Russian Military Forces Arrive In Syria

[el_guero]

Mark,

Since Obama turned the State Dept loose to start the Arab Spring, FEW things have been done right.

I almost hated Assad. But, he was MUCH better than his father, and much better than most Muslim leaders world-wide. But, war makes strange bedfellows. And now, the US feels some groups of 'freedom-fighters' are not terrorists and others are.

I believe a great business deal would keep Assad in power, limit the waring factions, and get rid of ISIS.

[Texan77]

US-led coalition’s downing of Syrian plane ‘act of aggression’ & ‘support for terrorists’ – Moscow

https://www.rt.com/news/393009-syria-plane-downing-aggression/

I doubt that assessment, but Obama did start this whole Arab Spring un-Civil War mess.

Ah right, so an american plane is shooting down a government-plane from the official government of Syria. How is that NOT an 'act of agression' even worse than Russia is blamed for regularly (flybies). Since the plane was on a mission to bomb IS-targets, that is in fact also helping the terrorists, so 'support for terrorists' is hardly a stretch, but very common language.

Mark.

Mark Syria wanted to get that plane shot down to create an international incident so they had  it was bombing Coalition troops. The got away with calling the gas a false flag so now they are trying to say it was shot down while trying to bomb IS  positions. It is just a ploy to try to force the US out of Syria. Of course you are a pro Russian troll so you only see in an anti US way. Hell you still think the Ukraine government is a Junta and electron in Crimea was real and fair. 

[Tom Cat]

US-led coalition’s downing of Syrian plane ‘act of aggression’ & ‘support for terrorists’ – Moscow

https://www.rt.com/news/393009-syria-plane-downing-aggression/

I doubt that assessment, but Obama did start this whole Arab Spring un-Civil War mess.

Ah right, so an american plane is shooting down a government-plane from the official government of Syria. How is that NOT an 'act of agression' even worse than Russia is blamed for regularly (flybies). Since the plane was on a mission to bomb IS-targets, that is in fact also helping the terrorists, so 'support for terrorists' is hardly a stretch, but very common language.

Mark.

Mark Syria wanted to get that plane shot down to create an international incident so they had  it was bombing Coalition troops. The got away with calling the gas a false flag so now they are trying to say it was shot down while trying to bomb IS  positions. It is just a ploy to try to force the US out of Syria. Of course you are a pro Russian troll so you only see in an anti US way. Hell you still think the Ukraine government is a Junta and electron in Crimea was real and fair. 

Far as I'm concerned, there is no valid argument. A Syrian jet shot down over Syrian airspace, by a uninvited government force. How can you possibly argue that the United states has a right to shoot down anything over Syrian airspace?

[rosco]

US-led coalition’s downing of Syrian plane ‘act of aggression’ & ‘support for terrorists’ – Moscow

https://www.rt.com/news/393009-syria-plane-downing-aggression/

I doubt that assessment, but Obama did start this whole Arab Spring un-Civil War mess.

Ah right, so an american plane is shooting down a government-plane from the official government of Syria. How is that NOT an 'act of agression' even worse than Russia is blamed for regularly (flybies). Since the plane was on a mission to bomb IS-targets, that is in fact also helping the terrorists, so 'support for terrorists' is hardly a stretch, but very common language.

Mark.

Mark Syria wanted to get that plane shot down to create an international incident so they had  it was bombing Coalition troops. The got away with calling the gas a false flag so now they are trying to say it was shot down while trying to bomb IS  positions. It is just a ploy to try to force the US out of Syria. Of course you are a pro Russian troll so you only see in an anti US way. Hell you still think the Ukraine government is a Junta and electron in Crimea was real and fair. 

Far as I'm concerned, there is no valid argument. A Syrian jet shot down over Syrian airspace, by a uninvited government force. How can you possibly argue that the United states has a right to shoot down anything over Syrian airspace?

Once again, Tomcat speaks with the voice of reason whilst Texan cracks jokes.

[andrewfi]

Texan77 doesn't get 'stuff'. Par for the course.

What Texan77 misses here is that 'Coalition Forces' in Syria, ANY Coalition Forces that are not Syrian, Russian, Iranian or Lebanese, are a legitimate target for attack by the Syrian armed forces of the legitimate government in Syria. Of course, as it happens the flight was against those fighting the legitimate government of Syria and thus, whoever they are, whatever they call themselves today, they were a legitimate target. The Syrian government and military disagree with the invaders of Syria about the name of the group that the flight was attacking.

[Tom Cat]

US Provides Air Support to Syrian Army — Just to Spite Russia

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/us-provides-air-support-syrian-army-just-spite-russia/ri20190

[AvHdB]

I suspect many across the spectrum do not fully understand both the players and cheerleaders.

I suspect most disagreements in the Middle East are not so much between countries but between the Sunnis and Shiite. The debacle in Syria is another version of a century old dispute just in a new jacket.

[el_guero]

I suspect many across the spectrum do not fully understand both the players and cheerleaders.

I suspect most disagreements in the Middle East are not so much between countries but between the Sunnis and Shiite. The debacle in Syria is another version of a century old dispute just in a new jacket.

A thousand year dispute ... Between the descendants of Genghis, and all others.

That is how Shias got there. Left behind troops as the invaders withdrew. Needless to say, modern Arabs do not appreciate the invaders, even though they did the same to the ME, Africa, Europe, Southern Asia, etc.,.

[Contrarian]

hey Shakespeare, do you read the Washington Post? I'll bet you do!

https://twitter.com/sahouraxo/status/887761908375453696

[andrewfi]

I suspect many across the spectrum do not fully understand both the players and cheerleaders.

I suspect most disagreements in the Middle East are not so much between countries but between the Sunnis and Shiite. The debacle in Syria is another version of a century old dispute just in a new jacket.

No, that's not true. In Syria, for example, the Shiia and Sunni communities are not in warfare. Of course that's not the case for the largely mercenary terrorist groups often referred to as 'the opposition' buy their paymasters. The Syrian army is manned by members of all creeds and society as a whole is still integrated.

What has tended to happen is that outsiders, and some rulers, have used sectarian differences as an easy tool to exploit differences and force schisms across the middle east - Saudi Arabia being an example of the latter and Iraq an example of the former. The trick to cause disruption is to change a country from being a secular state to a sectarian one.

You will maybe have seen in the Russian context (and elsewhere) reference to the term Takfiri. A Muslim who accuses another Muslim of being apostate. For many Muslims the conflict is not between Sunni and Shia but between ALL Muslims and Takfiri. Here's a useful article about the topic that will help understand how the Sunni/Shia thing is erroneous: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takfiri I mention the Russian case because of Chechnya. Foreign muslims infiltrated Chechen society and began the process of division through denunciation. The group of people who did this became known as Takfiri. The result was the Chechen wars and ongoing low level terrorism activity throughout the RF. In the RF muslims do quite well but all sects abhor Takfirism.

[Contrarian]

NeoCons not happy! Too bad. It's time to move on.

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/396944-military-us-training-syria/

[?ManyQuestions?]

Can anyone tell me who these "Syrian Rebels" are that the US is supporting?  Are they going to be worse than Assad? I think so. Only autocrats in the Middle East seem to keep the cork over the Islamist militants like ISIS. I, for one, am glad that Russia has a base in Syria. Look at what happened in Libya with the toppling of Gaddafi. Much worse Islamist Militants moved in to Libya and took their place.

[Contrarian]

I suspect many across the spectrum do not fully understand both the players and cheerleaders.

I suspect most disagreements in the Middle East are not so much between countries but between the Sunnis and Shiite. The debacle in Syria is another version of a century old dispute just in a new jacket.

No, that's not true. In Syria, for example, the Shiia and Sunni communities are not in warfare. Of course that's not the case for the largely mercenary terrorist groups often referred to as 'the opposition' buy their paymasters. The Syrian army is manned by members of all creeds and society as a whole is still integrated.

What has tended to happen is that outsiders, and some rulers, have used sectarian differences as an easy tool to exploit differences and force schisms across the middle east - Saudi Arabia being an example of the latter and Iraq an example of the former. The trick to cause disruption is to change a country from being a secular state to a sectarian one.

You will maybe have seen in the Russian context (and elsewhere) reference to the term Takfiri. A Muslim who accuses another Muslim of being apostate. For many Muslims the conflict is not between Sunni and Shia but between ALL Muslims and Takfiri. Here's a useful article about the topic that will help understand how the Sunni/Shia thing is erroneous: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takfiri I mention the Russian case because of Chechnya. Foreign muslims infiltrated Chechen society and began the process of division through denunciation. The group of people who did this became known as Takfiri. The result was the Chechen wars and ongoing low level terrorism activity throughout the RF. In the RF muslims do quite well but all sects abhor Takfirism.

You left out some others.

https://twitter.com/ExMuslimTV/status/887796766577446912

[Tom Cat]

Putin signs deal allowing Russian Air Force to stay in Syria for almost half a century

https://www.rt.com/news/397758-russian-air-force-syria/

[Tom Cat]

Government forces continue to take back their country, with the help of Russia.
Syrian soldiers embrace after breaking 3-year ISIS siege of Deir ez-Zor (EXCLUSIVE VIDEO)

https://www.rt.com/news/402105-syrian-soldiers-embrace-after-breaking-isis-siege/

[Manny]

Not on the BBC folks. It doesn't fit the narrative.

Government forces continue to take back their country, with the help of Russia.
Syrian soldiers embrace after breaking 3-year ISIS siege of Deir ez-Zor (EXCLUSIVE VIDEO)

https://www.rt.com/news/402105-syrian-soldiers-embrace-after-breaking-isis-siege/

[Tom Cat]

RUSSIAN MILITARY, NOT U.S., TO LEAD BATTLE FOR ISIS'S FINAL MAJOR CITY IN SYRIA

http://www.newsweek.com/russia-military-not-us-lead-battle-isis-final-major-city-syria-665322

[AvHdB]

I suspect many across the spectrum do not fully understand both the players and cheerleaders.

I suspect most disagreements in the Middle East are not so much between countries but between the Sunnis and Shiite. The debacle in Syria is another version of a century old dispute just in a new jacket.

No, that's not true. In Syria, for example, the Shiia and Sunni communities are not in warfare. Of course that's not the case for the largely mercenary terrorist groups often referred to as 'the opposition' buy their paymasters. The Syrian army is manned by members of all creeds and society as a whole is still integrated.

What has tended to happen is that outsiders, and some rulers, have used sectarian differences as an easy tool to exploit differences and force schisms across the middle east - Saudi Arabia being an example of the latter and Iraq an example of the former. The trick to cause disruption is to change a country from being a secular state to a sectarian one.

You will maybe have seen in the Russian context (and elsewhere) reference to the term Takfiri. A Muslim who accuses another Muslim of being apostate. For many Muslims the conflict is not between Sunni and Shia but between ALL Muslims and Takfiri. Here's a useful article about the topic that will help understand how the Sunni/Shia thing is erroneous: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takfiri I mention the Russian case because of Chechnya. Foreign muslims infiltrated Chechen society and began the process of division through denunciation. The group of people who did this became known as Takfiri. The result was the Chechen wars and ongoing low level terrorism activity throughout the RF. In the RF muslims do quite well but all sects abhor Takfirism.

As so often is the case Andrew is mocking RUA with his pseudo intelligence.

The Alawites have ruled or enslaved Syria and dominated the top of society at the expense to the Sunni majority. The Alawites are historically aligned with Russia. The Kurds which are a substantial minority want there own homeland, just a minor mistake of Whitehall nearly a century or so ago. They are allied with the Western powers. Than you have the B'ath party which ruled for a while and would like to return to power and seem to be allied with ISIS.

In short this is one 'wonderful' cluster fcuk that has cost way to many innocent lives. Way to go Washington and Moscow! Both of you yet again shown your stupidity and shortsightedness.

[Tom Cat]

Russian air strikes kill 2,000+ ISIS, Al-Nusra terrorists in Syria in 11 days – military (VIDEO)

https://www.rt.com/news/405121-russian-air-strikes-kill-2000-isis/

[andrewfi]

AvHdB, you get mocked for writing when in your cups, and, of course, not just by me.

What exactly is 'pseudo intelligence'? Save the answer for a day when you have not yet started killing brain cells. How are readers of RUA, including, in this context, yourself, being mocked by my words?

Tell us more about the Sunni, Shia and Christian slaves being held by the government in Syria. I am sure that the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights would be glad to see your evidence for this, hitherto unknown, practice.

You might want to check you knowledge (or that which you think is knowledge) for accuracy.

[AvHdB]

AvHdB, you get mocked for writing when in your cups, and, of course, not just by me.

What exactly is 'pseudo intelligence'? Save the answer for a day when you have not yet started killing brain cells. How are readers of RUA, including, in this context, yourself, being mocked by my words?

Tell us more about the Sunni, Shia and Christian slaves being held by the government in Syria. I am sure that the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights would be glad to see your evidence for this, hitherto unknown, practice.

You might want to check you knowledge (or that which you think is knowledge) for accuracy.

Another description for 'pseudo-intelligence' is Andrew.

You know unless you are stupid or a troll (and both are possible) that the Alawites have by force and deception via Assad now son, father before been dictators of Syria. Perhaps you find how a dictator rulers the population under his control not enslavement but lets just agree it is anything but freedom. If you want to see an earlier account how a dictator works than look at Hama massacre of 1982 done by Assad (father) of the present dictator. Assad relatives state 38,000 were killed, what a wonderful thing to boast about ~ how many women and children you can massacre, other Western reports believe 20,000 is closer to the reality.

[leslied]

Avey,

I would advise you discuss issues and situations about which you have an informed opinion.  There are countless morons posting drivel about the Syrian conflict, there is no need to join this multitude...

I have given up posting about Syria on this board, simply because there is no informed opinion here (Andrew included) though he has obviously read more widely than most. 

Like as not Moby will post here soon regurgitating drivel from the Independent and BBC.  I will leave the s*it shoveling to others...

A teeny weeny little hint - Do not base analysis on Western values or political philosophy.  These  are completely irrelevant to the people embroiled in this conflict. 

[AvHdB]

While I agree about allot of the nonsense posted and far greater on other sites.

My ex-brother in law is an Albarazi, one of the older families of Hama. He is a freelance independent journalist though I saw an article of his on RT last year. Some of his views would perhaps even make Wiz cringe. I saw his file and notes, he needs more than ten digits to list the members of his extended family that died during the massacre. Such is the Middle East, amazing but brutal; cradle of civilizations as well at times I fear the death bed of it.

[Wiz]

Some of his views would perhaps even make Wiz cringe.

Yes, I was cringing watching live on Greek TV the bombing of the Gaza Strip by the Isra(h)el air and arm forces, while all western media were concentrating their news on events in Ukraine, in 2014.

Just coincidence you will say but Not according to certain Greek experts on Middle East politics, on the panels. I can assure you that they have very good knowledge and following events closely but their views don't fit the propaganda and narrative of the US and western Media controlled by the Zionists. That is why you will never hear of them.

I was cringing when I was reading about the genocide of the Orthodox Christians in Syria by Greek reporters on the ground working for RAI TV (Italy), last target of the "Arab Spring" by the US and its Allies, taking place at the start of their covert attack, 5 years ago by their stooges ... so called "Moderate Opposition".

These Greek experts were warning us, of the impending US "plan B" for the Balkanisation of Syria and also for the recognition of the "Independent Kourdistan" and the effects will have on the whole Middle East.

Watch the news, already they had a referendum.....with a YES result!
Let's see the consequences! ..... 

Possible WWIII for the benefit of the Zionist Newclear Power of Isra(h)el.

 

 

[AvHdB]

Yes, I forgot to mention the massacre of the Christians in Syria as well Iraq in recent times. There are also the Yazidi that did not fare very well since the beginning
of the Syrian 'Civil' War.

As for Kurdistan, I think if the three nations with large Kurdistan minorities would work together for some sort of nation within nations there would be less tension. But as you point out in one way and I in a different fashion the three powers that are in the Middle East are only paying lip service to this concept. It serves there purposes that there is tension and warfare between the populations.

As has been noted by myself and others if the powers to be minded there own business there would be allot less dead civilians and internal strife as well as exported terrorism.