News Iraqi unrest, Syrian unrest, and ISIS/ISIL/Daesh

[Dotini]

The pretend war.

Snippet:

...Erdogan and Putin give the world a glimpse into how all this could spin out of control.

The threat posed by terrorism is merely symptomatic of larger underlying problems. Crush Isis, whether by bombing or employing boots on the ground, and those problems will still persist. A new Isis, under a different name but probably flying the same banner, will appear in its place, much as Isis itself emerged from the ashes of al-Qaeda in Iraq.

Does the West possesses the wherewithal to sustain another long war?
http://new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/sorry-but-just-bombing-isis-in-syria-wont-help-anyone/

 

[HossamCFD]

For UK-based PFers: A channel 4 documentary about a "12-month undercover investigation that penetrates the secret world of the women in the UK who support Isis and glorify jihadis"

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/isis-the-british-women-supporters-unveiled/on-demand/60376-001

Pretty enlightening and scary.

 

[ralfellis]

Some background historical info on the Syria conflict, which does not seem to be mentioned here.

This is not a recent dispute. Bashar Assad's father had exactly the same uprising in 1982, and put it down in exactly the same forceful manner, with some 40,000 casualties. So we know that the current Syrian civil war has nothing to do with oil pipelines, global warming or the tooth fairy. Please see the Hama Massacre.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Hama_massacreIn fact, this is a 1,300 year old dispute. Bashar Assad's Alawites were the most grievously persecuted minority in all of Syria, alongside the Yazidi. This is because they are half Christian and celebrate Easter and Christmas, and this makes them kuffer unbelievers to the Sunni majority. But the French saw the Alawites as allies and put them in control of the army, and from there they took control of Syria. And the Sunnies want to return the Alawites to the gutters of Syria, or worse.

So the Alawites are simply the Yazidi with guns. Would anyone condemn the Yazidi if they defended themselves against Sunni aggression? So why do Western governments condemn the Alawites of Bashar Assad? If Assad ceded power, all 4 million Alawites would be eliminated, and if the Alawites went then all 4 million Syriac Christians would be eliminated too. Which is why the Syriac Christians have backed Bashar Assad all this time.

The situation is much more complex than the Western media like to claim.

R

 

[Evo]

In fact, this is a 1,300 year old dispute. Bashar Assad's Alawites were the most grievously persecuted minority in all of Syria, alongside the Yazidi. This is because they are half Christian and celebrate Easter and Christmas, and this makes them kuffer unbelievers to the Sunni majority. But the French saw the Alawites as allies and put them in control of the army, and from there they took control of Syria. And the Sunnies want to return the Alawites to the gutters of Syria, or worse.

So the Alawites are simply the Yazidi with guns. Would anyone condemn the Yazidi if they defended themselves against Sunni aggression? So why do Western governments condemn the Alawites of Bashar Assad? If Assad ceded power, all 4 million Alawites would be eliminated, and if the Alawites went then all 4 million Syriac Christians would be eliminated too. Which is why the Syriac Christians have backed Bashar Assad all this time.

Please post the source for this.

Thank you.

 

[nikkkom]

In fact, this is a 1,300 year old dispute. Bashar Assad's Alawites were the most grievously persecuted minority in all of Syria, alongside the Yazidi. This is because they are half Christian and celebrate Easter and Christmas, and this makes them kuffer unbelievers to the Sunni majority. But the French saw the Alawites as allies and put them in control of the army, and from there they took control of Syria. And the Sunnies want to return the Alawites to the gutters of Syria, or worse.

The sad truth is that for the entire region this is SOP: you win and seize power, you oppress all other groups using whatever means available, up to and including use of WMDs (chemical weapons). Shia, Sunni, Alawites, ..., Lebanese Christians are almost indistinguishable in their methods.

 

[HossamCFD]

So the Alawites are simply the Yazidi with guns. Would anyone condemn the Yazidi if they defended themselves against Sunni aggression?

I'm sorry what sunni aggression and what defence? I wouldn't really call deploying tanks to meet anti-governement protesters in Deraa and Homs as a defence of a persecuted minority.

I mean 4 years isn't that long of a period to completely forget how the conflict started. But perhaps we need a quick refresher
https://news.vice.com/article/syria-after-four-years-timeline-of-a-conflict
https://www.washingtonpost.com/apps/g/page/world/timeline-unrest-in-syria/207/

You'll notice that the conflict didn't become fully sectarian until 2013. The original protests had more to do with the government being Baathist (stated in the Syrian constitution as "the leader of the state and society") than it being largely Alawite. You might remember that the last notorious Baathist was in fact Sunni.

The situation is much more complex

Indeed it is. Though I'm afraid that what you presented here is even more of an oversimplification than most accounts by the media.

 

[mheslep]

The sad truth is that for the entire region this is SOP: you win and seize power, you oppress all other groups using whatever means available, up to and including use of WMDs (chemical weapons). Shia, Sunni, Alawites, ..., Lebanese Christians are almost indistinguishable in their methods.

The Israelis, at least, break the regional trend.

 

[Dotini]

The US is beginning to put real pressure on Turkey to close the border.
The US suspects Turkey of supporting ISIS. But Turkey has its reasons for doing so.
"US officials are quoted as saying that there could be “significant blowback” against Turkey by European states if it allows Isis militants to cross from Syria into Turkey and then carry out terrorist outrages in Europe."
All according to this article: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-stretch-of-frontier-with-syria-a6753836.html

 

[HossamCFD]

Westminster is voting tonight on the government motion to extend air strikes to ISIS targets in Syria.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34980504

Most Tories and Lib Dems are expected to support the motion. Labour MPs are split, with Corbyn arguing against the motion, though he offered a free vote on the issue. SNP is mostly against.

 

[mheslep]

The US is beginning to put real pressure on Turkey to close the border.
The US suspects Turkey of supporting ISIS. But Turkey has its reasons for doing so.
"US officials are quoted as saying that there could be “significant blowback” against Turkey by European states if it allows Isis militants to cross from Syria into Turkey and then carry out terrorist outrages in Europe."
All according to this article...

The wording using in the article was "long-term tolerance of, and possible complicity with". That is, I would use the word "support" to describe what, say, Iran does with Hezbollah. I don't like what Turkey is known to be tolerating in, or complicit with ISIS, but I don't think the relationship is the same as Iran-Hezbollah.

...The US move follows increasing international criticism of Turkey for what is seen as its long-term tolerance of, and possible complicity with, Isis and other extreme jihadi groups such as al-Qaeda’s branch in Syria, Jabhat al-Nusra Front, and Ahrar al-Sham. Not only have thousands of foreign fighters passed through Turkey on their way to join Isis, but crude oil from oilfields seized by Isis in north-east Syria has been transported to Turkey for sale, providing much of revenue of the self-declared Islamic State.

Last week a Turkish court jailed two prominent journalists for publishing pictures of a Turkish truck delivering ammunition to opposition fighters in Syria. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan claimed that the weapons were destined for Turkmen paramilitaries allied to Turkey fighting in Syria, but this was denied by Turkish political leaders close to the Turkmen...

 

[HossamCFD]

Westminster is voting tonight on the government motion to extend air strikes to ISIS targets in Syria.

British government wins support of the house for air strikes against ISIS in Syria by 397 to 223.

 

[S.G. Janssens]

British government wins support of the house for air strikes against ISIS in Syria by 397 to 223.

Now it's time for the Dutch to also step forward with their (very modest) contribution.

 

[mheslep]

Now it's time for the Dutch to also step forward with their (very modest) contribution.

When lives are placed in harms way, the contribution would not be modest but noble in my view. These would be Dutch pilots, Dutch lives at risk. And Dutch defense spending is one of the highest in Europe per GDP.

 

[S.G. Janssens]

When lives are placed in harms way, the contribution would not be modest but noble in my view. These would be Dutch pilots, Dutch lives at risk. And Dutch defense spending is one of the highest in Europe per GDP.

Thank you, I appreciate your response. At the moment there is a small Dutch contribution in Iraq airspace, but the enemy is not deterred by borders. Usually I'm not such a "hawk", but in this case I think there is no alternative to a strong military answer. IS cannot be reasoned with, we have seen enough horrific evidence of that.

 

[mheslep]

Usually I'm not such a "hawk",

I see. Hawk used to be the term for the shoot first, shoot some more, and after everyone's dead negotiate school. Now the entire discussion is falsely mis-framed, I think, when "hawk" is the default label for *any* proposal for military action, regardless of scope or justification.

 

[S.G. Janssens]

I see. Hawk used to be the term for the shoot first, shoot some more, and after everyone's dead negotiate school. Now the entire discussion is falsely mis-framed, I think, when "hawk" is the default label for *any* proposal for military action, regardless of scope or justification.

I agree. When using the word "hawk" I was more thinking about the classical hawk-dove game, and it seems that while learning about the doings of IS I am required to adopt my "mixed strategy" to include more of "hawk" and less of "dove". Unfortunately, there seems to be no other way.

 

[Astronuc]

Russia appears to have 'gone ballistic' in Syria — and it may be helping ISIS
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russia-appears-gone-ballistic-syria-203310805.html

A stepped-up Russian bombing campaign in the Bayirbucak region of northwest Syria, near the strategically important city of Azaz, has primarily targeted the Turkey-backed Turkmen rebels and civilians — and the Turkish aid convoys that supply them.

It looks like Russia is mostly, if not exclusively, hitting rebel forces and Turkish interests. Maybe Daesh comes later.

 

[mheslep]

... And Dutch defense spending is one of the highest in Europe per GDP.

I can't recall now where I got that idea, but it appears to not be the case. Per the graphic, the Netherlands spends 1.2% on defense, about middle of the EU countries, well below the NATO recommendation. So yes, modest in regard to spending.

 

[nsaspook]

Russian sub launched cruise missiles.
http://tass.ru/en/defense/842471

 

[Astronuc]

many of the ex-Baathists working with Islamic State are driven by self preservation and a shared hatred of the Shi'ite-led government in Baghdad. Others are true believers who became radicalized in the early years after Saddam's ouster, converted on the battlefield or in U.S. military and Iraqi prisons.

One former intelligence commander who served in Iraq's national intelligence service from 2003 to 2009 said some ex-Baathists pushed out of state agencies by Iraq's government were only too happy to find new masters. "ISIS pays them," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/special-report-saddams-men-help-islamic-state-rule-100208506.html

 

[mheslep]

From the same article:

"...Most former Baathist officers have little in common with Islamic State..."

http://news.yahoo.com/special-report-saddams-men-help-islamic-state-rule-100208506.html

 

[mheslep]

After the Labor's election of Jeremy "[no] external intervention" Corbyn I had written off any further contribution of the UK to the fight against ISIS in Syria, as in Corbyn's mind ISIS and America are roughly the same thing:

"Yes they [ISIS] are brutal, yes some of what they have done is quite appalling, likewise what the Americans did in Fallujah and other places is appalling."

But then comes shadow foreign minister Hilary Benn's speech on Dec 2 in support of UK air attack in Syria, followed by an unheard of round of applause. Been really gets rolling after 6:30:

 

[HossamCFD]

After the Labor's election of Jeremy "[no] external intervention" Corbyn I had written off any further contribution of the UK to the fight against ISIS

Well, I think he deserves at least some credit for offering a free Labour vote on the motion. He could've whipped the vote, as many voices in the Labour party were asking him to. With the SNP mostly against the motion, a whipped Labour rejection of the motion could've changed the outcome.

Hilary Benn's speech was of course the highlight of the marathon debate. It was reported that about 16 Labour MPs voted for the motion primarily because of it.

 

[mheslep]

Well, I think he deserves at least some credit for offering a free Labour vote on the motion.

Possibly, and possibly he had no (politically viable) choice. That is, other Labour leaders may have threatened some kind of excommunication if he failed to get out of the way.

 

[Astronuc]

But then comes shadow foreign minister Hilary Benn's speech on Dec 2 in support of UK air attack in Syria, followed by an unheard of round of applause.

Benn provides a cogent and compelling speech.

 

[Astronuc]

I've been reading about some of the recent history in the region. The time to things right was long ago, and it seems external intervenors mostly got it wrong.

As a result - we watched as Daesh evolved.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanzim_Qaidat_al-Jihad_fi_Bilad_al-Rafidayn

 

[mheslep]

I've been reading about some of the recent history in the region. The time to things right was long ago, and it seems external intervenors mostly got it wrong.

As a result - we watched as Daesh evolved.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanzim_Qaidat_al-Jihad_fi_Bilad_al-Rafidayn

Al Qaeda did not form in Mesopotamia. So what from that Wiki article do you see as a mistake, and when, with respect to Daesh? The fall of Constantinople in 1453 to the Ottomans?

 

[Astronuc]

Al Qaeda did not form in Mesopotamia. So what from that Wiki article do you see as a mistake, and when, with respect to Daesh? The fall of Constantinople in 1453 to the Ottomans?

Al Qaeda in Iraq (formed from it's predecessor Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, which started in Jordan), which is not Al Qaeda, most certainly did form in Iraq under Jordanian radical Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/uploads/Documents/pubs/ResearchNote_20_Zelin.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jama'at_al-Tawhid_wal-Jihad
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Musab_al-Zarqawi

So what from that Wiki article do you see as a mistake,

Not in the Wiki article, but the US foreign policy, and particularly that of the GWBush administration.

 

[mheslep]

Al Qaeda in Iraq (formed from it's predecessor Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, which started in Jordan), which is not Al Qaeda, most certainly did form in Iraq under Jordanian radical Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Al-Qaeda in Iraq formed in Iraq?

Yes, AQI was formed as you say by an Al-Qaeda member, al-Zarqawi, who came from Afghanistan and was funded by bin Laden. Similarly there is AQ in Yemen, AQ in the Arabian Peninsula, etc. In the particular case of AQI, Al-Zarqawi was killed by US forces in 2006, and AQI largely disintegrated during the so called Sunni Awakening alongside the US surge.

And?

 

[Dotini]

Here is some really, really good news, and it makes me feel ever so much better:

MOSCOW (AP) — U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Tuesday accepted Russia's long-standing demand that President Bashar Assad's future be determined by his own people, as Washington and Moscow edged toward putting aside years of disagreement over how to end Syria's civil war.

"The United States and our partners are not seeking so-called regime change," Kerry told reporters in the Russian capital after meeting President Vladimir Putin.

----------------------------------------------------------------

President Barack Obama first called on Assad to leave power in the summer of 2011, with "Assad must go" being a consistent rallying cry. Later, American officials allowed that he wouldn't have to resign on "Day One" of a transition. Now, no one can say when Assad might step down.http://news.yahoo.com/video/kerry-calls-common-ground-russia-133755540.html

Russia, by contrast, has remained consistent in its view that no foreign government could demand Assad's departure and that Syrians would have to negotiate matters of leadership among themselves.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
On Ukraine:
http://news.yahoo.com/photos/us-secretary-state-john-kerry-left-speaks-russias-photo-162553471.html
US Secretary of State John Kerry, left, speaks with Russia's President Vladimir Putin during a m...

"We don't seek to isolate Russia as a matter of policy, no," Kerry said. The sooner Russia implements a February cease-fire that calls for withdrawal of Russian forces and materiel and a release of all prisoners, he said, the sooner that "sanctions can be rolled back."

The world is better off when Russia and the U.S. work together, he added, calling Obama and Putin's current cooperation a "sign of maturity."

"There is no policy of the United States, per se, to isolate Russia," Kerry stressed.
http://news.yahoo.com/kerry-moscow-talks-syria-ukraine-081842398.html

 

[jim hardy]

Here is some really, really good news, and it makes me feel ever so much better:

I just heard that too -

Great ! About time. Assad came across very reasonable on that Charlie Rose interview.


Will anybody admit US state department really bungled it ?

 

[russ_watters]

Here is some really, really good news, and it makes me feel ever so much better:

Can't tell if serious: which part of that was good news and why?

 

[S.G. Janssens]

Here is some really, really good news, and it makes me feel ever so much better:

Honestly, any cooperation with Putin makes me want to vomit. The fact that ISIS is a clique of rapists and murderers does not imply that Putin has to be pardoned for his many national and international crimes.

The West can and should show the rest of the world that it can deal with the scum that is ISIS without having to seek the companionship of other scum.

 

[mheslep]

I just heard that too -

Great ! About time. Assad came across very reasonable on that Charlie Rose interview.

How many chemical weapons attacks is President for life Assad allowed before he becomes unreasonable?

 

[mheslep]

"The world is better off when Russia and the U.S. work together"...

I agree with the disgrace that is John Kerry on this one point, but not in the way he means.

The fact the US and Russia are much restricted in cooperation due to Russian incursions demonstrates the consequences of a foreign policy that allowed Russia to become unworkable. Working with Russia would indeed by highly advantageous if executed by a US foreign policy that was not so utterly juvenile and naive with respect to Russia by way of ridiculous reset buttons. If Russia was seen realistically for the expansive and totalitarian power that it is, then it could be have been contained by real red lines by a US that meant what it said, yielding a Russia that never entered Ukraine shooting down airliners and never flew into Turkey.

 

[jim hardy]

How many chemical weapons attacks is President for life Assad allowed before he becomes unreasonable?

How many is he known to have made?
Sources i read were uncertain just which side set off those Aug 21 2013 bombs.

 

[russ_watters]

How many is he known to have made?
Sources i read were uncertain just which side set off those Aug 21 2013 bombs.

I'm not sure what your question has to do with his. Setting a limit doesn't require a count. However, if you're suggesting the number could be zero, the UN and US disagree - and it's their line. Point being: Obama explicitly acknowledged his "red line" was crossed. In any case, the number of attacks by Assad's forces is believed to be about two dozen:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_chemical_weapons_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War

Also, I don't think the prohibition on use of chemical weapons only applies/should apply to Assad.

 

[HossamCFD]

This seems very relevant to the current discussion. Human Rights Watch published a report on Wednesday authenticating photos that document mass scale torture under Assad's government
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-35110877

Human Rights Watch says it is confident photos smuggled out of Syria by a defector in 2013 showing 6,786 people who died after detention are authentic.

The group carried out a nine-month investigation into the 53,000 images handed to the opposition by a military police photographer, codenamed Caesar.

Researchers interviewed former prisoners, defectors, forensic experts and families of the disappeared.

The photos are mostly from the pre-ISIS period at the start of the civil war. Indeed it seems many of these people were tortured and killed for merely opposing Assad.

Among the 27 victims identified by HRW ... were Rehab al-Allawi, a boy who was 14 at the time of his arrest for having an anti-Assad song on his phone, and student Rehab al-Allawi, who was 25 when she was detained while working with an activist group.

My opinion of Assad has been the same since Deraa and Homs in 2011: he's a monster and a mass murderer.

 

[Astronuc]

Syria activists in hiding after Islamic State group killing
http://news.yahoo.com/syria-activists-hiding-islamic-state-112840555.html

Ibrahim Abdelqader and his friend Fares Hamadi were killed because Abdelqader belonged to a media collective, which secretly documents life at the heart of the Daesh's self-proclaimed caliphate. Family and friends have been forced into deep hiding. Hamadi was apparently at the wrong place and the wrong time.

 

[jim hardy]

Not living there i can't know what's actually going on.

If Assad is as he claims playing tough with ruffians sent from outside his country by folks trying to overthrow his government, i do not fault him.

Shame on both sides for the chemical attacks. That's a throwback to behavior of the world wars. Watch your documentaries, US stockpiled chemical weapons in Australia for the expected invasion of Japan. We didn't use them thank goodness.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction][/PLAIN]
Australia conducted extensive research into chemical weapons during World War II. Although Australia has never produced chemical weapons, it did stockpile chemical weapons sourced from the USA and Britain.[7] Chemical weapons known to have been stockpiled included mustard gas, phosgene, lewisite, adamsite and CN gas.

Some of the stockpiled weapons in the form of mortar and artillery shells, aerial bombs and bulk agents were sent to New Guinea for potential use against Japanese tunnel complexes.[7] No actual use of the weapons was recorded although there were many trials using 'live' chemical weapons (such as shown in the picture to the right).

After World War II, the chemical weapons were disposed of by burning, venting (for phosgene) or by dumping at sea. Some 21,030 tons of chemical weapons were dumped in the seas off Australia near Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne. This has been covered in a Defence report by Geoff Plunkett.[1] A complete history of Australia's involvement with chemical weapons - titled Chemical Warfare in Australia - has been published in book form by the Army History Unit (Defence Department) in 2013 (2nd Edn) [2] [3] Again it is authored by Geoff Plunkett [4].

A stockpile of 1,000 pound phosgene bombs was discovered at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Embi_Airfield&action=edit&redlink=1 in 1970 and disposed of by Australian Army personnel, and, up to 1990, drums of mustard gas were still being discovered in the bush where they had been tested.[7] Another stockpile of chemical weapons was discovered at Maxwelton, Queensland in 1989.[4] Australia signed the Chemical Weapons Convention in January 1993 and ratified it with the Chemical Weapons (Prohibition) Act in 1994.[7]

 

[HossamCFD]

Not living there i can't know what's actually going on.

Interesting. Would you say that no one can know whether the Halabja massacre happened or not unless they were living in Iraq at the time?
We have a good handle on the atrocities committed by the Assad regime provided by independent international observers. The evidence is overwhelming and the scale of the atrocities is unimaginable.

If Assad is as he claims playing tough with ruffians sent from outside his country by folks trying to overthrow his government, i do not fault him.

My bold.

I think "playing tough" needs some quantification and perhaps you can tell me if you still don't fault him.

Here's a list of barrel bomb attacks in urban civilian areas by the Assad regime since the start of the civil war. The bombs mostly kill his own civilians in their homes, not "ruffians sent from outside his country".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Syrian_Civil_War_barrel_bomb_attacks

They are typically made from a barrel that has been filled with High Explosives, with possibly shrapnel and/or oil, and then dropped from a helicopter.[1] Due to the large amount of explosives that can be packed into a barrel the resulting detonation can be devastating.[2][3] The Syrian military often dropped the imprecise bombs in urban areas leading to civilian death tolls. The BBC reported that between January 2014 and May 2015, only 1% of those killed by barrel bombs were rebel fighters.[4] There have been thousands of instances of the use of barrel bombs reported during the Syrian Civil War:

 

[jim hardy]

Would you say that no one can know whether the Halabja massacre happened or not unless they were living in Iraq at the time?

If that's the one i read about in Soldier of Fortune in 1988, reported by people with first hand knowledge namely soldiers on the ground, i definitely believe it happened. Saddam gassed them. It was about a year before i saw that reported in 'respectable' US news outlets.

From the wiki article you linked

International response at the time was muted. The United States intelligence and government suggested that that Kurdish civilians were not a deliberate target, and even that Iran was indeed responsible.[13][15]

What's the alternative to Assad?

I remain circumspect of non-first-hand reporting.. .

 

[russ_watters]

Jim, I find your position confusing. Saying we can't have an opinion unless we're there would apply to everyone including you and you clearly have an opinion. And that opinion appears to take Assad's side at face value and without analysis or qualification, which is a factual basis that strains credulity. It seems like you're using the "we can't know" condition as a way to dismiss any information except that provided by Assad. To me that's a bizarre choice.

Like Hossam, I also would very much like to know if you place any limits at all on "playing tough"...such as, perhaps, the Geneva Conventions' protections or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? It's rare that I see people being willing to make judgements based on 100 year old standards of morality/conduct (or face-value acceptance of the statements of a generally accepted criminal dictator). Heck, if that's acceptable, we could just nuke the place and be done with it!

Personally, I prefer making my judgements using all of the information available (that I can reasonably read/access, and accounting for source credibility) and basing that judgement on modern standards of morality and conduct. I can't understand judgements based on anything less.

 

[Dotini]

"If you’re in favor of World War III, you have your candidate."

So said Rand Paul, looking directly at Gov. Chris Christie, who had just responded to a question from CNN’s Wolf Blitzer as to whether he would shoot down a Russian plane that violated his no-fly zone in Syria.
http://original.antiwar.com/buchanan/2015/12/17/america-first-or-world-war-iii/

 

[russ_watters]

"If you’re in favor of World War III, you have your candidate."

So said Rand Paul, looking directly at Gov. Chris Christie, who had just responded to a question from CNN’s Wolf Blitzer as to whether he would shoot down a Russian plane that violated his no-fly zone in Syria.
http://original.antiwar.com/buchanan/2015/12/17/america-first-or-world-war-iii/

+1 for Christie. Glad to see his stock finally rising.

 

[S.G. Janssens]

"If you’re in favor of World War III, you have your candidate."

The USA were involved in two world wars before, and as a European I'm grateful for that, although I'm certainly not blind to the faults of US foreign policy in the past and present.

 

[jim hardy]

Jim, I find your position confusing. Saying we can't have an opinion unless we're there would apply to everyone including you and you clearly have an opinion.

Your well reasoned and eloquent post is noted, Russ.

Indeed i have an opinion
and one's opinions are formed from the summation information presented to him which he accepts as factual.

It seems like you're using the "we can't know" condition as a way to dismiss any information except that provided by Assad. To me that's a bizarre choice.

I think i qualified my statement with "If as he claims" .

Given that
US armed so called 'moderate rebels' to help overthrow Assad
and we at least played a role in the other overthrows over there
which seems a reversion to old foreign policy of keeping mideast unbalanced
and
Zbignew Brzezinski 's stated objective of spreading Democracy(translate US friendly governments) across the whole region( See his books Out of Control and Grand Chessboard )
i have to think US policy is still driven by Halford Mackinder's 1919 Heartland Theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geographical_Pivot_of_History
(which given his age Brzezinski doubtless studied in his formative years)
i question the judgement of whoever is directing US foreign policy.

It seems like you're using the "we can't know" condition as a way to dismiss any information except that provided by Assad.

i don't dismiss much of anything without chewing on it at length.
I do tune into Aljazeera, RT, Democracy Now, and find myself asking "What's the truth?"
I subscribe to and try to read Foreign Affairs, the CFR's magazine but it puts me to sleep.

http://www.cfr.org/syria/syria-need-diplomacy-de-escalation/p37326][/PLAIN] Of all the factors currently tearing the Middle East apart, none is more consequential than the war in Syria. The war has left some 250,000 Syrians dead, seven million internally displaced, and three million forced to flee to neighboring states and Europe. The conflict is exacerbating an already large regional sectarian divide, as the Bashar al-Assad regime's violence against a primarily Sunni rebellion fuels the growing conflict between the region's Sunni-majority states and Shia-majority Iran. The violence also leads desperate, resentful Sunnis from across the world to support whatever groups are most willing to fight that regime, including the self-proclaimed Islamic State. The November 13 Paris attacks tragically demonstrated that the repercussions of the conflict are spreading well beyond the Middle East. bold mine-jh

Just what he said - getting rough on rabble rousers

Anyhow - i don't think we need or want a return to the cold war or a major confrontation with Russia over Syria.

and I'm not convinced Assad is the worst thing for Syria, despite the calumny in US newscasts.

 

[mheslep]

calumny in US newscasts.

Calumny, as in, to falsely accuse with intent to harm? Why is it that you accuse US newscasts of calumny, and that you look instead to Aljazeera and the state controlled RT?

 

[russ_watters]

Your well reasoned and eloquent post is noted, Russ.

Thanks.

Indeed i have an opinion
and one's opinions are formed from the summation information presented to him which he accepts as factual...

Just what he said - getting rough on rabble rousers

Anyhow - i don't think we need or want a return to the cold war or a major confrontation with Russia over Syria.
[snip] despite the calumny in US newscasts.

Jim, I don't see how that answers any of the questions asked, except poking around the periphery a bit:

i don't dismiss much of anything without chewing on it at length.
I do tune into Aljazeera, RT, Democracy Now, and find myself asking "What's the truth?"
I subscribe to and try to read Foreign Affairs, the CFR's magazine but it puts me to sleep.

Do you not have any mainstream Western news sources on your list of your usual sources? I'd also be curious to hear what you think of RT and how it became one of your main news sources. While I do sometimes seek out such sources to see what they have to say, I don't generally consider what I get from them to be "news" but rather the opinion of the entity controlling them.

...and I'm not convinced Assad is the worst thing for Syria...

And you may be right about that, and in particular that the current quagmire hasn't really been improved by Western intervention. But there is a very wide gulf between "not the worst thing" and "I don't fault him".

 

[jim hardy]

Do you not have any mainstream Western news sources on your list of your usual sources?

I was addressing your point that one should have a variety of sources.
RT and Aljazeera push their agendas as hard as Thom Hartmann and Sean Hannity push theirs. Of course they propagandize and one watches them with that awareness .
For TV news i watch more ABC and PBS than anything else , they're the only two local stations we have. IMHO Frontline's reporting consistently stands out as 'fair and balanced'.

While I do sometimes seek out such sources to see what they have to say, I don't generally consider what I get from them to be "news" but rather the opinion of the entity controlling them.

And you don't notice similar spin by US networks ?

It's often revealing to watch both sides' coverage of the same event
because every argument has three sides
Party A's side
Party B's side
and the truth of the matter.