Will air assault against IS in Syria be used to effect regime change?

[another_liberal]

It would be tempting to use the pretext of attacking Islamic State targets to also degrade Assad's defenses, as well as his offensive assets. That could conceivably give the moderate faction anti-Assad forces a big boost. Nonetheless, it would be a dangerous proposition for our President to order such attacks on Syrian troops. They would very likely shoot back, and shoot back with some quite new and sophisticated AA capabilities. What if American planes are shot down, perhaps Americans captured? What then?

Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov adresses to his Malian counterpart Abdoulaye Diop (not pictured) during their meeting in Moscow, September 9, 2014. (Reuters)

Lavrov: West may use ISIS as pretext to bomb Syrian govt forces

If the West bombs Islamic State militants in Syria without consulting Damascus, the anti-ISIS alliance may use the occasion to launch airstrikes against President Bashar Assad’s forces, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said. “There are reasons to suspect that air strikes on Syrian territory may target not only areas controlled by Islamic State militants, but the government troops may also be attacked on the quiet to weaken the positions of Bashar Assad’s army,” Lavrov said Tuesday.

Such a development would lead to a huge escalation of conflict in the Middle East and North Africa, Lavrov told reporters in Moscow after a meeting with the foreign minister of Mali. Moscow is urging the West to respect international law and undertake such acts only with the approval of the legitimate government of a state, Lavrov said. “Not a single country should have its own plans on such issues. There can be only combined, collective, univocal actions. Only this way can a result be achieved,” he said.

His comments came shortly after Washington announced plans to go on the offensive against the Islamic State jihadist group. The US military has already launched over 100 airstrikes against militant targets in Iraq, including a new series that the military said killed an unusually large number of Islamic State fighters, AP reported.

(snip)

Moscow has repeatedly voiced its readiness to cooperate with Washington in countering terrorism, Lavrov said. Secretary of State John Kerry, in response, has proposed that the US, Russia and countries in the region cooperate to work out “a balance of interests so that they could eliminate terrorism threat,” he added, “However, this hasn’t got beyond words”.

(snip)

Read more at: http://rt.com/news/186356-lavrov-syria-bombing-west/

[Tarheel_Dem]

1. RT.

[grahamhgreen]

3. Ad Hominem attack FAIL.

[Tarheel_Dem]

18. Is this "ad hominem" as well?

[Tarheel_Dem]

21. Thank goodness there's still some honest folks in this debate, unlike the online propagandists.

[grahamhgreen]

22. It's nice to see they present opposing views;)

[Tarheel_Dem]

23. Yeah. Let's go with that.

[KurtNYC]

24. personally I try to treat EVERY news source with a critical eye that looks for the holes

Every source of news, from FOX to Pravda to Mother Jones to Twitter to YouTube videos with misleading titles or editing, is presenting ONE angle on events.Whether in text or video, a news story is basically a combination of facts and spin/analysis.

By focusing on the facts (actors, actions, events, sequence of events) presented in a story and ignoring, or perhaps unspinning, the spin one can acquire pieces of the greater truth. I treat RT with that same skepticism, ignoring or handicapping their spin, and I find that they present some facts that are otherwise missing.

A big part of propaganda is how issues get framed -- for example, they can present only a slanted and limited range of choices, like 'should we go to war now? or wait until ISIS attacks us?' By design propaganda can spin the truth by leaving out parts of it. So the way to get all the missing pieces left out by one source is to look to one or more other, very different sources.

[Tarheel_Dem]

26. TYT/Buzzfeed: "Russia's Online Troll Army Is Huge, Hilarious & Already Everywhere "

"Moscow is financing legions of pro-Russia Internet commenters. But how much do they matter?"

"Russia's campaign to shape international opinion around its invasion of Ukraine has extended to recruiting and training a new cadre of online trolls that have been deployed to spread the Kremlin's message on the comments section of top American websites.


Very enlightening, and spot on!

[grahamhgreen]

28. Same thing the NSA does here...

[Tarheel_Dem]

30. Yup. Exactly the same! Only Different.

[grahamhgreen]

31. You would know;)

[SidDithers]

29. Hehe...

Sid

[Cha]

35. We know "Russian Online Troll Army is huge"! Always popping up with their distractions..

"NSA- but but but the West-Leave Russia Alone Wah Wah Wah



It's Okay for Putin.. 'cause you know.. he's not President Obama!


Putin’s grip on the internet

snip//

The precedent of persecuting bloggers to silence them was set in 2008, a year after a blogger Savva Terentyev criticised police in a comment on a LiveJournal post he was sentenced to one year suspended sentence, article 282 of Russian Criminal Code for, “fomenting of social hatred” towards policemen. Since then, article 282, which covers actions provoking animosity and hatred towards certain religious, social, gender or national groups has been used to silence bloggers through the courts.

The other charge commonly used against internet users is “extremism” . Throughout Putin’s reign this charge has been used to target people who criticise the Kremlin — together with defamation and drug legislation. Russia’s Department of Presidential Affairs won three defamation lawsuits against newspaper Novaya Gazeta in just one week last year. All the articles talked about this authority’s controversial withdrawals from Russian budget and extremely high salaries of its staff. The editor-in-chief Dmitry Muratov told Index that Kremlin has been using defamation suits as a censorship instrument.

snip//

Starting from 1 November 2012 Russian authorities won’t need a court ruling, like they did in the Terentyev case. Authorities will appeal to ISPs, like in the Rumyantsev case, create website blacklists and will be able to actually shut down anything they won’t like. Previously, a court ruling could make a website or the URL of a certain web content inaccessible in a specific region, while it stayed available in another.

Andrey Soldatov, an expert on Russian security services, notes that soon “the Kremlin will have at its disposal the facilities for blocking access to internet resources across the whole of Russia”, including Skype and Facebook."

http://uncut.indexoncensorship.org/2012/08/putins-russia-internet-censorship/

More recently..

snip// March 20, 2014

Putin ramps up Internet censorship, citing Google and Snowden to ensure public support

On March 13, a half-dozen highly trafficked opposition blogs and indie media outlets were suddenly blocked within Russia. The websites — including the highly respected Ekho Moskvy radio station and the blog of popular nationalist opposition politician, Alexei Navalny — received no notice of the impeding cutoff.

There was no court order, no trial, not even a public hearing. But there’s no doubt the move was official: Roskomnadzor, Russia’s mass media and telecommunications regulator, very publicly announced it in a directive to Russian ISPs, explaining that access to these websites must be blocked for extremism and for encouraging people to attend unsanctioned protests — in this case, against Russia’s annexation of Crimea.

This new formal power to unilaterally block access to any website comes via a brand new Internet censorship law that went into effect on February 1, 2014. It’s called the “Law of Lugovoi” — named after its author, State Duma Deputy Andrei Lugovoi, a scary ex-FSB officer-turned-Duma deputy who is better known as the prime suspect in the 2007 polonium assassination of Alexander Litvinenko in London.

Russia has refused to extradite Lugovoi to the UK to face trial and has instead allowed him to make a second career for himself as an ambitious legislator in Russia’s lower house of parliament. Lugovoi has put his personal stamp on plenty of bills, including ones that limit free speech and expand the power of the FSB. (He’s also know for periodically issuing veiled death threats against opposition politicians.)

http://pando.com/2014/03/20/putin-ramps-up-internet-censorship-citing-google-and-snowden-to-ensure-public-support/


Russia Today Anchor Admits Spreading 'Lies' For Putin
By Catherine Taibi @cathtaibi

Another Russia Today anchor has resigned from her post at the Kremlin-funded TV network. I resigned from RT today. I have huge respect for many in the team, but I'm for the truth. pic.twitter.com/m...
HuffPost Media @HuffPostMedia

46 Retweets 7 favorites

Corespondent Sara Firth's announcement came nearly two hours after she stated on Twitter that RT anchors "do work for Putin" and spread "lies," in a conversation with RT London correspondent Polly Boiko. Firth alleged that the network asks its anchors to "obscure the truth," and now she is saying she's had enough.

Polly Boiko @Polly_Boiko

@ukTanos what am i spreading?

Sara Firth @Sara__Firth
Follow
@Polly_Boiko @ukTanos Lies hun. We do work for Putin. We are asked on a daily basis if not to totally ignore then to obscure the truth

11:50 PM - 17 Jul 2014 550 Retweets 175 favorites

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/18/sara-firth-resigns-russia-today-lies-anchor_n_5598815.html



Thanks for the Vid on "Putin's trolls", Tarheel~

[another_liberal]

36. The Op isn't even about President Putin . . .

Please try and stick to the topic of my OP. You are disrupting the flow of the conversation here with your off-topic, overly lengthy, copy-and-paste replies.

You could just post your own OP with the topic of bashing the Russian President. Thanks.

[William769]

37. OMFG!

[another_liberal]

40. Like I said . . .

Try to stick to the topic please. Surely that is not too much to ask?

After all, being "off topic" is grounds to have a reply hidden by a jury vote.

[William769]

41. Go for it!

[another_liberal]

43. When you are doing such a good job of proving my point?

I wouldn't think of it!

[Cha]

44. LOL.. the OP is about RT. End of story. P.S. I'm not reading any RT Shite.

[another_liberal]

45. Didn't bother to read any of it, right?

The OP is about the inherent dangers of expanding our anti-IS air attacks into the territory of Syria.

(sigh)

[Tarheel_Dem]

47. "You are disrupting the flow of the conversation here with your off-topic........"

Stop it! You're killin' me.

[William769]

39. Good job!

Side note. Glad to see my work is getting used. The truth shall set them free!

[Cha]

42. Glad you saw this, William.. I got it from my Journal and had thanked

you when I "borrowed it". But, I hadn't realized you actually created it.. it's brilliant! And, former anchor, Sarah Firth and so many others are here to back it up!

[another_liberal]

38. Lets try to stick to the topic of the OP, alright?

President Putin is not the topic of my OP. Please start your own OP if you want to indulge in Putin-bashing. Thank you.

[Tarheel_Dem]

46. But there's an "army of Putin trolls" who've swooped down on us from the Kremlin.

Aren't you the least bit concerned about that?

[another_liberal]

50. Write your own OP on that topic then . . .

This OP is dealing with a very different topic. Thanks.

[The Magistrate]

54. Your Opinions Are The Topic, Sir

And people are entitled to know what they are, so they can understand just what your level of understanding is, and what your judgement is worth.

Here is just one recent sample of your acute understanding of the political forces behind events in the world today:

"It is a personal hatred of Russia on the part of some . . .

Russian laws have insulted their life style, so they demand we fight a third World War to assuage their wounded pride.

I, for one, am not ready to get on that particular bandwagon.
A. L."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014881926#post185

A flat statement that laws establishing persecution of gay people are no more than 'insult to their life-style', and that gay people are pressing for WWIII to 'assuage their wounded pride'....

[Comrade Grumpy]

11. Who better to tell us what Lavrov is saying?

[jamzrockz]

2. Russia can stop all of this

by getting ahead of the US bombing of ISIS. You make a plan, bring in your war planes and if you do the job right, the US will have no reason to violate Syrian air space and bomb the ISIS terrorists there.

Only you can prevent another Libyan scenario in Syria.

My posts have been getting a lot of alerts lately. So please if my posts offends you, just send me a PM and I will edit it. Please don't take 1 sentence of my post and alert it or mix in what I said in other threads to get me locked out of this thread. If you are going to alert, at least use the complete post that I made and give the jury the complete picture of what I am trying to say.

Thank you very much

[grahamhgreen]

5. We can stop all of this by arming working with Assad, Iran, Israel, SA, Turkey, et al., to help THEM

to deal with this regional issue.

I see that as a smarter alternative, as it is we are likely to see the Sunni's take revenge against us for appearing to side with the Shia.

This is merely and extension of the Sunni/Shia rift, in my view.

[jamzrockz]

7. Why even do anything?

Turkey, Israel, SA and Iran doesn't need any help with weapons. But then again, i wouldn't want to involve Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia or any sunni dominated country for that matter. Israel is the one bombing Syria every time a missle meant for the terrorists staying in the occupied golan height misses its target. Turkey have essentially opened its borders and allowed ISIS terrorists to come and go as they please and also to sell their ill gotten oil in the country. Saudi Arabia has supplied the troops and a lot of the funding for ISIS.

I wouldn't let any of those countries near Syria. This is why Russia, Iran and maybe China are the only ones that are capable of stopping a US attack on Syria.

I hate it when people call it a rift, it gives the impression that sometimes the shia is instigator when in fact it is always the sunni's attacking and killing and the shia defending their people and their homeland.

My posts have been getting a lot of alerts lately. So please if my posts offends you, just send me a PM and I will edit it. Please don't take 1 sentence of my post and alert it or mix in what I said in other threads to get me locked out of this thread. If you are going to alert, at least use the complete post that I made and give the jury the complete picture of what I am trying to say.

Thank you very much

[grahamhgreen]

9. I have to agree. It seems to me ISIS may be the perfect thing to bring these disparate entities

together..... maybe. Depending on if they are actually SA surrogates.....

[another_liberal]

8. Would the United States, Turkey, Israel or other Mid-East powers be willing . . .

Would they be willing to see Russian combat aircraft in action above Syrian territory? I very much doubt such a thing would be allowed to happen.

Anyway, that would just lead to charges explaining the reason for moderate faction defeats was that Russian aircraft attacked them instead of IS.

[jamzrockz]

12. If you have been watching

videos and news stories from insider in Syria, you will realize that the FSA is all but defeated. The main fighting forces for a while now are the ISIS and Al nusra. Any entity who would blame the already defeat of the FSA on a future attack by Russia is not a very serious party.

My posts have been getting a lot of alerts lately. So please if my posts offends you, just send me a PM and I will edit it. Please don't take 1 sentence of my post and alert it or mix in what I said in other threads to get me locked out of this thread. If you are going to alert, at least use the complete post that I made and give the jury the complete picture of what I am trying to say.

Thank you very much

[another_liberal]

15. I've had seen no reason to take offense . . .

And I will do as you ask in the future.

As to the FSA being a totally spent force, I must admit I was unaware things had gotten that bad for them. So, despite all of the Western aid and even direct support from Turkey they are actually finished?

[Xithras]

17. There's a real question about what happens if Assad asks Russia for help.

While Syria does have the capability to bring down U.S. fighters and drones (they have the same Buk missile system that was recently used in Ukraine), doing so would lead to the immediate annihilation of the Syrian government by U.S. aircraft. Our government seems to be counting on this knowledge, expecting that Assad will just stand back and let us do our thing.

The wildcard in the situation is the Russians. Syria is has been a Russian ally since the 1970's, and is a huge military client of Moscow's arms traders. Syria is also home to Russia's only naval base in the Mediterranean. If Assad called on the Russians to help him repel American violations of Syria's airspace, there's a real question as to how the Russian's would answer. A newly assertive Russia might embrace the opportunity to flex its muscles and display its willingness to defend an ally (or to avoid the impression that they leave their allies hanging when push comes to shove). On the other hand, the Russian people tend to take a hardline position against Islamic extremists (given their own experiences in Chechnya and Dagestan), and there is the potential for serious political blowback if the Russian people interpret his actions as helping I.S. terrorists.

It's a real coin flip at this point, IMHO.

[another_liberal]

19. It would be advisable to avoid bombing in Syria . . .

How could any possible advantage to hitting IS there be worth taking the chance of starting a real war with a power like Russia.

It really doesn't matter if it's certain (as some would say) we would win. It would be a "win" at such a cost as to damn our country's name down through history.

[KurtNYC]

4. the pretext would probably not be the air strikes but the presence of ISIS itself

Our policy for ISIS in Iraq is the exact opposite of what it is in Syria. In Iraq we support the government's efforts against ISIS but in Syria...

The reality of US policy is to support the government of Iraq, but not Syria, against ISIS. But one reason that group has been able to grow so strong in Iraq is that it can draw on its resources and fighters in Syria. Not everything that went wrong in Iraq was the fault of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, as has now become the political and media consensus in the West. Iraqi politicians have been telling me for the last two years that foreign backing for the Sunni revolt in Syria would inevitably destabilize their country as well. This has now happened.

By continuing these contradictory policies in two countries, the US has ensured that ISIS can reinforce its fighters in Iraq from Syria and vice versa. So far, Washington has been successful in escaping blame for the rise of ISIS by putting all the blame on the Iraqi government. In fact, it has created a situation in which ISIS can survive and may well flourish.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/08/how-us-helped-isis-grow-monster-iraq-syria-assad

[another_liberal]

10. Good point . . .

And a revealing quote. Thank you, KurtNYC.

[pampango]

16. The government in Iraq wants to attack ISIS. In Syria the government did not attack ISIS

until last month when ISIS captured the military base in the north. They had a implicit truce with each other so they could both concentrate on attacking other Syrian rebel groups.

Should the US have the same policy towards ISIS in Syria, if the Syrian government does not attack ISIS itself and does not authorize the US to do so? That sounds like pretty dangerous foreign policy to me.

Syria has made it quite clear that the US had better not have a policy of attacking ISIS in Syria unless and until something is worked out with Mr. Assad. (Iraq has done the opposite.) At this stage, if the US policy towards ISIS was the same in Syria as it is in Iraq, Mr. Assad would not be a happy dictator.

[KurtNYC]

51. June 24, 2014 - the Syrian Airforce struck ISIS in Iraq

ISIS wants to oust Assad (as do the US, Israel and the Saudis). There is no truce.

[pampango]

53. "ISIS has spent most of the past 18 months avoiding actually fighting the Syrian government,

concentrating instead on destroying its rivals, the Jabhat al-Nusra (Succor Front), other radical groups, and the more secular-minded Free Syrian Army."

When IS comes after its rivals among the rebels, it is vicious, mowing them down without conscience. Even classic al-Qaeda under Ayman al-Zawahiri has condemned IS and kicked it out of al-Qaeda.

Abu al-Miqdad of the Islamic Front, which has fought both the regime and IS, said he supported the American intervention against IS because of the latter’s bloodthirstiness. “They don’t distinguish between civilians and combatants and they kill people with knives,” he said. “Who kills people with knives?” He said he hoped the US bombed every last one of them to smithereens. “They are not Muslims,” he said, “but infidels.” He said that real Muslims would never have done what they did to civilians and to the Free Syrian Army.

Jaber, head of the Islamic Front’s ad hoc military police in Aleppo, agreed that the US air strikes would be welcome. He said that fighters were facing a de facto alliance of the regime of Bashar al-Assad with IS, since the two avoided fighting each other and concentrated on the other rebels.

Meanwhile, the UN has issued a report condemning both the Baath and IS/ ISIL for war crimes.

http://www.juancole.com/2014/08/welcome-strikes-terrorists.html

Syria jets hit Islamic State targets in Raqqa

Regime planes bombard Islamic State positions as fighters close in on Tabqa air base in northern Raqqa province. Activists say Syrian jets have bombarded positions of the Islamic State group in the northern province of Raqqa as the self-declared jihadists close in on the last army base in the region.

Government forces have previously held off from targeting the Islamic State group, formerly known as ISIL - a strategy that has aided the group's battle against other rebels such as the Islamic Front coalition, the Free Syrian Army and al-Qaeda's affiliate in the Syrian war, the Nusra Front.

Syria's president, Bashar al-Assad, has long painted the uprising in Syria as a foreign-backed conspiracy and his enemies say he has allowed the Islamic State to grow to promote that idea.

The attacks come after the Islamic State group on Thursday captured the headquarters of Syria's 17th Division, based in the Raqqa area. It posted a video online of its operation.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/08/syria-islamic-state-raqqa-201481812135189335.html

You provided on link for this June 24, 2014 attack. If it happened it appears to have been a lone exception to the rule.

[KurtNYC]

56. Links

Military aircraft that conducted air strikes against ISIS military targets in western Iraq are believed to have been from Syria’s air force, a U.S. official told ABC News.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/06/syrian-war-planes-strike-isis-targets-in-iraq-us-says/

http://www.thewire.com/global/2014/06/syria-sends-warplanes-to-iraq-killing-dozens-in-targeted-isis-attacks/373356/

http://news.yahoo.com/syria-sends-warplanes-iraq-killing-dozens-targeted-isis-134145404.html

[pampango]

58. All your links reference Syrian airstrikes on ISIS - oddly - in western Iraq, not in Syria.

Odd that the first Syrian attacks on ISIS were targeted at those operating in Syria - exclusively attacking other Syrian rebel groups - but ISIS fighters who had left Syria to fight in Iraq.

Prior to August the only attack by the Syrian military on ISIS was outside of Syria. Doesn't that strike you as a little odd? First of all, who gave Assad permission to bomb another country? I'm thinking that he would not want another country bombing ISIS in Syria, would he?

[grahamhgreen]

6. Yes, of course, this has been the neocon plan since day 1:

The Plan, "take out 7 countries in 5 years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Iran" -- according to U.S. General Wesley Clark (Ret.)

Expect to hear anti-Assad propaganda repeated any day now til the deed is done.

[morningfog]

13. Obama's speech will be one year to the day of his speech requesting authroization to bomb Assad.

[another_liberal]

14. I had never seen that video clip before . . .

"Seven countries in five years."

Doesn't that take you back to the time. Isn't that exactly how the World was going to be, according to Dick Cheney and his crew?

The former President, Dick Cheney, is back advising top Republicans this week. He's advising them on how to deal with the "Islamic State" crisis in Iraq, and no that is not sarcastic fantasy, he really is currently advising the House Republican leadership.

[nationalize the fed]

48. a few years later and this is what he has to say

"America is a force for peace"

"The look"

Clark ought to know all about conquering the world since he commanded the first PNAC war. http://web.archive.org/web/20050104211642/http://www.newamericancentury.org/balkans.htm

[another_liberal]

49. It would appear the Military/Industrial Complex guys got to the good General meantime . . .

They told him if he didn't want his ears pinned back but good that he had better shut up about what our shadow Pentagon government has planned for the "Second American Century."

Don't expect General Clark to answer any more impromptu questions from non-main stream reporters.

[malaise]

20. Don't rule that out

The neo-cons are giddy starting with the war criminal of a Dick.

I hope Obama knows how he is being sucked into another mess in the Middle East

[another_liberal]

33. Is a rehabilitated Dick Cheney the kind of thing we should expect now?

What other arch villains will be returning to prominence and power as our country's foreign policy is further militarized?

[malaise]

34. I can't take any more of this madness

The good news is that the comments re Cheney are all against that war criminal of a dick

[SidDithers]

25. RT. LOL...nt

Sid

[Anansi1171]

27. Not to split hairs but OPs subject could confuse some.

An "air assault" is more than simply air strikes, its a helicopter (or other VTOL like Osprey) insertion of troops, often by fast rope.

Air strikes or air campaign may convey the articles meaning more clearly.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_assault

Just for the record. Youre good but the FSB trolls/spooks at RT.com should know better

[another_liberal]

32. A series of air strikes is often referred to as an air assault . . .

As in the, "Air Assault on Germany." It is a loosely applied term with several related meanings and uses.

[davidpdx]

52. Lavrov's CT's about bombing Syria are just that Obama isn't going to do it.

Russia and their minions should stop making unproven accusations against the US.

[The Magistrate]

55. The Only Way Assad's Forces Would Come Under Fire, Sir, Is If They Tried To Interfere

I do not think that likely, and it would be extremely foolish.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

57. The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men Gang aft agley Robert Burns