Russia in Syria

[+and-then]

Fixed your post for you.

The surge by Bush CRUSHED Al Zarkawi's group into ineffectiveness. Sure, it, like most other gangs remained intact because all they are is an ideology wanting money and weapons to rebuild. When Obama removed the only force that kept them in check of course they roared back. They were a minimal force until then. But go ahead and rewrite your little histories. If the world continues dealing with them the way you guys want, they will eventually, actually have a Caliphate.

[+and-then]

If the so-called FSA were truly a genuine political opposition, they wouldn't be organized as, and allying themselves with, foreign-backed mercenaries. Russia has simply called their bluff and exposed the FSA as yet another ISIS-type of fraud. That's what the "F" really stands for.

So if a "legitimate" rebel group accepts arms or help from foreign backed mercenaries, it is no longer really interested in the welfare of it's country? If I were fighting for my country's survival I'd take weapons from whoever offered and if they tried to take advantage later I'd turn those weapons on THEM. Having said that, I don't claim to have a clue what any of these groups really want. The whole thing seems to be a mindless slaughter of one flavor of the prophet's words versus another. Russia is playing a very dangerous game trying to use these fanatics to position itself in the M.E. You'd think they would remember their experience in Afghanistan - or at least take a look at OUR current experience there.

[ian hacktorp]

So if a "legitimate" rebel group accepts arms or help from foreign backed mercenaries, it is no longer really interested in the welfare of it's country? If I were fighting for my country's survival I'd take weapons from whoever offered and if they tried to take advantage later I'd turn those weapons on THEM. Having said that, I don't claim to have a clue what any of these groups really want. The whole thing seems to be a mindless slaughter of one flavor of the prophet's words versus another. Russia is playing a very dangerous game trying to use these fanatics to position itself in the M.E. You'd think they would remember their experience in Afghanistan - or at least take a look at OUR current experience there.

Perhaps the better question is whether any rebel group that is organized and funded by the very foreign nations who would gain from a collapse of the current government is, in fact, legitimate. Further, we can look to the utter chaos, strife, and disorder that lingers in places like Iraq, Libya, Yemen, and Afghanistan for an idea of what Western-style regime change would bring to Syria.

[EEHC]

If the so-called FSA were truly a genuine political opposition, they wouldn't be organized as, and allying themselves with, foreign-backed mercenaries. Russia has simply called their bluff and exposed the FSA as yet another ISIS-type of fraud. That's what the "F" really stands for.

The alliance of the FSA as part of the Army of Conquest is purely practical. It's a common front against both the Assad regime and ISIS. Secular rebels have no other choice but to coordinate with Islamist fractions or they would be defeated. That's because the FSA has had to deal with a lack of serious military backing. Assad's Army would have met the same fate, were it not for Iran and Russia who have been consistantly providing them with the equipment and troops they need.

Edited October 28, 2015 by Sam.

[ian hacktorp]

The alliance of the FSA as part of the Army of Conquest is purely practical. It's a common front against both the Assad regime and ISIS. Secular rebels have no other choice but to coordinate with Islamist fractions or they would be defeated. That's because the FSA has had to deal with a lack of serious military backing. Assad's Army would have met the same fate, were it not for Iran and Russia who have been consistantly providing them with the equipment and troops they need.

The propaganda narrative being pushed by Western media claiming that ANY group is fighting both the Assad regime AND ISIS is false. ISIS is a fictional ideology designed to get as much in the way of military men and materiel on the ground as possible for a final push into Damascus. At the first sign of the Assad regime starting to crumble, ISIS would magically evaporate and the military assets of the FSA would suddenly swell with "new" weapons and fighters. So, there are really only two factions over there; pro and anti Assad forces.

Edited October 28, 2015 by hacktorp

[EEHC]

The propaganda narrative being pushed by Western media claiming that ANY group is fighting both the Assad regime AND ISIS is false. ISIS is a fictional ideology designed to get as much in the way of military men and materiel on the ground as possible for a final push into Damascus. At the first sign of the Assad regime starting to crumble, ISIS would magically evaporate and the military assets of the FSA would suddenly swell with "new" weapons and fighters. So, there are really only two factions over there; pro and anti Assad forces.

Propaganda can be found just as much on the Russian side. In fact, they are even better at it than Western media.

Wouldn't agree that the Kremlin has a vested interest in painting any Syrian opposition to the Assad regime as terrorists, to help it's client?

Edited October 29, 2015 by Sam.

[ian hacktorp]

Wouldn't agree that the Kremlin has a vested interest in painting any Syrian opposition to the Assad regime as terrorists, to help it's client?

Of course. In fact, the ridiculous and foolhardy fashion with which the various proxy "armies" were arranged over there, with mercenaries able to transition between "moderate" and "extremist" factions and back again, played right into the Kremlin's hands. Putin simply declared all of them terrorists and began bombing the lot of them. The Saudi/Qatari/Israeli/US alliance could not have been more stupid...and now the Russia/Iran/China alliance look to be the stabilizing influence in the ME. Go figure.

[+and-then]

Who created the Mohagadine, alquada, the Taliban then Isis, we know how this started and by who, we know that to. Osamas code name working for the CIA was Geronimo and I think they even called him Tim.

https://www.youtube....ho created isis

So you believe the CIA did 9-11? And did it without leaving enough evidence to be caught?

[ian hacktorp]

The Saudi/Qatari/Israeli/US alliance could not have been more stupid...and now the Russia/Iran/China alliance look to be the stabilizing influence in the ME. Go figure.

Some of these same geniuses were behind the Ukraine coup d'etat as well. One wonders why they have grown so desperate.

[+and-then]

Some of these same geniuses were behind the Ukraine coup d'etat as well. One wonders why they have grown so desperate.

Maybe because the freedom they thought they had secured was slipping away just as it is in Russia proper? Putin has been anything but subtle in his power grab. I feel badly for the youth of Russia. They now know what freedom is and it is being taken from them to the applause of their parents and grand parents

[ian hacktorp]

Maybe because the freedom they thought they had secured was slipping away just as it is in Russia proper? Putin has been anything but subtle in his power grab. I feel badly for the youth of Russia. They now know what freedom is and it is being taken from them to the applause of their parents and grand parents

Yeah. In reality, "freedom for the people" ranks pretty low on the list of motivations for violent, Western-style regime change. Sounds good on the evening news though!

[+and-then]

Yeah. In reality, "freedom for the people" ranks pretty low on the list of motivations for violent, Western-style regime change. Sounds good on the evening news though!

Like a dog on a bone eh? I'm speaking from experience of friends I know there who see the freedom they have known being taken away. If you are implying that the West is taking it from them then I think you are having issues with reality. But for some here at UM I realize that the greatest demon of all is the West - especially the United States.

[EEHC]

Of course. In fact, the ridiculous and foolhardy fashion with which the various proxy "armies" were arranged over there, with mercenaries able to transition between "moderate" and "extremist" factions and back again, played right into the Kremlin's hands. Putin simply declared all of them terrorists and began bombing the lot of them. The Saudi/Qatari/Israeli/US alliance could not have been more stupid...and now the Russia/Iran/China alliance look to be the stabilizing influence in the ME. Go figure.

FSA brigades will probably benefit having some U.S. military advisors in their midst to take the best decisions on the ground. Coordinating with some other Anti-Assad fractions (Army of Conquest) has been been done out of absolute necessecity to ensure their survival, I think any objective observer can recognize that fact.

But it's kinda odd that Russia is striking the regime's opposition in Homs and then calling them out on a support offer. All terrorists really?

Edited October 29, 2015 by Sam.

[EEHC]

*Snip*

Edited October 29, 2015 by Sam.

[+and-then]

FSA brigades will probably benefit having some U.S. military advisors in their midst to take the best decisions on the ground. Coordinating with some other Anti-Assad fractions (Army of Conquest) has been been done out of absolute necessecity to ensure their survival, I think any objective observer can recognize that fact.

But it's kinda odd that Russia is striking the regime's opposition in Homs and then calling them out on a support offer. All terrorists really?

I think they have a name for this - " MASKIROVKA" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maskirovka

[ian hacktorp]

But it's kinda odd that Russia is striking the regime's opposition in Homs and then calling them out on a support offer. All terrorists really?

Offers to switch allegiances are hardly odd in warfare. Another way to put it is: "either you are with us, or you are against us". Sound familiar?

[EEHC]

Offers to switch allegiances are hardly odd in warfare. Another way to put it is: "either you are with us, or you are against us". Sound familiar?

Yeah I wonder if Putin would make the same offer to ISIS.

I think it proves my point that Russia is well aware that not all Syrian rebels are terrorists despite pounding their bases.

http://www.bbc.com/n...europe-34637154

Edited October 29, 2015 by Sam.

[ian hacktorp]

Yeah I wonder if Putin would make the same offer to ISIS.

I think it proves my point that Russia is well aware that not all Syrian rebels are terrorists despite pounding their bases.

http://www.bbc.com/n...europe-34637154

Putin has stated clearly that ISIS fighters are simply mercenaries who will fight for whoever pays the most. Labeling a mercenary a terrorist is waste of time since they can simply shave their beards and transform into a "moderate" or a "freedom fighter". No, the true terrorists are the financiers of ISIS like certain Saudis, Qataris, and Israelis (including US-based neocons). And Putin won't be making any offers to align with them, I should think.

[EEHC]

Putin has stated clearly that ISIS fighters are simply mercenaries who will fight for whoever pays the most. Labeling a mercenary a terrorist is waste of time since they can simply shave their beards and transform into a "moderate" or a "freedom fighter". No, the true terrorists are the financiers of ISIS like certain Saudis, Qataris, and Israelis (including US-based neocons). And Putin won't be making any offers to align with them, I should think.

I would have to disagree. I think most ISIS fighters are fundamentalists who share the group's ideal of creating an Islamic state all across the Levant. In fact, ISIS split from Jabhat al-Nusra back in 2012 because al-Quaeda-Syria weren't not ruthless enough for their taste. These guys are dangerous and shouldn't be trusted.

Look at Jürgen Todenhöfer's account, a journalist who spent 10 days among them. They aren't ''simply mercenaries'', according to him:

http://www.news.com....q-1227550297625

The FSA, on the other hand, is a revolutionary group created by defected Syrian officers who wish to topple the Assad regime and replace it with a secular and democratic state. It doesn't have a specific chain of command, it's fighters are divided in brigades fighting alongside other Anti-Assad fractions.

I think it's just part of the Russian propaganda to avoid making distinctions between different rebel groups. It makes Assad looks more legitimate.

Edited October 29, 2015 by Sam.

[Farmer77]

Putin has stated clearly that ISIS fighters are simply mercenaries who will fight for whoever pays the most. Labeling a mercenary a terrorist is waste of time since they can simply shave their beards and transform into a "moderate" or a "freedom fighter". No, the true terrorists are the financiers of ISIS like certain Saudis, Qataris, and Israelis (including US-based neocons). And Putin won't be making any offers to align with them, I should think.

Exactly. There is a reason Mccain was so p***ed at Russia. They're cutting into Mccain's profits by blowing up ISIS

[Phaeton80]

I think it's just part of the Russian propaganda to avoid making distinctions between different rebel fractions.

Very true. I also think it abundantly obvious the demonisation of al Assad, the narrative to topple this 'evil regime' in an effort to 'save the people', is Western propaganda. I also think funding disorganised 'FSA' groups who may or may not actively work together with ISIS elements in their mission against al Assad is unwise (or naive), and does not exemplify rational priorisation - or any learning curve gleaned from recent history for that matter.

[Phaeton80]

Interesting discussion.. (yes, Russian media)

[Farmer77]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/09/09/1237500/-The-PetroDollar-Why-Syria#

[EEHC]

Very true. I also think it abundantly obvious the demonisation of al Assad, the narrative to topple this 'evil regime' in an effort to 'save the people', is Western propaganda. I also think funding disorganised 'FSA' groups who may or may not actively work together with ISIS elements in their mission against al Assad is unwise (or naive), and does not exemplify rational priorisation - or any learning curve gleaned from recent history for that matter.

I have no love for dictators, let alone for those who cling to power and maintain the status quo. That's how the civil war got started, we can't ignore that fact. I think the West has a moral obligation to support Secular rebels in favor of democracy AND try to find a solution with the Syrian regime-Russia. It's obvious that Putin is trying to position his client as the ''one and only aternative'' to ISIS so that we can forget it's secular opposition fighting for change. It shouldn't be left unchecked.

Edited October 29, 2015 by Sam.

[Farmer77]

I have no love for dictators, let alone for those who cling to power to maintain the status quo. That's how the civil war got started, we can't ignore that fact. I think the West has a moral obligation in Syria to support Secular rebels in favor of democracy AND try to find a solution with the Syrian regime and Russia.

IS it how it got started? Or did it get started by agent provocateurs as a result of Assad's desire to begin selling oil in something other than US dollars? The timeline is suspect at best.