Russian boots on the ground in Syria. Another Afghanistan?

AbusesToilets

Tea drinker wrote: »

Doesn't change the fact that EU has lost control of it's borders, cannot protect it's citizens and will not condemn Arab dictatorships it's aligned with. Horrific double standards, and easily covered up with a few well chosen platitudes. Just the usual claptrap for the masses that the migrant crisis has been caused by Putin etc. Keep drinking that peaceful and moral NATO kool aid.
NATO air display and fly pasts for the Jihadi's for a year before Putin sorted them out, and NATO had to stop pretending. Massive influx of migrants and no way to stop them, all from NATO wars.
That's what losing a war looks like. But Putin is bad ;-) and another Afghanistan for Russki's
Well yeah he may be bad, but I don't live there, I live in EU which is going to be transformed by our lost wars.

Europe and the US's weaknesses were exposed a long time ago by the Russians. The Russian annexation of Georgia was the first test of their resolve, and having been successful there, Putin was confident that he could pursue his objectives further afield.

The European militaries are toothless, by and large, and the US can't intervene without kicking off WW3, so Russia has carte blanche to do as he pleases. Compare the difference in attitudes towards defence between Poland and Germany, night and day.

Gatling

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Europe and the US's weaknesses were exposed a long time ago by the Russians. The Russian annexation of Georgia was the first test of their resolve, and having been successful there, Putin was confident that he could pursue his objectives further afield.

That's it exactly

Dohnjoe

Russian judge delivers verdict that Ukrainian pilot is guilty of being complicit in the deaths of two journalists

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-russia-savchenko-idUSKCN0WN0O5?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews

She was captured by rebels and in their custody before the incident even took place.

Dohnjoe

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The European militaries are toothless, by and large, and the US can't intervene without kicking off WW3, so Russia has carte blanche to do as he pleases. Compare the difference in attitudes towards defence between Poland and Germany, night and day.

Most world leaders have to deal with a free press and genuine opposition, Putin has to contend with neither. His only mandate in the country is to appease the large block of low-information voters and nationalists.

Gatling

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Russian judge delivers verdict that Ukrainian pilot is guilty of being complicit in the deaths of two journalists

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-russia-savchenko-idUSKCN0WN0O5?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews

She was captured by rebels and in their custody before the incident even took place.

What a joke and yet the Russians were charing her with crossing the border illegally too

Gatling

Seems russia is itching to start bombing again In syria and are actually blaming America and are worried about civilians all of a sudden .

"MOSCOW -- Russia on Monday warned the United States that it will start responding to cease-fire violations in Syria unilaterally starting Tuesday if the U.S. refuses to coordinate rules of engagement against the violators.

The Russian military have accused the U.S. of dragging its feet on responding to Moscow's proposals on joint monitoring of a Syria cease-fire. A top Russian general said on the weekend that further delays are leading to civilian casualties, like in Aleppo where 67 civilians reportedly have been killed by militant fire since the truce started.

Lt. Gen. Sergei Rudskoi of the Russian General Staff said in a statement on Monday that Russia will have to use force unilaterally that because the U.S., in talks with Russia last week, had refused to coordinate a joint response.

"The American side was not ready for this particular discussion and for the approval of the agreement," the statement quoted him as saying.

There was no immediate reaction from U.S. officials."

Tea drinker

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Most world leaders have to deal with a free press and genuine opposition, Putin has to contend with neither. His only mandate in the country is to appease the large block of low-information voters and nationalists.

I think comparing how the West and Russia work in politics is interesting but ultimately pointless, it works for them, for now. And hopefully it gets better.
IMHO They need that "strong leader" thing otherwise anarchy beckons.

I see my point about EU inability to defend it's borders got brought home in a rather tragic way. Guys, this is OUR Afghanistan, forget about Russia.
It's suffering big on the embargo, but not for Syria...

BalcombeSt4

cerastes wrote: »

TBH
I think if a power/nation has the ability to put enough troops on the ground to hold and police ground, and instigate other measures that show the populace things are/can be improved, I think its possible to defeat an insurgency.

In the case of the US and Iraq that didnt work as the territory covered simply left huge swathes of land which they could not cover and an inadequete number of troops to complete the task.
Rumsfeld (a politician) went so far as to put Tommy Franks (a General) in his place on live tv (national and international) about what was right and that General Franks was over estimating the requirement for troops and that his plan was dated, Rumsfeld may have even referred to it being of the WW2 ear, well as that was the last confrontation that was won outright and given how any conflict had gone since, and how the whole mess went, it looks like Rumsfeld was wrong and Franks was right.

Rumsfeld wanted a corporate war, less men, less costs, all the rewards, and maybe the outcome was intentional?

Well he helped arm Saddam Hussien...

Hande hoche!

Well the Russians seem to be backing the Syrian army in pushing ISIL out of Palmyra. Seems to be a positive development.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/03/syrian-army-edges-isil-held-palmyra-160326140358526.html

Tea drinker

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Well the Russians seem to be backing the Syrian army in pushing ISIL out of Palmyra. Seems to be a positive development.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/03/syrian-army-edges-isil-held-palmyra-160326140358526.html

They always were against ISIS with SAA. Only in western media was they not fighting. Yes they (Russia and SAA) fought other groups and they didn't fight everyone everywhere all the time, that would not be sound military strategy.

BoJack Horseman

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Well the Russians seem to be backing the Syrian army in pushing ISIL out of Palmyra. Seems to be a positive development.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/03/syrian-army-edges-isil-held-palmyra-160326140358526.html

The Syrian army have been fighting there for some months now, but its only in the last few weeks that they have started to make breakthroughs.

It will be good news for Assad if they take it fully, after Palmyra there is just a couple of ISIS controlled villages but otherwise empty land between there and Raqqa.

I'm certain that ISIS would not have the strength to take the town again

BoJack Horseman

Tea drinker wrote: »

They always were against ISIS with SAA. Only in western media was they not fighting.

Indeed... evil old west.... how can anyone tolerate existing therein...

To clarify though, the media line is that Russia has not been focused against ISIS... which is both objectively true & contrary to the Kremlin's position from the start (though the started to change that stance in the last while, when it became too obvious ISIS were not their main goal).

Tea drinker

I just call it like I see it Bojack :-)
I have no agenda for russia or EU.... if anything I am more critical of EU due to the repercussions of living here but also they told me they were great fella's. I have a horrible habit of holding people to account over stuff like that ;-)
Can you imagine how pissed off I am looking at our messed up foreign policy of winning battles but losing peace, then watching our culture get eroded "for reasons". But I shouldn't get too off topic here, just wanted to tell you where I'm coming from, stuff doesn't always come across well on the interwebs.

Count Dooku

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Well the Russians seem to be backing the Syrian army in pushing ISIL out of Palmyra. Seems to be a positive development.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/03/syrian-army-edges-isil-held-palmyra-160326140358526.html

Not for US state department

Gatling

Count Dooku wrote: »

Not for US state department

Got to love Kremlin edited videos

weisses

Count Dooku wrote: »

Not for US state department

Since when is it a secret US don't want either party in power ?

BoJack Horseman

Some ally air forces are running low on munitions.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/u-s-allies-borrowing-munitions-to-drop-on-isis-as-u-s-1767362416

Jesus would weep, but he's too busy resurrecting today.

Count Dooku

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Some ally air forces are running low on munitions.

it could be even worse
In Syria, militias armed by the Pentagon fight those armed by the CIA - Los Angeles Times

donaghs

Gatling wrote: »

So we might get a cease fire on Friday but according to russia there not part of any agreement and they will continue bombing.

Pointless exercise

Following your anti-Assad line in this thread, In understand Assad is a sometimes brutal dictator. Its important to qualify by saying sometimes as Syria was a relatively stable country before the war, with very good minority rights/relations (relative to other Arab countries), and a decent standard of living/education for a non-petro state. Many western tourists also visited to see Ancient Palmyra, the old city of Damascus, Greek Roman and Crusader remains, old Mosques and Churches and Castles, the Armenian shrine at Deir el Zor, etc.

So my question is really, beyond your outrage, what are you honestly proposing should be done in Syria?
Do you really believe such a thing exists as a significant number of"moderate" rebels, who have any hope of establishing some sort of non-Sunni theocracy?

Look what happens to minorities in areas where the "rebels" take over. Genocide is now an acceptable term. Even minorities are afraid to flee to refugee camps as these are dominated by "rebels" who persecute them.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/immigration/for-syrian-christians-lives-depend-on-refugee-roulette/news-story/74de296000e09af537c62a9953e55660

So again, if you lived in Syria, honestly, and leaving utopian scenarios aside, which of the likely outcomes would you wish for? Because there are real people living through this, and someone will have to "win" (come out on top) for this to end (even if this means jihadis take over and anyone not up to their standards flees or dies).

Gatling

donaghs wrote: »

Following your anti-Assad line in this thread, In understand Assad is a sometimes brutal dictator. Even minorities are afraid to flee to refugee camps as these are dominated by "rebels" who persecute them.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/immigration/for-syrian-christians-lives-depend-on-refugee-roulette/news-story/74de296000e09af537c62a9953e55660

My assad line is he should face prosecution for his crimes against his own population if anyone should mention genocide it's against the regime and it's forces .

As for what should happen now, well syria is no more the bastion of democracy and tolerance is gone forever.
Assad wasn't elected for life ,I'm pretty sure his life will end in the not so near future ,
For now russia will take a piece as will iran and Hizbolla,
The Kurds are pushing ahead with their own autonomy they won't go back to assads syria ,
And as for the gains they made under russian assaults they won't and can't last as neither assad or russia has the tens of thousands of soldiers and military equipment to hold any gains .

So that leaves us with states within a state with no real reason to tie them all together under one government or flag .

bilston

The next flashpoint?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35949991

What will Russia do about this?

Gatling

bilston wrote: »

The next flashpoint?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35949991

What will Russia do about this?

Probably better off in the other thread but to answer your question they have a security agreement where russia will defend Armenia during conflict

IrishTrajan

Gatling wrote: »

Probably better off in the other thread but to answer your question they have a security agreement where russia will defend Armenia during conflict

If I'm not mistaken, Russia has security ties with both Armenia and Azerbaijan. They said they'd deal with the conflict through dialogue but has since tried to convince the EU to take over, since the EU is simply larger and can put more pressure on them.

Though I read this pre-Crimea, so maybe Putin will try to resolve it himself.

bilston

Gatling wrote: »

Probably better off in the other thread but to answer your question they have a security agreement where russia will defend Armenia during conflict

Ah didn't see the other thread, I read some quotes from Erdogan today which backed Azerbaijan.

This seems like a other potential flashpoint between the Russians and Turks.

donaghs

Gatling wrote: »

My assad line is he should face prosecution for his crimes against his own population

Fair enough, but I don't think this would resolve the conflict any quicker.

Gatling wrote: »

if anyone should mention genocide it's against the regime and it's forces .

Which group of people is the Assad regime targeting to exterminate?
That's a incorrect use of the word "genocide". Lots of civilians are dying in the conflict, but its still obvious that killing civilians is not a primary aim of the government. Rather they can be indifferent to civilian casualties in pursuing military victory. Not nice, but still different.

Gatling wrote: »

As for what should happen now, well syria is no more the bastion of democracy and tolerance is gone forever.
Assad wasn't elected for life ,I'm pretty sure his life will end in the not so near future ,
For now russia will take a piece as will iran and Hizbolla,
The Kurds are pushing ahead with their own autonomy they won't go back to assads syria ,
And as for the gains they made under russian assaults they won't and can't last as neither assad or russia has the tens of thousands of soldiers and military equipment to hold any gains .

So that leaves us with states within a state with no real reason to tie them all together under one government or flag .

So, going back to the question, is your preferred likely outcome for a peaceful solution, to break Syria up into smaller states, based on ethnicity like the Kurds, or pro and anti-government allegiance?
Also, would you really want this, if you had to live in each of those new states?

BoJack Horseman

donaghs wrote: »

That's a incorrect use of the word "genocide".

Correct.... however sectarian extermination is a huge problem in both Iraq & Syria.

Sunni towns that were attacked by Shia militias from Iran & Lebanon were not kind to the civilians of towns retaken for the Assad dictatorship.

Stories of 'sectarian revenge' are probably more stark in Iraq though..... these militias are disorganised & answer to no one.

The result is the reverse of ISIS territory, which are almost devoid of non-Sunni civilians.