Jump to content
Running Gator

Russia halts incident prevention in Syria

Recommended Posts

From the reports I have read so far, Syria took it upon themselves to bomb the US backed forces after the US made it clear not to do so, basically an agreement made that the US will not become involved in the Syrian governments conflict with those who have rebelled against them when the battle is between the two parties, but only to focus on stopping ISIS.  That was on shaky ground as we see in the result of Syria deciding to ignore the US agreement and bomb those US backed forces who were battling ISIS.  Now Russia will be lighting up our planes?  Not a wise decision on their part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, OneLight said:

From the reports I have read so far, Syria took it upon themselves to bomb the US backed forces after the US made it clear not to do so, basically an agreement made that the US will not become involved in the Syrian governments conflict with those who have rebelled against them when the battle is between the two parties, but only to focus on stopping ISIS.  That was on shaky ground as we see in the result of Syria deciding to ignore the US agreement and bomb those US backed forces who were battling ISIS.  Now Russia will be lighting up our planes?  Not a wise decision on their part.

This is not a battle the US can win in my opinion.  Russia has far more at stake in Syria than the US does and will accordingly be willing to commit more forces than the US.

I have been saying this for a long time, regardless of who is sitting in the White House, there is no winning side, no positive outcome for the US in Syria. 

We need to just get out of it before it is too late.   Neither Russia nor Assad has any love for ISIS, let them handle ISIS in that country. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Running Gator said:

This is not a battle the US can win in my opinion.  Russia has far more at stake in Syria than the US does and will accordingly be willing to commit more forces than the US.

I have been saying this for a long time, regardless of who is sitting in the White House, there is no winning side, no positive outcome for the US in Syria. 

We need to just get out of it before it is too late.   Neither Russia nor Assad has any love for ISIS, let them handle ISIS in that country. 

You are right....    

I don't see how anyone thought this could have a good ending for the US.  The US doesn't have the stomach to do what it will take to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Running Gator said:

This is not a battle the US can win in my opinion.  Russia has far more at stake in Syria than the US does and will accordingly be willing to commit more forces than the US.

I have been saying this for a long time, regardless of who is sitting in the White House, there is no winning side, no positive outcome for the US in Syria. 

We need to just get out of it before it is too late.   Neither Russia nor Assad has any love for ISIS, let them handle ISIS in that country. 

Not arguing for or against our involvement, just making observations and predictions.  The point I was making is that we were in some sort of agreement to fight against ISIS together, which now has gone bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Running Gator said:

This is not a battle the US can win in my opinion.  Russia has far more at stake in Syria than the US does and will accordingly be willing to commit more forces than the US.

I have been saying this for a long time, regardless of who is sitting in the White House, there is no winning side, no positive outcome for the US in Syria. 

We need to just get out of it before it is too late.   Neither Russia nor Assad has any love for ISIS, let them handle ISIS in that country. 

I agree. The rhetoric coming out of russia is concerning. This is not a good-guy, bad-guy situation. There are basically three sides in this, ISIS, the US backed rebel/militia forces, and the Russian backed syrian government. Of the three local players, one of them is a brutal totalitarian regime, one is what is probably now the largest and most powerful terrorist organization on the planet, and the final, which we are backing, also a lot of them terrorists, some of them terrorists that we would've probably been bombing ourselves five to ten years ago. The best thing we could've done for the syrian people is carve out a massive refugee area in a corner of the country or in a neighboring one and surround it with nato forces with the threat that any incursions or attacks there by any of the sides would be met with vicious retaliation. That, in my view, would've been a humanitarian move. Backing a side that is going to probably be just as brutal and oppressive (or worse) than the guy they are trying to replace is par for the course on US policy in this part of the world. What we are doing there is not worth even a tiny, remote possibility that we could come to blows with a nuclear power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Steve_S said:

I agree. The rhetoric coming out of russia is concerning. This is not a good-guy, bad-guy situation. There are basically three sides in this, ISIS, the US backed rebel/militia forces, and the Russian backed syrian government. Of the three local players, one of them is a brutal totalitarian regime, one is what is probably now the largest and most powerful terrorist organization on the planet, and the final, which we are backing, also a lot of them terrorists, some of them terrorists that we would've probably been bombing ourselves five to ten years ago. The best thing we could've done for the syrian people is carve out a massive refugee area in a corner of the country or in a neighboring one and surround it with nato forces with the threat that any incursions or attacks there by any of the sides would be met with vicious retaliation. That, in my view, would've been a humanitarian move. Backing a side that is going to probably be just as brutal and oppressive (or worse) than the guy they are trying to replace is par for the course on US policy in this part of the world. What we are doing there is not worth even a tiny, remote possibility that we could come to blows with a nuclear power.

Could not agree more.

Blessings,

-Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia has a lot more at stake in Syria than we do.  If you go back before the election one needs to remember that Putin told us that he would not stand by and see Assad removed from his office.

Then before the election he prepared his people and military for a nuclear war.

We do not need to be doing things that would put Assad out of his position.  Putin is willing to do whatever to see that doesn't happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, other one said:

Russia has a lot more at stake in Syria than we do.  If you go back before the election one needs to remember that Putin told us that he would not stand by and see Assad removed from his office.

Then before the election he prepared his people and military for a nuclear war.

We do not need to be doing things that would put Assad out of his position.  Putin is willing to do whatever to see that doesn't happen.

I wish our government would wipe the Middle East, other than Israel, from their combat boots and never look back.  Please tell me what average American gives a flying fig about Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan...etc?  We just don't and the U.S. has never received ONE positive result from all of the lives and money we have spent there.  We no longer need their oil so why are we still there?  I say let the Russians spend their money there and get bogged down for decades.  Time for us to pull out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are things on the spiritual level concerning occult things that may have something to do with why we've been there....  But it would be much too frustrating  to discuss it on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×