Welcome to DefenceTalk.com Forum!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The Current Conflict In Syria

Discussion in 'Geostrategic Issues' started by kurama, Jan 12, 2018.

Share This Page

  1. Strannik

    Strannik Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2014
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Australia
    That of cause is no secret to anybody, but I certainly did not expect facts appear in US "mainstream" before I got really old.

    US has no evidence of Syrian use of sarin gas, Mattis says

    Now Mattis admits there was no evidence Assad used poison gas on his people: Opinion

    Member banned for post in violation of the Forum Rules. Ban is permanent as this was not the first time the member had been an issue, and had been previously banned.
    -Preceptor
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 28, 2018
  2. ngatimozart

    ngatimozart Super Moderator Staff Member Verified Defense Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2010
    Messages:
    5,452
    Likes Received:
    539
    Location:
    In the rum store
    @Strannik how about doing some fact checking instead of cherry picking "evidence" and I use that term rather
    loosely where it's concerned to the Newsweek article and it's writer that you cite. I would actually consider that it's more in line with what generally accumulates in the bottom of ones dunny. It took me less than 2 minutes to obtain video of the relevant news conference where Gen Mattis made the remarks and the Newsweek article most definitely took him out of context.
     
  3. Feanor

    Feanor Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    15,255
    Likes Received:
    68
    Location:
    Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
    In light of the announced US withdrawal, Syrian and Russian forces are entering YPG-held territory in and around Manbij, and the YPG is supposedly withdrawing from the area. This creates an odd situation where US forces to the north and north-west are blocking Erdogan from attacking the SDF, while to the south-west Russian troops are blocking Erdogan from attacking the SDF. So far the village of Arima is the center of the SAA presence, and Russian MPs are located there.

    Сирийская армия входит в Манбидж

    EDIT: Some more updates, there is unconfirmed info of an agreement between Russia, Turkey, and the Kurds, to surrender the area west of the Euphrates to the Syrians, with some of the border area going to Turkey, and a joint commission to make sure anyone associated with the PKK leaves Manbij.

    Манбидж. 28.12.2018: Уверения в преданности и любви
     
  4. Ranger25

    Ranger25 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2012
    Messages:
    614
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Si Vis Pacem. Para Bellum
  5. John Fedup

    John Fedup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    3,430
    Likes Received:
    164
    Location:
    Vancouver and Toronto
    Clearly Bolton turned Trump around. The Mattis resignation blowback made Bolton’s job of delaying the exit easier, I doubt he had to use his resignation card. That will come soon.
     
  6. Feanor

    Feanor Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    15,255
    Likes Received:
    68
    Location:
    Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
    Meanwhile in Idlib; al-Nusra has actively gained territory from pro-Turkish groups, capturing armored vehicles, and other equipment, in the process. It looks like, if the US doesn't withdraw and the Kurds don't strike a deal with Assad (and they really should given US behavior in the recent past), then Erdogan might get the green light from Russia-Iran for an operation in Rojava, in exchange for an SAA push in Idlib. This simple but effective ploy of putting Erdogan on a collision course with the US while Assad profits by getting to take more rebel held areas means that if the US stays they actually simplify things for Russia and Iran.
     
  7. Pentaprism

    Pentaprism New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2018
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Queensland
    There is a lot of talk in Western Media that ISIS will be able to re-establish itself in Syria if the US pullout. Of course their argument completely overlooks the fact that Assad and Russia have also cleared ISIS from large areas in Syria, including Deiir Ezzor where they had a large presence, and presumably will continue doing so as fast as they can.

    So what is the actual report card? Which side has been most effective at eradicating ISIS and which one is best positioned to continue the job and why?
     
  8. Feanor

    Feanor Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    15,255
    Likes Received:
    68
    Location:
    Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
    I don't buy that argument at all. The US and the SDF/YPG made incredible gains against ISIS, seizing Raqqa and the area around Tabka airbase, when the race was on against Assadist forces. However after the behind-the-scenes deal was struck regarding the de-facto partition of Syria along the Euphrates (with some minor exceptions), and ISIS was chased into a small, geographically less relevant area, the US-backed offensive slowed to a crawl. While the Syrian government forces and allies actively and aggressively went after any ISIS-held territories, leaving only small roving bands in the desert, from where I sit it appears that the US and the SDF/YPG have intentionally allowed ISIS to retain a small patch of territory. Given that the US has no legal justification for it's presence in Syria, allowing ISIS to remain on the map is a good way to continue claiming that the US is there to "fight ISIS", even though it's also openly being said that the US is there to counteract Iranian influence.

    On the subject of report cards, I don't think it particularly matters. When ISIS became the focus of their efforts each side was able to eliminate them rapidly and fairly effectively, albeit with significant foreign support (the US backing the SDF/YPG, Russia/Iran backing the Syrian government). Either side is fully capable of crushing the last ISIS foothold rapidly and decisively. Assad is prevented from doing so because the enclave is on the east side of the Euphrates. What prevents the SDF/YPG? How little time did it take to seize Raqqa and how relatively easily were great resources brought to bear on the problem? How long since then have the Kurds and their backers been butting heads with a much smaller ISIS in the south-east? In my opinion, therein lies the key to understanding this situation, and any claims regarding the US being some sort of guarantor to ISIS not re-emerging should be disregarded as blatant lies.

    Or, if one is in a more cynical mood, interpreted to the effect that the US might go back to pumping weapons into questionable hands in Syria, should that be the only way to prevent a complete victory of a pro-Iranian Assad. In which case the US withdrawal could indeed lead to a resurgent ISIS, not because the US was holding them back, but because US actions would contribute to their resurgence. Though honestly, I don't think that's a likely outcome. With a US withdrawal, a major Turkish operation in the north, we would probably see a concentrated effort on the part of Syrians, Iranians, and even the Iraqis (sealing their side of the border), to finish off the last ISIS pocket with extreme prejudice.
     
    ngatimozart and ASSAIL like this.