper.

[Brumerican]

Just now, OutByEaster? said:

But having friends all around Israel is a much better tool.

 

Yeah they're in the poop right now along with the lemons.

[peterms]

2 minutes ago, Brumerican said:

Me neither but they are excellent tools for destabilising the West.

Isis emerged because the West destroyed Libya and Iraq, creating vast numbers of refugees and creating space and opportunity for the growth of terrorist groups.  These groups were found useful by the West to attack Syria, and so were funded and armed, including turning a blind eye to the supplies nominally going to "moderate rebels" actually going to Isis and al-Qaeda and various other groups who no-one in their right mind would call moderate.

Syria has started to become more stable since Russia became involved.  Towns have been liberated by the Syrian army with crucial support from the Russians and normal life is being resumed in many places.  Do you not recognise this as a simple statement of fact?

Terrorism in the West has occurred as a consequence of Western involvement in wars of aggression in the Middle East.  I gather our security services warned Blair that this would happen.

DO you recognise none of this?  Do you think all the stuff that's been happening with the ME and IS is caused by the Russians?

[Brumerican]

1 minute ago, peterms said:

Isis emerged because the West destroyed Libya and Iraq, creating vast numbers of refugees and creating space and opportunity for the growth of terrorist groups.  These groups were found useful by the West to attack Syria, and so were funded and armed, including turning a blind eye to the supplies nominally going to "moderate rebels" actually going to Isis and al-Qaeda and various other groups who no-one in their right mind would call moderate.

Syria has started to become more stable since Russia became involved.  Towns have been liberated by the Syrian army with crucial support from the Russians and normal life is being resumed in many places.  Do you not recognise this as a simple statement of fact?

Terrorism in the West has occurred as a consequence of Western involvement in wars of aggression in the Middle East.  I gather our security services warned Blair that this would happen.

DO you recognise none of this?  Do you think all the stuff that's been happening with the ME and IS is caused by the Russians?

I look forward to an ISIS free 2019 then .  

Trump has claimed complete victory over them and Putin is still there to make sure it stays that way .

Sounds legit .

[peterms]

3 minutes ago, Brumerican said:

I look forward to an ISIS free 2019 then .  

Trump has claimed complete victory over them and Putin is still there to make sure it stays that way .

Sounds legit .

As you probably know, pretty much everyone has noted that Trump is wrong and IS haven't been defeated yet.

In fact the Kurds have now dropped their actions against IS in the east, because they have to redeploy to defend the imminent attacks from Turkey now that Turkey has been given the green light by Trump (your earlier comment about Putin not giving a shit about allies would apply much better to Trump, by the way).  The Turks have said they are going to bury the Kurds in ditches.

[Brumerican]

1 minute ago, peterms said:

As you probably know, pretty much everyone has noted that Trump is wrong and IS haven't been defeated yet.

In fact the Kurds have now dropped their actions against IS in the east, because they have to redeploy to defend the imminent attacks from Turkey now that Turkey has been given the green light by Trump (your earlier comment about Putin not giving a shit about allies would apply much better to Trump, by the way).  The Turks have said they are going to bury the Kurds in ditches.

I'm sure Putin won't allow any humans to be put in ditches as he wants stability and world peace.

 Who are the Kurds fighting in the East by the way ? ISIS are dead and Putin today agreed with Trump about that assessment.?

PS , I'd very much like to see your tax returns .

[peterms]

20 minutes ago, Brumerican said:

Who are the Kurds fighting in the East by the way ? ISIS are dead and Putin today agreed with Trump about that assessment.? 

They're fighting IS.

Putin is reported as agreeing with the US withdrawal, making the point that the US presence in Syria, unlike Russia's, is illegal.  The Guardian reports Putin as saying that a heavy blow has been struck against IS, rather than saying they are defeated.

[Brumerican]

Just now, peterms said:

They're fighting IS.

Putin is reported as agreeing with the US withdrawal, making the point that the US presence in Syria, unlike Russia's, is illegal.  The Guardian reports Putin as saying that a heavy blow has been struck against IS, rather than saying they are defeated.

Can't fight something that doesn't exist .

Unless the Night King made it to Syria ? 

I'm sure it will all work out though.

[A'Villan]

I wish I knew more about the ins and outs of the military conflicts that is ever present in this world of ours. I don't even know what's happening with Australia's forces other than that we are forever brown nosed to the U.S and follow their lead when called upon.

There is so much animosity and turmoil going on. @Brumerican I personally don't know how you can say it will all work out though. Maybe I am missing your point.

[peterms]

It must be confusing for Donald.  He's being criticised daily, from all quarters, for all the illegal things he does.  Yet when he decides to stop the US doing one illegal thing, he gets criticised even more, and told he's wrong.

What's a chap to do?

[Chindie]

Revolving door on the Trump Administration continues as Matthis goes, openly because he disagrees with Trump.

They're going to run out of rats to replace the sinking ship. Arguably Ajay have.

[blandy]

6 hours ago, peterms said:

Towns have been liberated by the Syrian army with crucial support from the Russians and normal life is being resumed in many places.  Do you not recognise this as a simple statement of fact?

Nice one. Ha ha ha ha. Seriously this is one of the most ridiculously slanted things I’ve seen you write. “Liberated”. Ha ha. I’d just about go with “returned to the control of a murdering, torturing,  dictator”. I’d go with “towns have been indiscriminately bombed and gassed by the Syrian army with crucial support from the Russians”. I’d go with some acknowledgement that utterly deliberate targeting of medics and hospitals by Syrian forces with the crucial aid of Russia has caused particular suffering for the people.

Liberated. Yeah, good one. They’re free again to be ruled over by Putin’s tyrant friend. Where giving medical aid to anyone suspected of being an opponent is illegal, likely to lead to torture and then death in prison. A country where a popular uprising against the tyrant has been Liberated from democracy and retired to dictatorship. Liberated to return to a normal life of oppression. Liberated civilians liberated to their graves by the friendly Russians and Syrian army.

**** me. 

[Brumerican]

6 hours ago, A'Villan said:

. @Brumerican I personally don't know how you can say it will all work out though. Maybe I am missing your point.

It won't .

It's going to be a huge shit sandwich.

[LondonLax]

Putin sighting international law in his opposition to occupation of foreign countries 

[A'Villan]

3 hours ago, Brumerican said:

It won't .

It's going to be a huge shit sandwich.

I'm with you now. At least on that point.

I can't tell whether you are being tongue in cheek, sarcastic or sincere in regards to the IS/Syria/Russia/U.S discussion.

From the few minutes I've just spent reading articles from the Guardian and Washington Post on the subject some of what @peterms is suggesting checks out.

The Kurds and Arabs (I know next to nothing about either people) are apparently voicing their disapproval and feeling of betrayal by the U.S withdrawing forces.

Apparently it's going to create a power vacuum which will enable the resurgence of IS or something along those lines. I'm not going to pretend to know.

The Turkish defense minister stating that when the time is right it won't matter if the Kurds are in ditches, tunnels or underground, they will be buried in ditches.

I remember my Mum saying some months ago that an analyst or political commentator on the television said something along the lines of it will  be the situation with Turkey which determines whether or not we have a WW3. I have zero idea why that was said or why it would be Turkey that tipped things over.

[choffer]

5 hours ago, Brumerican said:

It won't .

It's going to be a huge shit sandwich.

Turkey sandwiches are always shit.

[peterms]

9 hours ago, blandy said:

Nice one. Ha ha ha ha. Seriously this is one of the most ridiculously slanted things I’ve seen you write. “Liberated”. Ha ha. I’d just about go with “returned to the control of a murdering, torturing,  dictator”. I’d go with “towns have been indiscriminately bombed and gassed by the Syrian army with crucial support from the Russians”. I’d go with some acknowledgement that utterly deliberate targeting of medics and hospitals by Syrian forces with the crucial aid of Russia has caused particular suffering for the people.

Liberated. Yeah, good one. They’re free again to be ruled over by Putin’s tyrant friend. Where giving medical aid to anyone suspected of being an opponent is illegal, likely to lead to torture and then death in prison. A country where a popular uprising against the tyrant has been Liberated from democracy and retired to dictatorship. Liberated to return to a normal life of oppression. Liberated civilians liberated to their graves by the friendly Russians and Syrian army.

**** me. 

That's quite a rant.

Let's start with "popular uprising against the tyrant".  The US has for many years been planning action against a number of countries.  US General Wesley Clark is on record way back in 2007 explaining that the goal explained to him shortly after 9/11 was to "take out" seven countries in five years, including Iraq, Syria, Iran.  The timescale ended up being less ambitious.  It was also thought better to present things less as an aggressive act of invasion.  When drought and food shortages led to protests in Syria, the US quickly acted to support groups hostile to Assad, with the aim of achieving regime change.  The groups supported were from various places, but the narrative has always been that they were "rebels", ie Syrians, rather than being the motley assortment of people from many places that we know them to be.  They were supplied with money, US and other advisers trained them, they were given lots of equipment (remember the convoys of brand new, matching Toyotas?), they were assisted to take control of oil supplies, the oil was routed through Turkey and sold to Turkey, Israel and others to provide continuing funding for Isis, al-Qaeda, Nusra Front and the rest.  As we know, they took control of vast areas and attempted to establish a caliphate.  But hey, this was just local civilians rising up against a tyrant, yes?  It became a bit like the creation of Dr Frankenstein, didn't it?

Indiscriminate bombing.  Well, you've been in the forces, you will understand the practical issues involved in trying to regain cities from well equipped forces, with networks of tunnels large enough to shelter lorries, using the civilian population as human shields.  Both Syria and the US used bombing in cities to capture territory.  You present this as what Syria and Russia does, and by implication, by saying nothing about other actors, you suggest that it is only them that do this.  Let's look for example at what Amnesty said about the US attack on Raqqa:

Quote

Shortly before the military campaign, US Defence Secretary James Mattis promised a “war of annihilation” against IS.

From 6 June to 17 October 2017, the US-led Coalition operation to oust IS from its so-called “capital” Raqqa killed and injured thousands of civilians and destroyed much of the city. Homes, private and public buildings and infrastructure were reduced to rubble or damaged beyond repair.  

Residents were trapped as fighting raged in Raqqa’s streets between IS militants and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) fighters, supported by the Coalition’s relentless air and artillery strikes. IS mined the escape routes and shot at civilians trying to flee. Hundreds of civilians were killed: some in their homes; some in the very places where they had sought refuge; and others as they tried to flee.

US, British and French Coalition forces carried out tens of thousands of air strikes and US forces admitted to firing 30,000 artillery rounds during the offensive on Raqqa. US forces were responsible for more than 90% of the air strikes.

“A senior US military official said that more artillery shells were launched into Raqqa than anywhere since the Viet Nam war. Given that artillery shells have margin of error of over 100 metres, it is no surprise that the result was mass civilian casualties,” said Donatella Rovera.

And so on.  Like Mosul, like Falluja, like Vietnam.  Mass bombing, coupled with PR spin.

In Raqqa, Isis killed civiliand trying to leave, and mined the outskirts of the town.  The US dropped leaflets telling people to leave.  Some tried to get across the river in boats, and the US bombed them, before bombing the city.  Raqqa after the US finished its "precision bombing" campaign has been compared to Dresden in WW2.

"Liberated" is a term used by both Syria and the US to describe recapturing towns from Isis.  I should think anyone reading accounts of life under Isis control would view the removal of Isis as liberation.  Perhaps you think it's only liberation when the US does it?  It may be worth thinking about the difference between Aleppo today, where a process of reconstruction is under way (hampered by the US attempting to prevent any economic relations between Syria and other countries, which restricts the scale and pace of activity, the same economic warfare they are using against Iran) with post-US-liberation Libya, a scene of utter destruction of what was the wealthiest country in the continent, and where slave markets now operate openly.  I wonder if the people of Libya prefer the post-US state of affairs to living under Gaddafi?  I wonder if anyone asks them.  Perhaps some Syrians might prefer a similar outcome to living under Assad, but I suggest they would be few.  Because let's face it, the US agenda is not about creating a strong, well-functioning, autonomous and democratic state where people live in harmony in the sunlit uplands of freedom, is it?  It's about maintaining regional weakness, in pursuit of wider strategy, and the locals are dispensable tools in that, as the Kurds are again discovering, as they did when the US abandoned them to Saddam after the first Gulf war.

[villakram]

15 hours ago, blandy said:

Nice one. Ha ha ha ha. Seriously this is one of the most ridiculously slanted things I’ve seen you write. “Liberated”. Ha ha. I’d just about go with “returned to the control of a murdering, torturing,  dictator”. I’d go with “towns have been indiscriminately bombed and gassed by the Syrian army with crucial support from the Russians”. I’d go with some acknowledgement that utterly deliberate targeting of medics and hospitals by Syrian forces with the crucial aid of Russia has caused particular suffering for the people.

Liberated. Yeah, good one. They’re free again to be ruled over by Putin’s tyrant friend. Where giving medical aid to anyone suspected of being an opponent is illegal, likely to lead to torture and then death in prison. A country where a popular uprising against the tyrant has been Liberated from democracy and retired to dictatorship. Liberated to return to a normal life of oppression. Liberated civilians liberated to their graves by the friendly Russians and Syrian army.

**** me. 

So you support the AQ affiliated groups or whatever it is they have rebranded themselves these days?

A popular uprising where "we" supported jihadi groups because freedom and democracy, that has resulted in the destruction of a fully functioning country. 

Take off the blinkers.

Edited December 21, 2018 by villakram

[bickster]

29 minutes ago, villakram said:

that has resulted in the destruction of a fully functioning country.