The Russians are coming.

[grzegorz]

First confirmed Russian casualty.

Russia's first confirmed casualty in the Syrian conflict was 19-year-old Vadim Kostenko, one of the Russian air force's support staff in Syria. His body was delivered on Tuesday to his family home in the village of Grechnaya Balka, in southern Russia's Krasnodar region.

Interviewed by Reuters, Alexander and Svetlana Kostenko did not believe the military's account that their 19-year-old son had hanged himself. They said their son had sounded cheerful in phone conversations as recently as Saturday, the day he died while working on an airbase on the Syrian coast.

There are social media reports of nine other Russian military deaths in Syria, but these have not been confirmed.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/multimedi ... /6070.html

[Steve James]

Well, iinm, it's clear that Russia supports Assad. The people fighting against Assad have been doing so before IS existed. If fighting Assad is terrorism, then the people doing it are terrorists. However, this just seems like a "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" debate, except that the argument seems to be that one side is fighting terrorism and other is supporting it. It's a bit more complicated than that, imv, and I'm not going to try to justify my opinion with references to things I can google or get from social media.

I agree that the US created IS and al Qaeda and the Taliban. But, I think the results are all unintended consequences, not part of a grand (and working) plan. US support for the removal of Assad definitely strengthened Russia's resolve to support him. Fighting "terrorists" was a perfect way to fight Assad's enemies. Btw, keeping Assad in power now is probably a good idea, given that "we" have no idea who would or could replace him. However, it's also fairly clear that neither the US nor Russia wants IS to take over.

Afa the weapons, what makes IS dangerous, besides its ruthless practices and appeal to people -even in the west-- is that it has enormous resources. Last I heard, just one of the oil fields they control rakes in $50 million per day. Trump's suggestion to bomb them does make some sense. Of course, there's a cost to that approach as well. Anyway, my point is that IS can afford to buy any military ordinance available for sale.

[windwalker]

Agree with Steve,

My comments where directed about the weaponry being used and what it would take to support them.
A little surprised that the US would sell them TOWs,

Afa the weapons, what makes IS dangerous, besides its ruthless practices and appeal to people -even in the west-- is that it has enormous resources. Last I heard, just one of the oil fields they control rakes in $50 million per day. Trump's suggestion to bomb them does make some sense. Of course, there's a cost to that approach as well. Anyway, my point is that IS can afford to buy any military ordinance available for sale.

unfortunately very true, but some things are a little harder to field and require a little more involvement from those that sell them,
then what might be considered standard throw away type weapons.

[grzegorz]

Although the U.S. overthrowing Saddam Hussein led to ISIS becoming powerful I don't believe the U.S. propagated ISIS as much as it grew from the suppression of Sunnis by the Shia. If the Sunnis were given fair representation in the Iraqi government and Sunni protestors were not gunned down by the Shia government ISIS wouldn't have become as powerful as it is. The divisions between Sunnis and Shia is much older than the U.S. looks like Bush senior knew what he was doing by stopping at the border.

I have always been strongly opposed to W's invasion of Iraq which we heavily debated on here and I still remember who supported the invasion yet I rarely hear those people speak up now.

[Steve James]

The guys who began IS all met each other in Guantanamo (iinm) or some other US facility. It's also true that the US did not recognize how important maintaining a religious balance in Iraqi politics was. I just don't believe that the US gov't's plan was to create IS or increase Islamic fundamentalism.

It should also be recalled that we supported the Taliban because they were fighting the Soviets. "We" provided them with the sams that were used to counteract the Soviet helicopters. Of course, if the Soviets had won, there's no reason to believe that it would have been better. After all, why were they there in the first place?

[grzegorz]

Yes, I agree with your points but ultimately ISIS came to power out of Iraq's attempt to suppress the Sunnis. Obama urged the Shia to share power but absolute power corrupts absolutely and since Iraq isn't a U.S. colony their government was free to make mistakes.

As far as Afghanistan I wasn't really discussing that but I too would take up arms against foreign invaders. As I recall in the initial days of the Afghan war the Soviets were doing well there too. Perhaps history will repeat itself since the rebels don't have to race against the clock.

It seems that I'm not alone in that. Let's hope that doesn't happen.




Russia risks a repeat of doomed Afghan war in Syria, says EU foreign policy chief

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/o ... -war-syria

[Michael]

The Bush admin. line about fighting them over there was not the same as what Russia and EU countries are saying about their own citizens, including a few from North America, joining ISIS, being trained in bomb making, and then returning to Denmark or wherever and causing massive problems at home.

What happened in Denmark? I don't recall a terrorist attack on Denmark.

Nothing happened in Denmark except some cartoons. I said "Denmark or wherever," meaning something hypothetical, but much more of a realistic threat that the Bush admin. saying they were justified in pre-emptive wars in order to fight them "over there".

Pres. Assad and Putin have express specific concerns about jihadists from Russia and the EU and given that as evidence about how allowing ISIS is a destabilizing factor outside of even Iraq and Syria.

Sorry, I don't buy it. The war on terror is just a recipe for endless war.

Yes, I agree, and I have always said the GWOT is just a pre-text for endless war and many things that go along with it, such as legalized torture and other fascist tendencies at home.

[Michael]

These policies have reached their conclusion that spreading terrorism and its ideology can destabilize Europe as well. Look at the chaos of Libya that is now a perfect terrorist breeding ground to provide Islamic fighters in Syria and Iraq. Where will it lead? Can Russia allow this to spread to the Caucsuses or can China sit back and watch it spread to Xinjiang?

Using this logic the Russians and the Chinese should turn the Middle East into a parking lot.

No, that's not any kind of logic.

The logic is that the USA's use of terrorists in the Middle East can ultimately entangle Russia and China, further evidence of the folly of doing so.

[Michael]

President Assad's English interviews this year where he answers a lot of the questions we're discussing about Syria and terrorists.

BBC News interview from February 9, 2015, 27 minutes.

CBS News interview from March 30, 2015, 56 minutes.

France 2 interview in English from April 21, 2015, 24 minutes.

RT interview in English from September 15, 2015, 40 minutes.Full text of RT interview

I think Assad corrects many incorrect accusations and assumptions, including the one about barrel bombs, which Pres. Obama repeated in his Sep. 28, 2015 address to the UN General Assembly.

[Michael]

Pres. Putin was interviewed by Charlie Rose at the end of September, and if you can sift through all the links, he does respond to the topic of Russian military attacking ISIS.

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/charlie-r ... mir-putin/

Ruptly version in Russian
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8qttUJrl20

[Michael]

A seven minute interview where Putin gave his opinion about a year ago regarding USA policy in Syria, Libya, ISIS, etc.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQuceU3x2Ww

[grzegorz]

Thanks, I have seen all those too. I also found the 60 Minutes Putin interview worth watching as well.

Personally I think powerful nations are a much larger threat and willing to blow up the world than a few Iraqis in a Toyota pick up truck. To me a drone attacks on a wedding or a fighter pilot dropping bombs on civilians is just as much a terrorist than an Islamic fundamentalist militant fighter may be.

I believe the whole reason why governments fear terrorists is because terrorists challenge government's authority and for governments to exist and stay in power they can't have ordinary citizens questioning or challenging them.

Essentially I am an anarchist at heart so I mistrust the governments of Russia and the PRC as much as the U.S.'s. I have no doubt the U.S. will be involved in a new war within a year of the election.

[Steve James]

Re: Assad, Amnesty International has reported human rights abuses done by the gov't since the "Arab Spring" of 2010-11. The organization also notes atrocities committed by IS and others. In any case, these abuses are considered the main reasons for the refugee crisis. Clearly, Assad's regime is striking back at the rebels. However, the rebels are the ones who stay and fight, and Assad attacks them where they are. So, the bombs (barrels or not) are falling on civilian non-combatants. I.e., Assad's own people. And this was happening before anyone said anything about IS. In fact, the Republican nominees for president in the last two elections proposed that we arm the rebels or take direct military action. It was/is a strategy, not a conspiracy. Putin wants to help Assad; that's not a conspiracy. One can disagree whether it is right or wrong. However, imo, to support Putin because he's acting against the US --or to support Obama because he's acting against Putin --is just more Cold War ideological rhetoric. It's not a fight between the white hats and the blacks hats.

[chud]

These policies have reached their conclusion that spreading terrorism and its ideology can destabilize Europe as well. Look at the chaos of Libya that is now a perfect terrorist breeding ground to provide Islamic fighters in Syria and Iraq.

The New York Times' Maureen Dowd captured the moment last weekend when she referred to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as "the midwife to chaos" in Libya.

[Michael]

A major diplomatic effort to end the war and help Syria's political process is underway in Vienna.

https://www.rt.com/news/320178-lavrov-s ... ceasefire/

TEXT:

Meeting in Vienna, on October 30, 2015, China, Egypt, the EU, France, Germany, Iran, Iraq, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United Nations, and the United States ["the participants"] came together to discuss the grave situation in Syria and how to bring about an end to the violence as soon as possible.

The participants had a frank and constructive discussion, covering major issues. While substantial differences remain among the participants, they reached a mutual understanding on the following:

1. Syria's unity, independence, territorial integrity, and secular character are fundamental.

2. State institutions will remain intact.

3. The rights of all Syrians, regardless of ethnicity or religious denomination, must be protected.

4. It is imperative to accelerate all diplomatic efforts to end the war.

5. Humanitarian access will be ensured throughout the territory of Syria, and the participants will increase support for internally displaced persons, refugees, and their host countries.

6. Da'esh (Islamic State), and other terrorist groups, as designated by the U.N. Security Council, and further, as agreed by the participants, must be defeated.

7. Pursuant to the 2012 Geneva Communique and U.N. Security Council Resolution 2118, the participants invited the U.N. to convene representatives of the Government of Syria and the Syrian opposition for a political process leading to credible, inclusive, non-sectarian governance, followed by a new constitution and elections. These elections must be administered under U.N. supervision to the satisfaction of the governance and to the highest international standards of transparency and accountability, free and fair, with all Syrians, including the diaspora, eligible to participate.

8. This political process will be Syrian led and Syrian owned, and the Syrian people will decide the future of Syria.

9. The participants together with the United Nations will explore modalities for, and implementation of, a nationwide ceasefire to be initiated on a date certain and in parallel with this renewed political process.

The participants will spend the coming days working to narrow remaining areas of disagreement, and build on areas of agreement. Ministers will reconvene within two weeks to continue these discussions.