OH GREAT!! this should complicate things Syrian moderates make a deal with Isis

[bigdarryl]

This war Obama is getting ready to start is not going to end well http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/12/isis-deal-syria_n_5814128.html

[Laelth]

1. I don't think we care too much about Syria at this point.

I consider this tentative "alliance" barely noteworthy.

Now that the Kurds have their pipeline through Turkey to the Mediterranean, and now that the U.S. has made it clear that it will protect the Kurds from IS, Syria is barely on our radar. Or, so I surmise. More on that HERE.

-Laelth

[femmocrat]

2. Good grief.

From the above article:

If true, Landis said, the news of a ceasefire proves Washington does not know who it can support or trust within the fractured country.

"We don't know who the moderates are," Landis said. Describing a recent interview in which a Free Syrian Army commander told an Arab outlet that the U.S. wanted to make Syrian rebels "slaves," he added, "These guys are supposed to be our buddies?"

K & R. Excellent article.

[Comrade Grumpy]

3. So, we're going to give these guys half a billion dollars to NOT fight ISIS?

We need to quit trying to overthrow Assad. It's not our country. It's not our affair. And the failed "Syrian revolution," supported and egged on for years by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, and the US has led us precisely to where we are now.

[99th_Monkey]

5. +10

you may want to see my post below re Assad's looking better by the day.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5530453

[99th_Monkey]

4. All of a sudden Assad is looking pretty good, by comparison.

All Obama really needs to do here is partner up with Assad and Iran (who's chomping at the bit to wipe out ISIS), and wipe these creeps off the map; but Obama does not seem inclined to do this.

Kerry said it "is not appropriate" for Iran to be part of the strategy meeting for how to deal with ISIS.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/16/iran-offers-iraq-everything-it-needs-to-fight-isis.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/13/world/middleeast/kerry-opposes-irans-inclusion-in-iraq-security-talks.html?action=click&contentCollection=Middle%20East&_r=0

Oh well.

[oberliner]

7. Partner up with Assad and Iran?

You really think that's a good idea?

[99th_Monkey]

9. Neither of those nations have any reason to attack USA

Well except that we've been trying to take out Assad, but still; all the more reason we'd have some leverage with him.

At some point it is going to take some "boots on the ground" to take out ISIS. <-- we know this.

I have never bought the big lie demonizing Iran as our "enemy".

So why would we NOT want to partner with Iran and Assad again?

[oberliner]

10. "So why would we NOT want to partner with Iran and Assad again?"

Because we are ostensibly pro-democracy and anti-dictatorship?

Do we really want to increase our support for autocratic regimes?

[99th_Monkey]

13. If we learned anything from taking out Saddam Hussein

It's that relatively stable regimes (regardless of how repugnant they may seem by our standards) are better than trying to shove democracy down their throats at the point of a gun, which has NEVER worked, ever.

It's high time the USA disabuses itself of the notion that we are the "Cops of the World"

[oberliner]

14. By allying with Assad and Iran we are getting involved

I'm not sure how that's not just as meddlesome as aiding the Syrian resistance.

[99th_Monkey]

17. What? No War?

Hell no. We MUST have some kind of perpetual war to feed the Military-Industrial-fatcat-Masters-of-war Oligarchy.



Totally, my preference would be to scale back all the war mongering, but I've been saying that for 45 years now, and have not seen any inclination by our bought-and-paid-for politicians to take on the Dark Side of the munitions industry. Well .. not except for JFK and RFK, who learned the hard way not to challenge the evil scumbags that really are running this country .. into the ground .. on purpose, for profit.

[oberliner]

18. Allying with Assad and Iran is waging war as well, is it not?

If it's not, perhaps you can clarify what is meant by allying?

[99th_Monkey]

19. I'm saying that IF it's a given that we are going to have perpetual war

Last edited Sat Sep 13, 2014, 04:13 PM - Edit history (1)

which by all indications IS the mindset of whoever happens to be living at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., then yes ...

it makes much more sense than arming ISIS to take out Assad and/or elected leaders in iraq, and much more sense than arming "less militant" jihadists who then turn around a week later to join forces with ISIS, with the munitions they just got from the US.

BTW - in case you hadn't noticed, the list of "US Allies" who are decidedly NOT democratic, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan & Egypt for starters.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/02/americas-most-awkward-allies-103889.html#.VBSTPlZH1FI

[AnalystInParadise]

11. Yes.

Iran and Syria are not really our natural enemies.

[oberliner]

12. What about the fact that they are ruled by un-elected dictators?

Iran has had the same Supreme Leader for the last 25 years while the Assad father-son regime extends even longer than that.

[Comrade Grumpy]

15. As opposed to our allies in the region? The monarchies?

[oberliner]

16. Just like them

One of these days our support for those un-elected monarchs is going to come back to bite us.

I am especially uncomfortable with our chummy relationship with the Saudi regime.

I certainly wouldn't want to add any more dictators to the roster.

[liberal_at_heart]

6. kick. There is no way to tie this up in a pretty pink bow.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Taking sides in the ME is like going into a sewer to look for the least smelly turds.

Lesson #1: Stay out of the conflicts in the Middle East.

Lesson #2: If you insist on being stupid and get involved in any of the conflicts, no matter which side "wins", you lose.

[Volaris]

20. God, what a clusterfuck.

Thanks, Georgie...