ISIS/ISIL conflict in Syria/Iraq (No OpEd, No Politics)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Jura The idiot
General
which border did you mean here:
?
India says Pakistan soldiers are killing Indian soldiers near the border. every 6 months 5 to 10 Indian soldiers are killed.
Jura The idiot
General
Jura The idiot
General
Dizasta1
Senior Member
In light of the recent events in Aleppo, Syria. It has been reported that "chemical attacks" were carried out, targeting Aleppo city. Both the Russian Federation and the Syrian Govt had repeatedly warned of such attacks being prepared by terrorists in Idlib. However no due consideration was given to such warnings and it seemed that they were deliberately ignored. Now that they attacks have taken place, the mainstream media is blaming Syrian Govt of orchestrating such attacks in order to undermine the Idlib Peace initiative, through the working mechanism of "De-Conflicting Zones" created and monitored by Russian Federation, Turkey and the Syrian Govt.
If we are to go by what the mainstream media's stance is on this subject. Then by their logic, if a chemical attack (perpetrated by Idlib Terrorists) occurs within the De-Conflicting Zone, then it is the "Assad Regime" which has carried out the attacks in order to undermine the Peace Deal. And if a chemical attack takes place in Syrian Govt controlled area, then the "Assad Regime" has carried out the attack on its own territory in order to blame it on the Idlib Terrorists. In other words, the Syrian Govt is "damned if you, and damned if you don't." Such logic, seems pretty much fixated on the narrative that "Assad Regime" is to be blamed for anything that remotely resembles chemical attacks. This narrative by mainstream media hardly is reflective of the standards of journalism which constitutes of being unbiased.
In 2015-2016, the Syrian Govt was all but destroyed and had lost nearly all of its territory to ISIS and the so-called "moderate rebels." Today (2018), Syria exists in some form better than what happened to Libya. The latter has been completely ripped apart, where there is no accountability, no rule of law and is the perfect breeding ground for more terrorists ... *cough* *cough* ... sorry, "Moderate Rebels" that are "fighting the good fight" (allegedly) to win freedom for Syria. The reason why no one in the mainstream media talks about Libya, is because the country is a sanctuary for terrorists. Libya is now the new Somalia of Africa, where human trafficking, drugs, weapons smuggling is rampant and Europe bears the brunt of this, despite the fact that it was the two old European colonial behemoths (Britain & France), which were on the forefront of the destruction of the country.
What has happened to Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Iraq and Syria, is a testament to what would happen to the Middle East, if it were left in the hands of the West and its allies.
Last edited:
Jura The idiot
General
Dizasta1
Senior Member
Moscow welcomes US pullout from Syria as signal of hope for political settlement
Washington's decision to pull its troops out of Syria might signal hope for political stability in the war-torn country, a spokeswoman from the Russian Foreign Ministry said, while other Russian officials remain skeptical.
The US soldiers' withdrawal might just bring Syria closer to a "real prospect of political settlement," Maria Zakharova Russia's Channel 1. It will also help resolve the tense situation in the Rukban refugee camps near the Syria-Jordan border, which have reportedly become a regional safe haven for terrorists – and also happen to be located not far from the US base in Al Tanf.
"There is hope that this area of Syria will eventually return to normal, peaceful life just like in Aleppo and other Syrian cities before it," Zakharova said, adding that "As long as the US [soldiers] were there, there was no such hope."
Rukban, which hosts some 50,000 refugees from Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor, is located on a territory largely controlled by the US. In August, Moscow that hundreds of terrorists from the Islamic State (IS, former ISIS) and the Al Nusra front were hiding among the refugees, holding people hostage and using them as human shields. The same refugee camp was listed in a recent report by the UN Security Council’s Sanctions Monitoring Team as one of the sources of the Islamic State’s reemergence.
Moscow and Damascus have repeatedly urged the US to cooperate to deal with the situation in Rukban, with Russia offering to help provide safe transportation of the refugees back to their homes. The Americans, on the other hand, were more of a hindrance than an asset, according to Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu, who earlier this month claimed that US military presence at the Al-Tanf airbase was making it harder to deliver aid to the camp.
Now, Zakharova says that Washington has apparently finally realized that it is only doing itself a disservice by impeding the joint efforts of Russia, Turkey and Iran, to resolve the conflict in Syria.
Plausible deniability?
Some Russian officials remained skeptical, however, suggesting that the pullout is designed to untie the hands of Washington's militant proxies on the ground. Aleksandr Sherin, the deputy head of the Russian State Duma's Defense Committee, told RIA Novosti that Washington could be aiming for plausible deniability in future provocations by anti-Assad forces.
Lawmakers also Washington might be planning to get concessions from Moscow.
When President Donald Trump announced the withdrawal, he said that the Islamic State was "the only reason" for US presence in Syria, and they have now been defeated. According to Konstantin Kosachev, the head of the Russian Senate's Foreign Affairs Committee, this leaves Washington without a formal enemy to fight, and its only remaining options are to withdraw in earnest or admit that their real fight is against Bashar Assad's government.
Even if American forces leave, Kosachev is not optimistic about seeing real change in the power landscape of Syria. He believes Washington will most likely continue pulling the strings through its allies on the ground.
While announcing the move on Wednesday, the White House made it clear that this does not "signal the end of the Global Coalition or its campaign" but instead marks a "transition to the next phase of this campaign." Nonetheless, the decision provoked quite a stir among politicians and the media alike, who responded with anger and disbelief.
Washington's decision to pull its troops out of Syria might signal hope for political stability in the war-torn country, a spokeswoman from the Russian Foreign Ministry said, while other Russian officials remain skeptical.
The US soldiers' withdrawal might just bring Syria closer to a "real prospect of political settlement," Maria Zakharova Russia's Channel 1. It will also help resolve the tense situation in the Rukban refugee camps near the Syria-Jordan border, which have reportedly become a regional safe haven for terrorists – and also happen to be located not far from the US base in Al Tanf.
"There is hope that this area of Syria will eventually return to normal, peaceful life just like in Aleppo and other Syrian cities before it," Zakharova said, adding that "As long as the US [soldiers] were there, there was no such hope."
Rukban, which hosts some 50,000 refugees from Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor, is located on a territory largely controlled by the US. In August, Moscow that hundreds of terrorists from the Islamic State (IS, former ISIS) and the Al Nusra front were hiding among the refugees, holding people hostage and using them as human shields. The same refugee camp was listed in a recent report by the UN Security Council’s Sanctions Monitoring Team as one of the sources of the Islamic State’s reemergence.
Moscow and Damascus have repeatedly urged the US to cooperate to deal with the situation in Rukban, with Russia offering to help provide safe transportation of the refugees back to their homes. The Americans, on the other hand, were more of a hindrance than an asset, according to Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu, who earlier this month claimed that US military presence at the Al-Tanf airbase was making it harder to deliver aid to the camp.
Now, Zakharova says that Washington has apparently finally realized that it is only doing itself a disservice by impeding the joint efforts of Russia, Turkey and Iran, to resolve the conflict in Syria.
Plausible deniability?
Some Russian officials remained skeptical, however, suggesting that the pullout is designed to untie the hands of Washington's militant proxies on the ground. Aleksandr Sherin, the deputy head of the Russian State Duma's Defense Committee, told RIA Novosti that Washington could be aiming for plausible deniability in future provocations by anti-Assad forces.
Lawmakers also Washington might be planning to get concessions from Moscow.
When President Donald Trump announced the withdrawal, he said that the Islamic State was "the only reason" for US presence in Syria, and they have now been defeated. According to Konstantin Kosachev, the head of the Russian Senate's Foreign Affairs Committee, this leaves Washington without a formal enemy to fight, and its only remaining options are to withdraw in earnest or admit that their real fight is against Bashar Assad's government.
Even if American forces leave, Kosachev is not optimistic about seeing real change in the power landscape of Syria. He believes Washington will most likely continue pulling the strings through its allies on the ground.
While announcing the move on Wednesday, the White House made it clear that this does not "signal the end of the Global Coalition or its campaign" but instead marks a "transition to the next phase of this campaign." Nonetheless, the decision provoked quite a stir among politicians and the media alike, who responded with anger and disbelief.
Jura The idiot
General