DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Russia Airstrikes in Syria, not helping fight against ISIS, seem to help Assad.

Therein lies the biggest part of the problem. The middle east had been at war with each other since the beginning of man, why do we even think we can fix it?

One thing that never changes is that a picture is worth a thousand words!

Looks like the Russian/Syrian/Iranian coalition is gaining support from the people of Iraq now...

Victory over ISIS in Iraqi town has some supporting Iran

BEIJI, Iraq – A big victory over Islamic State here provided fresh ammunition for the many Iraqi Shiites who prefer Iran as a battlefield partner over the U.S., despite indications that Washington could soon intensify its battle against the extremist militants.

Shiite militias and politicians backed by Iran have claimed much of the credit for the Iraqi recapture a little over a week ago of the city and oil refinery of Beiji, about 130 miles north of Baghdad. Militia fighters danced and posed for pictures on tanks and armored cars near the bombed-out shell of the massive refinery there, Iraq’s largest.

But U.S. officers say the Iran-backed proxy militias known as Popular Mobilization Forces, or PMF, played only a supporting role. The bulk of the fighting was by Iraqi federal police and elite counterterrorism units trained by the U.S., the American officers said.

Still powerful Iraqi politicians and militia leaders have cited the yearlong operation to retake the city as evidence that Iraqis can combat Islamic State alone—or with help only of the Iran-backed militias. Some are now lobbying Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi to rely less on the U.S.-led coalition battling Islamic State and more on the PMF.

“Iraqi people in general, not only us, have started to feel that the Americans are not serious at all about the fight against Islamic State,” said Moeen Al- Kadhimi, a spokesman for the Iran-backed Badr Corps militia. “Every victory that the PMF does without the help of the Americans is a big embarrassment for the Americans.”

Following the declaration of victory at Beiji, the U.S.-led coalition, which has been conducting an air campaign against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria for more than a year, published a list of airstrikes it conducted around the city.

“It’s easy to say after the fact that ‘we did this,’ ” said Maj. Michael Filanowski, an officer for the Combined Joint Task Force, which organizes operations of the U.S.-led coalition. “But if you look at the sequence of events, it was Iraqi security forces that did the assault operations.”

He called the militias a “hold force,” meaning they secured the territory after it fell to the Iraqi forces.

The barbs reflect the geopolitical wrangling under way in Iraq. Militias often trained and supplied by Iran—and open to military assistance from Russia—have long sought a more prominent strategic role in the fight against Islamic State. As these voices grow louder, the U.S. risks losing influence in the country if an alliance including Iran and Russia gains.

The U.S. is seriously considering new measures to step up the fight against Islamic State, officials said this week, including deploying some Apache attack helicopters to Iraq. The move could require the deployment of hundreds more U.S. service members to Iraq.

After a joint U.S.-Iraqi Kurdish ground raid last week on an Islamic State prison, Secretary of Defense Ash Carter said the U.S. military would mount more such raids and provide more active support to groups, including Kurdish fighters, who can counter the extremists. He said he was prepared to put more American forces “in harm’s way.”

The raid resulted in the rescue of 69 prisoners and killed more than 20 Islamic State militants, according to the Kurdistan Regional Government. An American service member was killed—the first U.S. combat casualty in Iraq since the U.S. withdrew its forces in 2011 at the end of a decadelong war.

While that raid was welcomed by traditional U.S. allies representing Iraq’s Sunni minority, Iran-backed Shiite lawmakers and militia leaders called it American overreach, saying the U.S. never coordinated with the Iraqi government

Hezbollah fighters are now battling on the side of Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad and Russia against Sunni insurgents including the so-called Islamic State.

I wonder how long before Iran starts rolling missiles across the former countries of Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon so they can get them closer to Israel.

You will have to ask Vlad, he runs the middle east now.

I'd posit that NOONE runs the Middle East... and that Vlad will soon find himself hip deep in that tribal cesspool just like we've been.

Just my own personal take on the entire region: It's remained culturally unchanged for thousands of years, no matter who comes in there from the outside. So they've graduated from rocks, sticks and knives to ballistic missiles, ied's and RPG's... but they are still ruled and/or motivated by the same impulses and cultural codes that date back to before the time of Christ.

It is the pinnacle of hubris for either us or Putin to think we can change a single thing over there.

It's been said: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." In the Middle East, it's more like:

"The enemy of my enemy is my enemy once we've dispatched our most recent common enemy." Fighting, killing and dying isn't a social and cultural anomaly for that region- it's ingrained in the very fabric of daily life. I really do believe that most wouldn't know what to do with a protracted period of peace if they had it... anywhere.

>3,000 years of what we see in the news every day. Putin isn't going to make a dent or even a dimple in that. And if he thinks he can... well- he's welcome to try to run that asylum, afaic. It will bring him and his country to ruin if he goes all-in.

It's a geopolitical Black Hole. Nothing good ever comes from being over there.


.02

Pretty much agreed.

But, the middle east is exporting more than just oil - they're exporting too many people that have lived in the manner you described.

That's a scary thought.

And just to head off any issues here: no, not all.

because we fixed the war with each other here ....

One of the best Life educations I ever got was when I moved from Lima to Toledo. Until then, I'd only known about folks from the Middle East through the TV. I've now spent more than 30 years around them on an almost daily/weekly basis... and here's what I've learned:

The American citizens I know who hailed from that region were (by Western standards) the best, brightest, and most motivated that you'd ever want. Almost to a person, they've told me that they simply couldn't live there any more... not when there was the promise of a better life waiting for them elsewhere. They abhorred the violence, the tribalism, the death and daily mayhem... and wanted something better for themselves and their families. No matter what country they came from: Lebanon, UAR, Egypt, Syria [you name it], they all had one thing in common: they were all beneficiaries of some sort of education. Some were formally educated. Some were autodidacts. But ALL came here because they were (in some way) free to think for themselves, even under the most oppressive and restrictive of circumstances.


It's heartbreaking to see these refugees fleeing Syria and other war-torn countries because I know that most (in fact almost all) are folks who just want for themselves the things we take for granted: to be safe from harm/danger, to be given an environment for self-betterment, and to live in a world where they can see their kids grow up to make a difference.

Here in The States, we get a very targeted, skewed version of what these people are. With a constant news diet of burned-out buildings, crying people huddling near corpses on the street, and YouTube vids of the latest ISIL atrocity, we tend to view everyone from that region as some wild-eyed terrorist, hellbent on destroying the infidel of the West. I'm glad you took the time to say "not all," because that's the Real Truth of the matter.

Over there, 'America's news' is being shaped by the most extreme of actors... and all too often, those are the ones setting tribal policy. The rank & file citizen- the Arches, Clems, ddubias, 40s, DCs, GMs and Swishes are just everyday folks trying to have a decent life. Assad is responsible for Europe's new challenges, not the people who are fleeing his dysfunctional hellhole. And there may be a terrorist infiltrator or three among that human tsunami battering their shores, but truth: it's mostly desperation, not political or religious ideology.

So you see.... I'm less worried about the sensible people fleeing that atmosphere to come here than I am about sending our folks into that region where the crazies set the conditions. We will never 'fix' that region, because culturally, those in charge don't think it's broken. Ask anyone who's left there, and they'll tell you: THEY LEFT BECAUSE THEY COULD SEE IT WAS BETTER SOMEWHERE ELSE.

That's someone I can welcome to these shores. That's someone who will do all they can to be a good citizen in their adopted country.


“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”


.02

Clem, your well thought out posts are accurate when seen through caring American frosted lenses. The truth of the Middle Eastern situation is a bit more harsh.

Putin could care less about huddled masses and people wishing for a better place to live their lives.

Putin cares about position and influence. You claim he will find himself caught in a 3000 year old quagmire but I believe he will avoid this by Installing and supporting strong and brutal dictators in the region. Strong dictators have worked well in controlling the middle east over the centuries.

He has already cleared out millions of fighting age men from Syria with the mass exodus of them into Europe. These men were not fighting for the Assad regime so they were a threat. Left are those men who are more easily controlled or who will fight for Assad.

Today Putin is clearing out the resistance to Assad with his own air power and tanks manned by Assad's troops. In time, Assad will be in full control again. Putin could probably care less about ISIS because they are also killing Assad's foes who are backed by America.

When Putin is done, all of Syria will be under Assad's control, or for that matter, under the control of Russia's pick for Assad's replacement. Putin will have vital allies in Syria, Iran, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas/Fatah in Palestine. He will then be able to pull his involvement back while his allies run the middle east with a Iron Fist. The sale of Russian made armaments will be HUGE.

Obama's weak policies on the Middle East have, in a few short years, undone 50 years of America's efforts to drive Soviet and now Russian influence out of the Middle East. He will in the end, return us to the days of Proxy Wars and competition for Allies in the Middle East, increasing the possibility of a World War by 100 fold.

God help the Kurds and Iraq as they come under pressure from a strong and unified Syria and an already strong Iran.

Now, to your concerns for the best and brightest huddled masses longing to become citizens of our great Nation.

Are you aware that due to the influx of illegal aliens, it takes the best and brightest of other lands DECADES to achieve American citizenship today? That part of the system is broken. The huddled masses must huddle elsewhere because there are no longer rooms available at this inn.

why are people so mad that we don't have soldiers potentially dying in syria?

how is that a bad thing?

We just had one killed in a firefight last week.

That is like saying every war America fights will be another Vietnam. As if people don't learn from the past. Silly.

I'm giving you the past which I did learn from. Both the U. S. and Russia have failed repeatedly in changing the culture in the middle east. We've installed regimes there before, and in the end, changed nothing.

You're the one trying to pose that history in the middle east means nothing.

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

That would explain why I got remarried.

Well, to be fair, this is largely in part because every regime either one has ever installed there was set up purely for self-serving purposes.... and then usually given zero backing/support once in place.

The whole reason that we failed in Vietnam is the same reason that the Soviets failed in Afghanistan... we were actually fighting each other while trying very deliberately to not turn it into a broader, direct conflict. The Vietnamese received massive support from the Soviets (and China), and after Korea we were terrified of doing ANYTHING that might pull China directly into it. In Afghanistan, we were giving direct support via the CIA and our own SPECWAR groups to the mujahaddin to help them oppose the Soviets.

Unfortunately, this is (again) exactly what is happening in Syria. ISIS is really just nothing more than a bug in the ointment. Russia wants to support their friend because it is a port on the Med and helps their oil interests. I believe we want to block it because I'm nearly 100% certain that it is all just a power-play to disrupt Russia's larger oil plans. There's a really HUGE pipeline plan that Russia has been working toward for YEARS, plus they have China barking orders at them because China needs readily available & cheap oil - which is why the Iran deal happened.

It's also why I believe that Russia's plans will ultimately collapse.

The regimes in this region are notorious for being volatile, unstable and yes... unreliable.

Alliances change as quickly as the sands beneath their feet. Agreements (and even signed treaties) mean nothing to them, if someone who has been an historic enemy decides to throw a wrench into the proceedings. Alliances in this region are made for immediate expedience only. Tribes who fight together on November 15 will become mortal enemies AGAIN by Christmastime.

The only constant in this region is instability.
Such is as it is now, and such has it always been.

With all due respect to 40's take on this, he sees this scenario from a Western tactical and strategic POV, as do I. In his response to me, he's channeling Putin's (assumed) strategy, and he did a GREAT job of outlining the tactics employed to achieve that end.

There's only one problem with 40's take(and by extension, Putin's) approach):

These cray-cray MF's have NEVER cared what outsiders want.



They only care about what they can get for their tribe. They aren't thinking Global Politics. They aren't concerned about what an alliance with Western powers can bring them. Their main concern has always been expanding heir own regional footprint.

They are happy to take support from wherever it may come, but they have no loyalty to the powers that afford them advantage. It's why the Mujahedeen were thorns in the side of Russia in the 80's & 90's... and became a thorn in the side of USA in the new millennium (under the banner of The Taliban).

Everywhere we have ever tried to 'nation build,' the results have always been the same: every regime we help depose is replaced by some group that is crazier and less beholding to us than the one they replaced. Russia has experienced the exact same thing, every time they've tried.

No Western power (no matter how globally influential they may be) will EVER have even a minimal measure of control in this region... because we cannot impose our culture and mores upon a People who listen to their ancestors on a deeper level than we will ever reach.

This goes beyond political strategy, diplomacy, or military tactics. Russia & the US are playing a loser's hand in the Middle East because they don't care what we want... and they never will.

They cannot be co-opted in any cost-effective way.
They cannot be used (without prohibitive cost in human lives)
They will not be 'tamed' to meet our standards of civility or 'global citizenship.'
They are culturally predestined, for the next 100 years to do things as they always have.

It's why I have believed, since the 1970's, that every modern nation should avoid this region of the globe like The Plague.

There are only 2 things this region has to offer the rest of the world:

1. Crazyass MF's killing each other over plats of sand.
2. 'Easy' Oil.

At this point, the rest of the world has to ask itself:
"Is the cost of dealing with these lunatics worth what they have under their soil? Is it worth the cost in Human Capital, national resources and continual social angst to keep Big Oil happy and healthy? Is there something we can do to extricate ourselves from this hellhole on Earth?

The irony of this geopolitical quagmire is just too rich for words. The world's Superpowers are beholding to a group of 13th century tribes because of what lays beneath their soil... and millions of Human Lives have been sacrificed upon the altar of Power and Profit to make $#!+ happen.


And all the while, The Sun beats down upon all of us. The same Sun that gave Life to everything else ON THE SURRFACE OF THE PLANET.

Dig, dig. dig.
Burrow deeper.
Let's keep going DOWN- because that GOTTA be The Answer.

Looking up? Dude- that's not really a viable option, is it?
.02

Great post. It's proven that meddling is an extremely expensive and fruitless effort, yet our leaders seem ignorant to this fact. There was more stability when the super powers propped up dictators and despots who were able to keep these lunatics under a bit of control. Granted there was oppression and atrocities, but viewing the victims as good guys and arming them to the teeth isn't the answer.

Advice is given to many but only those who listen prosper.

One of the worst things to happen in terms of global stability was the fall of the Soviet Empire.

Putin casually mentioned using nuclear bombs in Syria


Vladimir Putin casually dropped nuclear weapons into conversation while discussing Syria.

Russia has carried out multiple air strikes in Syria, and Putin claims his TU-22 bombers have caused ‘significant damage’ to an Islamic State munitions depot, an oil facility and other key targets.

Talking about Russia’s military campaign in Syria, Putin mentioned the weapons currently being used could ‘be equipped with special nuclear warheads.’

‘Both the Calibre missiles and the Kh-101 rockets are generally showing very good results. We now see that these are new, modern and highly effective high-precision weapons that can be equipped either with conventional or special nuclear warheads,’ Putin said during a meeting with Russia’s Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu.

He did not reveal concrete plans to use nuclear weapons – but he didn’t exactly rule it out either.

http://metro.co.uk/2015/12/10/putin-casually-mentioned-using-nuclear-bombs-in-syria-5556168/

Heard about that. Putin is a scary dude...

he is bluffing, if he were to use nukes without international approval russia would be in an international chit storm of crazy proportions.

Yes, bluffing. Just imagine the crap storm if he were to send troops into Syria, begin bombing our allies in Syria, fire cruise missiles from submarines into Syria!

Oh yea, he is doing all those things. Never mind.

Now he has brought in Batteries of his top of the line anti aircraft missiles. Wonder if ISIS has Fighter Jets and Bombers? What else could they possibly be there for???

How much do you want to bet he won't fire nukes in Syria?

Never bluff unless you are prepared to follow through. If you get called on a bluff and then back down, you look weak. And Putin would rather have his eyeballs removed with a rusty fork than appear weak...

he won't do it. that would be the permanent end of russia.

he can't risk that.

NK bluffs all the time. nukes is simply a power move. nothing more.

He is not bluffing.
Here is what he is doing. He is Leading.

Our Commander in Chief announces ahead of time, I will not do this, I will not do that. I will not put boots on the ground, I will not use Nukes. I will not bomb civilian areas.
Heck, our guy won't even call the enemy Islamic Extremists because that would not be PC.

Putin on the other hand has sent this message...

I will do whatever it takes to win my cause in the middle east, period.

Do I really think he will use Nukes? No.
Do I really think he is playing Chess while we play Checkers? Yes.

I have been looking into this stuff for a while and here is a little side note I picked up on...

Putin is KGB and speaks fluent English. He speaks English with other English speaking leaders but he never speaks English to President Obama, never.
Why? My guess is when Obama says something, Putin completely understands it but always looks to his translator. This gives him time to think further of the best possible answer.
Chess.

what is this nonsense about playing chess vs checkers crap?

you think destroying food in russia because it comes from western nations is leading?

you think tanking the economy in the name of military might, and telling your citizens to lower their quality of life so that putin can flex his muscles is leading?

please, tell me 40, what has his bombing in the middle east done?

they still bombed paris, they still attacked us here, and they still beheaded people in the middle east.

oh, and now they have even more recruits than before.

and you somehow think he's doing a good job?

man go move to russia. you're a communist. that fact that you show more respect and loyalty to a commie over our own country shows you're a joke. you're not a patriot, you're a fraud.

our president, no matter who is is, has to follow our constitution, and is at the mercy of congress, democrat or republican. Putin doesn't HAVE to do the same. totally different government styles.

oh, and BTW, putin also uses a translator in other global meetings as well. there are tons of people who do the same, just because someone foreign speaks english doesn't mean they are proficient at it, and might still use a translator in the most important meetings that way they don't misinterpret serious discussions. they do it at G20 summits all the time.

you don't even know what you're talking about. but you're a fraud, so it makes sense.

i just lost all my respect for you, commie. you probably beat off to a picture of putin riding shirtless on a horse.

go move to russia.

Rule #1 is know your enemy.

As usual I find you funny because many of us used to tell the Hippies things like, "Better Dead than Red" and "You don't like it here, move to Russia"!

And here we are, come full circle.

You don't like what I say, well neither do I like having to say it. We need LEADERSHIP!

commie. move to russia. you're not a patriot.

this conversation got ridiculous really quickly.


If you think anybody is going to use nuclear weapons in a little civil war, please go take your Xanax (preferably Lithium) and sit in the corner.

Pretty low class and uncalled for. Im surprised we allow that on here.

what's low is that he shows more patriotism to russia than the usa.

but of course imma get called out for saying what i said. not this unloyal loser.

Win his cause.

Communist dictators don't need the approval of a congress. They don't lead, they dictate.

It was people like you who Pfft'ed at Hitler in 1939 as he was a funny little man with a stupid little mustache. Germany's economy was in ruins and his pockets were empty.

Know your enemy.

did hitler drop a nuke?

as a matter off fact, name the country or countries that have used nuclear bombs.

if putin launches a nuke, we WILL go to WW3, you understand that, right?

Russia doesn't have enough allies that will back them against NATO.

Chinese won't risk their economic dominance, especially against the US.

Iran just got a nuke deal, they already know they won't be able to win, plus that means going back to zero in whatever power they was gaining.

Russia doesn't have the funds nor the backing of any remotely good allies to go to War with the US.

he's running his mouth, just like north korea does.

you're not knowing your enemy. you're just a fanboy.