War Against ISIS

PO2GRV said:

This isnt the first post youve made in this thread advocating for greater involvement on the part of the US which makes me feel that youre awfully cavalier with the blood and treasure of other countries and infact im having difficulty recalling any time n this thread that youve made similar calls on behalf of the UK. What im not doing is turning this into a Us vs Youz argument but i do ask that you clarify your statements or take greater care in making policy prescriptions with the blood of other nations

Mind you this doesnt even begin to answer the question of wherhet or not the US actually has an interests at stake in what is still a regional conflict

<pinned, more to come later>

Click to expand...

I'm happy to put my cards on the table and say where I stand on the matter.

1) I think the US have played the situation well. They have showed restraint from the very beginning, performing air strikes mainly in support of their allies in the region, to attack ISIL positions. At the same time they are respecting the complexity of the situation and the local rivalries, which sometimes conflict with their own objectives. A good example being the Turks and the Kurds. Furthermore they have shown respect for Russia's interests; they did not bomb Assad's forces over the alleged poison gas issue but instead allowed the weapons to be shipped to Russia. The US have as far as we know kept out of the air defense zone set up by Russia, thereby not escalating the conflict. All of this against a back drop of huge opposition in congress protesting against the lack of more decisive action in the conflict.

So while no one is likely to come out of this smelling of roses, the US (and partners) have shown to me the most appropriate action.

2) Russia has gone bull at a gate from the outset bombing indiscriminatly civilians and civilian infrastructure, targeting opposition at first and not the terrorists ISIL. We can only conclude that Russia's involvement was deceptive and politically motivated and although allegedly standing up for it's ally in the region there is huge suspicion regarding their real interests. They have provoked Turkey by invading their air space, which resulted in loss of live and this as we know came very close to a major escalation. In the meantime more and more civilians are being killed at the hands of crude Russian air strikes.

Russia are threatening world war if other sides send in troops, and have even hinted at nuclearising the conflict.

So I know who I am supporting the most and I have good reasons for doing so.

You believe the USA showed restraint even as they were training and equipping rebels, as they proudly declared again and again. Then when they realized what the hell they were doing they shut those "partner-building" programs down in shame. They carry a huge responsibility for the rise of the radical islamists, they actually proved Assad right about his warnings.

And they provided TOWs to the rebels, perpetuating the civil war and humanitarian/refugee crisis.

And you place the blame for the su-24 shootdown on the russians, as if a small air violation is reason enough for a shootdown (hint: it isn't and never has been), while Turkey has a history of making a mockery of all types of borders. You are actually accusing Russia that it escalated the situation dangerously.

I am starting to believe in parallel dimensions, because you and I cannot possibly live in the same one

EDIT: Are you living in the land of the free? That would explain a lot.

Toblerone said:

And these are the bedfellows of the USA. Turkey is a NATO member ffs. Erdogan already actively tried to force Putin's hand with the su-24 shootdown when the situation wasn't as unfavourable.

Click to expand...

This is a more then nasty situation but I personaly think the current POTUS has a clear image and a firm stance on the things.

Lets not forget that the Ghouta chemical attacks forced him in an undesirable position a lot of people interpreted as weak and which did some harm to him.

Some evidence now leans towards an attack staged by rebels rather than an SAA strike and even though the US govt. didn't publicly validated this (iirc), I do think that the lack of a military response on the event back then hints towards some knowledge or at least suspicioun in the US intelligence about who realy used the chemical agents.

( Seymour Hersh has a nice write up on that whole situation: Seymour M. Hersh · Whose sarin? · LRB 19 December 2013 )

With the whole mess of surfacing evidence that turkey was (or is) smuggeling weapons into syria under the umbrella of humanitarian aid, including the harsh respond towards the involved journalists, rumors that the compounds used in the attack were coming into Syria via Turkey don't seem to bee unfeasible anymore.

This dosn't imply an direct involvement of the turkish Goverment but the laissez-faire attitude towards fighters and weapons crossing into syria from its territory (seemingly unhindered) does put them in a bad light.

Then there were the leaks about a planned "false flag" attack which would probably landed in the land of conspiracy theories if Turkey didn't respond with blocking youtube giving the whole thing credibility.

Turkey blocks YouTube amid 'national security' concerns | World news | The Guardian

I belive the US have had it with Turkey pretty much and know very well what is going on. They do play along atm because of the need to deter russia and give the impression of a unified NATO to appease the baltic states and keep their influence in Europe. I think this becomes clear when you see that the US keeps working with the kurds and is calling Turkey to stop its shananigan.
Europe on the other hand knows very well what Erdogan does too but because of the refugee situation has to appease him, a political strategy Erdogan seems to have picked up right from Gaddafi but in time there will be a resolution to the border controll in greece and on how to handle those who are unwelcome under the refugees.

I don't think the US or NATO would go to war with russia over some turkish provocation.

What worries me is that I start to believe Turkey would be willing to go in Syria without its NATO allies if it feels comfortable enough with SA on its side and SA itself might already see itself in a direct war with Iran.

After all SA troops fight iranian backed militias in Yemen and iranian forces fight SA backed militias in Syria so one can see how SA could see them already in a defacto state of war with Iran, proxy or not and this makes it far more realistic for them to engadge directly in Syria to turn the tides and save themselfes from an shia "enciclement".

gazzzwp said:

I'm happy to put my cards on the table and say where I stand on the matter.

1) I think the US have played the situation well. They have showed restraint from the very beginning, performing air strikes mainly in support of their allies in the region, to attack ISIL positions. At the same time they are respecting the complexity of the situation and the local rivalries, which sometimes conflict with their own objectives. A good example being the Turks and the Kurds. Furthermore they have shown respect for Russia's interests; they did not bomb Assad's forces over the alleged poison gas issue but instead allowed the weapons to be shipped to Russia. The US have as far as we know kept out of the air defense zone set up by Russia, thereby not escalating the conflict. All of this against a back drop of huge opposition in congress protesting against the lack of more decisive action in the conflict.

So while no one is likely to come out of this smelling of roses, the US (and partners) have shown to me the most appropriate action.

2) Russia has gone bull at a gate from the outset bombing indiscriminatly civilians and civilian infrastructure, targeting opposition at first and not the terrorists ISIL. We can only conclude that Russia's involvement was deceptive and politically motivated and although allegedly standing up for it's ally in the region there is huge suspicion regarding their real interests. They have provoked Turkey by invading their air space, which resulted in loss of live and this as we know came very close to a major escalation. In the meantime more and more civilians are being killed at the hands of crude Russian air strikes.

Russia are threatening world war if other sides send in troops, and have even hinted at nuclearising the conflict.

So I know who I am supporting the most and I have good reasons for doing so.

Click to expand...

I feel the only point at which our opinions intersect on item 2 is the regrettable loss of civilian life as Russia chose to act imrecisely rather than sit idle waiting to use the precision weaponry they have too little of. That choice undermines Russo-Syrian-Iranian goals in the region and internationally.

Beyond that i dont see whats unclear about Russias intentions: Defend the regime from being deposed, maintain its alliance with the Syrian state, gain or maintain credibility in the region, ditto abroad, and thnk its safe to say in that order.

Russia wants sanction relief and believes rightly so that being inseparable from and invaluable to the political process (be it regime transition or regime stabilization) is thr best way to get that but Russia will not trade away everything to get it. I do however also believe that Russia will accept international credibility, cachet, and favorable strategic position in lieu of sanctions relief

Say what you want about Putin and his administration, but Russia is a rational actor (moreso than most in this conflict) and its goals arent hard to discern. It's now a matter of weighing costs and benefits on all side.

Lastly, your recounting of the MiG shootdown by Turkey conveys a rather simplistic view of the situation. Turkey acted rashly and theyve been been paying for it ever since. Erdogan has taken a big bite, and again, i worry its because he thinks the US will help him chew

GermanHerman said:

What worries me is that I start to believe Turkey would be willing to go in Syria without its NATO allies if it feels comfortable enough with SA on its side and SA itself might already see itself in a direct war with Iran.

After all SA troops fight iranian backed militias in Yemen and iranian forces fight SA backed militias in Syria so one can see how SA could see them already in a defacto state of war with Iran, proxy or not and this makes it far more realistic for them to engadge directly in Syria to turn the tides and save themselfes from an shia "enciclement".

Click to expand...

This. Was having a discussion just yeaterday about this scenario. I believe Erdogan is taking a page out of Russia's "How to Menace the Baltics" playbook in that Turkish warplanners likely expect to be able to quickly overtake SAA positions and overwhelm regime territory thus creating a fait accompli on the ground and putting the escalatory ball in Russia's court: Accept thr loss of the regime as an ally or continue war to force a reversal which could involve an Article 5 invocation.

Turkey also sees themself in a favorable position of being just over the border which wouod allow them to easily keep up the war effort in Syria meanwhile Russia would be in a rules of engagement straitjacket not unlike the US in Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan.

The question then would be does Russia want to win a regional war against Turkey, striking airbases and shipping in and around turkish territory -or- does Russia want to avoid global war with NATO limiting its strikes to Syrian territory

Its whats keeping Putin up at night with heartburn i imagine. Obama too to be fair.

Russia cannot hope to engage the turkish army on these terms, not by a long shot. But I hope Erdogan isn't crazy enough to invade Syria, the political blowback inside and outside of Turkey will be immense, the kurdish strife for independence will come to the forefront and may result in a kurdish state down the line after Erdogan is not around anymore.

I am not worried about the Saudis, they are incompetent and they know it. They have bit off more than they can chew elsewhere already. Time is against them, Iran will become a great power within 20 years and I hope I will be around when the iranians roll over them.

USA and Europe should keep Erdogan in check. And USA should focus more on Iraq and Afghanistan fighting sunni islamists. “You break it, you own it”

Toblerone said:

And USA should focus more on Iraq and Afghanistan fighting sunni islamists. “You break it, you own it”

Click to expand...

Powell would also have used overwhelming force for Iraq 2 if he was in charge, not the on-the-cheap effort GWB's neo-con advisors came up with, especially if you think disbanding the Iraqi army was a good idea.

PO2GRV said:

Lastly, your recounting of the MiG shootdown by Turkey conveys a rather simplistic view of the situation. Turkey acted rashly and theyve been been paying for it ever since. Erdogan has taken a big bite, and again, i worry its because he thinks the US will help him chew

Click to expand...

It's good to here your views which I respect.

The only thing about the trespass into Turkish air space as has been said before is that we are talking about NATO territory. Russia cannot have one rule for itself and one for NATO.

gazzzwp said:

It's good to here your views which I respect.

The only thing about the trespass into Turkish air space as has been said before is that we are talking about NATO territory. Russia cannot have one rule for itself and one for NATO.

Click to expand...

Turkey is violating another NATO member's airspace daily ... they don't give a crap about rules, they have invaded countries illegally, stomping over human rights, the list goes on. They recently sent troops in Iraq in the classic arrogant fashion of the turks, then took them back.

I don't think you understand the difference between land borders and airspace violations. Especially extremely short ones that are because of the border shape. (it was a bulge in the borders, the su-24 cut through that as I understood it)

Russiands media said that Russia’s defense ministry suspects Turkey of preparations for intrusion into Syria


upd.

Russia Claims Turkey for Systematic Shell Attacks upon Syria

http://mil.today/2016/Syria2/

Both Assad's forces and Syrian Kurds have taken even more territory from the rebels northern enclave yesterday. For Kurds, that included Tall Rifat. Turkey says it won't let Azaz fall to the Kurds. I wonder, what they will say if it is Assad's forces that approach Azaz, instead of the Kurds.

corporalclegg said:

Russiands media said that Russia’s defense ministry suspects Turkey of preparations for intrusion into Syria


upd.

Russia Claims Turkey for Systematic Shell Attacks upon Syria

Russia Claims Turkey for Systematic Shell Attacks upon Syria

Click to expand...

Just more Russian propaganda at the present point in time. However the Turks have been shelling the Kurds who have been fighting Al Nusra.

ngatimozart said:

Just more Russian propaganda at the present point in time. However the Turks have been shelling the Kurds who have been fighting Al Nusra.

Click to expand...

I mean, in this case I don't think it is. I'm certain Turkey has plans to intervene. Whether those plans are activated or not remains to be seen, but to say that the Turks are in no way preparing for a potential invasion of Syria would be rather absurd.

EDIT: I'll try to make a bigger update post later tonight, for now the Kurds have also closed the Azaz corridor, north of the SAA lines. The rebels are not cut off from Aleppo by two layers of hostile forces, SAA and YPG. Russian airstrikes in the Azaz corridor continue and some of them appear to be aimed at supporting the Kurdish offensive, though it's pure speculation on my part. They may very well be strikes against troops and supplies moving down the corridor. There is now a layer of Kurdish insulation between the Turks and the SAA, meaning that to reopen the Azaz corridor, the Turks/rebels will have to fight a serious fight against the Kurds, before they even hit the SAA/Hezbollah positions.

There is also footage suggesting that Russian use of ground forces is greater then originally speculated, especially around Palmyra and Latakia.

interesting op-ed re the syrians

Interview: CGSRS’ Hirah Azhar on the Syria Civil War - Geopoliticalmonitor.com

too big to post

gf0012-aust said:

interesting op-ed re the syrians

Interview: CGSRS’ Hirah Azhar on the Syria Civil War - Geopoliticalmonitor.com

too big to post

Click to expand...

I'm sorry but what exactly is interesting about this? The author of the article doesn't seem to have a basic understanding of the situation on the ground, insists on pretending the Kurds don't exist, and is under the impression that if we all just try really hard, a war-torn third world hellhole with no middle class to speak of will suddenly erupt into a liberal democracy.

I mean this guy thinks al-Nusra is like ISIS, and somehow separate from the rest of the rebels. Look at the very situation in the Azaz corridor right now. Al-Nusra and the FSA are enemies of ISIS, and basically allies for all intents and purposes. Look at the part where he talks about continued Russian bombardment sabotaging the peace talks. Bombardment, my ass... the huge SAA offensive, together with Kurds and Hezbollah fighters, against the Azaz corridor, is the reason the talks failed. What's the point of negotiating, if Assad is still going to crush the rebels in Aleppo, unless some sort of decisive shift on the ground occurs? And let's not mention that the talks opened with a unilateral demand by the rebels and excluded the Kurds. I mean do a word search, this guy mentions the "Kurdish population" twice, and that's it. Not a word about one of the largest fighting forces in the conflict. And the first comment is hilarious and spot on.

Feanor said:

I'm sorry but what exactly is interesting about this?

Click to expand...

any views that have a footprint are worth reading... its how people can form opinions for themselves

I've never come across a single reliable source of truth

they're all baggaged with a degree of bias

ngatimozart said:

Just more Russian propaganda at the present point in time. However the Turks have been shelling the Kurds who have been fighting Al Nusra.

Click to expand...

Well, you can, routinely, call it "Russian propaganda". However the great many signs suggest this is in fact "Information". Turks and Saudi repeatedly raising issue of ground invasion of Syria. Their narrative goes like this:
We are not planning to invade, but we are ready any time, we would however like it very much if it would be a concerted effort involving at least part of the coalition.

But words aside, Turks are already, technically, invading. Their artillery providing support on the ground in side Syria. As well as foot on the ground. Military moving into Syria, whoever they are, they work for Turks, obviously.

Update.

In the Azaz corridor joint regime and Kurdish offensive widen the breach between Aleppo and Azaz. The rebels attempted a brief counter-attack but it failed. With the fall of Tal Rifaat to the Kurds, the Azaz offensive is now in their hands. Mari is the last major stronghold, outside of Azaz, and likely the next target.

Inside Aleppo itself, Kurds have attacked a quarter of the city held by Islamist rebels. A source claims the quarter was first strafed by Russian jets.

In Deraa fighting over portions of the city continues, as the SAA attempts to clear out rebel fighters.

In Palmyra, the SAA forces took a strategic crossroads, and are pushing towards Tabka. Russian airstrikes against targets in Raqqa have intensified to support this push.

In Latakia several more villages have fallen as well as some of the hills surrounding Kinsibba. A reminder, Kinsibba is the next major rebel stronghold in Latakia province. After it's fall, the SAA forces will be practically at the borders of Idlib province.

СириÑ, военное положение 14 Ñ„ÐµÐ²Ñ€Ð°Ð»Ñ 2016 года (обновлено-2) (Туфелька)
Ð’Ð¾ÐµÐ½Ð½Ð°Ñ Ð¾Ð±Ñтановка в Сирии 15 Ñ„ÐµÐ²Ñ€Ð°Ð»Ñ 2016 года (Туфелька)
Сводка военных дейÑтвий СирийÑкой армии и РоÑÑийÑких ВКС 16 Ñ„ÐµÐ²Ñ€Ð°Ð»Ñ 2016 года (Туфелька)

Maps and footage of the most recent fighting around the Azaz corridor and Aleppo. Note, some very graphic images.

Битва за Ðлеппо 17.02.2016 - Colonel Cassad

CNN footage from the "regime" frontline against Palmyra. Note most of the equipment and vehicles in the footage are distinctly Russian. There's a T-90A tank, some BTR-82A, some brand new Russian trucks, including armored arty tow trucks, Msta-B howitzers (their presence there had been tacitly acknolwedged earlier), new Russian jeeps, and an Mi-8AMTSh helo. Plus a few Syrian vehicles.

РоÑÑийÑкие гаубицы "ÐœÑта-Б" в районе Пальмиры - bmpd
Репортаж телекомпании CNN из ВоÑточной Сирии - Коллекционер баÑнов
Репортаж телекомпании CNN из ВоÑточной Сирии. РБаба Яга против - nortwolf_sam
ИнтереÑное видео CNN Ñ Ð¿Ð¾Ð·Ð¸Ñ†Ð¸Ð¹ ÑирийÑких войÑк, воюющих против Халифата - Юрий ЛÑмин

Footage of Turkish arty firing on the Kurds.

Турецкие T-155 Firtina против ÑирийÑких курдов - Юрий ЛÑмин

Turkey also issued an ultimatum to the Syrian Kurds, to leave the recently captured areas in Syria. The Kurds, predictably, refused. Meanwhile Syria says hundreds of fighters have entered the Azaz pocket (as it's no longer a corridor) from the Turkish side. Following this, Syria also says that the Turkish ground operation has begun, on a limited scale. Roughly a hundred Turkish troops have entered Syria.

Please keep in mind, these are Syrian claims. Not fact.

Of course it doesn't help when the Turkish government says they want to see a buffer zone of safety, 10kms deep, that includes Azaz in it.

СирийÑкие курды отвергли ультиматум Турции (RML)
Ð’ ДамаÑке заÑвили о вхождении в Сирию Ñотни бойцов Ñо Ñтороны Турции (СиÑтемник)
Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Ñèðèÿ îáúÿâèëà î íà÷àëå òóðåöêîãî âòîðæåíèÿ, ìàñøòàáû ïîêà ñêðîìíûå
Ð¢ÑƒÑ€Ñ†Ð¸Ñ Ñделала заÑвление по Ñозданию буферной зоны на Ñевере Сирии (pob_ol)

Some combat footage out of Iraq and Syria.

Gur Khan attacks!: Ðд на земле

The Germans say they are regularly accompanied by Russian fighters, in their missions over Syria, noting that these are not attempts at intercept.

Су-35С в небе Сирии регулÑрно Ñопровождает Ñамолеты "Торнадо" бундеÑлютваффе - nortwolf_sam

It appears that the Su-35S is being loaded up for anti-ground missions as well.

ИÑтребители Су-35С привлекаютÑÑ Ð´Ð»Ñ Ð¿Ð¾Ñ€Ð°Ð¶ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ Ð½Ð°Ð·ÐµÐ¼Ð½Ñ‹Ñ… целей в Сирии? - bmpd

Note the map of Russian airstrikes in this link. They're clearly not just hitting around the SAA positions but along the entire Azaz corridor, right in front of the Kurdish lines. This is immediately prior to the Kurdish push across the corridor. This looks like Russian airstrikes in support of the Kurdish offensive.

Курды и турки идут на принцип - Colonel Cassad

A different viewpoint on the mysterious box appearing on SAA vehicles, claiming that it's likely an EO system actively disrupting the operator's ability to guide ATGMs on target.

По поводу ÑирийÑкого уÑтройÑтва оптико-Ñлектронного противодейÑÑ‚Ð²Ð¸Ñ ÐŸÐ¢Ð£Ð  - Andrei-bt

The Tu-214R shows up in Syria. It's the most advanced Russian ELINT/SIGINT asset. Previously it was tested against the Japanese, in fly-bys with Su-30s for escorts, and it was used frequently along the Ukrainian border. Syria is a logical next step, especially with the Turkish threat in mind.

Ð’ Сирию прибыл Ñамолет Ту-214Р - bmpd

The Turks are suggesting that the war in Syria can't be ended without a ground operation.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Òóðöèÿ íàìåêàåò, ÷òî âîéíó â Ñèðèè íå îñòàíîâèòü áåç íàçåìíîé îïåðàöèè

Several Tochka missiles have hit civilian targets in Aleppo. Turkey accused Russia of launching the missiles from the Caspian Flotilla. Unsurprisingly Russia denied the accusations because they're technically illiterate. However it's no secret that Russia is the source of the Tochka missiles the regime is currently firing in large quantities. Some are even being used by Hezbollah, a fact that must alarm Israel.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Ðîññèÿ îïðîâåðãëà îáâèíåíèÿ Òóðöèè â óäàðàõ ñ Êàñïèÿ ïî áîëüíèöå è øêîëå â Ñèðèè

K-a tiles installed on the rear of a T-72 turret in Syria.

Любопытное фото танка Т-72 СирийÑкой арабÑкой армии, уÑтановка ДЗ на кормовой чаÑти башни. - Andrei-bt

Russia claims that ISIS, as a brand, was professionally designed.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Íàä ñîçäàíèåì áðåíäà ÈÃ ðàáîòàëè ïðîôåññèîíàëû, óáåæäåí ãëàâà Ðîñêîìíàäçîðà

There is evidence that ISIS may have used chemical weapons against the Kurds in Iraq.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: "Èñëàìñêîå ãîñóäàðñòâî" çàïîäîçðèëè â èñïîëüçîâàíèè õèìè÷åñêîãî îðóæèÿ â Èðàêå

Over February 15th the Turks violated Greek airspace over 20 times, with the Greeks claiming that the Turks are using the current situation with Syrian refugees as a pretext for increasing their military presence in the Aegean Sea.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Òóðåöêèå ÂÂÑ çà ñóòêè áîëåå 20 ðàç íàðóøèëè ãðàíèöó ñ Ãðåöèåé

ISIS took responsibility for a bombing in Russian Dagestan.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: "Èñëàìñêîå ãîñóäàðñòâî" âçÿëî íà ñåáÿ îòâåòñòâåííîñòü çà âçðûâ â Äàãåñòàíå

Obama calls on Putin to stop bombing the moderate rebels.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Îáàìà â ðàçãîâîðå ñ Ïóòèíûì ïðèçâàë ïðåêðàòèòü óäàðû ïî "óìåðåííîé îïïîçèöèè"

Turkey says (their Prime Minister) that they intend to keep attacking the Kurds.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Äàâóòîãëó çàÿâèë î ïëàíàõ Òóðöèè ïðîäîëæèòü àòàêè íà êóðäîâ

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CbVT-uMW4AAcDuB.jpg:large
Wow that is some serious kurdish progress...

I have been reading some new articles on the ISW blog. Factually they have always been on the money I think but their fully americanized ideas for the next steps that should be taken gave me some laughs. Their solution consists of giving humanitarian aid to some specific non-radical groups so they don't get assimilated into the radical coalition. While allowing them to coordinate with the terrorist groups for the defence of Aleppo.

And providing food and a TOW or two will, according to these analysts, convert them from "potential powerbrokers" to "powerbrokers" and "US clients". And later USA can use them to fight ... ISIS

It's amazing how easy this "partner-building" seems to americans, just bring some trucks all the way around from Turkey to Aleppo city, throw some stale sandwiches and a dollar or two to those unwashed rebels' face. Now we bought them and they fight for us like loyal dogs. 'merica!

What do you think about this way of "partner building"? Are there any legitimate rebel groups that would willingly fight for USA interests? It is my understanding that they are universally hated.

If there is one force that can fight with USA assistance and beat ISIS, while not throwing gasoline in the fire within Syria, it is the kurds. But that would mean displeasing the sultan Erdogan.

Seeing the russians working with the kurds and having such success actually proves that the USA decision making is lacking. And it will probably get worse as the US elections get closer. Then it may get fully anti-interventionist after Sanders becomes president.

EDIT:
Turkey is basically providing artillery support to Al Nusra Front, an Al Qaeda affiliate, not even hiding it. They are actually proud of their "success" in halting the kurd advance. Wake up USA ...
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-turkey-davutoglu-idUSKCN0VO0ZZ

Advanced Russian spy plane in use over Syria (TU-214R). Apparently with advanced sensors to detect hidden or camouflaged targets. The US concern is that it can be used to spy on their aircraft.


Advanced Russian spy plane now in Syria - CNNPolitics.com