|
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...lame-7k3thhjhz Chemical weapons watchdog wins powers to assign blame The world’s chemical weapons watchdog was empowered to name and shame those responsible for chemical attacks in Syria after Britain won a victory over Russia yesterday. Russian efforts to protect the Syrian regime from censure for using chemical weapons collapsed after a western alliance led by Britain voted overwhelmingly to give the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) enhanced powers to identify those behind the attacks in Syria. The vote, which passed by 82 to 24, came at the end of two days of wrangling at a special session of the OPCW in the Hague yesterday, the culmination of an intense diplomatic offensive by Britain to bolster the global ban on use of chemical weapons. Previously, the OPCW could say whether chemical weapons had been used, but not who was responsible. Russia, with the help of allies including Syria, Iran and Venezuela, tried to prevent the resolution from reaching the floor, and accused Britain of seeking to politicise the OPCW. Britain called the session after Russia repeatedly blocked attempts to reform the watchdog’s mandate in the 41-member executive council. A record 143 countries out of 193 sent representatives and 30 co-sponsored the British resolution. Britain was moved to act after the poisoning with a nerve agent of Sergei Skripal, the Russian former spy, and his daughter in Salisbury in March, an attack blamed on the Kremlin. Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, hailed the “overwhelming” vote. “After the recent spate in the use of chemical weapons at Salisbury, Syria and elsewhere, it’s great that so many of our friends and partners have supported the UK,” he said. “The result of this vote is that the OPCW now has a crucial extra power . . . to point the finger at the organisation, the state, that they think is responsible, and that is crucial if we are going to deter the use of these vile weapons.” Russia said the vote threw the body’s future into doubt. “A lot of the countries that voted against the measure are starting to think about how the organisation will exist and function in the future,” Georgy Kalamonov, Russia’s industry minister, said, adding that it faced “an artificially-created crisis”. |
Actually these were efforts to encourage terrorist groups (like An Nusra and its derivatives) and their friends such as "white helmets" to keep prepare and implement provocations with chemicals and then blame the other side.
But before doing that, it would make sense to at least better train all those clowns. Though I am not sure they will qualify to enter the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art :-) Recall what a poor show they staged the previous time? They brought some kids into a hospital near Damascus shouting that there was a chem. attack, while indeed they simply took all the kids out of cellars giving them chocolates to partricipate in the show. Later some kids with their parents and doctors who were on duty on that day were brought to the Hague and spoke at a OPCW press conference confirming that there was no gas there, they were not poisoned but just scared by armed thugs. All people were real, no masks, faces matched the staged video. No surprise that NATO countries ignored that press-conference. Now they prepare some new show in the Idlib province. |
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/a...ghts-0rxlb9s2c Assad forces trap civilians against Golan Heights https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...eb585544b2.jpg Hundreds of thousands of displaced people, interspersed with rebel groups fighting a rearguard action against advancing Assad regime forces, were crammed against the fence along Syria’s border with the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights yesterday. Rebel forces firing artillery less than 50 yards from the fence were seen in photographs taken from the Israeli side, as regime forces advanced to within a few miles. Israel, which has dropped the rebel groups it once supported, is warning that it will not offer refuge. It is also warning the Assad regime not to bring its forces up to the fence, which is protected by a military exclusion zone under the 1974 UN-negotiated ceasefire which established the border. It is unclear whether the regime will respect that, given the presence of rebel militias, a circumstance not foreseen by the ceasefire treaty..... Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, thought that he had won promises from President Putin of Russia that pro-Iranian forces would be kept away from the latest fighting. But Israeli military officials have confirmed rebel claims that pro-Iranian militias have nonetheless been operating within 20 miles of the border. They were spotted in the town of Da’el, 18 miles from the border....... The White House decreed that it would not support the rebels if they resisted, and Israel, which had funnelled some money, aid and arms over the border to bolster the rebels against Iranian-backed forces, followed suit. Mr Netanyahu, in two visits to Moscow, asked Mr Putin for guarantees over the Iranian role in return. He is determined to prevent Iran building up a “new front” for anti-Israel activity in Syria, as it has done in areas of Lebanon controlled by Hezbollah......... The International Rescue Committee said that 160,000 civilians had fled the fighting and were trapped between the border fence and the front lines. It said that many were living out in the open. “They can hear the fighting getting closer and worry it’s only a matter of time before the front line reaches them,” Mark Schnellbaecher, IRC’s Middle East vice-president, said. Two hundred of the displaced marched up to the border, demanding to be let in, after an air strike on a school in the village of Ain al-Tineh, six miles from the fence, killed ten civilians. Ammar al-Zayed, 27, an activist currently near the border, said: “There’s only a little drinking water, there are no toilets, not enough tents, and no proper health care for children who are suffering diarrhoea and fatigue because of the high temperatures. Many people went to the Israeli border asking to be let in but nobody was allowed to come close at all.” Israel has admitted thousands of Syrian civilians and rebel fighters for medical treatment, but has said it will not give them asylum........... |
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/w...-war-77mjs6kck Rebels in southwest Syria have surrendered to the Assad regime, signalling the close of another chapter in the seven-year war. A spokesman for the Free Syrian Army confirmed today that a “reconciliation process” was under way in the west of Deraa province and in Quneitra, on the border with the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. Those fighters who do not want to lay down their weapons will be ferried by bus to the last non-Isis rebel stronghold, in Idlib, northern Syria. Others will “reconcile” with the regime, which in practice means joining the regime army..... The outcome was regarded as inevitable once the United States informed the rebels in the area that they would be on their own if they chose to resist the regime advance. Hundreds of civilians and fighters were killed in a blitz by regime and Russian jets before the army began moving across the area. Hundreds of thousands of civilians fled towards the Jordanian and Israeli borders........ Israel said today it had continued to pour in humanitarian supplies to the tens of thousands of displaced civilians who have gathered near its border but has refused to give refuge to either fighters or civilians fleeing the fighting. Jordan has done the same. The Assad regime, in a statement on state media, appeared to meet a key Israeli demand by saying troops would return to their positions as before 2011. The Israelis had threatened to attack regime forces if they occupied a demilitarised zone that stretches alongside the border fence. Russian military police are also said to be in the area......... |
David’s Sling fired in combat for first time Israel’s David’s Sling anti-ballistic missile system made its combat debut on Jul. 23 when two interceptors were fired when a pair of Syrian OTR-21 (NATO: SS-21) ballistic missiles were detected approaching Israel’s border. One of the interceptor was ordered to self-destruct after it was determined that both SS-21s were to land inside Syrian territory. It is not known what happened to the other interceptor. http://alert5.com/2018/07/24/davids-...or-first-time/ |
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 10204461)
David’s Sling fired in combat for first time Israel’s David’s Sling anti-ballistic missile system made its combat debut on Jul. 23 when two interceptors were fired when a pair of Syrian OTR-21 (NATO: SS-21) ballistic missiles were detected approaching Israel’s border. One of the interceptor was ordered to self-destruct after it was determined that both SS-21s were to land inside Syrian territory. It is not known what happened to the other interceptor. Alert 5 » David?s Sling fired in combat for first time - Military Aviation News |
some noise of dissatisfaction claiming that the "David’s Sling" did not perform well and not intercepted the Syrian missiles |
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 10204567)
"One of the interceptor was ordered to self-destruct after it was determined that both SS-21s were to land inside Syrian territory. It is not known what happened to the other interceptor."
Here is the one I was referring too, FYI http://www.newsru.co.il/israel/24jul2018/prasha_103.html Sorry it's in Russian, but any online translator will at least provide the contents. E.g. here is an excerpt: "The website of the Haaretz newspaper wrote that the Syrian rockets haven't been brought down. Operators "Prachtchi David" had to destroy interceptor missiles after they haven't hit the mark, it was told in this publication. Yoav Zeytun writes on the website Ynet that preliminary investigation confirms correctness of the decision on start of antimissiles, each of which costs 1 million dollars as there was a real threat: one of the Syrian missiles launched approximately for 100 km to an estimated point of interception has fallen all in kilometer from the Israeli border. The author of the publication considers that the Syrian rockets haven't been intercepted because of a technological, but not human factor. The Ministry of Defence and Raphael concern investigate this incident." |
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-44940599 Israel 'shoots down' Syrian fighter near Golan Heights Israel says it has shot down a Syrian warplane which entered its airspace - a rare incident between the two foes. Two surface-to-air missiles were fired at the Sukhoi fighter jet, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) tweeted. According to Israeli reports, it happened over the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. The pilot's fate is not clear. Syrian news agency Sana said Israel had targeted the jet over Syrian airspace, but did not say whether it was hit. Sana quoted an unnamed military source as saying the plane was conducting raids against "armed terrorist groups" near the southern Yarmouk Valley...... Israel's Haaretz news website said residents in northern Israel saw interceptor missiles fired and heard explosions. Flames and smoke were also later seen rising from the area of the fence between Syria and the Israeli-occupied Syrian Golan Heights, AFP news agency reports...... |
China offers troops to Syria. Nit sure their reasons are just as he surmises - just like Russia it will be an opportunity to put theirnlatest up against current western technology and gather intelligence and assessments. https://www.snafu-solomon.com/2018/0...-syria-in.html |
That's a long way from offering troops........... could be kit, could be "advisors," could be medics, could be intelligence.......
"Two Chinese diplomats have raised the possibility of Chinese military operations in Syria alongside the Assad regime. Speaking to Syrian pro-government daily Al-Watan on Thursday, China’s Ambassador to Damascus, Qi Qianjin, said that the Chinese military is willing to participate “in some way” alongside the Syrian Army in Idlib as well as other parts of Syria. Additionally, Chinese military attaché Wong Roy Chang, in a similar statement also delivered to Al-Watan, reportedly stated that there is “ongoing” military cooperation between the two countries. “We, China, wish to develop our relations with the Syrian Army. As for participating in the Idlib operation, it requires a political decision,” Chang said. " |
I remember what happened to the Chinese embassy in Belgrade when they didn’t take the hint about providing intelligence on US operations to the Sebian government. I believe the US government apologised for the JDAM that went astray - all 5 of them....... |
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/w...g-up-k6pc2gszm
Cold war on Iraq’s frontier with Syria is hotting upThe last checkpoint before the border was different: the scale, the delay but most of all the flags. During our long drive across the Iraqi desert in a convoy of United Nations jeeps and army pick-up trucks we had been swiftly waved through. Not here. Instead, we were stopped by militiamen whose black, green and white banners gave the post away as belonging to the “Popular Mobilisation Units”, militias controlled by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. It took a call from the mayor of the border town, al-Qaim, to let us through. The abrupt change of control over the road was not random. This border is the most sensitive 12-mile patch of territory in the world. On the Syrian side, a few miles away across the sand, lies a giant base controlled by Iran, unreachable to outsiders but spotted by satellites, thought to contain thousands of Afghan, Iraqi and other Shia fighters. It was bombed by unknown forces in June. A hundred miles further into Syria is a large, remote and previously unwanted patch of desert now inhabited by 1,000 US, French and Norwegian special forces, alongside perhaps 2,000 allied Syrian Arab Sunni tribal fighters. This territory, previously largely uninhabited, is now a fixed western presence, described satirically by British and US officials as “the spherical emirate of al-Tanf” after the expanding military base at its core. This border, straddled by the Iraqi town of al-Qaim and its Syrian twin, al-Bukamal, is a patchwork of Iraqi army, western, and militia control, and in the wreckage of Iraq and Syria has become the epicentre of the conflict between the US and Iran. It is a cold war, but it is hotting up. President Trump originally called time on al-Tanf, which came into existence as part of US support for rebels in the Syrian civil war, saying in his election campaign he no longer wanted to waste resources trying to overthrow President Assad. Now he has done a volte-face, under pressure from his foreign policy advisers, particularly Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, and John Bolton, the national security adviser, to try to scupper Iran’s advance across the region. Both are long-term Iran hawks. “Trump was opposed to staying put in Syria but it seems the ‘steady state’ has got its way at the moment,” a diplomat in the region said, referring to foreign policy greybeards around Mr Trump. “There doesn't seem any likelihood the troops are pulling out soon.” The US establishment has become fixated on what they are calling the Iranian road to the Mediterranean and the Israeli border, expanding Tehran’s hold over the so-called Shia crescent. Iran’s support for President Assad has allowed it to set up bases across Syria manned by members of the Revolutionary Guard, officially, as “advisers”, and Shia militias recruited in Syria and across the region.Among them are the Lebanese Hezbollah, several Iraqi brigades and fighters from Afghanistan and Pakistan’s Shia minorities. The Iranians already have Hezbollah in Lebanon, which leaves the only gap in the crescent as being the Iraqi territory between the Syrian and Iranian borders, which is why the road west from Baghdad has become so significant. At Mr Trump’s new command, the US is fighting back. A US envoy, Brett McGurk, is fighting an open battle with Iran’s Revolutionary Guard al-Quds’ brigade head, General Qassem Soleimani, to shape the incoming Iraqi government. It is a battle where neither side can win outright but Iran is gaining the upper hand. Hadi al-Ameri, who heads the biggest Iran-backed PMU militia, the Badr Corps, also leads the Fateh, or Liberation, party which came second in May’s elections and looks likely to be a key member of any ruling coalition. On the ground, the Badr Corps is establishing bases with its PMU allies from the Iranian border across Iraq. The 12-mile stretch of frontier they have secured west of al-Qaim is the key choke point, and the centre of Iranian-US rivalry. It is a volatile mix. “The Iraqi army, which is close to the Americans, control the actual border crossing at al-Qaim,” said Hishem al-Hashimi, a prominent Iraqi security analyst. “On the other side in Syria there are 8,000 Shia militiamen.” He has also been taken by American forces to visit al-Tanf, a rare outsider’s vew. “From there the road [into Syria] is monitored by the Americans, French and Norwegians,” he said. His experience of al-Tanf brought home its unique qualities. “A genie couldn’t live there,” he said. “But it’s an open landscape and they have vision over 45 miles. It’s a very good choice for them.” Al-Tanf’s original Free Syrian Army forces now number less than 400, compared with the 1,000 western troops and up to 2,000 tribal fighters, Mr Hashimi said. The battle against Islamic State is now in its last stages. Mr Trump said in March troops would afterwards be withdrawn, but now his new envoy to the Syrian opposition says they will be staying, both as a brake on Iran and as a tool to undermine Assad himself. “We will make it our business to make life as miserable as possible for that flopping cadaver of a regime and let the Russians and Iranians, who made this mess, get out of it,” James Jeffrey, the envoy, said. This month Mr Bolton said US forces would stay so long as Iranian forces remained outside Iran. The Iranian-backed forces are not backing down, however. General Soleimani has issued a direct warning to the US not to take on Iran, and American officials fear militias like the Badr Corps are preparing attacks on US forces. That threatens a return to the chaos following the 2003 invasion, when Iran-backed militias ravaged American and British troops, killing hundreds of them. “We are near you, where you can’t even imagine,” General Soleimani said this summer. “If you begin the war, we will end the war. You know that this war will destroy all that you possess.”.......... |
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 10263245)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/w...g-up-k6pc2gszm
Cold war on Iraq’s frontier with Syria is hotting up The last checkpoint before the border was different: the scale, the delay but most of all the flags. During our long drive across the Iraqi desert in a convoy of United Nations jeeps and army pick-up trucks we had been swiftly waved through. Not here. Instead, we were stopped by militiamen whose black, green and white banners gave the post away as belonging to the “Popular Mobilisation Units”, militias controlled by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. It took a call from the mayor of the border town, al-Qaim, to let us through. The abrupt change of control over the road was not random. This border is the most sensitive 12-mile patch of territory in the world. On the Syrian side, a few miles away across the sand, lies a giant base controlled by Iran, unreachable to outsiders but spotted by satellites, thought to contain thousands of Afghan, Iraqi and other Shia fighters. It was bombed by unknown forces in June. A hundred miles further into Syria is a large, remote and previously unwanted patch of desert now inhabited by 1,000 US, French and Norwegian special forces, alongside perhaps 2,000 allied Syrian Arab Sunni tribal fighters. This territory, previously largely uninhabited, is now a fixed western presence, described satirically by British and US officials as “the spherical emirate of al-Tanf” after the expanding military base at its core. This border, straddled by the Iraqi town of al-Qaim and its Syrian twin, al-Bukamal, is a patchwork of Iraqi army, western, and militia control, and in the wreckage of Iraq and Syria has become the epicentre of the conflict between the US and Iran. It is a cold war, but it is hotting up. President Trump originally called time on al-Tanf, which came into existence as part of US support for rebels in the Syrian civil war, saying in his election campaign he no longer wanted to waste resources trying to overthrow President Assad. Now he has done a volte-face, under pressure from his foreign policy advisers, particularly Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, and John Bolton, the national security adviser, to try to scupper Iran’s advance across the region. Both are long-term Iran hawks. “Trump was opposed to staying put in Syria but it seems the ‘steady state’ has got its way at the moment,” a diplomat in the region said, referring to foreign policy greybeards around Mr Trump. “There doesn't seem any likelihood the troops are pulling out soon.” The US establishment has become fixated on what they are calling the Iranian road to the Mediterranean and the Israeli border, expanding Tehran’s hold over the so-called Shia crescent. Iran’s support for President Assad has allowed it to set up bases across Syria manned by members of the Revolutionary Guard, officially, as “advisers”, and Shia militias recruited in Syria and across the region. Among them are the Lebanese Hezbollah, several Iraqi brigades and fighters from Afghanistan and Pakistan’s Shia minorities. The Iranians already have Hezbollah in Lebanon, which leaves the only gap in the crescent as being the Iraqi territory between the Syrian and Iranian borders, which is why the road west from Baghdad has become so significant. At Mr Trump’s new command, the US is fighting back. A US envoy, Brett McGurk, is fighting an open battle with Iran’s Revolutionary Guard al-Quds’ brigade head, General Qassem Soleimani, to shape the incoming Iraqi government. It is a battle where neither side can win outright but Iran is gaining the upper hand. Hadi al-Ameri, who heads the biggest Iran-backed PMU militia, the Badr Corps, also leads the Fateh, or Liberation, party which came second in May’s elections and looks likely to be a key member of any ruling coalition. On the ground, the Badr Corps is establishing bases with its PMU allies from the Iranian border across Iraq. The 12-mile stretch of frontier they have secured west of al-Qaim is the key choke point, and the centre of Iranian-US rivalry. It is a volatile mix. “The Iraqi army, which is close to the Americans, control the actual border crossing at al-Qaim,” said Hishem al-Hashimi, a prominent Iraqi security analyst. “On the other side in Syria there are 8,000 Shia militiamen.” He has also been taken by American forces to visit al-Tanf, a rare outsider’s vew. “From there the road [into Syria] is monitored by the Americans, French and Norwegians,” he said. His experience of al-Tanf brought home its unique qualities. “A genie couldn’t live there,” he said. “But it’s an open landscape and they have vision over 45 miles. It’s a very good choice for them.” Al-Tanf’s original Free Syrian Army forces now number less than 400, compared with the 1,000 western troops and up to 2,000 tribal fighters, Mr Hashimi said. The battle against Islamic State is now in its last stages. Mr Trump said in March troops would afterwards be withdrawn, but now his new envoy to the Syrian opposition says they will be staying, both as a brake on Iran and as a tool to undermine Assad himself. “We will make it our business to make life as miserable as possible for that flopping cadaver of a regime and let the Russians and Iranians, who made this mess, get out of it,” James Jeffrey, the envoy, said. This month Mr Bolton said US forces would stay so long as Iranian forces remained outside Iran. The Iranian-backed forces are not backing down, however. General Soleimani has issued a direct warning to the US not to take on Iran, and American officials fear militias like the Badr Corps are preparing attacks on US forces. That threatens a return to the chaos following the 2003 invasion, when Iran-backed militias ravaged American and British troops, killing hundreds of them. “We are near you, where you can’t even imagine,” General Soleimani said this summer. “If you begin the war, we will end the war. You know that this war will destroy all that you possess.”.......... 1. I am sad to see that people coming back/reducing the foot print seems a low ball bet. 2. Undermining Assad strikes me as a pointless exercise, but the brake on Iran is a piece of geopolitical position that is about 40 years old for US geopolitics. Nothing new under the sun. ORAC, thanks for the link, it's an interesting look at a messy situation. |
Cheers ORAC a bit of light reading there. :(
|
Meantime the US has moved 500 Kurdish fighters away to the eastern Syrian border to help put the squeeze on a very large and deadly pocket of IS resistance armed with anti-tank missiles and other heavy weaponry. (Iraq and France have been shelling IS at the same time from east of the Iraqi border.)
Turkey, who agreed to joint patrols with the US up in Manbij, seem to have simply driven in and taken over, and taking full advantage of Kurd troop movements out of the area they have commenced heavy shelling today of Kobane and other villages east of the Euphrates along the northern Syrian border, places fought for at heavy sacrifice by the Kurds not too long ago. The Kurds drove IS out, but mainly just wanted their homelands back. Turkey does not want any Kurds along their southern border and openly states that she will force the creation of a bufferzone in those very same sacred Kurdish lands. Erdogan is announcing the start of this campaign. Has some backdoor deal been made where the Kurds have been thrown to the wolves, I wonder? Are the Kurds hoping that by helping the US eradicate IS in eastern Syria, the US will stand by them in their defense against the Turkish onslaught? Should the Kurds trust the US? And have Turkey done a deal partly to help IS by attacking the remaining Kurds back in their newly-won homelands? Most of this information can be found digging around in the back pages of al Arabiya, etc., but little of it seems to have hit the mainstream Western press. |
How do we get the great unwashed of the UN GA to make appeals for the Kurds with the same vigor that they do for certain residents of the West Bank?
Why do the Kurds not have an advocate? Who did they piss off? |
Well it looks like Trump is throwing the Kurds to the wolves. If if you have been keeping up with the press in the last few days, Turkey has been massing troops getting ready for a large attack on the remaining Kurdish held area in north-eastern Syria, and presumably also Iraq around the oilfield areas Turket has always considered they lost unfairly in the Treaty of Lausanne. There are many US troops embedded with the Kurds and there were fears Turkish and US troops could end up in combat. Well Trump has just announced that “ISIS has been defeated”, and all US troops are being pulled up with immediate effect. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...c36_story.html https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...kurds-in-syria https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...rds-under-fire https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...thdrawal-trump |
I had to wonder what was really behind that call. Part of me thought it was pure 'troops home for christmas' PR.
I feel very sorry for the Kurds. |
So Trump lets Russia win?
|
The Kurds never get a break - they deserve better than this. Indeed, they deserved better the last time they were abandoned - and the time before that.
|
" ... It came upon the Midnight tweet ..."
.....
Christmas Dinner - Russia, Iran and Turkey have just had a big joint conflab and carved it all up, leaving the Kurds on the menu again. ‘Everyone else’ doesn’t even get to do the washing up this time. It also seems Turkey’s having another Army purge – this time of those who are apparently less keen to b***gar their neighbours and involve NATO fighting NATO. I wonder if Jim Mattis knew ** about this ? .... Apparently the Brits didn’t. ** and the French, Mr Pompeo, Mr Bolton etc ? .......... |
Some reports are the timing of the decision came as a surprise to them as well!
|
I think we can park the idea of joining the US in any military coalition; at least for the next few years.
With the abrupt loss of western military critical mass in the region I hope everyone else gets back ok. |
And so it starts - The Times Turkey poised to attack Kurds as US pulls troops from Syria Turkey is gearing up for a full-scale offensive in Syria that could shatter Kurdish dreams of statehood and permanently reconfigure alliances in the eight-year civil war. Hulusi Akar, the Turkish defence minister, said that Ankara was “intensely” preparing for operations east of the Euphrates river, an area currently held by the Syrian Defence Forces (SDF), a coalition largely comprised of Kurdish fighters. His comments came only hours after the US — which created the SDF as its ground force against Isis in 2015 and has supported it since then with weapons shipments, airstrikes and troops — announced that it was pulling out of Syria. President Trump used the SDF’s victory last week in Hajin, Isis’s last major Syrian stronghold, to declare that the US mission had been accomplished. But his announcement was preceded by days of diplomatic wrangling with President Erdogan, who had been threatening to attack Kurdish areas where US troops are operating. Their negotiations culminated in a phone call last Friday in which Mr Trump informed Mr Erdogan that the withdrawal was imminent. A US official told Reuters that “everything that has followed is implementing the agreement that was made in that call”....... The threat of an imminent Turkish attack sparked immediate reactions from the Kurds inside northeastern Syria today. Activists told The Times that Kurdish fighters had withdrawn from their bases in Amuda and Ras al Ain, next to the frontier, to Hassakeh, 60 miles inside Syrian territory...... US officials told Reuters that the Pentagon will also halt its air support in Syria — the decisive factor in the Kurds’ huge territorial gains over the past four years..... |
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 10340833)
And so it starts - The Times Turkey poised to attack Kurds as US pulls troops from Syria Turkey is gearing up for a full-scale offensive in Syria that could shatter Kurdish dreams of statehood and permanently reconfigure alliances in the eight-year civil war. Hulusi Akar, the Turkish defence minister, said that Ankara was “intensely” preparing for operations east of the Euphrates river, an area currently held by the Syrian Defence Forces (SDF), a coalition largely comprised of Kurdish fighters. His comments came only hours after the US — which created the SDF as its ground force against Isis in 2015 and has supported it since then with weapons shipments, airstrikes and troops — announced that it was pulling out of Syria. President Trump used the SDF’s victory last week in Hajin, Isis’s last major Syrian stronghold, to declare that the US mission had been accomplished. But his announcement was preceded by days of diplomatic wrangling with President Erdogan, who had been threatening to attack Kurdish areas where US troops are operating. Their negotiations culminated in a phone call last Friday in which Mr Trump informed Mr Erdogan that the withdrawal was imminent. A US official told Reuters that “everything that has followed is implementing the agreement that was made in that call”....... The threat of an imminent Turkish attack sparked immediate reactions from the Kurds inside northeastern Syria today. Activists told The Times that Kurdish fighters had withdrawn from their bases in Amuda and Ras al Ain, next to the frontier, to Hassakeh, 60 miles inside Syrian territory...... US officials told Reuters that the Pentagon will also halt its air support in Syria — the decisive factor in the Kurds’ huge territorial gains over the past four years..... |
...........
Defense Secretary has resigned already - less than 24 hrs ? ........... |
Read his Letter of Resignation.....very carefully.
This is a very good Man, a Marine's Marine, and probably the best Secretary of Defense we have ever had. He points out some major accomplishments during the Two Years of his tenure as SecDef for Trump. Trump for his faults has worked hard to re-build the US Military after twenty years of wartime operations. |
Well :mad:!
“My views on treating allies with respect and also being cleareyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held,” Mr. Mattis wrote. “Because you have the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position.” We are now exposed: the DoD will be subjected to the tender ministrations of ... whomever the President tweets to tomorrow. Some idiot like William Cohen. (Perry's successor for Clinton). I can't even guess who'd take the job, but I am sure someone will. I'll be drinking in the morning over this one. Mr President, you don't know what you've got til it's gone. It's a song lyric, but I think you need to take it to heart. Further comments censored. But Mr. Mattis’s core complaint was that Mr. Trump had lost sight of the import of the competition for global power with Russia and China, who want “a world consistent with their authoritarian model.” Mr. Mattis was the primary author of a new American defense strategy with a central goal of taking on “revisionist” powers — an approach that some of Mr. Trump’s former advisers say the president never fully read. {Well, it wasn't on CNN, nor Twitter, so why would he read it?} Mr. Trump’s decision to pull out of Syria, which was opposed by virtually every high-level administration official, but lauded by President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, was the last straw. Along with both the military and civilian leadership at the Pentagon, Mr. Mattis viewed the withdrawal as an abandonment of Kurdish fighters and other American allies, and a ceding of critical territory to Russia and Iran. So angry was Mr. Mattis at the Syrian withdrawal that neither he, nor any other senior Pentagon official, would defend it publicly, despite requests from the White House to do so. As a result, Mr. Trump appeared by himself in a video showing him in front of the White House on Wednesday, announcing that victory over the Islamic State had been won. |
Putting lyrics and specific persons aside let's consider the current situation from the "territorial" point of view.
Indeed, most of the ISIS forces were taken out. The major part of the syrian territory was fought back by the Syrian (gov.) army. The minor part - by the kurds who were supported by the US. Just look at the map. The Idlib zone remains the main unresolved issue. But there Turkey claimed to take care of it. Neither Russia, nor US are interested to enter into a direct mil. conflict with Erdogan because of this (small) area. The same with the Kurds. And the Kurd issue will soon come next. The kurds expected to get a strong support from the West and were dreaming of finally establishing its own independend state. But none of the countries in the area (Syria, Turkey, Iraq, Iran) want such a new state because it can only be formed by sacrifising some parts of their own territories. It would blow up the Middle East again. Military wise, Turkey will not hesitate to enter this part of Syria to nail the kurds down and shut any efforts towards their independence. The Syrian governmental army is alone too weak to fight with the kurds, but together with Turkey the chances rise significantly. Therefore, the US withdrawing from Syria NOW, before the kurds start building a sort of independence relying on the mil. support from the West (and crying to provide it) does not look stupid. Let Turkey and Syria (with Russia behind) have this headache... Uncle Sam is washing hands. |
Who am I to prognosticate on strategy in the Middle East, but from my comfortable armchair it has always been blindingly obvious that this would be the outcome. There was always precisely zero chance of the regional players allowing a Kurdish state to establish itself, and not much more of a chance for an autonomous region. If that wasn’t as obvious to policy makers a few years back then the train wreck of the Iraqi Kurds’ referendum should have made it so. It was good strategy to partner with the Kurds to clear out IS but it should have always been with a view to allowing the Syrian regime to re-establish sovereignty over its former territory, with a settlement over regional government that gave just enough to the Kurds for the west to be able to say it hadn’t thrown them to the wolves. What other credible end state is there besides Syrian sovereignty that doesn’t involve permanent western military presence, propping up an unsustainable position at huge expense and toxifying relations with a crucial player (the Turks)? Sorry if this is too obvious for idealistic and over-academicised foreign policy wonks. Call it ‘realism’ with a curled lip if you will, but for me the clue is in the ‘real’... Edit: I wondered at the time whether Mike Pompeo’s comments about the recent Russian expedition to Venezuela being a gross waste of taxpayers’ money would give Trump food for thought in precisely the opposite sense to that Pompeo intended, both on the funds the US is pouring away in what amounts to a futile attempt to interdict one of several possible Iranian supply lines to Hezbollah, and on how expeditionary operations are perceived from the other end of the telescope. Maybe I wasn’t too far out on that either. |
Truman confirmed the concept about civilian control over the military during Korea.
This is not the same sort of issue but does remind us that the President is the Commander-in-Chief of US Military forces and head of the Executive Branch of Government. Just as Kennedy had to remind the Joint Chiefs of that during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Just as Obama did in withdrawing troops from Iraq....against his military advisors wishes. The Presidents are not always right....but they are always the President and it is in them the final authority lies. If President Trump is trying to extricate us from a very precarious situation in particular and from the Middle East in general....combined with Energy Independence.....meaning less need to be in the Middle East.....perhaps that is good thing. I do wish Mattis had stayed....but at some point these folks....the genuinely good ones do not stay too long for the very reasons they are the good ones. Only Time will tell. |
China trade, interest rates, Syria, Afghanistan, Mattis.
Could the president just be creating spectacular headlines in a row? Like to divert attention from his own troubles in D.C.? Like leading the media caravane elsewhere? Feels like it. |
Trade press has an interesting juxtaposition, suggesting that privatization may have been the issue:
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/y...20Bird%20Brief |
More likely is the simple fact the current strategy (or whichever version you wish to choose) has not been very successful....and we remain mired in an eighteen year old war that continues to cost lives, limbs, and money.
Trump ran on the promise to get us untangled in these kinds of affairs. Look back to the very start of the Afghanistan War....Special Ops Teams with Air Support and related assistance defeated the hostile forces. Very small numbers of very capable troops on the ground with lots of sophisticated support did very well. Then....the Conventional forces arrived and we know the rest of that story. You also recall Trump asked the Military and Intelligence Communities what the end goal was for Afghanistan and Syria and was not pleased with the mumbling and non-committal responses. Also....he is not a politician in the standard definition and is neither a Liberal or Conservative but rather is simply a pragmatist who comes from the business world and not prior elected offices. He is results oriented and not happy at all with mealy mouthed half assed answers. Washington and the Media are quite comfortable in their ruts....and hate being shaken up and made to justify their lack of success over the years. The Kurdish area of Syria that is at risk is very small....and in the long game is not worth the risk to our national security interests in that region. Our military likes to leave large numbers of boots on the ground in these affairs and thus increasing the likelihood of drawn out involvements. At least this time Mattis resigned....and did so on his own with no encouragement from the President. The last time he got out of step with a President....Obama fired him from CentCom. Obama did not like being asked questions about his Iranian policy. I am of the belief Trump is trying to extricate the US Military from these seemingly never ending conflicts and reducing our presence....military or civilian in the process. The military has talked of much the same strategy as Prinz but using Spec Ops troops and local forces augmented by non-uniformed government personnel. |
|
Just for giggles....I went back to the first pages of this thread and began to read the posts.
What stood out was along about post 25-40 or so....where the question was asked..."why is the UK getting into this....why should we be involved in something that will drag out forever....etc...(or words to that effect). Someone even asked why the UK should be the World's Policeman. So here we are and as Trump begins to withdraw American Troops he is seen as being wrong. Anyone care to explain how we have gone from being against any involvement to being against getting un-involved? A take on all this that is a bit different than the Politico article. http://thefederalist.com/2018/12/21/...NEspQU.twitter For context....when Trump took office the United States had been directly engaged in Afghanistan combat operations for Sixteen Years. Dubya and Obama each. had eight years to figure out a strategy to get our troops out of there and failed. Perhaps Trump is not willing to risk another endless war like that? Our very senior military leadership cannot brag too loud about their successful strategies I would suggest. |
Setting policy is Trump's job. Providing information to the President and then executing policy is Mattis' job. If Mattis can't do his job, then good decision for him to admit it and quit.
I personally suspect that Mattis got used to making decisions and pitched a fit when Trump went a different direction. I think it's past time we got out of Syria and let Russia pick up the ball and run with it for a while. We have friends in the region (Jordan), pseudo "allies" (Turkey) that have been playing us for fools, and we broke Iraq pretty badly so we ought to help them out a bit. But our policy of interfering in Syria to encourage regime change is an Obama/Hillary/Kerry disaster of an idea and it's time to quit that nonsense. |
Look at the map, e.g. the following one
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/in...144229467.html Even this anti-syrian source admits that the major part is controlled by the government. Putting the kurds aside, the question arises: where are so-called "coaltion supported" "democractic" forces? ..... "Vanished in the haze"..... A small area around Al-Tanf is just a safety zone around the US base (to be shut down according to Trump). The Idlib zone (where re-named Al-Qaeda and An-Nusra terrorists reside) was agreed to be under the turkish resposibility (to avoid gov. forces offensive). And Turkey now has a difficult task to demilitarize it. So, after the kurds were "sold out" and talks between the Syrian government and "moderate" opposition are on the way (a so-called "Astana process", out of any US control), pulling out of the area seems a logical solution. |
Originally Posted by SASless
(Post 10341858)
Just for giggles....I went back to the first pages of this thread and began to read the posts.
What stood out was along about post 25-40 or so....where the question was asked..."why is the UK getting into this....why should we be involved in something that will drag out forever....etc...(or words to that effect). Someone even asked why the UK should be the World's Policeman. So here we are and as Trump begins to withdraw American Troops he is seen as being wrong. Anyone care to explain how we have gone from being against any involvement to being against getting un-involved? A take on all this that is a bit different than the Politico article. Trump's Syria Withdrawal Policy Is Correct, But Communicated Horribly - The Federalist For context....when Trump took office the United States had been directly engaged in Afghanistan combat operations for Sixteen Years. Dubya and Obama each. had eight years to figure out a strategy to get our troops out of there and failed. Perhaps Trump is not willing to risk another endless war like that? Our very senior military leadership cannot brag too loud about their successful strategies I would suggest. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 22:57. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.