Posted on 05/20/2016 1:55:40 PM PDT by Innovative
The Russian defense minister proposed on Friday that Russia and the U.S.-led coalition launch joint action against al-Qaida's branch in Syria, known as the Nusra Front.
A spokesman for the U.S. State Department said no agreement on such action has been made with Russia.
Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said that Moscow had proposed to Washington that the coalition call on all factions eager to abide by a cease-fire in Syria to leave the areas where the al-Qaida branch is active by May 25. Then Russia and the U.S.-led coalition could conduct joint strikes against the Nusra Front and any other groups refusing to honor the truce, Shoigu suggested.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I hope the US is willing to work out something with Russia against the terrorists in Syria.
They just called our hand...to show the world if we’re serious about taking out Obama’s pals.
That's why we won't.
The potential gains far outweigh the risks, but your point is well taken.
The message is for Donald Trump
Aren’t Syrian Al Quaeda those ‘moderate rebels’ we’re supporting.
——Aren’t Syrian Al Quaeda those ‘moderate rebels’ we’re supporting.-—
no. the rebels of which you speak began the revolution in Syria as citizens and defecting military. they had HQ near the Turkish border and actually inside Turkey
At some point the revolution was taken over by AQ and to a greater extent by ISIS
However this view is not Free Republic doctrine and has been dogmatically rejected by those that are unable to understand there are different Islamic groups
You wanted in -- you're in. Get yourselves out.
Ok...well let me ask a few dumb questions:
1. If Assad is deposed, will the ‘moderate rebels’ take control...or will Al Quaeda or ISIS take control.
2. What is our compelling national interest in deposing Assad - especially if the answer to question no. 1 is a ‘no’.
If I equate this to American politics - some people in the neverTrump crowd are advocating voting for Gary Johnson. IMHO, a vote for Gary Johnson is just as good as a vote for HRC. Similarly, supporting the ‘moderate rebels’ in deposing Assad is just as good as supporting Al Quaeda and ISIS. I just don’t understand why we are so hell bent on picking out a side...and by ‘picking a side’, I mean really parsing words and trying to differentiate a group that wears a white cowboy hat in this mess...when we know that, at the end of the day, no Assad = a terrorist run nation state.
That won’t happen until Trump is president
There simply ARE no moderate rebels. Every single one is a sunni jihadi group. I defy anyone to show me a different group.
And Al Nusra who the Russians want us to bomb, is being supplied by the USA.
> the rebels of which you speak began the revolution in Syria as citizens and defecting military
AKA it began as a Hillary Clinton/CIA “color revolution”
why must there be an Amerocentric causation
Why can’t there be genuine Syrian revolution?
They’re telling 0buttbongo to put up or shut up..
Because when John McCain shows up it’s never a genuine revolution.
And when it happens in nation after nation after nation after nation the same way, and the CIA is always involved, it becomes beyond credulity to posit that this was anything but.
If our rogue national security establishment didn’t relentlessly mess with every other country on the planet, then there might be some possibility of a non-”Amerocentric causation”.
The eagerness of McCain and Kerry to launch an invasion of Syria - even to the point to conspiring to create false testimony to Congress - was as red as red flags get.
you failed to note that although there was American involvement, the Syrian revolutionaries were aided by a coalition that included Turkey Saudi Arabia and other GCC members and Jordan
For reasons we do not know, Obama got pissed at the others and deserted the coalition. I don’t know why but suspect the others would not tolerate his arrogance and pacifist nonsense.
The result was ISIS
American failure produced ISIS
ISIS wasn't a US government failure. It was a US government success - until the Russians stepped in.
please provide a source for that allegation
Here’s a good place to start to bring yourself up to speed...
The M.O. of the rogue foreign policy establishment is to start a rebellion in a target country and use it as an excuse to intervene.
They JUST did the same thing in Libya successfully right before they started it in Syria. Armed and funded an Al-Qaeda rebellion, along with anyone else wanting to join in, in Libya. Now Al-Qaeda/ISIS (same thing in reality) controls most of Libya.
Put what you already know together and it’ll be obvious.
Remember Elizabeth O’Bagy? All the money and weapons and training that went into “moderate rebels” that don’t exist? Turkey being ISIS’ safe zone, Saudis threatening to intervene on their behalf? USAF allegedly bombing them for a year yet doing no damage? The leaders having come out of Camp Bucca in 2009? Blind ammo paradrops? Rand Paul calling Clinton out for running all the weapons to them? All the money the Clinton Foundation got from the Saudis? Clinton’s Saudi aide Huma and the private email server from which they directed US foreign policy and from which 30,000 emails have been deleted? The attack at Benghazi and the the theft of the weapons that were used in Libya and were being shipped to Syria after Qadafi was killed?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VG40Iej-Bq4
There’s way too much detail to put it all down in one post but you’ve probably read these stories if you’ve kept yourself up to speed on the subject. If you didn’t understand the big picture, a lot of these events probably made no sense at all... now you know the big picture into which they all fit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
