Thread: What Will It Take To Get Rid Of ISIS?

Meanwhile, under cover of "Fighting ISIS" and with Vlad's gleeful protection.....

Syrian forces have used chemical weapons more than two dozen times during the country’s civil war, said UN war crimes investigators, including in the deadly attack that led to US air strikes on government planes.

In the most conclusive findings to date from investigations into chemical weapons attacks during the conflict, the UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria says a government warplane dropped sarin on Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province in April, killing more than 80 civilians.

“Government forces continued the pattern of using chemical weapons against civilians in opposition-held areas. In the gravest incident, the Syrian air force used sarin in Khan Sheikhoun, Idlib, killing dozens, the majority of whom were women and children,” the report said on Wednesday, declaring it a war crime.

Syrian government was behind April sarin gas attack, UN says | The Independent

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

It seems Fisk is still reporting from hotel poolsides as usual.

Assad was safe the minute Putin backed him.

Spot on.

I just looked up what it does :

Within seconds of exposure to sarin gas (or liquid, which evaporates easily), we start to notice the immediate effects of acetylcholine buildup. First, our smooth muscles and secretions go crazy. The nerves to those areas keep firing, keep telling them to go. The nose runs, the eyes cry, the mouth drools and vomits, and bowels and bladder evacuate themselves. It is not a dignified state.

Since sarin has no smell or taste, the person may very well have no idea what's going on. Their chest tightens, vision blurs. If the exposure was great enough, that can progress to convulsions, paralysis, and death within 1 to 10 minutes.

If the exposure was not enough to kill them, though, the person should recover pretty quickly and completely. It is not the sort of agent that leaves people blind and infertile and glowing green. The U.S. military also has a lotion that can be applied immediately after exposure, Reactive Skin Decontamination Lotion, to good effect, among other antidotes. Most people exposed to sarin do not die. A large exposure is not a death sentence.

Originally Posted by Klondyke

and the Israelis may have to go to Putin to clear up the mess they’re now in

After hitting Syria with some missiles a couple of days ago.

Israel strikes deep in Syria, said to hit military facility - ABC News

Originally Posted by SKkin

Originally Posted by Klondyke

and the Israelis may have to go to Putin to clear up the mess they’re now in

After hitting Syria with some missiles a couple of days ago.

Israel strikes deep in Syria, said to hit military facility - ABC News

Fisk is such a fucking twat.

Those in the Israeli political right who claimed that Assad was a greater danger than Isis may have to think again – not least because Assad may be the man they’ll have to talk to if they want to keep their northern border safe.

Assad was always the man they had to talk to, and he always knew better than to mess with them.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Assad was always the man they had to talk to

Assad is totally cowed by Israel...the real danger to the Zionist entity is from ISIS-inspired attacks launched by Palestinian fanatics and those from Iran-supplied Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon...

Originally Posted by tomcat

Assad is totally cowed by Israel...the real danger to the Zionist entity is from ISIS-inspired attacks launched by Palestinian fanatics and those from Iran-supplied Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon...

The Syrian President has his work cut out. He is using his assets where they will gain the most.

^Is there room for another? Seems to me there are many who deserve that fate prior to his being "nailed".

He is defending his country in the only way he sees as being effective. He has seen other countries invaded on lies and believes if his country does not have a deterrent it will be invaded in the same way by the same aggressor.

What is happening is only reinforcing this belief, continual threats, sanctions and shows of force are only counter-productive they only make him more determined.

He has Nukes and missiles, that will not change, accept it, let him have them and take away any reason he may ever have to use them.

^The DPRK thread no?

Originally Posted by birding

He is defending his country in the only way he sees as being effective. He has seen other countries invaded on lies and believes if his country does not have a deterrent it will be invaded in the same way by the same aggressor.

What is happening is only reinforcing this belief, continual threats, sanctions and shows of force are only counter-productive they only make him more determined.

He has Nukes and missiles, that will not change, accept it, let him have them and take away any reason he may ever have to use them.

Syria? Really? Surely you jest!

Originally Posted by Neverna

Syria? Really? Surely you jest!

either the wrong thread or he's OD'd on Israeli propaganda...

Syrian War Report ? September 26, 2017 | The Vineyard of the Saker

How Putin Checkmated The US In Syria
Sep 26, 2017
----
Putin had stood by Assad from the very beginning and protected him in multiple ways. He armed him, protected him on the U.N. Security Council, and sustained Syria’s military and economy. But the intervention was a game changer that signaled Russia’s escalation in Syria.

Today, on balance, Putin achieved virtually everything he wanted in Syria. He kept Assad in power. He entrenched Russia’s military presence in Syria for at least the next 49 years—Russia’s largest military presence outside the former Soviet Union at that. Thus, Putin reduced US ability to maneuver militarily in the region and assured Russia’s influence in one of the most strategically-important countries in the Middle East.
----
Most importantly for Putin, he can now showcase cooperation with the West —on his terms. He created a perception of Russia as a great power broker and obtained international recognition for his latest ceasefire initiative in southwest Syria that led to establishment of de-escalation zones after Putin met with Trump in July of this year. Russia, Iran, and Turkey serve as ceasefire guarantors. Putin always resisted Western-protected safe zones in Syria, but a Russia-led ceasefire allows him to preserve his interests in the country.
----
It might come as a surprise that during the lowest point in US-Russia relations since the Cold war, new Russian ambassador to Washington Anatoly Antonov, who is on Ukraine-related EU sanctions list, said after he presented his credentials to President Trump on September 8, “For my part I said that we are looking forward to an improvement in the relations between our two countries.” But Moscow wants to present itself as the voice of reason, and point to the West as the cantankerous one. Moreover Russia needs the West—as both an adversary and a partner. So it seeks to trap the West into cooperation.Too many analysts had believed Putin’s announced “withdrawal” from Syria in March 2016—an example of taking official statements at face value over reality.

The current ceasefire, however flawed, has held so far. Its future—along with Russia’s—remains uncertain. But for as long as the West continues to defer to Moscow in Syria, Putin will have a lot to celebrate.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/annabor.../#29412afc767e

Originally Posted by Klondyke

How Putin Checkmated The US In Syria
Sep 26, 2017
----
Putin had stood by Assad from the very beginning and protected him in multiple ways. He armed him, protected him on the U.N. Security Council, and sustained Syria’s military and economy. But the intervention was a game changer that signaled Russia’s escalation in Syria.

Today, on balance, Putin achieved virtually everything he wanted in Syria. He kept Assad in power. He entrenched Russia’s military presence in Syria for at least the next 49 years—Russia’s largest military presence outside the former Soviet Union at that. Thus, Putin reduced US ability to maneuver militarily in the region and assured Russia’s influence in one of the most strategically-important countries in the Middle East.
----
Most importantly for Putin, he can now showcase cooperation with the West —on his terms. He created a perception of Russia as a great power broker and obtained international recognition for his latest ceasefire initiative in southwest Syria that led to establishment of de-escalation zones after Putin met with Trump in July of this year. Russia, Iran, and Turkey serve as ceasefire guarantors. Putin always resisted Western-protected safe zones in Syria, but a Russia-led ceasefire allows him to preserve his interests in the country.
----
It might come as a surprise that during the lowest point in US-Russia relations since the Cold war, new Russian ambassador to Washington Anatoly Antonov, who is on Ukraine-related EU sanctions list, said after he presented his credentials to President Trump on September 8, “For my part I said that we are looking forward to an improvement in the relations between our two countries.” But Moscow wants to present itself as the voice of reason, and point to the West as the cantankerous one. Moreover Russia needs the West—as both an adversary and a partner. So it seeks to trap the West into cooperation.Too many analysts had believed Putin’s announced “withdrawal” from Syria in March 2016—an example of taking official statements at face value over reality.

The current ceasefire, however flawed, has held so far. Its future—along with Russia’s—remains uncertain. But for as long as the West continues to defer to Moscow in Syria, Putin will have a lot to celebrate.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/annabor.../#29412afc767e

The West can sit back and watch as the majority of vengeful Sunni in Syria terrorise both the Shi'a and any Russian interlopers for years to come.

Putin has to pay for this shit and he's already bleeding cash.

Some victory, just for a shitty naval base.

It would seem my last post which I posted elsewhere somehow got put in this topic, will see what happens to this one.

From January Last year:

Syrian army gains in north and south; two rebel-held towns agree to cease-fire - LA Times

And on to this month:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-m...-idUSKCN1BD09P

So the Syrian Government with the help of friends is taking back its country from both the US backed rebels who have been attempting to take over the country and ISIS which rose to power after the US invasion of Iraq.

While the US has finally realised the mistake it made in in backing the rebels in the first place:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/19/w...s.html?mcubz=1

But not before costing the US tax payer a lot of money, just how much no one seems ready to admit but we do know that the folly of attempting to train rebels cost $500 million with the end result of 4 or 5 trained rebels:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-isis-fighters

We also know that they have sent a lot of weapons:

http://www.businessinsider.com/weapo...4/#762x39-mm-1

With the help of the Saudi's:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/24/w...s.html?mcubz=1

So the Syrian Government with help can now concentrate on fighting ISIS while making peace with the weakened rebels provided that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan dont continue to supply the rebels.


This is an interesting take on the situation:

Arming Syrian rebels: Where the US went wrong - BBC News

Originally Posted by birding

So the Syrian Government with help can now concentrate on fighting ISIS while making peace with the weakened rebels provided that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan dont continue to supply the rebels.

So what you are saying is that we are right where we started in 2011, except for:

1. Three quarters of the population now hate Assad with a vengeance.
2. And now they hate Russia too.
3. ISIS are there.

Which makes you wonder why Assad didn't "make peace" in 2011 instead of slaughtering 400,000 people.

Answer: Because they wanted him and the rest of his minority, unelected Shi'a shite out of power in 2011, and they fucking certainly do now.

And trust me, they will have long, long memories of this one.

Like I said, he may have won a conventional war - only with Putin's help - but now he can look forward to lots of terrorism until he fucks off.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

So what you are saying is that we are right where we started in 2011, except for:

1. Three quarters of the population now hate Assad with a vengeance.
2. And now they hate Russia too.
3. ISIS are there.

Which makes you wonder why Assad didn't "make peace" in 2011 instead of slaughtering 400,000 people.

Answer: Because they wanted him and the rest of his minority, unelected Shi'a shite out of power in 2011, and they fucking certainly do now.

And trust me, they will have long, long memories of this one.

Like I said, he may have won a conventional war - only with Putin's help - but now he can look forward to lots of terrorism until he fucks off.

What a load of shit Harry with not one single link to back any of it up.

And no I dont trust you for you believed in WMD in Iraq and you believed the destruction of Libya was humanitarian and now you probably still believe Assad used chemical weapons even though the UN says it was the US backed rebels

U.N. has testimony that Syrian rebels used sarin gas: investigator | Reuters

Originally Posted by birding

And no I dont trust you for you believed in WMD

A couple of things.

- I did not believe in WMDs in Iraq and have always said the invasion was pointless and done for money.

Your inability to read properly is what makes you spout shit.

- This of course does not negate the fact that the US sold Saddam WMD materials for use against Iran, which he subsequently used against his own people.

However, they were long gone by 2003.

That's probably more basic shit that you don't understand.

Originally Posted by birding

What a load of shit Harry with not one single link to back any of it up.

And no I dont trust you for you believed in WMD in Iraq and you believed the destruction of Libya was humanitarian and now you probably still believe Assad used chemical weapons even though the UN says it was the US backed rebels

U.N. has testimony that Syrian rebels used sarin gas: investigator | Reuters

Assad had no reason to use chemical weapons, esp on his own people, though it makes a great read for numpties that really need to believe the US was playing the good guy 'this time'.

Once Putin clarified his position Assad was as secure as he could be since Putin could not afford to let him down, was able to demonstrate loyalty under international pressure, that Russian forces could cope with an extended conflict, sent a message to other dictators/despots that they could trust their position to him, and of course extend his sphere of influence whilst selling arms and technology hand over fist...under the stress of sanctions! Imho he ran rings around the black guy in context of the Syrian civil war.

America's 'friendly rebels', on the other hand, or at least those that did not end up turning US training and weapons against US personnel, were few, costly, insignificant, untrustworthy, and were shown to have used chemicals nanoseconds before the Leftist media dropped the 'Assad used chemicals' line and sauntered off in search of something else to entertain their gullible audience.

Originally Posted by jabir

Assad had no reason to use chemical weapons, esp on his own people

they probably weren't his own people (in the Middle Eastern sense): they were likely Sunnis who despise Shi'a Alawites (like Assad, his father and his tribe) as heretics...in any event, resistance to the Syrian dictator, no matter which group it is, puts one in the line of fire...Assad jr. is as bloodthirsty as his father was, which isn't saying much in that part of the world where barbarity is an everyday occurrence...