Russia ramped up its calls for the U.S. military to depart from Syria on Thursday, contending it had no substantial reasons to be in the country and its presence there "must end."
“Any reasons cited by the Americans to justify their further military presence... are just excuses, and we think their presence must end," Alexander Lavrentiev, Russian President Vladimir Putin's envoy to Syria, told reporters. Lavrentiev was in Astana, Kazakhstan, on Thursday ahead of peace talks regarding the Syria conflict between Russia, Iran and Turkey, Reuters reported. Russia, a major ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, has played a significant role in the Syria conflict.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: The U.S. has a different line .... US Envoy: Russia, US to Remain Engaged in Syria in 2018 (VOA).
13 comments:
Syria is an issue where I honestly don't understand why the US is still there/what the goal is. If it's getting rid of Assad, I applaud that, he seems to be a mass murderer of his own people (killing a different religious group than him, I get that, but those are still Syrians and his people). But if it's just to make it costly for Russia, I wouldn't be for that. We need Russia to be able to trust us. Especially with the China issue coming up next year that could set the entire APAC at war.
The American position was: get rid of Assad and support the rebels, esp. the Kurds.
Russian position: support Assad
Iran position: support Assad
now we are to leave?
Yes leave because Putin out thought and out fought the u.s on every level.
It's over, Assad wins, pack up and leave.
Fred.. positions without explanations of benefits to either US or humanity are just no longer acceptable. Are we fighting a righteous war? Is it really to get rid of Assad? Surely we could just drone him. Or is this one of those proxy wars where we are just making it costly to Russia? (And if so, what's the cost to civilians? )
Look I'm not saying Assad should stay. Drone him. I don't care. He seems to be a mass murderer and I don't care if head or state or not. If you purposefully kill innocent people you have no place on this earth.
But ..I do care about the long term strategic implications. What's our gain? What's the humanitarian gain? If keeping the fight going is "good", I just want to understand "how is it good? " ..can anyone explain? It's an honest question, I'm not up to my game when it comes to Syria.
"killing a different religious group than him, I get that, but those are still Syrians and his people."
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/11/16/opinion/the-worlds-next-genocide.html?referer=https://www.google.ca/
The Syrian Arab Army is a multi-ethnic organization composed of Sunni's, Shia, 5 different kinds of Christians, Druze, Alwites, Sufi's, Kurds, Palistinians, Zoasterans, Atheists and Agnostics. The majority are Sunni's, but the command chain is dominated by Alwites.
The SFA consists of a multi ethnic group of Sunni's and Sunni and Christian Kurds. The majority are Kurds and the command chain is Kurdish. The Kurds have engaged in ethnic cleansing, not just against pro-ISIS Sunni's, but Yardzi's and Assyrian Christians.
The FSA remmenants are a barely multi-ethnic organization composed of mostly Sunni's, with foreign fighters such as Chinese Uighur's and Trans Caucus Turkomen, also Sunni's. The FSA has engaged in ethnic cleansing against Kurds, Druze, Assyrian Christians, Shia, Alwites.
What ever al Quida in Syria is calling itself this week mirrors the FSA in make up and atrocities, with a larger contingent of global Sunni jihadists, fewer Chinese Uighurs and Turkomen.
ISIS mirrors al Quida in Syria's make up, but much greater atrocities, but with a larger contingent of global Sunni jihadists, (Westerners, Chechens, Tunisians, Morrocans, etc), almost no Turkomen or Chinese, more Iraqi's.
Dear anon:
I think you misconstrue my comment. I was simply stating what had been the position of the US under Obama and continued under Trump; now we are being told by an Assad supporter that we need to leave...Do we listen to Russia/Iran/Assad? or do we continue what now seems a lost cause...I am simply asking. My position: we are involved in a proxy war and on the verge of losing it.An indication was when we pretty much gave up our earlier support of the anti-Assad Kurds, though why we did this is something I do not understand nor have I been able to see any explanation
99.9% of US arms and training, both Pentagon and CIA, went to the Sunni jihadists of the FSA, most of whom either sold their weapons on to either al Quida or ISIS, or defected to them.
US support tor the YPG Kurds only started in the form of airstrikes in January, 2015 after the ISIS sweep of Kurdish areas and the seige of Kobane, (after 6 months of publicity) had captured global attention.
The CIA allegedly shuttered it's FSA arms and training programs in September, 2017,
The Pentagon has continued it support of arms and training for some FSA groups, ( but not all), under the guise of calling them SFA Groups, even though they are not allied with the YPG and are hundreds of miles away from the Kurdish areas.
My apologies.
I'm just really confused about Syria and our strategy there. If it's a proxy war, then -why- are we having it? Is it to reduce Russians influence there? To what end goal?
I just don't want us to be in wars we don't fully understand why we're having them... I personally don't want any war, proxy or direct, with Russia unless I understand the strategy but more importantly the ethos behind it. I'm not a pacifist either, but I just want to know what we all pay taxes for (I'm actually not American, so see the "we"/"our" as "you"..I'm European and pro US on most things, I just sometimes don't get what "your" goals are )
"Yes leave because Putin out thought and out fought the u.s on every level.
It's over, Assad wins, pack up and leave."
Preserving the Kurds and ousting Assad are two different items. Currently, we have not been able to unseat the dictator Assad, but that may still happen. Maybe not in the next 3 to 5 years, but it can happen. Assad can be unseated in as little as 3 weeks.
Iran has paid a lot of Afghan Shia to fight in Syria with the inducement of religion and money and the threat of throwing their families out of Iran. So Iran is stretched too. Being stretched is okay so long as you do not reach the breaking point and at some point you can relax.
Now that idiot Obama gave them some room to relax and gave them money.
The U.S. is n a bad position not so much because of Iran or Russia, but because of the aggressor Erdogan. If the U.S. had Turkey as an ally, Russia and China could not do anything.
Ps had food poisoning so overlooked part of your answer I realized. ..Call me old fashioned, but I like to know why we're engaged in wars : ) kinda helps with morale too... After all, if you don't know and I don't know, then who does? And how can we be sure we're not doing the wrong thing or are even "the bad guys"? I don't think we are, but as a citizen who is working 12 hours a day, sometimes more, it's just really hard to keep track of all these conflicts. How can we know for sure that this isn't the military industrial complex Eisenhower warned us about? To me it's foolish to assume that whatever Russia does we have to be on the opposing side. This way we'll likely never see peace. And if Russians are really the bad guys, OK, let's be on the opposing side but please show some form of evidence... I just find wars these days a bit abstract. They are fought by others for us - and we thank them for their service - but it's becoming so routine and transactional that I just would love some reassuring at some point. When is the last time a US president addressed the nation and made it clear why we are there and what "we" (our young sons and daughters) are fighting and sometimes dying for.. I get terrorism. ..kill them all. .no trouble sleeping over it. ..but if there's just one civilian dying by accident I want to know if it was worth it
"I just don't want us to be in wars we don't fully understand why we're having them... I personally don't want any war, proxy or direct, with Russia unless I understand the strategy but more importantly the ethos behind it. I'm not a pacifist either,"
Did Bismark ever stop plotting, calculating, etc during a war, after a war, or before a war?
Was Bismark's Germany, Richelieu's France different than any other country?
Most people in the West really hoped war was over after the wall fell in 1989 and the USSR fell in 1991. But that was naive. So enjoy the suck.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last_Man
Haven't you learned of Libya?
Getting rid of Gaddafi did absolutely nothing. If anything, it made things worse.
As much as I hate Assad, I think it's best he stays, we need to learn from the events of other nations. Getting rid of Assad won't do any good.
Anon,
1. George Bush left Gafaffi alone after we reached a deal.
Obama came and broke the deal. That makes him "a despicable or very unpleasant person (or thing)."
We have no deal with Assad.
2. Assad assisted jihadis during the 2003-2011 Iraq War. Gadaffi did not.
Those 2 things make a big difference.
Plus Obama et al displayed 'smart power'. They broke the pottery barn rule. That is as smart as Jeb Bush trying to win the primary without the base. They are the same levels or super smartness. They do not get much smarter than Jeb Bush and Obama.
Post a Comment