How does /int/ feel about the current escalations in the Syrian conflict? It's starting to become WW3 tier.
>saudi arabia preparing for invasion of syria to remove assad by force
>turkey currently shelling the fuck out of kurdish forces and syrian army
>syrian army about to recapture aleppo
>russia and america about to implement a ceasefire which will inevitably fail
>iran prepared to back up assad against foreign attacks
If? I thought the Saudis were pretty much decided, they are going to invade.
I personally feel that, even if nukes aren't used on civilians, nukes could be used on military targets without disturbing MAD.
I'm assuming Russia will bomb the Saudis when they start invading Syria?
Assad is going to stay
America should focus on attempting to get Putin to coordinate so we can take down ISIS
Jeb Bush is fucking insane for thinking we should resume supporting the rebels
Assad's been making serious gains since I last saw that map, so I'm feeling pretty good
> tfw Americans of a sound mind like these two gentlemen will never become the majority and American foreign policy will stay the same
> tfw the US military will never back Assad against the durka jihadis because "hurr durr the enemy of the enemy is my friend"
The reasonable thing to do is to colonize them. 1600 years of Islamic inbreeding has reached critical mass and it's around the point that the population will require superior peoples to rule over them. They are literally all 85 IQ retards.
Will the US let Saudi Arabia and Turkey engage in a war with Russia and Iran? There's no way you're staying out of this. The Saudi's wouldn't be invading unless they had ally support anyway.
>even if the majority had an opinion it would matter at all
im just a guy living here, so take my opinion for what it's worth, but i think we could keep the saudi's out of it. turkey i have no fuking idea, we could stop them from attacking russia (hopefully) but if russia attacked them we would have to defend.
Nukes will never be used in a scenario other than total war between superpowers.
Nukes are not going to be used for the same reasons that chemical weapons were out of the question in WW2. We know what they can do and everyone is scared of a snowball effect. You may massacre hundreds of thousands of civilians like in Rwanda or the DRC, but don't you dare bring up nukes.
It's nowhere near WW3 tier.
This will likely quiet down in Western media as Assad and friends eventually put down the Jihadi rebellion over this year.
The war is essentially finished.
i highly highly doubt we would ever go to war with russia
i always felt like when the time came (50, 60 years from now) russia and usa would form alliance out of necessity to btfo china
Turkey is currently shelling the Kurds and have also hit Assad's army but they haven't actually stepped foot in Syria yet. However, Saudi Arabia has already their moved troops and aircraft into Turkey so it's almost certain they're going to invade.
>Turkey is currently shelling the Kurds and have also hit Assad's army but they haven't actually stepped foot in Syria yet
yes i know that
>However, Saudi Arabia has already their moved troops and aircraft into Turkey so it's almost certain they're going to invade.
did not know hopefully just posturing
Russian troops, Iranian troops, 1000+ American special forces, French special forces, Iraqis Shias, Turkish special forces, and rumors of NK special forces.
This is based upon three years of lurking the Mideast Wars thread on /k/.
By the way, the war is essentially won by Assad. Now the cleanup process will begin.
Not until Assad manages to stamp out most significant opposition outside of ISIS. Any chance that we could possibly get another middle eastern ally or at least disallow Russia to have one is one the government is willing to take.
Ayy my first quints confirming. I usually lurk.
Iraq and Syria won't allow that legal recognition.
No. We were trying to overthrow him as recently as October. The Russians threw us and our "forces" out of Syria.
The SDF is all we have left, and it isn't going to do much against ISIS because they care only about Kurdish territory.
I want ISIS to win.
And it's not because of any ideology of mine, nor any radiant movement of some kind.
It's entertainment for me.
I want to see them succeed, not because of any political matter or religious, just out of pure entertainment and curiosity.
That is coming pretty fast.
The SAA is currently cutting ISIS to bits for propagnda purposes, they are closing the Aleppo pocket, pinning the rebels in Idlib, and slowly destroying them on the Southern Front.
Only the Hama pocket is being left generally untouched. The rebels have lost any chance of winning this war and all winds are blowing the SAA's way.
>Saudi Arabia might just be flexing its muscles.
What muscles? Nobody cares about Saudi Arabia unless they actually invade though. They would also get BTFO without ally support, so it seems highly probable that it'll be both them and Turkey that invade.
>did not know hopefully just posturing
Saudi Arabia is having a hard enough time trying to deal with the Houthi rebels. What are they going to do to people that actually have an air force?
I'd like Russian soldiers to do one day to Lithuania what IS is doing to the locals there. Not out of religious or political beliefs, just for my entertainment. Because let's be honest, who needs Lithuania?
They have succeeded enough the last three years to provide whatever "excitement" you want. I can understand your feelings, but just know that this shit will happen again. You won't have to wait long.
It's not like the SAA's main concern is ISIS. They'll be around for a few more years at least. They are also expanding in Libya and Afghanistan
The Saudis are not going to just accept defeat. If they do, they lose all credibility as a champion of the Sunni world.
Saudi Arabia is in a very awkward situation. On the one hand, they enjoy a firm grip on the media, to the extent that no mainstream Western media are reporting on the invasion of Yemen, where half the population are about to starve. On the other hand, I doubt they will be able to handle a three-front war (Syria, Iran, Yemen) unless they put their American mercenaries to use as they always do, but it's election year in the USA, and the USA does not want to attack Russia and Iran directly, so I don't think the Saudis can count on American blind loyalty this time.
These are rough times.
Ah who knows, nobody expected a rebel group which barely existed 5 years ago to conquer huge territories in two muslim countries. So if it happens, I'll make sure to remember you so that I can just cheer for Russians for my personal entertainment
I enjoy it as well. Call me edgy I don't give a fuck this is 4chan.
I just laugh my ass off seeing how badly Bush and Obama have failed in the middle-east, and now they have the credibility to question Russia's actions?
Russia has been the force that has completely changed the course of this war. By defeating the other jihadists, Russia has freed up the SAA for their attack on ISIS.
I just love seeing the idiots posture politically while hypocritically doing the opposite in the middle-east.
Just to think this all started in 2003 when Bush invaded Iraq on made up premises.
>The Saudis would get torn apart by Russia.
They must know this though. They can't even defeat a few barefooted Houthis in Yemen let alone a proper army. Which is why I suspect they won't invade unless they have Turkish or some other ally support, making the situation very dangerous.
So if Turkey invades Syria, and Russia in turn fucks up Turkey, does that invoke article 5? Or is Turkey seen as the aggressor, and NATO fucks off?
Is Turkey and Saudi Arabia banking on NATO dealing with their problems?
Not really. They are just stagnant.
They've sent out thousands of soldiers to Libya, Nigeria, and Afghanistan where they are currently expanding. Probably a number joined the "refugees" as well.
They recently lost Ramadi and lost some ground to the Kurds and to the SAA near Al-Taqbah.
But overall they still hold their power centers and logistics routes. Ramadi, Al-Tafir, Fallujah, Mosul. About 10 million people are still under ISIS rule.
They will be around as long as the other "moderate" rebels are around in Syria. >>55078495
My sympathy is for Russia and Assad. At least people could live normally. Regarding Saudi Arabia - they might have weaponry but in the end they are brown people, meaning they suck as soldiers. I'm sure even Albania could handle Saudi Arabia, let alone Russia.
The Saudis have the support of the US. If the US doesn't support them, then they will NEVER go through with it.
And the comparing the US to Russia is like comparing a lion to a little rat.
The US is garbage against guerillas like ISIS, but in a conventional war, the US would come on top no matter who we were against, granted prolonged occupation isn't one of the goals.
It basically represents the complete collapse of the Obama administrations policy in Syria and ME in general. Turkey, SA and the Gulf states (i.e our ME allies) are all gearing up for an offensive to push the Kurds away from the Turkish border. All though its being billed as an anti-ISIS action the real goal is to secure the Turkish border from the YPG while also providing a safe zone to the rebels and keep a corridor open for supplies. Pretty mind boggling to think that basically all of the US's allies in ME are supporting a military action against our primary group on the ground in Syria.
Not only that, but Obama's recent policy goal was to de-escalate the conflict by cutting arms and forcing FSA groups to the negotiating table. This has also been an abject failure. With Jihadists holding all the power the FSA has become largely irrelevant and with Turkey et. all choosing to continue to arm the Jihadist the war will continue regardless. If anything the cutting of supplies to the FSA groups will only serve to force more to join jihadist groups that still have the ability to continue fighting. This will probably push the rebel opposition in the North to the position they've been heading for a while which is basically just a bunch of powerless generals staying in Turkish hotels with no actual military or political power on the ground in Syria.
While this is an insanely risky move on Turkey, SA, KSA's part the likelihood of it provoking a global conflict are still slim atm. Of course rhetoric will intensify but Russia and Iran are in too fragile of an economic condition to pursue open conflict especially against a NATO member state. What is clear is that US has lost all control of the alliance that it helped to form and all of the recent policy the US has put forth has been smashed to bits by Russia and our own allies.
It would be a grey area. If Turkish forces attack Russian forces the self-defense treaty is broken.
But if Russian forces respond to Turkish attacks on the SAA it will spark the article and NATO. Any full attack of Turkish soil will also initiate the treaty unless Turkey attacks Russia meaningfully first.
Just like any alliance treaty, it all depends on the members interpretation. The Turks are trying to decide that right now.
There's far more than just a few barefooted houthis in Yemen.
The Yemeni loyalists are also on their side and they are heavily armed and trained. Also, the only thing the Saudis and allies have done poorly is ground operations. Their air force has been at least not fully retarded even though they like bombing civilians.
Turks won't ever move against Russia, are you crazy? Half of Europe at least won't do shit against Russia for the sake of Turkey, even if Putin himself would fly the first bomber attack over Istanbul.
The US isn't garbage against them, everybody is. Seriously, with the Geneva convention and international scrutiny, it's almost impossible to beat, say the Taliban. Russia and the US have both experienced it, and Russia had pretty much no regard for human life in Afghanistan (they did better in Chechnya, the second time around).
However, ISIS is not even remotely comparable to the Taliban and especially not the Vietcong, they are brave fighters but that's it. They have no mountains or jungles to hide in.
As for conventional war, it would be a joke. Nothing more than an exercise for the US.
Am I the only one who finds it somewhat ironic that SA is joining the fight against its very own jihadist mostly funded by Saudi oil princes?
This is pretty accurate.
No. There's an "informal" security treaty between us and them. Just like with Taiwan.
NATO only applies in the North Atlantic region (Europe, Canada, America). For example a Chinese attack on American forces in Guam would not spark NATO.
It's arguable if a Russian attack on Turkish forces in Syria would initiate the treaty. I doubt most NATO partners would respond.
>I doubt most NATO partners would respond
There's literally only one NATO member that matters. Only reason NATO is relevant is because of the US having to help in case one of their partners is attacked.
People of barbaric nature need tyrannical leaders to control them. Only the retarded would think that a psychopath should be released from the asylum.
>tfw the majority of the country is retarded
Dude , you don't find bizarre , that NATO country cheels Rebels ,that are currently supported by USA and bit by Russia , who also fight another group of Rebels that are supported by US , through CIA...Who needs GoT, then you have clusterfuck in Middle East like this...
Except the Russians are fucking slaughtering the "moderate" rebels right now.
Kurds are defeating ISIS.
SAA is beating the remnant FSA on the Darya front.
Some nations are trash at beating asymmetrical warfare, some who don't give a fuck and put everything on the table are doing well.
Russia is backing Assad's Syria. Assad's is a United Nations-recognised government that has requested Russian military assistance. If Turkey and Saudi Arabia launch an invasion of Syria, they are the aggressors. They would be invading a sovereign country so NATO is not forced to defend Turkey unless Putin bombs Trabzon or something.
Saudis are struggling to hold Sunni areas in Yemen despite having a lot of firepower. Hell, despite having ALL the firepower in Yemen. Neither Obama nor the prez candidates are stupid enough to start a huge war with Russia and Iran just because the Saudis won't accept that nobody else in the Arab world likes salafist monarchies.
The Saudis want to kill some ISIS members, but mostly just the Kurds so their "moderate" rebels can continue trying to overthrow Assad.
Essentially its a cover for keeping a Kurdish state from forming. The Saudis kill the Kurds/ISIS, the Turks then continue helping the Saudi's "moderates."
I was having an argument with a left wing guy the other day over Syria and he said we should legitimize ISIS and let them take additional territory, because then it's somehow easier to defeat them.
It's pretty much what people told Obama was going to happen.
He hoped US extrication would lead to a quiet cold war between regional forces, and get us off the hook for being the security guarantor.
Instead, the regional parties are at each others throats and it's getting worse. So we end up having to get involved in the end anyway because the situation escalates, albeit with substantially less leverage and in a worse position to change it.
>Russians are fucking slaughtering the moderate rebels
And they were humiliated in Afghanistan, and for a while in Chechnya.
>Kurds are defeating ISIS
Lmao, Kurds were getting blown the fuck out until America started giving them air support. Kobanî would have been captured had it not been for the US.
Every nation is trash at beating asymmetrical warfare. But ISIS is not a tough cookie to crack and they are not a big problem in this conflict. The problem is who will lead the country in the aftermath of this mess.
Now the consensus among Western people who think they know shit (but don't) is that Assad is a necessary evil. But I know he will get overthrown. Which is good.
Changing jewbook's profile pic to the flag of france isn't enough.
It's absolutely time that the Kurds get their own nation. Literally the only ethnicity with balls in this region, letting others live in peace and just defending themselves. They don't deserve to be fucked by the turks just because the US once again fails to step up for what it stood for a long time ago but prefers to lick the ass of an absolute psycho who ruins what secular Turks achieved over decades, once making Turkey the only non-radical muslim state.
Hard to pick sides 2bh. I side with the Kurds for sure and side against ISIS for sure, but I'm not sure when it comes to Assad and the Rebels. On one hand, the rebels will run Syria into the ground if put into power and will likely either turn on the US, turn on the rest of the Middle East, or be taken over by ISIS due to weak leadership.
On the other hand, Assad would just make Syria an authoritarian regime with few human rights, which would just lead to more unrest in the future.
Honestly it shoukd go under either US or UK control. NATO needs to recognize that Syria is fucked and hit the reset button by instilling a first world government in power, wiping out the rebels (except for the Kurds, since they've proven themselves over the years), providing jobs so that rebellion will be slowed to a halt, and then allowing for independence if the people want it.
I'm going to filter you.
You're one of the worst posters on /int/.
Stop fucking deep throating my country's cock and slurping up the cum. We don't need an arab who ran from his "oh so great" shithole of a sharia state defending us on 4chan.
Either provide content or fucking kill yourself.
Yeah, no. Despite what mudshits want The Lion is gonna whoop durkah ass.
I think, main reason why Rebels fail so hard right now, it's just their chronic problem got much worse.
The problem in question - they are not monolithic faction, and recent Russian strikes on their commanders ,I think, there aiming to further divide them. Truly I think , at some point moderate Rebels existed, and maybe they exist, but they are eclipsed by basketheads that are not better then IS.
I don't think they are capable of any significant offensive right now, as they become increasingly divided.
But there's a grey area senpai. A Russian attack on say Turkish airbases in North Turkey would likely initiate NATO even if the Turks started it first.
The Russians can't just be 100% sure America and Britain won't go full retard and respond.
I personally say FUCK Roachogan and his Turkish scum, but my government is different.
Okay to fuck a hijab middle eastern girl. Are the stories on int true that its possible to fuck them if you finesse or just lies
Ill be moving to southern Ontario in September for uni, apparently a lot of arabs
Russia only lost in Afghanistan because my government was actively arming jihadists with state of the art equipment.
That's something we are doing for the rebels nearly as much (Saudis do it instead) and so these rebels are losing.
Doesn't matter. Russia would be powerless to stop a Turkish invasion. If it comes down to it the air power that Russia has in Syria would not stack up against Turkish, Saudi and KSA air force. To get much of its air power to Syria Russia would have to fly hundreds of kms around the Turkish air defense which would leave them completely exposed. Russia and Iran's best bet is to rattle sabers and hope it scares the invasion off, but if the Turks and SA decide to go forth with it there's little Russia could do.
It doesn't matter if the US is obliged by treaty to protect them in this situation they still would. Beating Turkey would require Russia striking deep within Turkish territory and neutralize an air defense system that the US helped build and is the cusp of the US's deterrence against Russia in the region.
Then filter me you obese rat. I'm not deepthroating your hellhole of a country, I'm merely stating facts.
Assad will be overthrown, Syria will become a Sunni Arab state, and Kurdistan still won't be independent. Mark my word and keep discussing Syria with other mongoloids here who haven't the slightest clue about the Middle-East.
Takes like 30 Russian Nukes to turn you into wasteland for good.
There's no way of defeating Russians without them using their nukes, which would turn the world into shit. And all that cause some small cocked turks and dirty petrol niggers don't want a kurdish state? Politicians aren't that dumb, don't you worry
Except Assad and regime buddies ran Syria from 1965-2010 without much of a hitch.
Supporting democracy and human rights is all good. But America and the West did it the wrong way in Syria. War and pain cannot beget a stable democracy; especially when Jihadists abound.
It only brings more war and pain.
Obviously the biggest issue is that they're divided. If they were a united force like the YPG they would probably have made some good grounds, and if it was exclusively the FSA it would have been an easier sell to the western public.
As it is they're a total shambles and will be fairly easy for Russia/Iran/Assad to take out eventually, provided the Saudis and Turks don't do anything drastic. Though it seems they're going to escalate things soon.
And it should be this way, I am pretty sure every country neighbouring Syria prays,makes sure, that shit didn't hit fan in their own country..
For example we have those others Arabic Monarchies near...something like Bahrain or Kuweit, actually does anyone knows about them, are they terrible like KSA ,or marginally better?
If the Western powers actually sought to end the suffering quickly they'd support an Assad victory. Clearly they have a desire for regime-change (to what would probably end up being a much less stable alternative) and would now find it difficult to back Assad due to path-dependency and wanting to stand against Russia.
Another half-baked attempt to try and paint a rebel faction as a group espousing Western democratic norms, then half-arsing a plan to support them.
Also the double-think re. Turkey & Saudi Arabia's activities is pretty mind-blowing at this point.
>tfw europe will still get millions of more migrants no matter what
The pathetic thing is he's trying to act like "he's not doing anything stupid" and trying to de-escalate it, but its mainly his fault it got to this point. The CIA coordinated the initial effort to arm and support the rebels and made tons of political promises to them. He basically formed the alliance that started a complete polarization in the region and now is acting like he is trying to lower tensions, but at this point he has lost control of the alliance and the ability to do so. He flip flopped the entire war and now he's alienated his allies and lost the proxy war he started.
Yes there is a possibility, but its still unlikely. Like I said to defeat Turkey you would have to neutralize its American made and funded air defense system and would also involve bombing air bases that a significant amount of US airpower is stationed. Turkey is basically holding the US hostage because there's not much they can do to get them to stop without risking the collapse of decades of NATO strategy in the ME.
They existed in 2011-2012. But Al-Nusra (the offshoot of Islamic State of Iraq) got a ton of support from the Gulf states and Turkey, set up shop in Northern Syria as the FSA, and then expanded control over the moderates.
Nusra would get the most funding so they would pick up more and more fighters and land. Eventually by late 2013 Nusra and Islamists buddies was the FSA!
ISIS is literally formerly Nusra. The lands of ISIS control used to be the lands the FSA controlled in 2013. That's because that part of the FSA was Al-Nusra.
Too many people here have only a 2015-2016 view of the Syrian war. It's understandable but it gives them the wrong answers.
Can you explain why you think Assad will be overthrown? I know it's unlikely that Syrian territory would splinter up, but even if Saudi and Turkey do get involved it's going to prolong the war a lot more considering that Assad holds the entire coast.
How do you factor in the retaking of ISIS territory in your theory? You have both Assad and ISIS to take out in order for your scenario to come true.
This. If there is a regime change who's to say it wouldn't be much worse? The country would be very unstable and the new government wouldn't even have the means to remove jihadist
I don't have any proofs but there have been many pictures of chinky looking SAA soldiers with NK arms in the Syria war threads on /k/.
Plague Doctor said they were NK. I believe him.
Middle East is a mixed bag of shit
Jordan is very pro-western, never pops up on the human rights council's radar
Lebanon is a mixed bag because something like 30% is Shia and 30% is Sunni with the rest being Christian and a tiny Druze, and it's political system includes all of them except the druze so shit never gets done.
Bahrain and Qatar aren't winning Peace Prizes any time soon, but they aren't as bad as the KSA, and I don't think Kuwait and the UAE are much better either
>living in the same continent with pakistan, india north korea and china.
i think safest place would be chile or smth. i hate politics and in this place it's impossible to avoid politics REEEE
>Turkey & Saudi Arabia's activities is pretty mind-blowing at this point.
Neither the saudis nor erdoğan would attempt something like this without american support. There some things going on behind the curtains.
Just checked the /k/ thread, it's full of shitposting Turks - or shitposters pretending to be Turks. Either way it's shit.
What the hell are the Saudis thinking? They already have a hard enough time of it with the Houthis, why would they go into the Syrian quagmire? Do they expect the Americans to back them with troops or something?
>Like I said to defeat Turkey you would have to neutralize its American made and funded air defense system
Which is even worse, we'd have to somehow give NATO an opportunity to overlook the fifth article of their code which would immediately force them to declare war on us. Despite what our propaganda might've pictured, that would be a curb-stomp war, with Turkey being the curb.
This is the stupidest war ever.
>ISIS filled with CIA trained former Talibans whose seen shit in their time
>FSA trained by the CIA
>Kurds - trained and supplied by the US - fighting ISIS, al-Nusra and FSA
>Saudi Arabia, which is a allied of the West, is joining the bandwagon to supposedly """""push backthe kurds"""""
>Turkey, which is in NATO, openly buys the oil pruced by the Islamic State and lets its jihadis in and out the border with Syria
not him, nor turkish, but you do know the background of kurds right? as in background history? they are shafi islamists, behind things like armenian genocide and whatnot
we literally only like them b/c they are easy to control
What cock sucking? That I'd rather side with Russia, who share my faith and partially culture instead of Turkey or worse, Saudis, who if given the opportunity would enslave us all and make us obey to shariah? That you call cock sucking or what? It's funny in your little republic you sit over there and all you have to worry is german cock every 50 years, try siding next to a madman like Erdogan and see then.
>Do they expect the Americans to back them with troops or something?
I doubt they would go into Syria alone. So I'm assuming they're relying on Turkish or possible US support for their invasion.
>he's alienated his allies and lost the proxy war he started
Basically, yeah. The Red Line bluff was catastrophically damaging to US credibility. Had he either never made it, or made it and stuck to it, we wouldn't have been hearing about cables the Russians and Chinese were exchanging about how weak we looked.
And our regimen for "train & equip" was a joke to begin with, more to stave off editorials in the NYT than actually accomplish objectives. There will be books written about how we walked out with 100 fighters, half of which deserted immediately. Which make us look even more rudderless.
Superpowers don't bluff. So either shut up and do nothing, or make a threat and follow through. The middle ground pisses off allies, encourages enemies, gets nothing accomplished. What an absolute mess.
And now we're bombing, just like we were trying to avoid. So much for not getting involved in "somebody else's civil war", as Obama put it.
What clusterfuck? It's easy peasy!
Iraq has a minority Sunni dictatorship with a majority Shia population. USA invades Iraq because... Just because. Iraq turns into hell on Earth. USA puts Shias in power in Iraq, which Iran likes, because they are Shia, but not too much, because they hate the USA. Sunnis retreat into the desert and start doing terrorism stuff because they are pissed they lost power, pretty much like the KKK after the American civil war. Saudi Arabia and its neighbours back the Sunni durkas because they are also Sunni durkas and hate Iran, but not overtly, because those Iraqi durkas are nasty and Sauds & Co are friends with the USA.
Then a revolt starts in Syria, which has a Shia government with a majority Sunni population, i.e. the reverse of Iraq pre-invasion. In other words, something that Iran likes but Turkey (also Sunni) and Saudi Arabia hate. Since Iran is Syria's friend, that makes Syria another enemy to America. So Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the US team up and decide it's the best opportunity to topple Syria's Shia government and replace it with a Sunni one.
Yet Syria is not alone! They have the support of Shia Iran, as mentioned, including the very effective Hizbollah which is actually Lebanese and fucks with Israel but hey welcome anyway. Plus, the only Russian military base outside Russia is... IN SYRIA, and its existence depends completely on the Shia government in Syria. So Russia is also a player for the Syrian team.
Then there's the Kurds, who are more or less on their own and in good terms with the Shia government, but who are Turkey's mortal enemy. So Turkey has two reasons to destroy Syria. Kurds are sandwiched between Turkey and the Gulf-sponsored ultrajihadis but somehow manage to survive. (1/2)
Western people always complain about how we drew arbitrary borders, and that is the cause of the conflicts in the middle east.
How would we draw better borders? At this point is that even remotely an option?
I'm totally sure that's what they think, and they might be right.
We fucked up by not pulling the trigger in 2012-2013.
Now Obama gets to pat himself on the back for not "getting us in another war" and he gets all the popular points while Syria and Iraq go to hell and their refugees flood the EU.
We are so good at destabilizing our rivals. I give Obama that.
It seems like no one else notices how much we cuck them because America is the only protector of Europe from evil awful Russia.
We cuck the world and I love it. Funny thing is the world loves it.
>he still believes this war is about >muh religion or >muh country
Over time, the Sunni anti-government Syrians get more and more durka jihad. Sauds fucking love this, and Turkey doesn't give a crap as long as they kill non-Sunni Syrians, but Americans don't like it. Russia is an important trading partner and Iran suddenly becomes a non-enemy of the West (in an awkward frenemies situation) so the US is trapped in a story that would make Kafka hard. After spending 5 years funding and training rebels, it turns out you don't want them to win, but you don't want them to lose either. Awesome.
Enter Russia. Russia's military is serious business and actually DOES HAVE A PLAN unlike the USA. Blast rebel territory into the Stone Age and wait for the government to capture it before you move to the next town.
So far, it's working. Which pisses Turkey and Saudi Arabia off.
Did I mention that Saudi Arabia is involved in another war, the invasion of Yemen, against Iranian proxies? And that Turkey is threatening to start a front on their own?
It's so easy, man!
It's better to say "Shia Friendly" when talking about the Syrian government, rather than Shia. It's secular and Assad's family are Alawites, who Iranian shia's would consider heretics.
Although Nusra has now completely surpassed the FSA the thing that really started when ISIS gained power and started their campaign against ISIS. They destroyed or forced to dismantle dozens of FSA groups from Aleppo to Idlib. The FSA fighters that didn't flee joined Nusra or other Islamic groups since the US cut arms to the FSA after ISIS took over the FSA's logistical center in Idlib. The remaining FSA groups were basically forced to ally with Nusra for survival. Those that didn't like the SRF, Harakat Hazzm, Division 30 were one by one destroyed by Nusra in 2014-2015. ISIS's campaign against the FSA completely destroyed any advantage the FSA had over Nusra and solidified them as the leader of the rebellion.
The rise of ISIS started with the humiliation of the Sunni people during Iraqi Freedom, then they saw an opportunity during the Syrian civil war to wage jihad in that shithole.
The Kurds shall overcome. Bîjî.
Ocenia is an option too, but still fuck this shit.
We just are trying to destabilize Assad so he gets kicked out of power and Russia loses an ally.
ISIS was an unfortunate.... Side effect.
Most of the blame goes on the Gulf States though. They were the ones supporting Nusra and calling it part of the FSA.
Yes, but now look at the size of this conflict. It became more than two groups of sandniggers shooting each other in the desert.
Now the regional powers want to save their $$$$ and acquire more power(Iran).
Who allowed roaches in this thread ?
Die you subhumans.
Russia will nuke your shithole.
Oh I agree. No one in the region is good.
But the "moderates" Turkey supports are way worse than the vast majority of the Kurdish forces.
Finally, they support our interests. They are our proxy troops against ISIS. Therefore we support them.
If Russia was invaded the nukes would come out...
Isn't the one of the most used accusations to Erdogan , that he is Neo-ottaman or something...
Shame , really Turkey , recently I read about Ataturk and finally understood , why you plaster his portrays everywhere, dude deserves respect.
The majority either literally wants to "kill the bad guys" or like me just want off. But I realize that just pulling out early is what caused this shit, we need to finish what we started and keep troops there for an extended period of time to prevent it from happening again, and then NEVER do this again.
I fell like a quarter of the wolds population needs to be culled. Muslim women and children will soon watch their husbands and fathers get their hearts ripped out of their chest and force fed them before they meet a similar fate.
>Alright mate what sort of civil war do you want
>Just fuck my shit up
If it was so then why is this war 5 years long and destabilizing Europe, Turkey, and America?
Nothing like this is easy to fix.
The only rational solution is to remove all our support and let Assad and Russia retake the land.
Yes, but it's just typical nationalism. He's increased funding to muslims schools and even brought back programs to learn Ottoman Turkish.
There's no chance of him actually taking back any former territories, considering they all (barring maybe Bosnia and Albania) despise Turkey.
Reminder that Russia is the only sane player in the game with clear goals: We have our base and allied legitimate government which invited us.
Local players are all muh religion which is THE SAME religion except differentely brewed.
West intervention fights for what exactly? Muh democracy? Muh world order in some coutry not related to ours un any way.
Assad is Sunni and his wife is sunni. The majority of the armed forces are sunni. The vast majority of Assad's citizens are Sunni.
It's a sectarian war, but it is the jihadist sunnis versus the actually moderate sunnis, shias, and minorities.
Well he can't credibly say it was "someone elses civil war" due to our involvement and political posturing since the beginning. Now he's trying to act like he's trying to moderate the situation but he no longer has the power to do so.
The one thing I don't get is how the US allowed the YPG to cross the Euphrates which Turkey had outright said was a red line for them. We should have done everything in our power to coarse them to not attempt to link up with Afrin. I'm not sure what happened behind the scenes but either we didn't try to stop them or we failed at stopping them. Not only that but once they crossed the Euphrates the administration actively bombed groups Turkey and our own allies support. We provoked Turkey after they said they wouldn't allow it and now we have literally every ally we have in the ME against us because of it (Sans Jordan and Egypt).
He promised the CIA training program at the beginning of the war but then actively resisted it as the pentagon tried to implement it. Then after forcing out a defense secretary he decides to allow the training to go forward after the FSA had already lost most of its power among the rebels. That and the red line was just a series of flip flops that showed he had no idea what he was doing from the start. He helped start the proxy war then didn't allow the pentagon or his allies to pursue it the way they wanted. He should have stayed out from the beginning but instead he didn't but did about everything in his power to hamper our allies and the pentagon.
Yeah I didn't even get into details such as:
> Syria's government is actually secular and protects religious minorities
> economic war with oil prices between Saudis, Iranians and Russians
> 1200 different groups fighting in Syria
> muh Sykes-Picot
> some of the rebels the West has been supporting are the organisation behind 9/11
> terrorism general
> atrocities general
> chemical weapons general
> the Israeli elephant in the room
Assad is not Sunni, he's alawite which is closer to a Shia splinter sect than a Sunni one.
I don't deny Syria is Sunni majority, but painting the Syrian government along religious lines is stupid. You have plenty of Christians fighting in the SAA as well.
I just wish you and US put ,through diplomatic means, Turkey and KSA on their place, I don't think US wanted this situation.
Then you can continue on choking Rebels without much interference....well beside support of rebels from US....
Global politics goddamn stupid.
Kind of. But ISIS never had Idlib and neither did Nusra until May 2015.
Nusra was the dominant organization in the FSA in late 2013. The moderates were either radicalized, marginalized, or forced to the Southern front. That's the truth.
The real fucker here is Turkey who supported Al-Nusra and other jihadists over the moderate FSA because the moderates were willing to make a peace deal with Assad.
Turkey actually switched most of its support from the real moderates to the more politically loyal jihadists in late 2013. That's what led to Al-Nusra and buddies dominating the FSA.
Man the media here since years is working on awaking a more european self-understanding in us, which is difficult as the country is nationalistic beyond belief. They were succeeding to a point in which the west had normal relations with Russia. People here are worried that being in Nato could actually mean that you have to actively side with your historically seen worst enemies vs your best "friends". Nobody here is up for that. I've never understood why the US has to built up Saudi Arabia, a country which hates everything the US, on paper, stands for, instead of normalise the relations to Russia, a christian country with just as much resources. Why again a fake conflict must be framed in order to strenghten tensions in Europe? Who fucking cares about Turks and why are they even part of Nato anyways? I'd built a fucking wall on the border to Turkey and forget about this for good tbqh, fuck middle east as well and their nigger riots all the times.
>implying the united party of mafia isn't ready to nuke even their own people to stay in power
Not happening. This region is going to be a warzone for a long time to come.
What's funny is Iraq in 2010 before we pulled out had the lowest number of civilian casualties in HISTORY.
And would you be culled as well? Anyone who posts on 4chan would probably be better off culled.
They control fucking Bosphorus. And in our times....Religion have much less importance then you both competing for same thing.
I am pretty sure that both Russia and US are not against weak EU ...
>ISIS never had Idlib
They never controlled Idlib but they fought there way into Idlib and neutralized tons of FSA groups here. One of the reasons we supported Jamall Marouf and the SRF because they were the first FSA rebel group to successfully fight off ISIS in Idlib. ISIS definitely had a big presence in the province and even took over the FSA's primary arms warehouse and supply route there. The only reason ISIS didn't completely destroy the FSA in rural Aleppo and Idlib was because the Jihadist groups like Nusrah and Ahrar al-Sham ended up joining the FSA against ISIS after they realized they were next up. If it wasn't for Marouf and the SRF ISIS would have taken Jebel al-Zawiyah in Idlib and destroyed one of the last FSA controlled supply routes in the Northern part of the country.
Also not sure where you're getting that the rebels in the North were sent to the Southern Front. The Southern Front FSA groups are largely tribal and many are bedouin. FSA groups in Idlib or Aleppo would have no interest in fighting for groups 100's of kms away that are only trying to preserve their tribal interests. One of the reasons the SF has been as successful as they should be with the majority they hold over the FSA is because Jordan and the US can't get them to work cohesively since they're all playing power games amongst tribes. The rebels in the North want no part of that.
>The Baltics will probably be Ukrained by Russia at least.
The answer is no.
First, we have no interest in Baltics, cause their butthurt is hazardous.
Second, if even we would want to do it, there is no money for it.
Third, the ukranian crisis has not even ended.
All of us will be culled. The fires of hell will purge us clean.
I'm incorrect about Assad, but the rest of my points are accurate.
This sectarian war is moderate sunnis/shias/minorities versus Wahhabist Sunnis. It's not Shia/Alwaite versus Sunnis.
They want the conflict to be extended as long as possible.
> Hizbullah backs Assad
> Israel wants Hizbullah destroyed
> but if rebels win, Sunnis shall gain momentum: Muslim Brotherhood, Palestinians, etc
> Iraq and Syria are about Arabs killing Arabs
> longer wars mean more Arabs kill more Arabs
> 10/10 would Golan again
How your elections, American? I heard that Trump non-ironically has chance to win, are you actually fucking crazy?
Also I heard only good news about " Bernie " or smth ..
And goddamn everytime I look at Clinton, she reminds me of lizard
Unless Turkey invades Syria, the war is coming to a close. A couple more years, at the most.
Well I like to think the best of NATO countries despite all of them being cunts to the USA when it comes to military except for the UK
i dont why we joined nato
no visible benefits our army is falling apart because we dont need to maintain it anymore and we have to have a number of our troops stationed in asia adn on top of that we probably had to give our stock of s300 to the yanks
Nothing Ottoman Empire just strikes back
Not sure how much the shootdown really effected it. It might have sped up Russian's deployment, but the deployment was already underway. The shootdown was a move to preserve Turkish airspace and not allow Russia to play brinkmanship games with them like they did with all of the Baltics, Nordice countries and Eastern Europe in 2014 when Russia was routinely invading their airspace. Russia definitely reacted against it by speeding up their air campaign, but the campaign itself was already in the works.
Pretty sure Iran would kick Saudi ass if it comes down to a heads up. Spoiled towel heads with no military history vs Iran which has military experience. Not even sure the turks could do smth against Iran.
I don't remember ISIS near Idlib during their 2014 emergence.
But what you are saying sounds accurate.
I meant some of the more moderate funding and arms support went to the Southern Front because of the steady loss of the Northern moderates.
I'm only arguing that Nusra and jihadists were dominant in the north before ISIS's emergence.
Trump isn't bad. He's hated immensely by the media. I see him as a moderate republican who isn't politically correct.
Be more afraid of warhawk Hillary. She voted for or supported every American military operation since 1991. She wanted Obama to remove Assad in 2013.
Not a lot of discussion about what Iran might do.
If foreign powers send more troops into Syria, I'm sure Iran would send troops to oppose them. We might see a war at the very least between turkey and Saudi Arabia, and Iran. If not that plus Russia and NATO.
>russia and america about to implement a ceasefire which will inevitably fail
Wtf? If Russians do not break this Assad will lost. USA don't need to do shit there. They allready won if Russia decide to stop bombing the shit out of Daesh
The Russians met with the YPG and announced air support after the shootdown. Since then Russia and the kurds have worked together to beat ISIS and the jihadists in their pursuit of Afrin canton.
We encouraged it but we prefer it weak and in discord. Understand my point now?
I don't see anyone as good or bad. Hitler and ISIS and the Japs yeah, but America and other cunts support their interests. Nothing more.
>Probably a number joined the "refugees" as well.
whoa whoa source?
look at the map reveals why Turkey is hugely strategic. If you kicked them out of NATO, how long do you think it would take for us to find a new weapons supplier and strategic friend? When you destroyed your relationship with Iran, they turned to Russia. When you tried to invade Cuba, they turned to Russia. Coincidence? I think not.
>Russians and Americans are agreeing on something.
Seriously though It d be great if you both kept "allies" there those alies belong.
"Fighting IS" , my ass , maybe fighting for IS , goddamn KSA
Iran's air force is extremely weak and outdated with no experience in years. The Saudis have the newest jets, with US training that have been flying combat missions in ME for a couple years now. Same can be said about Qatar and KSA's air forces all though they are smaller. Iran's army is probably more powerful than the Saudi National Guard, but air superiority would be key to winning an actually war.
Oh yes they were absolutely in Idlib. They were wrecking the shit out of the FSA there too. The only reason they didn't completely wipe them off the map was because ISIS assassinated an Ahrar al-Sham emir which caused Nusra and the rest of the Jihadists to fight with FSA against ISIS because they realized ISIS would turn against them after they destroyed the FSA.
In fact ISIS's seizure of the FSA arms depot in Bab al-Hawa Idlib can pretty much be seen as the final nail in the collapse of the FSA's strength in the North. Before the SMC group had held the FSA groups together by acting as an arms funnel to all of the FSA groups and keeping them in line. Once the warehouse fell and the FSA lost its arms supply many of the groups that hadn't been destroyed by ISIS joined Nusrah and Islamist since Turkey et all was still arming them. The only reason ISIS didn't completely destroy all of them was because Jamal Marouf successfully countered in Idlib and the Islamists joined the fight against ISIS as well.
Surprised you hadn't heard of this. It was the undoing of dozens of FSA groups and the end of cohesion in the FSA that was created by having the US backed SMC having control of the arms supply.
Here's an article that talks about it. If you google SRF and Jamal Marouf in Idlib in 2014 you'll find stuff about his counter attack against ISIS in the region.
Russia already has a finger on nofly zone trigger.
No. This is where it gets even more complicated. Turkey asked IF and Ahrar al Sham to take back the border crossing from ISIS. They did, but after they kicked out ISIS they refused to give the crossing back to the FSA. Then the FSA and IF clashed and IF came out on top. It was also a seminal moment in the war because it was one of the first times Turkey sided with the Islamists because they realized the FSA was beyond salvaging. So the whole event can really be seen as the start of the unraveling of the FSA in the North and the rise of Nusra, IF, Ahrar etc. and Turkey's and Saudi Arabi's decision to primarily switch to supporting them. I feel like its such a huge moment in the war but most people don't know anything about it because many people didn't follow the conflict in Syria till ISIS became prominent in 2014 and the beheading videos started.
Here's another article that talks about it:
Another important thing to mention about the rebel in fighting that occurred in 2014 before the media really started paying attention to ISIS. As soon as the FSA and the rest of the Jihadists started fighting ISIS the SAA stopped fighting ISIS on all fronts for nearly a year. Basically they saw the rebel in-fighting as a great thing because the enemy of my enemy is my friend. The rebels quickly kicked ISIS out of Aleppo and Idlib after banding together, while ISIS consolidated control in the East and destroyed all the rebels in Deir Ezzor, Hassakah and Raqqa.
Since all of the major cities and the vast majority of Syrian's population is in Syria's West that had always been the Syrian government's priority. They decided to focus their efforts against the rebels in the West while entering a de-facto truce with ISIS in the East. For more than half a year neither ISIS nor the SAA launched an offense against each other and both focused on trying to destroy the rebels in their respective areas.
However the SAA was forced to react to the Islamic State eventually. In 2014 after ISIS had completely cleared the East of Syria from the rebels they turned their focus on Iraq. At the time they held almost no major cities there. But they used their stronghold in East Syria as a springboard and launched a cross-border offense against Mosul from their completely uprisings Iraq and Syria. After the fall of Mosul Iran forced the Syrian government to turn their attention to ISIS since they had just used Syria as a base of operations to invade Iraq. By this time ISIS held the advantage in the East so all the government could do was bomb ISIS positions. As soon as SyAF started bombing ISIS, ISIS launched a huge offense against all the regime positions in the East effectively ending the truce. Over the next couple months ISIS drove the government almost entirely out of the East of Syria.
looks mean nothing. we are like thousands of kms away from central asia for like 1000 years now. of course the looks change. but when you go to a rural town in turkey you see people with slightly slant eyes, which means that original turkic blood is still there. but culturally we are the same.
i have been to Kazakhstan couple of years ago and after a day or two i was able to understand them. the way they talk is not something i was used to but the words and grammar were all the same.
Turk roaches are not humans.
Turks should honestly just be genocided.
I dont see any other option at this point.
Holy fuck man I never knew about any of that. Pretty crazy the articles still call ISIS an Al Qaeda affiliate. No one definitely had any idea how strong they would become.
ISIS was still technically an Al Qaeda affiliate but they had been operating independently from Al Qaeda central and Nusra front for a while. At that point they were basically their own entity and the unraveling between the groups had begun a long time before. I don't think Zawahiri officially condemned the group for several months after that but Nusra and the other Jihadists had already been fighting ISIS for a while before they officially were cast out by AQ. Another interesting even in this period was the split of the Chechen Jihadists with Omar Shishani going to ISIS and the rest going to Nusra's allies JMA, Ansar al Deen etc.
I say United States just keeps out and sells weapons to all to help our econmy
>Except Assad and regime buddies ran Syria from 1965-2010 without much of a hitch.
IIRC it was a pretty oppressive regime.
>America and the West did it the wrong way in Syria
I agree with you, because IIRC we supported the rebels who then allowed ISIS to take power. (Or did we support Assad? I'm tired idk).
>War and pain cannot beget a stable democracy
It does when you win by a landslide.