The Islamic State

[grzegorz]

There are already terrorists in PRC.

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/china-ahead-ra ... ain-636125

The Uyghur's are fighting for their freedom.

[Steve James]

There are already terrorists in PRC.

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/china-ahead-ra ... ain-636125

The Uyghur's are fighting for their freedom.

And acts of violence against innocents (in theaters, churches/mosques, bars, stadiums) did not start with IS.

[grzegorz]

Putin says Russia ready to support Syrian opposition in fight with Islamic State

http://news.yahoo.com/putin-says-russia ... 09170.html

[grzegorz]

There are already terrorists in PRC.

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/china-ahead-ra ... ain-636125

The Uyghur's are fighting for their freedom.

And acts of violence against innocents (in theaters, churches/mosques, bars, stadiums) did not start with IS.

I don't condone terrorists but obviously if you oppress people and they don't have an organized military they will rely on any means necessary to get their message across.

IS is a many headed dragon and I don't believe they will ever be defeated. When people from Belgium can be recruited online people will always take up their cause if they believe Sunnis are being oppressed. Unfortunately bombing Syria into the stone age only helps their cause.

[Michael]

IS is a many headed dragon and I don't believe they will ever be defeated. When people from Belgium can be recruited online people will always take up their cause if they believe Sunnis are being oppressed. Unfortunately bombing Syria into the stone age only helps their cause.

Basically, this is what the Russians have been saying for 15 years or longer, that the USA/NATO policy of using terrorism (or other regime change methods) for geopolitical purposes is too dangerous. If you create groups like Al Queada or the Muslim Brotherhood, or the Anbar Awakening (Iraq 2006), they will spread beyond the intended target of regime change for a variety of reasons, attracting people from all over the world.

[Michael]

Putin says Russia ready to support Syrian opposition in fight with Islamic State

http://news.yahoo.com/putin-says-russia ... 09170.html

Since USA/NATO/FRANCE/UK complained Russia was bombing the wrong armed rebels, but refused to tell Russia where not to bomb, eventually Russia made contact with FSA by itself, and they can give target information about ISIS to Russia directly in order to avoid being attacked.

This fits in with the theory that Assad's visit to Moscow in October included an explicit agreement for him to step down as part of the transition once the country was stabilized in the very near future.

[grzegorz]

Well personally I don't think it's NATO's responsibility to tell the Russians where or where not to bomb.If you supposedly you haven't killed one civilian it seems like you should already have that information if anything I think it shows that the Russians have no idea who or what they're bombing just like everyone else.

That being said dealing with one opponent is better strategically than dealing with two or three or four so I'm not surprised there is an alliance against IS especially after the downing of the Russian airliner, which was a direct response to the Russians getter involved in Syria.

Anyway, IS will just cross the border or blend into the crowds and reappear long after the US/France/Russia is long gone. I'm not convinced of any of this will work but politicians do what politicians do... Terrorism will just be a fact of life as long foreign countries are involved in the world Middle East and there is a Sunni/Shia divide.

I support the troops but as with the Russians I have sympathy for them because the horrors they will experience will be things they'll have to live with for the rest of lives.

Just my 2 cents, debating is pointless what's going to happen is going to happen and there's nothing we can do about it.

I'm not criticizing your point as much as the RT talking points that went from; they're all terrorists, to the FSA doesn't exist, to if they exist tell us where to find them, and to we now have an alliance with the good guys.

[Steve James]

I don't think it's NATO's responsibility to tell the Russians where or where not to bomb.

Russia didn't ask for permission to bomb or ask anyone (except Assad) who to bomb.

[Michael]

Despite announcing ambitious plans for its coalition against Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL), “the analysis of those [US-led] airstrikes during over a year lead to conclusion that they were hitting selectively, I would say, sparingly and on most occasions didn’t touch those IS units, which were capable of seriously challenging the Syrian army,” Lavrov told the Rossiya 1 channel.

The Russian FM called Washington’s actions in Syria a “dangerous game,” making it hard to determine America’s true aims in Syria.

“Apparently, it’s a kind of a ‘honey is sweet, but the bee stings’ situation: they want IS to weaken Assad as soon as possible to make him leave somehow, but at the same time they don’t want to overly strengthen IS, which may then seize power,” he explained.

https://www.rt.com/news/322482-lavrov-us-isis-assad/

EDIT: Better article

[Michael]

Russia's Syria Propaganda
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/russias-syria-propaganda

[Steve James]

they want IS to weaken Assad as soon as possible to make him leave somehow, but at the same time they don’t want to overly strengthen IS, which may then seize power,

They want Assad out. That's been clear for a few years. In fact, the complaints here have been that we haven't done enough to oust him, which McCain has suggested would be to better arm the rebels. I'm not sure that one can show that the US wants IS to succeed. At any rate, the people whom McCain and others want to arm are in fact the enemies of IS. One would think that IS (or the members of darsh (?) would simply join forces. Then, the idea that US wants IS to succeed would be valid. Perhaps, if it eventually comes down to a suggestion (by Kerry, Hollande, Merkel, etc) to allow IS to have some power in Syrian gov't, then the argument would be even stronger. But, right now, they're all committing forces to destroy IS, and the only complaint is why we've waited so long. Public opinion on the matter is totally clear, which is also scary. We usually muck shit up even more when we're scared.

[Michael]

Russia to use right of self-defense to fight terrorists — Russian Foreign Ministry
http://tass.ru/en/politics/837297

Moscow urges the United Nations Security Council to waste no time and pass a resolution on forming a broad anti-terrorist coalition

[Michael]

the people whom McCain and others want to arm are in fact the enemies of IS.

The waters get muddied and things can change in war. McCain's meeting is the subject of this article, which makes connections between FSA, Nusra, and ISIS.

New York Times Tries and Fails to Cover Up Extensive Links to ISIS by Senator McCain, Chairman of the International Republican Institute, National Endowment For Democracy
http://tarpley.net/new-york-times-fails-to-cover-up-extensive-links-to-isis-by-senator-mccain/

This is a year and a half old, but just a reminder that the USA has been sending weapons to armed Syrian rebels, including anti-tank weapons.
Congress secretly approves U.S. weapons flow to 'moderate' Syrian rebels

[Steve James]

Yes, Congress approves sending weapons to the Syrian rebels. There's no secret, or else no one would know. The question is whether the gov't (or any US entity) supports IS or is in favor of an Islamic Caliphate or that IS gains control of Syria. Only finding documents tacitly supporting that will do; otherwise, it's merely a theory.

Our desire to remove Assad is clear. Russia's desire to support him is also clear. If Russia didn't target IS at first, it certainly is now. Russia has troops on the ground. Tank warfare always relies on infantry support.

Try to get someone to vote for you here if there is even the hint of support for IS. Anyway, my concern now is what the US and Russia will do to and about the Syrians who are running away from the bombing. The possibles are interesting but not worth entertaining, since considering them is only a sign of impotence.

[Michael]

The question is whether the gov't (or any US entity) supports IS or is in favor of an Islamic Caliphate or that IS gains control of Syria. Only finding documents tacitly supporting that will do; otherwise, it's merely a theory.

The implication of Lavrov's statements posted above is that after a year of claiming to bomb ISIS, but doing very little damage, a conclusion can be drawn that there was partial support for ISIS as a way to achieve the USA goal of regime change in Syria, as he explained. The case has been made for this by tracing the activities of McCain, but it's a pretty tangled web.

Russia has troops on the ground. Tank warfare always relies on infantry support.

ISIS has USA tanks they acquired from Iraqi security forces we trained and equipped. I wonder if the FSA will use USA TOW missiles to destroy American tanks used by ISIS?

Putin has always said they will only use the air force and last I read, they said there were 4000 troops around the two Russian air bases, up from 2000 since the Russian bombing campaign began. It makes sense to cooperate with the Syrian army on the ground, but maybe a UN Sec. Council resolution will change this.

This gives an example of Russia cooperating with the FSA.

According to Russia’s Defense Ministry, Syrian citizens are joining national self-defense units, which play an active part in operations against the jihadists. Around 4,000 people have apparently already signed up.Intensive daily sorties by Russian fighter jets enabled the Syrian Army to lift the blockade of the Kweires Airbase of the Syrian Air Force, which remained under siege for nearly three years, Konashenkov told Ruptly.

“I want to specifically stress that information about terrorist strongholds around the Kuweires Airbase was passed to us by the Syrian opposition,” he said on November 11.

The data was cross-checked, additional reconnaissance was conducted and only after that Russian bombers eliminated the targets, the spokesman revealed.

Anyway, my concern now is what the US and Russia will do to and about the Syrians who are running away from the bombing.

Are they running away from the bombing only, or also running away from ISIS? The increased numbers of refugees coincided with more of both.

1 million Syrians return home since launch of Russian anti-ISIS ops - Syria UN ambassador