‘Direct aggression’ by the United States towards the Syrian government and armed forces would lead to ‘frightening, tectonic shifts’ in the Middle East. (Reuters)
Al Arabiya: Russia warns against US attack in Syria
“Direct aggression” by the United States towards the Syrian government and armed forces would lead to “frightening, tectonic shifts” in the Middle East, RIA news agency cited Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova as saying on Saturday.
Russia and the United States back opposing sides in the Syrian conflict.
A US-Russian brokered ceasefire in Syria recently fell apart, and Russian war planes on Saturday struck rebel-held areas north of the Syrian city of Aleppo.
Zakharova warned that regime change in Syria would create a vacuum that would be “quickly filled” by “terrorists of all stripes.”
US-Russian tensions over Syria have escalated since the breakdown of a cease-fire last month, with each side blaming the other for its failure.
Syrian government forces backed by Russian warplanes have launched a major onslaught on rebel-held parts of the northern city of Aleppo.
Read more ....
Update #1: Russia warns against US attack on Syrian forces (AP)
Update #2: Direct aggression by US against Damascus to cause 'tectonic shift' in Middle East - Moscow (RT)
WNU Editor: The Western press is downplaying and/or not covering this story as much as they should. Russia is essentially telling the U.S. that if this happens again .... U.S.-Led Coalition Air Strikes Kill 62 Syrian Soldiers (September 17, 2016) .... there will be blow-back on the U.S..
8 comments:
With the Obama "foreign policy" everything can happen everywhere. The world would be more secure if he was playing golf 24/7.
I can't see American soldiers doing this on purpose.'
On purpose or not, it would be a good idea for America to take this seriously. An "accident" could put the United states in a shooting war with Russia the most powerful military force on the planet. I see two possibilities. 1.) Place American forces operating in the region under the command and control of the Russians. While I'm not suggesting this is the optimal solution, I did suggest he possibility when Russia first became directly involved in Syria. Had this been done some of the other accidents like the recent firing on Syrian forces could have been avoided and perhaps we would still have a cease fire. 2.)Get American forces completely out of the way. As long as they are operating in and around Syria, there is the risk of an accident.
There were 70 to 80 cease fire violations a day. With a track record like that it was going to succeed?
It was known that they ceasefire was going to fail during the discussions forI the cease fire. Mr Ed could have got better results and he was better looking as a horse or as a man when compared to John Kerry.
B. Poster should place himself under Putin's direct control. Maybe can be Putin's butler, shoe shine or bell boy.
AS: With regards to your last sentence I actually think the second option I suggested is the better option. Nevertheless were I in charge of American foreign policy I would have explored the possibility of placing American military forces in the region under the command and control of the Russians as this would have given the mission of defeating ISIS and stabilizing Syria a far better chance of succeeding than what we are currently doing. With that said it probably is not doable as there are to many cultural differences to make this work in any kind of near to mid term. As such, getting out of their way is probably going to be the best option.
Frankly, I'm surprised it has taken the Russians a year now. I'd have expected them along with Assad forces to have vanquished all opposition by now. This actually affirms what I have been saying for quite awhile. This is a VERY tough enemy.
Yes russia is a tough regional power.
REGIONAL.
Yes russia is a tough regional power.
REGIONAL.
Actually Russia is a tough power globally. Given their nuclear arsenal, cyber warfare capabilities, special forces operatives, and numerous allies they can coordinate with they are currently the strongest military in the world, however, the tough enemy I was referring to in the above post is ISIS. Apparently the anti-Assad forces apart from ISIS are pretty tough as well.
In a year, Russia has not managed to defeat them. This has surprised me. This affirms what I have been saying all along. This provides considerable evidence confirming it.
Perhaps if they had not been flippantly dismissed as a "JV" team we might be in better shape as far as defeating this enemy. Since we did not do it properly at the start, we will never know.
As a they arose, the did capture territory and hold it more efficiently than the US military ever could have. Where they messed up is they were never able to adjust to behaving like a normal nation state does.
Hence now they are facing ultimate defeat. Failure to understand how tough this enemy is will make things like the battle for Mosul much harder than perhaps it needs to be. Unfortunately some in power seem to never learn. Furthermore do we really want to help Iran solidify it's control over Iraq? No one seems to even be asking the question.
Post a Comment