Russia Bombs CIA-backed Rebels in Syria

Clean

Clean

5,000+ Posts
After meeting with Obama on Monday, Putin sent jets into Syria, not to bomb ISIS or Al Queda held positions, as he claimed they were going to do, but to bomb the CIA-backed rebels that oppose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The U.S. has spent hundreds of millions of dollars equipping and training this group.

It's unclear why Putin is so concerned about the Rebels, they've been able to accomplish next to nothing compared to ISIS. His real purpose must be to humiliate the United States. This could trigger a showdown if we had a President with a backbone, but little does Putin realize you can't humiliate Obama. He'll just release statements like "we're monitoring events" and "we believe a diplomatic settlement is possible". The main stream media will ignore the situation altogether.

Get ready for lots more Syrian refugees.

[URL="http://"]http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/1...-by-russian-airstrikes-in-syria/?intcmp=hpbt1[/url]

[URL]http://news.yahoo.com/wary-obama-meets-putin-syria-crisis-russia-help-113004509.html;_ylt=AwrBT7fDKg1WcoAAhU5XNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEyODRjcmJxBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDQjAzNDFfMQRzZWMDc2M-[/url]
 
I think there are a few different objectives.

1. Protect Russia's key ally in the region (Assad) as well as Russian military interests, such as its naval base in Tartus. That's going to mean attacking all rebel groups.
2. Put Russia in a position to benefit most if/when the crisis ends (probably through a major war involving global powers like the US).
3. Shake his nuts in Obama's face and show off. He's showing resolve and action in the face of American irresolution and weakness, which isn't too hard. Our Syria strategy is so disorganized that it's borderline comical.
 
Clean said:
After meeting with Obama on Monday, Putin sent jets into Syria, not to bomb ISIS or Al Queda held positions, as he claimed they were going to do, but to bomb the CIA-backed rebels that oppose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The U.S. has spent hundreds of millions of dollars equipping and training this group.

It's unclear why Putin is so concerned about the Rebels, they've been able to accomplish next to nothing compared to ISIS. His real purpose must be to humiliate the United States. This could trigger a showdown if we had a President with a backbone, but little does Putin realize you can't humiliate Obama. He'll just release statements like "we're monitoring events" and "we believe a diplomatic settlement is possible". The main stream media will ignore the situation altogether.

Get ready for lots more Syrian refugees.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/1...-by-russian-airstrikes-in-syria/?intcmp=hpbt1

http://news.yahoo.com/wary-obama-me...NvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDQjAzNDFfMQRzZWMDc2M-
Click to expand...
Mainstream media does no serious analysis, but instead engages in non-stop propaganda: Assad bad. Putin bad. Rebels good. Allies (the countries like Saudi Arabia which produce the jihadist rebels) good. It's comical.

First of all, Russia has been transparent about its objectives. Putin spoke before the UN and conducted an interview with Charlie Rose just this week and made clear Russia will support and collaborate with Assad. It doesn't matter to Russia if the targets are ISIS or one of the U.S. Al Qaeda affiliates termed "rebels" by the press and U.S. State Department.

Putin has invited the U.S. To join Russia in wiping out ISIS but the U.S. leadership apparently places a higher priority on regime change in Syria. So why is regime change so important when Syria poses zero threat to the U.S.?

If you buy the standard line that the U.S. merely wants to stop Assad's oppression and allow democracy to flourish you either haven't thought about it or you are dumber than a post.
Bombing the country to oblivion, injecting thousands of foreign jihadists, and creating a massive refugee crises does absolutely nothing for making Syria safe for democracy.
Ask yourself why the Saudis and the gulf states are so gung-ho on regime change.

Syria would be the conduit for a gas pipeline into Europe from the Middle East. Currently Russia is the main source of natural gas for Europe. Quatar, Kuwait, and Saudis want a piece of the action, and the U.S. Wants to cut off Russia at the knees. Russia likes the economic arrangement the way it is.

The role of the press is to mimic talking points from the government and the Pentagon. Never discuss the real issues, but instead provide something the public will get on board with. Assad bad. Putin evil. U.S. Good.
 
I have to go with Musberger1 on this one. The war has caused more problems than merely having Assad as the leader. I know he is a bad guy, but he is probably the best option right now.

The only thing I wish the US would do in this is support/arm the Kurds to help them protect themselves. It is truly a nation without a state, and at least what I know of them sounds way better than any of the groups surrounding them.

As far as Russia bombing "rebels", I am not sure I care one way or the other.
 
Putin just continues to publicly humiliate Obama. If Obama wasnt such an arrogant prick, I would feel sorry for him.
 
Do we know if the NYT ever changed it position from 2012?

CQRkq4VVAAAk9YZ.jpg
 
Seattle Husker said:
Obama, or the US? I'd argue that Putin is continually giving the middle finger to the Western powers.
Click to expand...

My take is that everything he says and does is aimed at his domestic market. I don't think he really cares much what people outside Russia think of him.

As far as Syria goes, I don't think the Russian people, generally, give a crap what is happening or has happened in Syria. The two things they care about in this context are (1) They like the projection of Russian power on the world stage again; and (2) They do not want to see dead Russians coming back. No casualties. Along these same lines, there were reports of Russian refrigerated trucks in the Ukraine working to get the dead Russians back home so they could hide it. I wonder what they will do about this for Syria? Because besides the air force, they have special forces on the ground (fighting next to Iranians and Hezbollah -- who also get US air cover. What a mess).
 
Last edited:
Putin gave a press conference at the UN after his speech. Video was banned (but Live Leaks let out a copy anyway).

In the presser, Putin addressed Obama's Middle East Policy. He was pretty scathing, and even though US journalists were there, they seemed to be ignoring what was said. Here is the text.
-------------------------------------

"First point. I never said that I view the US as a threat to our national security. President Obama, as you said, views Russia as a threat, but I don’t feel the same way about the US. What I do feel is that the politics of those in the circles of power, if I may use those terms, the politics of those in power is erroneous. It not only contradicts our national interests, it undermines any trust we had in the United States. And in that way it actually harms the United states as well.

Undermined trust, with the understanding that they are one of the global leaders in politics and in matters of the economy.

I can stay silent on many things, but as I always say, and Dominic here has mentioned it, “one sided actions” in the continuous search for the next “alliance” and coalitions which are predetermined – this is not a method that seeks to discus and agree on mutual grounds of understanding. These are one sided actions. They are carried out all the time. They lead to crises.

I’ve said this before, another threat that President Obama mentioned was ISIS. Well who on earth armed them? Who armed the Syrians that were fighting with Assad? Who created the necessary political information and climate that facilitated this situation?

Who pushed for the delivery of arms to the area? Do you really not understand who is fighting in Syria?

They are mercenaries mostly. Do you understand they are paid money? Mercenaries fight for which ever side pays more. So they arm them and pay them a certain amount. I even know what these amounts are. So they fight. They have the arms. You can’t get them to return the weapons of course, at the end.

Then they discover elsewhere pays a little more…so they go fight there. Then they occupy the oil fields.

Where ever in Iraq, Syria, they start extracting the oil and this oil is purchased by somebody. Where are the sanctions on the parties purchasing this oil?

Do you believe the US does not know who is buying it? Is it not their allies that are buying oil from Isis? Do you not think the US has the power to influence their allies? Or is the point that they indeed do not wish to influence them?

Then why bomb ISIS? In areas they started extracting oil and paying mercenaries more in theose areas the rebels from “civilized” Syrian opposition forces immediately join ISIS, because they pay more. I consider this absolutely unprofessional politics. It is not grounded on facts, in the real world.

We must support civilized, democratic opposition in Syria. So you support, arm them, and then tomorrow they join ISIS. Can they not think a step ahead? We don’t stand for this kind of politics of the US. We consider it to be wrong. It harms all parties, including you (USA).

When it comes to the consideration of our national interests I would really like it if people like you (US journalists) who posed the questions, would one day head your government. Maybe then we can somehow reverse the situation.

If that doesn’t happen, I will at least ask you to deliver my messages to your government. To the President of the United States, the Vice President, and all other relevant people. Tell them that we do not want or look for any confrontation whatsoever. When you start to consider our national interests in your actions, any other disagreements we may have they will self-regulate. This needs to be done, not just talked about. You must consider the interests of others, and you must respect other people.

You cannot “squeeze” others having considered only the benefits that you require from whatever… in economies, in your military activities, in everything. Look at Iraq the situation is terrible. Look at Libya and what you did there, that got your ambassador murdered.

Was it us that did this?

You even had a security council decision to establish a no fly zone. What for? It was so that Gaddafi’s air force couldn’t fly over and bomb the rebels. This wasn’t the smartest decision, but okay… what did you proceed to do yourselves? You started bombing the territory. This is in clear contravention of the security council resolution. It is even outright aggression over a state. Was it us that did this? You did this with your bare hands.

And it ended with the murder of your Ambassador. Who’s fault is it? It is your fault. Is it a good result that your Ambassador was murdered? It is actually a terrible catastrophe.

But do not look around for somebody to blame when it is you making these mistakes. You must do the opposite; rise above the endless desire to dominate. You must stop acting out of imperialistic ambitions. Do not poison the consciousness of millions of people like there can be no other way but imperialistic politics.

We will never forget our relationship when we supported the US in the war of independence (civil war). We will never forget that we collaborated in both world wars as allies. I personally believe that the geo strategic interests of Russia and the US are essentially the same. We must focus on this interrelationship."

https://themarshallreport.wordpress...id-isis-mercenaries-in-middle-east-and-syria/
 
Seattle Husker said:
Obama, or the US? I'd argue that Putin is continually giving the middle finger to the Western powers.
Click to expand...

Mostly Obama. The US without question has the strongest, most advanced military in the world and has far more economic leverage than Russia. However, Putin knows that Obama is too weak to ever use US power in any meaningful way. I do agree that it makes the US look quite silly that we were stupid enough to elect and re-elect such an impotent, weak leader.
 
"An attempt by Russia & Iran to prop up Assad and pacify the population ... is a quagmire. It won't work." -Obama

As opposed to ... ?
 
JoeFan
You are right Putin clearly is sneering at BO. Does the country suffer some as a result?
Yes but thank goodness Bo is on the way out. It can't come too soon
However now that it ha been mentioned again What did BO mean when he wanted Putin to know He, BO, would have more flexibility after the election?

between much of the world seeing Putin take the lead and BO etc snubbing our one ally in the ME we have lot so much.
 
Did anyone catch this "brilliant" line by BO on Tuesday.
'President Obama, addressing Soviet intervention in Syria at a White House press conference, said Tuesday Iran and Syria President Bashar Assad represented Russia's entire coalition "and the rest of the world makes up ours."
:whiteflag:
 
Musburger1 said:
Pat Buchanan on Putin's analysis of the U.S. misguided foreign policy.
Click to expand...

I can't argue about the unintended consequences our foreign policy has had on the M. East. The M. East would probably be a more stable place today if Saddam and Gaddafi were still in power.

I do think that the decision to go into Afghanistan, which was already a failed nation state and a training ground for Al-Queda, was correct.
 
Joe Fan said:
.....
As far as Syria goes, I don't think the Russian people, generally, give a crap what is happening or has happened in Syria. The two things they care about in this context are (1) They like the projection of Russian power on the world stage again; and (2) They do not want to see dead Russians coming back. No casualties. Along these same lines, there were reports of Russian refrigerated trucks in the Ukraine working to get the dead Russians back home so they could hide it. I wonder what they will do about this for Syria? Because besides the air force, they have special forces on the ground (fighting next to Iranians and Hezbollah -- who also get US air cover. What a mess).
Click to expand...

 
Here's another perspective.

Link

The World Disorder

by Ghassan Kadi

The recent speech of President Putin at the UNGA has shown the rest of the world the extent of Western lies and inefficiency. Moreover, the Russian military initiative in Syria that almost immediately followed the speech has left all enemies of Syria in a bind, confused, and not knowing what to do.

In one moment, Foreign Secretary Kerry says that he wants to cooperate with Russia all the while other US officials express concern about Russia’s role and demand the military action to stop. Israel is very concerned about the Russian-imposed curfew imposed on its air-force in Syrian skies. To add to Israel’s woes, some leaked news indicate that Hezbollah has received from Iran the highly advanced SA-22 ground-to-air anti-aircraft missiles (1). Turkey is up in arms because Russia is allegedly attacking the FSA. The Saudis are demanding that Russia stops its “assault”, and all the covert would-be Islamists are wishing that Russians would be taken back to Russia in body bags in repeat to what happened in Afghanistan.

Russia is clearly showing that there is no distinction at all between any of the illegitimate armed forces operating in Syria and that Russia is there to support the Syrian Army and the legitimate government, irrespective of the West and its supporters say, want or think.

Lavrov could not put it more bluntly when he said that “if it looks like a terrorist, walks like a terrorist, if it fights like a terrorist, it’s a terrorist, right?” (2)

In fact, one can almost be certain that the first Russian strikes have deliberately hit as many different groups as possible in order for Russia to send a clear message that it does not see any distinction between the different terrorist groups and that it is intent to destroy them all.

President Putin also made a very subtle remark when he said that the foreign fighters in Syria should not be allowed to return home. Logic implies that he meant that they should all be killed or captured.

The Russian military intervention is undoubtedly an unprecedented move that heralds the actual beginning of a new geopolitical era. This is a much further step from the previous milestones that signaled the end of the NWO era.

The end of the NWO hegemony has been made clear earlier in Ukraine and in the East Mediterranean in September 2013, and which meant that America is no longer the unrivaled world leader.

The ancient nation of Syria was destined to be the place where this historic new phase in geopolitics has emerged and where the basic change has been enforced.

When we use the term “enforced”, we need to qualify the nature of the enforcement because Presidents Putin and Assad are “enforcing” international law and bilateral treaties; unlike the multitude of US-led coalitions which invaded countries to topple their legitimate governments and to pillage their infrastructures and resources and destroy their economies.

So the USA is now stuck between a rock and a hard place. For the first time in a very long time, it is coerced to accept that it is no longer the sole world super power. Furthermore, it finds itself having to accept that a major international development has eventuated in Syria against its will and that it is incapable of stopping it.

But America’s acceptance of the new status quo and the abolishment of the post-USSR NWO is not the main dilemma that America is facing now. In the eyes of hawkish American politicians, the main issue would be in dealing with its aftermath. If America were to sit back and watch Russia implement its own resolutions in Syria, then such an American position would be tantamount to conceding defeat.

Conceding defeat is something huge that America is not used to do. For America to concede defeat is a serious matter that may, just may drive hawkish politicians to make big gambles and dangerous maneuvers.

Not very long ago, I wondered what would a desperate America do, and I wrote an article titled “How Far Will A Desperate America Go?” (3). Some potential scenarios were hypothetically examined and reactions considered, but the Russian initiative in Syria has shuffled all cards in such a manner that have now put America in a situation in which it may find itself needing to fight not only for survival, not only for stature but to also fight for its impunity and its ability of independent decision-making.

As a matter of fact, many observers consider that America’s actions in Ukraine were intended to punish Russia for the role it played in Syria up till 2013. We have to keep in mind that if this is true, it would have been in retaliation to the Russian downing of two Syria-bound American missiles over the East Mediterranean. In comparison to what Russia is doing now, the downing of the two missiles becomes child’s play, dwarfed and insignificant.

So here’s the question, if America indeed stirred up the whole Ukraine issue in order to punish Russia for merely downing two American missiles that were intended to hit Syria, then to what extent will America be prepared to go in order to “punish” Russia for bombing the terrorist cells in Syria and for making America look totally powerless?

Such a scenario is frightening to say the least and this is perhaps the only concern as to how the Russian intervention in Syria can go pear-shaped.

Short of an open confrontation with Russia in Syria, America realistically cannot do much in way of curtailing Russia. America’s Middle Eastern regional cronies, including Israel, are not in a position to stand up against Russia. Erdogan has been rendered totally powerless and the Saudis are deep in mud. Furthermore, even before the Russian onslaught began, the “Anti-Syrian Cocktail” had already broken up and each of its fragments went on solo picking up its own pieces in the pursuit of its own interests and survival.

Washington must be abuzz with turmoil and confusion. Policy makers, military and political advisors, strategists and pundits would be looking at all alternatives, but they must be finding it very hard to choose what to do because they do not have too many options. If America opts to leave Russia do its bit in Syria, it may do this with the knowledge and intention that it can still easily stir up another potential hot spot and/or rekindle the Ukraine fire and cause trouble for Russia. But this only solves half the problem because unless America manages to stop the Russian initiative in Syria, it will be seen as a party who accepted defeat.

Russia is trying to restore the globally-accepted UN-based world order, but America still has the power to create a whole new world disorder. Whether American policy makers are foolhardy enough to go into this direction, will be decided by many factors; including who will be sitting at the helm in Washington after Obama. We can well criticize Obama and we do and should, but it is very possible that the new American President to be will make George W. Bush look like Mother Teresa. This is perhaps a good reason as to why Russia needs to act swiftly in Syria and before some conservative nut-case wins the next US presidential elections.

Russia is now calling the shots. The American-led conspiracy in Ukraine has already backfired in Crimea with more Russian gains down the pipeline.

President Putin understands well the American mentality. He knows that the Americans are bullies and he knows how to deal with bullies.

Bullies do not accept to be seen defeated. Americans may therefore have to accept their pride to be broken, with minimal damage, if Russian diplomacy can find them a face-saving sweetener.

After all, the Syrian surrender of chemical weapons back in 2013 was a Russian-brokered sweetener that America lapped up without hesitation. The difference between the 2013 events and those of today, is that the downing of the two American missiles by Russia in 2013 was kept behind the scenes and only known to a select few. America did not seem embarrassed to be seen backing down because in the eyes of the world, it didn’t. Currently however, it is all in the open and any magic panacea that is going to give the United States any face-saving will clearly look to the rest of the world that it is written in Cyrillic.
 
Musburger1 said:
Here's another perspective.
Link
The World Disorder by Ghassan Kadi
Click to expand...

This perspective is a bunch of BS. What survival do we (USA) have our in fighting in Syria. Kadi thinks that we have something to prove. What? This vision of us being bullies in Syria makes no sense from a factual stnadpoint. BO in his presidency has just been a blow-hard. "Red Lines" mean nothing and "Assad must go" is a big laugh. BO will do nothing and Putin knows it.

The bottom line is that Putin has fallen into a trap if we were to take the correct military action that would be in our interest. Putin has to prop up Assad and to protect his military presence in that part of the Med Sea. Look at where he is bombing. It has nothing to do with ISIS and is to stop the other Syrian rebel thrust into northwestern Syria where his strategic interest and military base lies. What we have to do as a strategy is to make Putin believe that it is in his interest to fight ISIS. The next president strategically should push ISIS out of northern Iraq into Syria. Create a no-fly zone not in Syria but over the north Iraq border and bottle up ISIS in Syria once they are pushed into Syria. What that would cause in the world politics is the difficult point to predict.

Let the approximate 30K ISIS troops take care of the Russian soldiers. We do not have to do any fighting in Syria except to make sure ISIS stays there.
 
Last edited:
Clean said:
I can't argue about the unintended consequences our foreign policy has had on the M. East. The M. East would probably be a more stable place today if Saddam and Gaddafi were still in power.

I do think that the decision to go into Afghanistan, which was already a failed nation state and a training ground for Al-Queda, was correct.
Click to expand...

We agree. I said as much before we went into Iraq on multiple occasions. Despots in the Middle East may be the only regimes capable of keeping the caps on the powder kegs. Of course, it's too late for that now. The cat is out of the bag.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top