DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Putin Orders Russian Troops to Begin Withdrawing from Syria

They barely made a dent over there. ISIS still beheaded people left and right, still took over resources and land, and their recruitment numbers got higher.

How much have Russia and the US spent over there bombing the area?

I read his statement as "We have seen first hand how jacked up the region is, and we aren't wasting anymore money or soldiers over there."


http://abcnews.go.com/International/puti...ory?id=37637792

Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered his country's military to begin its withdrawal from Syria, saying the intervention has “largely achieved its objectives”.

In a statement the Kremlin says Putin called Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to inform him of the Russian decision and that Putin has also ordered Russia “intensify” its role in the peace process to end the conflict.

I disagree that he barely made a dent over there.

Assad is now firmly in control of Syria, his military is crushing opposition every day. Once again his tanks, choppers and jets roam the countryside.

When the Russians arrived, Assad was about to flee. No more.

except you forget that ISIS is a terrorist group, not an official government.

the beheadings still continued, the bombings still happened. ISIS lost some ground, that's about it.

Assad having firm control of Syria has less to do with ISIS and more to do with the fact that the US pulled off on trying to get rid of him.

China was suppose to join in the fight, but now they won't since Russia is pulling out.

most likely, ISIS recruitment numbers are gonna skyrocket, as they are gonna market this as them holding their own against a world superpower.

the only way to end...eh...minimize terrorism in the middle east is a full out, permanent occupation of the region.

and that's a big fat nope from me.

Considering we can't go back in time and fix some of the more stupid mistakes that have taken place in the Middle East and you say only an all out occupation would solve it and yet you aren't in favor of that option, are you then proposing we vacate the Mediterranean region and say, well ya on your own, good luck killing each other, we'll be back to drill when this place is rubble?

I didn't forget ISIS.
Putin could care less about ISIS, this you never understood.
He was there for Assad, he was there to strengthen Assad's grip on Syria. Assad is now in a position to control Syria and can handle ISIS on his own.

I am glad that Putin does not appear to want more of the Middle East and is going home. My worry was he would link up with Iran and completely control the Middle East. He has decided to go home now, Mission Accomplished.

it's more along the lines of not helping people who hate our existence.

i've said this over and over: the moment we decided to give israel billions a year, plus weapon, is the moment we made permanent enemies with some countries in the middle east.

We entered a holy war without even realizing it.

I've said before that i support vacating the region. those countries need to figure it out on their own, without outside influences. Their problems are deeply rooted in religion, which is funny as its an internal beef of Islam.

like what we saw with protestants and catholics back in the day. this is the same crap with the sunni's and shiites.

i don't support at all a full out occupation, but if we were to do it, we better do it right.

my issues with that is one we are seeing here in America play out; we can fix their economies and all that, they can be a booming region...

but all that does is suppresses the problem. a problem that doesn't have anything to do with economics. do we really wanna suppress this religious divide?

we think we have problems here in the states. we got nothing on the stuff going on in the middle east.

and the reality is that we aren't in a position to even try to tell somebody whats morally right. we aren't in a position right now to try and be somebody's middle man.

the average american, in politics or not, we as a collective group simply have no idea what's going on socially over there. this is issues that go back centuries, before America was a twinkle in anybody's eyes.

there's just way too many factors that we need to take into account before i'd even consider something like that.

Assad's grip on Syria could end as soon as next year. Putin didn't accomplish anything.

more likely, he ran out of money.

Disagree.

I am pretty sure Turkey turning hostile towards Russia and being backed by the US had nothing to do with ending Russia's idea they could waltz in and take control. I don't think ISIS has much to do with why Russia went in at all. They were just as excuse for an attempted power grab and Turkey and the US made it clear that would not happen.

Just glad it was russian dollars wasted on it instead of US dollars.

that's fine.

I'm just looking at the state of Russia's economy right now. the state of the citizens, especially after they went on this anti-western everything and started destroying food.

combined with the massive drop in oil prices that russia got smacked with, and Putin is probably trying to save money.

the point is driven home when you take into account him trying to reel in the billionaires who have their money out of the country.

thats a good perspective, bro. i forgot all about that.

ISIS was never more than the excuse palatable to the western world for Putin to help Assad against the rebels. ISIS is barely a thorn in Assad's side.

annnnnd another one:

American Fighting With ISIS Captured in Iraq

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/15/world/middleeast/american-isis-fighter.html?_r=0

SULAIMANIYA, Iraq — An American fighting for the Islamic State was captured in northern Iraq early Monday morning, according to Kurdish and American officials.

The American, identified by Kurdish officials as a young man from Virginia, was captured near the city of Sinjar, which Kurdish forces retook from the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, in November. A senior American military official and the Kurdish official, fighting with Kurdish pesh merga forces, confirmed the capture on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the news media.

A Pentagon spokesman, Capt. Jeff Davis, said in a statement: “We’re aware of the reports, aware that the U.S. citizen allegedly fighting for ISIL has been captured by pesh merga forces in northern Iraq. We’re in touch with Iraqi and Kurdish authorizes to determine the veracity of these reports.”

Continue reading the main story
RELATED COVERAGE

State of Terror: To Maintain Supply of Sex Slaves, ISIS Pushes Birth ControlMARCH 12, 2016
Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, said at Monday’s news briefing that he could not answer any questions about the man.

Kurdish officials in Iraq identified the American as Mohammed Jamal Amin, 27, but an image that Kurdish officials appeared to have circulated on social media showed a Virginia driver’s license belonging to a man named Mohamad Jamal Khweis who would be 26 years old.

If his identity is confirmed, the man would be the first American fighting with the Islamic State known to have surrendered in the field, according to Seamus Hughes, an expert on Islamist extremism in the Center for Cyber and Homeland Security at George Washington University.

Continue reading the main story
ISIS in America
82 people have been accused by American officials of trying to help the Islamic State. How serious is the threat?


Twenty-five Americans have been confirmed to have traveled to Syria to fight alongside the Islamic State. A number of those fighters have been killed, and a few others have returned to the United States to face criminal charges; the whereabouts of the rest are not known.

Federal officials have cited higher figures for American fighters — more than 250 — but they have not distinguished between American citizens who went to Syria to join the Islamic State and those who joined other extremist groups, like Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria, the Nusra Front.

The American fighter captured on Monday appears to have entered Syria from Turkey several months ago, and made his way to Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, which has been under the Islamic State’s control for more than a year and a half.

It was not immediately clear how he ended up near Sinjar. The Kurdish official said the American had been carrying a large amount of Turkish money and three cellphones.

Since March 2014, more than 80 people have been accused by American officials of trying to help the Islamic State, but none appeared to receive specific direction from ISIS abroad, according to evidence presented in legal documents and other public information that were analyzed by The New York Times and the Center on National Security at Fordham Law.

A third of those accused were alleged to be discussing or plotting an attack in the United States. The majority were charged with trying to travel abroad to fight for the Islamic State, or trying to help others travel.

Although the domestic plots may cause alarm, fighting abroad has been the driving force among those in the United States inspired by the Islamic State, according to Karen J. Greenberg, executive director of the Center on National Security. All told, almost all of those charged were American citizens or permanent residents. About 40 percent had converted to Islam. Nearly three-quarters were under 30, and all but 12 were male.

IMO, you're severely underestimating the impact fighting ISIS was gonna have on Putin's relationship with the rest of the world, with regards to terrorism.

of course everybody thinks "ulterior motives" because he didn't succeed.

but if he did, these post would look more like "putin did what obama couldn't" "putin defeated isis"

the tune changes depending on what actually happened.

I have no problem with that option, I bet 99% of Americans could get behind that option... as long as they KEEP IT OVER THERE. Problem is, they won't. They want the whole world to share in their misery.

The only thing that will ever settle the hate in the middle east is armageddon. They just have so many thousands of years hating each other that even when peace arrives some jerk with a grievance going back a thousand years goes on a rampage. Once the oil is gone or not needed it will go back to a region that no one gives a crap about. I mean they are the ones who want Jihad against America. I say stop dicking around and the next country that publicly supports Jihad against us we wipe them out. Probably take a few weeks if we stop the political crap about caring about civilians. I am one of these jerks that believes if your going to go to war then go to freaking war and destroy everything. Level it all. Do that once or twice and it will stop. It will all stop.

THEN you let them start over with American controlled schools that forced them to get a damn education and understand reality instead of lala land where women are garbage and abuse. I could justify plowing them down just for how they treat women alone. How can any sane man want to harm his own daughters. I have no respect for a culture like that where your children are not treated as the most precious gift of God. A person who does harm on purpose to his children without holding their life as precious should just die IMHO.

This is so far off base, I don't know where to begin with it. Swish pretty much nailed this thread in my opinion. Excellent point by Razor too. If you sum up what is going on in all countries with all perspective leaders, economics and military movements, Swish's analysis is very logical.

Perhaps you can start here...

In the case of Syria, Putin's objectives are two-fold. First, he wants to ensure that Assad, a longtime Russian ally (and buyer of Russian weapons), is not toppled. Last fall, rebel forces were advancing and threatening Assad's grip on power. No longer. The Russian intervention was ostensibly supposed to attack Islamic State. In fact, some 90% of Russian sorties have been directed not at its strongholds but at more moderate rebel groups backed by the United States. This has enabled Assad to regain part of Aleppo province and to consolidate his hold on an eastern corridor running from Damascus to the Mediterranean Sea.

Putin's second objective is to reassert Russian power in the world — to make clear that Russia is not isolated after the unlawful invasion of Ukraine and that, in fact, it is ready to challenge American primacy in the Middle East, a region where the U.S. has been the dominant power for decades. That mission also has been accomplished. As a bonus, Putin even got to show off the capabilities of a new generation of advanced weapons systems, from fighter jets to cruise missiles, that he hopes to sell to eager customers around the world.

Putin probably figures that it's time to ratchet down his commitment before the cost of intervention grows. Tellingly, his decision came shortly after a Syrian MiG-21 was shot down by a portable surface-to-air missile — reportedly a U.S.-made Stinger. This would have been a grim reminder to Putin of the Russian war in Afghanistan. He has no desire to risk such a costly conflict again — and no need to do so.

Putin can achieve his limited objectives in Syria at much lower cost, and if Assad gets into trouble again, it's easy enough for Putin to send back more Russian forces. He is not, after all, giving up the newly established Russian airbase in Latakia province. It will now be Russia's second military installation abroad, alongside the long-standing Russian port facility nearby at Tartus on the Syrian coast.

Seen through a lens of morality, what Putin has done is monstrous — he is helping to prop up a bloodthirsty regime that has been responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of people and turning millions more into refugees. But from the narrow vantage point of Russian self-interest, Putin has pulled off another coup and shown that he is a more adept international poker player than his counterpart in Washington.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-boot-putin-removes-troops-from-syria-20160316-story.html

Video of military convoy new evidence Russia not pulling out of Syria

There is more evidence that Russian forces are not pulling out of Syria, but instead, more troops are arriving there, a new video from Russian state television Saturday apparently shows.

Russian jets and helicopter gunships helped Syrian forces push ISIS from Palmyra, once a popular tourist destination filled with ancient Roman-era artifacts, earlier this week.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said in March that his forces would begin withdrawing from Syria. Pentagon officials now say otherwise.

Despite sending less than half of its jet fighters back to Russia, there are now more Russian attack helicopters in Syria than at any time since the air campaign to shore up Syrian President Bashar al-Assad began in late September.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/04/02/...ml?intcmp=hpbt3

Putin plays chess while we play checkers.

His crew wan't exactly Boris Spassky in 80's-90's Afghanistan, and he's now doing the same in Syria.

It's the same thing USA has been guilty of in years past:
Shah of Iran
House of Saud
Ferdinand Marcos
Saddam Hussein
Mobutu Sese Seko
Hosni Mubarek....

Every time, the results end the same.

1. Ruthless dictators get deposed by a military coup. Replaced by something/someone worse and more unstable/'controllable.'
2.Propped-up strongmen either outlive their usefulness and get run out by the West, only to be replaced by something exponentially worse.

The entire region is a Black Hole into which money, equipment and Human Lives are dumped- with negative (and short-lasting) returns.

So tell me this: how is Putin's "chess game" in Syria any better/smarter than Leonid Breznev's "chess game" 37 years ago?

There are NO winnable 'chess games' to be played here. Putin would be well-advised to learn from the mistakes of every US Pres from Eisenhower to Bush 43... and let Bashir stand on his own.

This ain't chess.
In fact, this is chess' polar opposite... and we have 75 years of recorded History that tells us so.

Syrian army presses ahead with offensive against ISIS
Published April 04, 2016 Associated Press

Syrian troops and allied militiamen pressed on with an offensive against Islamic State militants in central Syria on Monday, clashing with the extremists around the town of Qaryatain a day after it was captured by pro-government forces.

The push into Qaryatain took place under the cover of Russian airstrikes and dealt another setback to ISIS in Syria a week after the army retook the historic town of Palmyra from the group. Syria's state news agency, SANA, said the army was fighting ISIS militants in areas around Qaryatain Monday, as well as in farms east and north of Palmyra.

The capture of Qaryatain deprives ISIS of a main base in central Syria and could be used by government forces in the future to launch attacks on ISIS-held areas near the Iraqi border.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/04/04/...ml?intcmp=hpbt3

-Just as one poster had predicted but everyone keeps on arguing with me.

Chess.

-and Checkers...

US seizes thousands of Iranian weapons, including grenade launchers, in Arabian Sea

The crew of a U.S. Navy ship stopped a massive Iranian arms shipment dead in its tracks, seizing thousands of weapons, AK-47 rifles and rocket-propelled grenade launchers that likely were headed to Yemen, the Pentagon announced Monday.

The seizure, which unfolded in the Arabian Sea on March 28, was the third of its kind in recent weeks, military officials say. Iran has been supporting Houthi rebels in Yemen in their proxy war against a Saudi-led coalition backed by the United States. Like Iran, the Houthis are a Shia-led group.

The arms shipment appears to mark the latest provocative action from the defiant Islamic republic, which reported last month that it tested missiles marked with the phrase "Israel must be wiped out." And on Monday, the Iranian government warned the U.S. to butt out of trying to control its missile program. "The White House should know that defense capacities and missile power, specially at the present juncture where plots and threats are galore, is among the Iranian nation's red lines... and we don’t allow anyone to violate it," Deputy Chief of Staff Brig-Gen Maassoud Jazzayeri told state media.

On Friday, President Obama said Iran was obeying the "letter" of its landmark nuclear agreement with the West, but not the "spirit" of it.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/04/04/...ml?intcmp=hpbt3

Lol here we go with the chess and checkers comments.

Well if you get board with Chess and Checkers, I could post junk like this...

Swish: "Assad's grip on Syria could end as soon as next year. Putin didn't accomplish anything."

"more likely, he ran out of money."

Obama to Putin: King me.

Putin to Obama: Check.

So the President actually expected Iran to participate in good faith and just do the right thing and now he's surprised that they are not?

Yea DC! Yea! Yea he actually did!

They are obeying what is legally required of them.

Every country does it.

Definitely not. But if that is what helps you sleep at night

From Obama's quote, assuming it's accurate... it sure sounds like he was expecting more..

He probably was expecting them to go above and beyond.

Just like people expect us to go above and beyond.

Iran has no reason to. Just like we have no reason to go above and beyond for any other country.

As long as they are honoring the requirements, then that's all that matters.

Remember, our own government doesn't go above and beyond for us. Let's not think a foreign Muslim country will.

I get all that.. but Obama's administration negotiated and agreed to the deal... now he wants Iran to live up to MORE than he negotiated and we are supposed to accept that he isn't getting what he wanted and that's what we should have expected because "everybody does it"? Then if he wanted them to live up to "the spirit" of the deal, then he should have made it a legally binding part of the deal.

Ok. He hoped they would go above and beyond.
They didn't. It's disappointing, but hardly news worthy.

Iran fires ballistic missiles a day after test; U.S. officials hint at violation


(CNN)Iran test-fired two ballistic missiles Wednesday, state media reported, just a day after other missile tests that Washington suggests were in violation of a U.N. resolution.

The missiles, capable of reaching Iran's archenemy Israel, were marked with a statement in Hebrew reading "Israel must be wiped off the Earth," Iran's semiofficial Fars News Agency reported.
The phrase originates from a remark made by the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of Iran's Islamic revolution. CNN has not independently confirmed this report, and Iranian media have not shown photographs of the message.

The firings took place on the second and final day of a large-scale military drill, which marked the first time Tehran has fired ballistic missiles since signing a deal with world powers on its nuclear program in July.
Iran: Rare images of underground missile bunker

U.S. officials said that the first tests did not violate the nuclear agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), but were very likely in breach of a U.N. resolution calling on Iran not to undertake ballistic missile activity.
Iran's state news agency IRNA reported Tuesday that the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps had said that the drill had Iran's enemies "shivering from the roar" of the missiles.
The commander, Maj. Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, said that since Israel -- referred to as the "Zionist regime" -- was within range of the missiles, it was "quite natural" it would be concerned, IRNA reported.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/09/middleeast/iran-missile-test/

So it might have violated a UN agreement that had nothing to do with the Iranian deal?

Call me when they fire a nuke. Til then, whatever.

Russia defends Su-27's interception of US spy plane over Baltic Sea

The Russian Defense Ministry Saturday defended a Su-27’s barrel roll over a U.S. spy plane in the Baltic Sea, saying the American jet had turned off its transponder and it wasn’t identifiable.

A senior U.S. defense official told Fox News Friday that the Russian fighter jet flew within 100 feet of the U.S. RC-135 surveillance plane.

“All flights of Russian planes are conducted in accordance with international regulations on the use of airspace,” the Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement. “The U.S. Air Force has two solutions: either not to fly near our borders or to turn their transponder on for identification.”

It’s the second time in less than a month a Russian fighter jet has conducted a barrel roll over a U.S. spy plane. In the first barrel roll, on April 14, the jet flew within just 50 feet of the spy plane, Capt. Jeff Davis, a Pentagon spokesman, told reporters.

Russian aircraft have conducted a series of daring maneuvers calling out U.S. forces in recent weeks. Video on April 11 captured two Russian jets zooming past the USS Donald Cook, a Navy destroyer in the Baltic, flying only 100 feet off the ground. A U.S. defense official called it a "simulated attack profile."

Secretary of State John Kerry responded, "We condemn this kind of behavior. It is reckless. It is provocative. It is dangerous." He said forces on the destroyer could have shot down the jets under U.S. military rules of engagement.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/04/30/...ml?intcmp=hpbt3

NATO reportedly plans to send 4 battalions to eastern border with Russia

NATO allies reportedly plan to put four battalions in Poland and other Baltic countries to beef up its Russian border as Moscow steps up military activity.

According to The Wall Street Journal Friday, U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary Robert Work confirmed the overall size of the force – about 4,000 troops – and said the reinforcements were a response to the increased Russian activity around the nations of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.

Western officials told the paper that the U.S. will likely provide two of the battalions and Germany and Britain will likely supply the other two.

“The Russians have been doing a lot of snap exercises right up against the borders, with a lot of troops,” Work said. “From our perspective, we could argue this is extraordinarily provocative behavior.”

Russia has repeatedly defended its increased military activity, saying they are a response to NATO’s buildup and aggressiveness toward Moscow.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/04/30/...ml?intcmp=hpbt4

But are you surprised? But Swish is right, can't be mad if someone is only willing to do what is minimally required of them to do. The problem here however, is that the basis of Obama's foreign policy IS the expectation that countries like Iran will go above what is written in the agreement.

He doesn't view it as: this is what we got, anything else is a bonus. He really believes that by requiring so little that somehow it will translate in to despots and dictators discovering the errors of their ways and that they'll turn over a new leaf.

But this is the fall out of having a policy of reduced leadership and influence. When it's time to come to the table, you don't operate from a position of strength , influence, or respect.